Politicians, philosophers, historians, sociologists at all times and throughout the civilized world were interested in the problem: "the role of the individual in history." In the recent Soviet past, the Marxist-Leninist approach prevailed: the main driving force of society is people, the working masses. It is they who form society, classes. The people create history and bring forth heroes from their midst.
It's hard to argue with these, but you can place accents differently. Society to realize
significant goals in their development, passionaries are simply needed (more on this later), leaders, leaders who are able to predict the course of social development earlier, deeper and more fully than others, understand goals, set guidelines and captivate like-minded people.
One of the first Russian Marxists G. V. Plekhanov argued that the leader is great in that he has features that make him the most capable of serving the great social needs of his time, which arose under the influence of general andspecial reasons.”
What are the criteria to be guided by when determining the role of the individual in history? Philosophy judges by
a) how significant ideas this person generates for society, b) what organizational skills she has and how well she can mobilize the masses to solve nationwide projects, c) what result society will achieve under the leadership of this leader.
It is most convincing to judge the role of the individual in the history of Russia. V. I. Lenin headed the state for no more than 7 years, but left a significant mark. Today it is estimated with a plus sign and a minus sign. But no one can deny that this person entered the history of Russia and the whole world, influencing the fate of several generations. Evaluation of I. V. Stalin went through all the stages - from admiration, and then many years of silence - to resolute condemnation and denial of all his activities and again to the search for rationality in the actions of the leader
of all times and peoples.” In the last years of his life, L. I. Only the lazy did not make fun of the “leader” of Brezhnev, and after decades it turned out that the time of his reign turned out to be the golden mean for the Soviet Union, only subsequent unfortunate reformers not only failed to multiply the achievements, but also squandered the potential created over the post-war decades. And today, the assessment of its activities is again undergoing changes. It seems that the personality of M. S. will someday become the same significant figure. Gorbachev. He would have already become a national hero and recognizedworld authority, if the “perestroika of 1985-1991” conceived by him and his team had not turned out to be such a failure. We recall how many "Yeltsinists" were in the country in the nineties, until it became obvious that this "democratic leader", together with his team, was surrendering Russia, being under the hood of the American administration. Probably, life will still make amendments, much is hidden from the eyes of contemporaries, but a lot has been published. He who has ears, let him hear.
But today it would be good to turn to Lev Nikolayevich Gumilyov's theory of passionarity. In the passionary theory of ethnogenesis, people of an energy-abundant type are those citizens who have an innate ability to receive more energy from the external environment than is required only for species and personal self-preservation. They can give out this energy as a purposeful activity, which aims to modify the environment around them. The characteristics of human behavior and his psyche testify to increased passionarity.
The role of personality in history under certain conditions becomes a driving force for them
thanks to such quality as purposefulness. In these cases, passionaries seek to change the surrounding space in accordance with the ethnic values they have adopted. Such a person measures all his actions and actions with moral standards that come from ethnic values.
The role of personality in history for such people is that they are people of new thinking in the population. They are not afraid to breakold way of life. They are able to become and are becoming the dominant link of new ethnic groups. Passionaries put forward, develop and innovate.
Probably, among contemporaries, too, there are many stands. For ethical reasons, we will not name the living. But now a portrait of the leader of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, rises before my eyes, about whom, during his lifetime, they wrote that this is the hope of progressive mankind. Russian cosmonauts, outstanding athletes, scientists, researchers - they are heroes because they do not need to be ex alted, but simply do their job. History will determine their role. And she is a fair lady, only with a result postponed to future generations.
