17.3. Role and Significance of Masses of People and Personalities in History

It was already stated that the motive forces of historical development are multiplied interests that is society’s and individuals’ realized multiplied needs. The next question is what the subjects of historical process are. Society as a whole is the subject in its relation to nature and to society itself, for society aims to subject nature to society’s interests. But simultaneously society appears the object of activity of all connections and relations created by society and alienated from its control. As far as such subjective-objective status is characteristic to society as a whole, it is right for smaller subjects of historical process: people, crowd, classes, nations and individuals.

The People is the concept the least researched in philosophy, so far as people’s role in history was being ignored by historians for centuries. Only in the XIX century common people were set forth and opposed to aristocracy and clerics, they were given importance in historical process; they were regarded as an objective force in the flow of history. Nevertheless the substantiation of the term is limited: 1) usually only participants of material production are referred to people as a subject of history; 2) only social groups whose activity leads to progressive development of society is thought of as the people; 3) a barrier is erected between the people and outstanding personalities who are absolutely opposed, as if the people does not consist of persons.

Sometimes the term “the people” is identified with that of “nation” or “ethnos” so far as an individual is simultaneously associated both with the people and with a definite nation or ethnos. But this identification is not correct; as there are uninational people (Japanese, French, etc.) and multinational ones (American, former Soviet, etc.).

The same correlation one can see between the concepts of “the people” and “the class”: there are uniclass people (peasantry) or multiclass communities (in the time of French revolution of 1848 when peasantry, factory workers, artisans, small owners, clerks and tradesmen were combined into a single community).

To clear out the term of “the people” it is necessary to take into consideration several moments:

1) common historical destiny which is not obligatory connected with common territory and state though it is the precondition of its formation. The people’s destiny sometimes is represented in dispersing throughout the world: the Jews, Armenians, or in the long period of division: the North and South Korea, former West and East Germany, Poland as a result of three divisions of the end of the XVIII century;

2) common faith and common idea that integrate the people into a single whole. This faith may be not only religious but secular as well (national-liberation, for instance). L. Tolstoy, the greatest Russian writer said: “It is bad if man has nothing peculiar for what he is ready to die”. The lack of such “something peculiar” is evident in our society now;

3) common historical perspective when the people is able to enjoy life without making great sacrifices to “happy future”. The lack of such historical perspective that once united people into a single whole makes this unity weaker and destroys it.

A few words should be said of people’s historical memory that is preserving the past in the present, the way people evaluate their past, correlate it with their ideals, activity, perspectives. All this influences social and psychological state of people. People who do not respect their own past have no future.

So, without claiming to rigorous definition one can conclude that the people – is a social integrity characterized by common historical destiny and historical memory that reflects this destiny; by common faith, common idea and common historical perspective.

In the process of its development people pass through qualitatively different social-psychological stages-states, crowd being one of them. There are two various meaning of crowd: in the wide meaning crowd is the state that precedes the formation of people as integrity or indicates its degradation; in the narrow meaning crowd is a group of people who are in direct “face-to-face” contact with each other. These two meanings are correlative, having the same features: quick excitability, huge but short-termed energy, instability and mobility together with unprognostication and veering from one extreme to another.

The transition from the state of crowd is not at all a straight forward process; it is possible under the condition of entire individuals’ self-creation and up bringing on the base of social experience that is not always only positive.

The formation of the entire masses of individuals into the people is the most meaningful result of civilization process which is not exhausted till now.

What are we from the point of view of our social-psychological state? Are we capable to be a single whole and to make a decisive influence on the choice of the further historical development?

The masses of people who produce material wealth has got a decisive role in historical process, in economic sphere, in particular, as they are the most important and powerful element of productive forces.

L. Tolstoy underlined the role of working masses while reading “The History of Russia” by V. Solovyov: “on reading that ones robbed, ruled, made war, ruined (only this is spoken about in history) one can unwittingly ask: what was robbed and ruined? And another question: who produced that what was being ruined? Who and how fed with bread the entire people? Who made brocades, broadcloths, dresses and coats in which tsars and boards made parade? Who caught black foxes and sables that ambassadors were presented; who extracted gold and iron; who selected horses, bulls and sheep; who built houses, churches and palaces; who transported goods?”

That are working people who every day improve implements of labor aimed to perfect the effectiveness of their labor activity and this way they constantly prepare changes in technological mode of production and in social system as a whole.

The masses of people play a great and significant role in the socio-political sphere. The dominant classes had always to take into consideration people’s attitude to their policy at all stages of the definite system development. All reforms and democratic liberties were established under the demands of working people; their role is particularly powerful in the epochs of social revolutions, for the radical changes in society are impossible without masses of people active intervention. The character of these changes depends on the level of culture of masses, political culture in particular.

Intellectual-spiritual sphere of society’s life is also dependent of masses of people, though the history of spiritual life is always personified: there is no nameless philosophy or science but we know philosophical systems of Plato, Socrates, F. Bacon, I. Kant, K. Marx, E. Husserl etc. and scientific theories of Copernicus, A. Einstein, Ch. Darwin and I. Pavlov. The same situation is in art. Nevertheless masses of people play a significant role in the intellectual-spiritual culture: 1) the people is the creator and the keeper of the language that is the prime base of spiritual culture; 2) folk art was and still continues to be the source of professional art; M. Gorky stated: “The people does not only produce all material wealth, he is a single and unexhausted source of spiritual values; he is the first in time, beauty and greatness philosopher and poet who created all great poems, all world tragedies including the greatest among them – the history of world culture”; 3) all great philosophers, scientists, artistic men were inseparably linked with their people; their masterpieces remained deathless only if they reflected people’s needs, interests and hopes; 4) despite severe exploitation and suppression of people’s creative potential a great number of outstanding men were ordinary people by origin, among them were M. Lomonosov, S. Polzunov, H. Skovoroda, M. Faraday, R. Fulton, M. Shchepkin, T. Shevchenko, H. Berlioz, J. Haydn, L. Beethoven, F, Shopen, M. Gorky and many others.

Throughout human history social philosophers often exaggerated personality’s role in history, statesmen, in particular, regarding them to determine historical process, as if they could govern the course of history like a puppet theatre. Each historical personality was set forth to the scene of historical development by certain definite social forces.

Hegel regarded world historical personalities or heroes those not numerous outstanding people who possess some substantial element which is the will of World Spirit or Reason of History. These people don’t belong to themselves; they are like ordinary people, only the World Spirit tools, though great tools with the help of whom historical process is carried out. These people intuitively grasp historical necessity; they are wise spiritual leaders who guide masses of people. As usual they are not happy for as soon as they have accomplished their mission they “fall off like an empty seed-coat” as Hegel said.

N. Machiavelli considered that the happiness of great historical personalities was the occasion due to which they got some material, that they formed according to their principles and goals; without such occasion their merits could become extinct: Mousey found out Israel people who were suffering in slavery and oppression in Egypt; their desire to get free stimulated them follow him. For Romulus became the founder and the ruler of Rome it was necessary that he was sent away from Alba and left alone at his birth. Teseus could hardly manifest his entire valor, if he had not found Athenians weak and separate. Really an occasion was the starting point of all those people’s fame but each of them was talented to give the chance development for the sake of their peoples.

Analyzing the personality of Napoleon J. Goethe stated that “anyhow his personality towered above all the rest, but the most important was that people, though were subjected to him, aimed to achieve their own goals; that is exactly why they followed him like one follows anybody who inspires with such confidence in the future”.

Russian historian and writer N.M. Karamzin said of Peter the Great: “The people was going to take the field, they expected a leader and the leader appeared!” The fact that precisely that man was born in that country in that definite time is of course contingent. Sometimes history gives chance to more or less worthy people; if they appear to be incapable to guide people the results are very poor for them. Democritus was wise when he noted: “Fool citizens less deserving high honorable posts become careless, stupid and impertinent”.

History is carried out by people in accordance with objective laws of development. The people is a great separate and dispersed number of individuals, while the force and energy of his being and self-assertion needs some certain unity. The unity of people is embodied in a single spiritual-volitional centre that is the person who possesses great intellect and experience which reflects will and civil spirit of the entire people. Plato said that “the world will become happy when sage men become rulers, and rulers become sage men”.

In the process of historical activity the personality vividly reveals all his advantages and disadvantages that gets a great social meaning and influences life of nations, peoples and even mankind as a whole.

For in human history the people but not the individual is the decisive force, the initial point of development; personalities depend on the people like a tree depends on the soil where it grows. If legendary Anthey’s strength consisted in his ties with native land, personality’s social strength is in his connection with his people. At the same time only a genius is capable to intuitively understand the people’s sole.

Whatever genius a historical personality might be in his activity he is determined by the aggregate of social relations; personality by making decisions can either accelerate historical process or slow it down. The leader’s activity supposes deep theoretical generalization of social practice, a dialectical flexibility of thought, an acute perceptiveness for various nuances of social life, the ability for timely and adequate evaluation of favorable and unfavorable tendencies, enabling to reject obstructions and to encourage progress. Outstanding historical personalities are characterized by their ability to derive benefit from any necessity and even to turn fatal coincidence of circumstances for the good of society and people; they should take into consideration both the general line and all the subtlest possibilities of development; they should choose a correct way to transform a mature historical possibility into reality. Great historical leaders are much more than ordinary people responsible for their decisions and activity.

Confucius wrote that “man who does not peer into remote future is expected to get into trouble in the nearest future”. “Everybody who is given much will be required much” is said in the Bible (Luc. 12, 48).

Classic conceptions of personality’s role and significance in history were based on the contradiction: reason or passions are determining factors that make some person a leader; but in actual fact neither blind gust of passion nor cold rationality but their harmonious unity defines person as integrity, underlines his powerfulness. In his “Philosophy of history” Hegel wrote that “nothing great in history was created without passion” and French writer Honore de Balzac puzzling over the problem of outstanding people noted “All great people are born in a definite century womb but inside their body mankind’s heart is beating”. Other classic approaches to clear understanding the role of personality in history were based either on fatalism (the form of determinism that predestines each one’s place in life and history) or on voluntarism (that relies on personality’ subjective will while ignores objective circumstances of his possibilities).

Thus, the masses of people who produce material wealth has got a decisive role in historical process; they constantly prepare changes in technological mode of production and in social system as a whole.

Historical personality is a philosophical characteristic of a personality meaning that his being purport and practical activity are directed towards the development of historical process. Personality’s role in history – means correlation of personality’s being purport with fundamental meaning of history; person’s subjective freedom with objective necessity of life. As it was substantiated by G.V. Plekhanov in his work “The role of personality in history” the role and significance of personality in history is determined by the dialectics of objective and subjective, freedom and necessity, regularity and chance.

Basic concepts and categories:

Philosophy of history is a constituent part of social philosophy which is interested in the analysis and interpretation of historical process and historical cognition.

History is the processes of reality that arises and develops as a specific part of cosmic processes, as it is connected with men’s conscious activity and their conscious realization of life-being as a whole. History develops in accelerated tempo constantly extending the sphere of its forms and possibilities, h”ence it is manifested as the space where human creates and realizes his freedom, his essential forces.

Meaning of history is understanding history as a process directed towards some definite strategic goal, the process in which man can realize his essence – that is his theoretical and practical faculties.

Progress is development of social system from the elementary towards the complex, more perfect, more finely organized, towards a richer potential and greater informational volume.

Regress is “reverse development” that leads to decay, to degradation, from the higher to the lower level.

Revolution means a qualitative change, the radical turn in a social system that provides progressive development.

Evolution means gradual changes in the course of social life and in nature that do not change the system as a whole.

Historical personality is a philosophical characteristic of a personality meaning that his being purport and practical activity are directed towards the development of historical process

Personality’s role in history means correlation of personality’s being purport with fundamental meaning of history; person’s subjective freedom with objective necessity of life.