of liberalism as the consequence and not as the cause of the decay? In any case, Leont'ev's theory implies that the natural law of evolution is something altogether different from the progress preached by European philosophers and their Russian imitators. However this may be, Leont'ev becomes somewhat alarmed when he contemplates the future of Russia, for he is seized with a doubt whether, in accordance with his evolutionary law, Russia, too, must not perish, despite her Byzantinism. He cannot console himself with the thought that Russia is still young, for his country is already in fact more than a thousand years old. Besides, Peter and his successors introduced a suspiciously large amount of the European enlightenment and of European institutions into Russia. How, then, can Russia be preserved? With pitiless consistency Leont'ev comes to the conclusion that Russia must, in contrast with Europe, undergo an arrest of development; Russia must be "frozen" that she may escape "living"—for everything that lives must die. Russia must therefore be protected from her arch enemy, European progress; Russia must not succumb to equalitarian liberalism. Leont'ev would rather accept socialism than liberalism, for socialism contains elements of discipline and organisation. Liberalism seems to him to embody negation as its principle; liberalism is decomposition, for it wishes to level and to suppress natural inequalities. Leont'ev believes that in civilized lands socialism will inevitably be realised, but that in Russia hereditary inequalities will persist. He deplores that in 1861 the "stone wall" of privileges was overthrown. The old aristocracy in conjunction with the tsar constituted aristocracy as by God established; their piety was exemplary; during the days of serfdom the peasant, too, kept the fasts of the church according to rule.
It is obvious that Leont'ev is disturbed by the undesired consequences of his evolutionary law. He would like to keep Russia in the second stage of development, and that is why the "mailed fist " of absolutism must be used against liberalism. The liberalism which in his belief was effecting the decomposition of Europe, was regarded with the utmost hostility by Leont'ev in all its forms and gradations; he considered every liberal to be half a nihilist; and he thought the most dangerous of all liberals were those who diffused their doctrines under the protection of the military uniform, the professorial chair, the judicial bench, or the editorial pen.
