We deliberately cited the opinion of this modern individualist in order to show that the elements of political individualism, synthesized by the revolutionary doctrine, follow Montesquieu and Rousseau. and their followers, became the founder of modern democratic individualism.
Only modern democratic individualism, to its internalized demand for the political liberation of the individual, adds the demand for his economic liberation. In relation to the three French declarations of the rights of the citizen and man, everything is explained by the pre-publication that has developed about them in connection with the question of the economic liberation of the individual.
From an examination of the text of these declarative and individualistic principles, it is clear that their individualistic character has nothing to do with state non-interference in the economic and cultural life of citizens. Only this intervention is not of the nature of coercion and oppression. The state is considered here not as a guardian, as it seemed to enlightened absolutism, but is assumed to be an environment where the individual can find favorable and auxiliary conditions for the development of his abilities, for economic support, in a word, not for school, but for the development of his
1) 1. rozzit.
ve to" her oakeiod and toads Pos ua call Ze individuality. The doctrine contained in the declarations can be examined a), from the point of view of individual rights in it, p), the principles of political construction corresponding to these rights and c), drawing a line of demarcation between the individual and the state in the economic and cultural fields; This is what we will do briefly, noting that the Fravpuz revolutionary doctrine has similar main points with the American “5118 oE 110165” 1).
People are born and remain - (this word, which was objected to, still remained in the final edition) - free and equal in rights. This is the main point of the 1st French lecture, from which, according to many AStep ^), all the political and social implications have not yet been derived, for these: freedom and equality have not yet penetrated to the area of social relations in which slavery nests, i.e., the forced, economic dependence of one person on another. The purpose of any political association declaring is to preserve natural and inalienable rights. (Isn’t this what Rousseau apparently wanted, in his search for a form of association where a person would remain free and obey only himself?) Members
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
RI JSC
The constituents, as can be seen from the previous 1), believed that these rights: freedom), property and resistance to oppression are the essence of the rights - “their rights” of any state. On the one hand, they precede the state and the state form must be in accordance with them. On the other hand, they serve as the precursors of its sovereignty, which 3) belongs to the entire people and only to them. Giving the definition of freedom “), declaring to establish a position that will be perceived in slightly modified forms by Cantom and Spencer: freedom consists in the ability to do everything without harming another individual 5). Thus, the use of each individual by his natural rights is limited to the only use by other members of society of the same rights.
Among the individual rights, the declarator asserts: the right of personal inviolability from arbitrary arrests 6) and from nasishya during detention, responsibility only for crimes provided for by law 7), the right to freedom of conscience 3) (but not worship), the right to freedom of thought and world, spoken, written and printed word °). The declaration establishes: equality before the law and the court, equality in achieving public positions 10) i.e.
t) N!zote rateshetalte U.P. Vieveh ee Voikh.
2) Types of individual freedom: see de AtaNov 1879 at. UI-HG.
3) Ag. Sh.
4) Agyo. THAT.
[fragment unreadable in scan of first edition]
6) Ag. USH [H.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
8) AtE. X; at. X and W. 1193 am. USh-1795.
3) Ag. HG; ahyo. UI. B: 1793
10) Ag. UG at. U-O. 1193; aze. XHT. Decl. 1795.24*
her
— 868 destroy privileges, purchases and inheritance of positions, equality and proportionality of taxes 1). However, the list of these rights indicates that the