Nineteenth-century Russian intellectuals were faced with a dilemma. They had to choose between modernizing their country, thus imitating the West, or reaffirming what was perceived as their country's own values and thereby risk remaining socially underdeveloped and unable to compete with Western powers. Scholars have argued that this led to the emergence of an anti-Western, anti-modern ethnic nationalism. In this innovative book, Susanna Rabow-Edling shows that there was another solution to the conflicting agendas of modernization and cultural authenticity – a Russian liberal nationalism. This nationalism took various forms during the long nineteenth century, but aimed to promote reforms through a combination of liberalism, nationalism and imperialism.

Liberalism is a crucially important topic today; this book adds the important yet neglected Russian aspect to its history.

Besides absolutists of the right (the tsar and his adherents) and left (Lenin and his fellow Bolsheviks), the Russian political landscape in 1917 featured moderates seeking liberal reform and a rapid evolution towards a constitutional monarchy. Vasily Maklakov, a lawyer, legislator and public intellectual, was among the most prominent of these, and the most articulate and sophisticated advocate of the rule of law, the linchpin of liberalism. This book tells the story of his efforts and his analysis of the reasons for their ultimate failure. It is thus, in part, an example for movements seeking to liberalize authoritarian countries today—both as a warning and a guide. Although never a cabinet member or the head of his political party—the Constitutional Democrats or “Kadets”—Maklakov was deeply involved in most of the political events of the period. He was defense counsel for individuals resisting the regime (or charged simply for being of the wrong ethnicity, such as Menahem Beilis, sometimes considered the Russian Dreyfus). He was continuously a member of the Kadets’ central committee and their most compelling orator. As a somewhat maverick (and moderate) Kadet, he stood not only between the country’s absolute extremes (the reactionary monarchists and the revolutionaries), but also between the two more or less liberal centrist parties, the Kadets on the center left, and the Octobrists on the center right. As a member of the Second, Third and Fourth Dumas (1907-1917), he advocated a wide range of reforms, especially in the realms of religious freedom, national minorities, judicial independence, citizens’ judicial remedies, and peasant rights.

With its rocky transition to democracy, post-Soviet Russia has made observers wonder whether a moderating liberalism could ever succeed in such a land of extremes. But in Liberals under Autocracy, Anton A. Fedyashin looks back at the vibrant Russian liberalism that flourished in the country’s late imperial era, chronicling its contributions to the evolution of Russia’s rich literary culture, socioeconomic thinking, and civil society. For five decades prior to the revolutions of 1917, The Herald of Europe (Vestnik Evropy) was the flagship journal of Russian liberalism, garnering a large readership. The journal articulated a distinctively Russian liberal agenda, one that encouraged social and economic modernization and civic participation through local self-government units (zemstvos) that defended individual rights and interests—especially those of the peasantry—in the face of increasing industrialization. Through the efforts of four men who turned The Herald into a cultural nexus in the imperial capital of St. Petersburg, the publication catalyzed the growing influence of journal culture and its formative effects on Russian politics and society. Challenging deep-seated assumptions about Russia’s intellectual history, Fedyashin’s work casts the country’s nascent liberalism as a distinctly Russian blend of self-governance, populism, and other national, cultural traditions. As such, the book stands as a contribution to the growing literature on imperial Russia's nonrevolutionary, intellectual movements that emphasized the role of local politics in both successful modernization and the evolution of civil society in an extraparliamentary environment.

Although many Russians thought that the Constitutional Democrats, or Kadets, would be the party that would lead them through the Russian Revolution into the ranks of the Western European democracies, the Kadets were easily crushed by the Bolsheviks in the struggle for power. How the Kadets responded to the events of the revolution and failed at the time of the party's greatest crisis is the subject of William G. Rosenberg's study. As political history, the book examines the values, programs, organization, and tactices of Russia's most priminent liberal party from 1917 to 1921. As a study of the Russian Revolution and Civil War, it probes the strengths and weaknesses of the one political group whose politices did more to influence the outcome of events that any other political organization except the Bolsheviks. Based largely on party journals and emigre archives, the book focuses not only on the role of the Kadets in the revolution, but also on the broader issue of the relationship of Russiasn liberal politics to revolutionary social forces. William G. Rosenberg is Associate Professor of History at the University of Michigan. Originally published in 1974. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

This book examines the challenges and pressures liberal journalists face in Putin's Russia. It presents the findings of an in-depth qualitative study, which included ethnographic observations of editorial meetings during the conflict in Ukraine. It also provides a theoretical framework for evaluating the Russian media system and a historical overview of the development of liberal media in the country. The book focuses on some of Russia’s most influential liberal national news outlets: "the deadliest" newspaper Novaya Gazeta, "Russia’s last independent radio station" Radio Echo of Moscow (Ekho Moskvy) and US Congress-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. The fieldwork included ethnographic observations of editorial meetings, long interviews with editors and journalists as well as documentary analysis. The monograph makes theoretical contributions to three main areas: 1. Media systems and terms of reference. 2. Journalism: cultures, role conceptions, and relationship with power, culture and society. 3. Mediatisation of conflict and nationhood.

Modern political systems have been the products of liberal democracy, Marxism, or fascism. Dugin asserts a fourth ideology is needed to sift through the debris of the first three to look for elements that might be useful, but that remains innovative and unique in itself.