| | 7 Foreword |
| POST-SOVIET POLITICAL ECONOMY: THE NEW THEORETICAL WORK |
| | 14 Sergey D. Bodrunov |
| | Towards a New Quality of Material Production: The Future of Russia in the Eurasian Space |
| | | The article contains a number of theses that justify the sustainable tendency to becoming of the new industrial society which can be called as “the negation of the negation,” a dialectical “removal” both of the late industrialism described by Galbraith and post-industrial trends. Generation of the new industry is based on knowledge intensive technologies that change a nature of economic processes significantly. Russia needs to change in a large degree imperatives of its economic policy, putting industrial development in a priority to encourage own successful incorporation and progress in the new system; Eurasian economic cooperation plays a role of a tool to reach this goal. |
| | 32 Alexander V. Buzgalin |
| | Global Capital: The New Quality of Market, Money, and Capital in the Global Economy (On the Occasion of the 150th Anniversary of the Publication of Volume I of Karl Marx’s Capital and the 200th Anniversary of the Birth of Karl Marx) |
| | | This text is a presentation of of the third, 2-volume Russian edition of Aleksandr Buzgalin and Andrey Kolganov book Global Capital, which appeared in earlier editions in 2004 and 2007. The text reveals the basic provisions of the book. The starting-point for the book is its chapter on methodology. Found here are not only critiques of conventional Soviet “Marxism-Leninism” and post-modernism, but also a new rethinking of the classic dialectic (the authors propose a “dialectic of non-linear transformation”) and a theory of the “sunset” of the capitalist mode of production. |
| | | For the most part, however, the book is devoted to revealing the new quality now assumed by commodities, money and capital within the global economy. |
| | | The market has become not only global, but a totalitarian force that is no longer a “socially neutral mechanism of coordination”. It is now a product of the hegemony of corporate capital, featuring the intensive and extensive growth of new types of commodity – information, simulacra and so forth. The authors demonstrate the new qualities acquired by value, use-value, price and commodity fetishism within this new market, while exploring the contradictions of new non-limited resources (such as knowledge) and the commodity form of their existence. |
| | | Money is now a virtual product of fictitious financial capital, possessing a new nature, contradictions and functions, all of which are shown in the book. This analysis of the new nature of money helps the authors reveal the essence of so-called financialisation. |
| | | Capital has become the result of a complex system of exploitation. In the twenty-first century context of this exploitation includes the “classic” extraction of surplus value from industrial workers combined with internal corporate redistribution of income by “insiders”; international exploitation; and the exploitation of creative labour through the expropriation of intellectual rent. Further, modern capital imposes its hegemony not only on labour, but also on free time, and subjugates not only the labour power of the human individual, but also his or her personality (human and social “capital” are thus irrational forms of the development of the personality and of solidarity). |
| | | The book also includes a chapter showing how the authors’ analysis of the modern market, money and capital helps to explain the nature of the recent world economic crisis. |
| | | The book’s final chapter sets out the features of the “Jurassic Park” of Russian capitalism. |
| | | Also provided in the book is a broad picture of the debates occurring within the Post-Soviet School of Critical Marxism. The latter is a network that includes many well-known Russian authors, who over the past 25 years have produced more than 50 books and hundreds of articles. |
| | 48 Mikhail I. Voeikov |
| | Market Fundamentalism and a New Wave of Vulgarization in Economics |
| | | The article discusses the conceptions of Western economic theory, which can be treated as a vulgar political economy. Soviet economists have long pointed to the scientific inadequacy of these provisions. Unfortunately, these vulgarisms are now widely presented in Russian textbooks. It is therefore, necessary to turn to the achievements of the Soviet economic science to replace vulgar borrowing. |
| | 58 Anatoly A. Porokhovsky |
| | Political Economy in the Twenty-First Century (A Reliable Key to Systemic Analysis of the Modern Economy and to Resolving Its Problems) |
| | | The article reveals the objective process through which political economy arose and developed as a fundamental part of economic theory in general. Discussion questions are set forward on the topic and the method of research. The role of the industrial and information periods in the development of capitalism is examined. The article demonstrates that political economy has a full set of instruments for systematically analysing the modern economy and resolving its problems. |
| | 75 Victor T. Ryazanov |
| | Political Economy of the Crisis and Its Consequences: the Socialization of Finance and Returning of Real Values to the Economy |
| | | On basis of the analysis of contemporary economic situation in the world and Russia is made the conclusion about retention in the post-crisis period of the domination of speculative-financial capital in the economic model. For overcoming of the existing disproportions and speculative distortions in the economy is based the need for development and implementation of the program of the socialization of finances. Its importance is determined by the possibility of the formation of the new model of the mixed economy, and for Russia this program comes out as the key condition of diversifying of economy and conducting of the policy of neoindustrialization of the country. |
| | 88 Georgy N. Tsagolov |
| | Authoritative Point of View about Formation of the New Integral Society |
| | | Both books are the political and economic chronicle of Russia and fast developing countries of the last 25 years. Analyzing ways of the development of these countries the authors comes to the conclusion that the new societies have appeared in the world. Those are integral or convergent societies the prominent thinkers such as J. K. Galbraith, J. Timbergen, P. Sorokin have dreamed about. And this is the only way to develop for Russia. |
| | 99 Natalia G. Yakovleva |
| | Political Economy of Education: Statement of the Problem |
| | | The paper presents the characteristics of the prevailing views on education. For a comprehensive study of the role of education in modern society, including the economy, it is proposed to use the methodology of the political economy and its tools, which allows to study the socio-economic relations, which are formed in the field of education. The starting point for the use of the proposed methodology is to define the sphere of education as a sphere of production (both literally and figuratively) of the main resource of the economy in general and in particular of material production – labor skills and innovation (even more – a creative) potential employee. |
| POST-SOVIET POLITICAL ECONOMY: METHODOLOGY, HISTORY, TEACHING |
| | 110 Liudmila Bulavka-Buzgalina |
| | Culture and Market |
| | | Author shows that under the conditions of global hegemony of capital market is becoming totalitarian force, and culture became a commodity. Furthermore, instead of market of useful commodities and objects of art modern market is more and more space of production and of simulacra, ‘consumer society’ is transformed into the ‘society of simulative consumption’. Alternative to this situation is disalienation of personality through dialectical negation of the ‘market fundamentalism’ based on development of social creativity. |
| | 117 Gleb A. Maslov |
| | Potential of Research Concerned the Impact of Techno-Economic Factors on the Content of Economic Theory |
| | | In the article there is a justification of high potential of the research concerned the impact of techno-economic factors on the paradigms of Economic theory formation. The existing heritage concerned the development of Economic theory, takes into account this factor. However, there is a huge scope for continuation of this research. Enrichment of scientific knowledge in the sphere of theories changing obtains the extra importance in conditions of qualitative changes in the economic system. |
| | 134 Dmitriy A. Pletnev |
| | Problem of Alienation: Challenge to the Political Economy of the XXI Century |
| | | The article deals with modern verges of alienation problem and the possibility of overcoming it with the help of the political economy. The evolution and current state of the problem of alienation in modern society are analyzed. Particular attention is paid to such diverse aspects of alienation as encouraging infantilism, emancipation and alienation in love, intellectual property, ideological coercion and “soft power”, hyperformalization. The article explains important role of science, education and culture to overcome the alienation of a human being, including the political economy as a methodological basis for the unalienated way of thinking and overcoming of alienation. |
| | 144 Alexandr V. Sorokin |
| | Political Economy: Basic Level |
| | | Marx's Capital is a basic level of political economy. In the “Capital” the categories of the capitalist mode of production are presented in their intrinsic connection. Marx included in a general model the main categories: commodity, money, price, capital, wages, profit, rent, interest, etc. |
| | | Fundamental Capital model is not obsolete, but there is a need to incorporate the modern categories of micro and macroeconomics into it: demand, quantity demanded, supply, quantity supplied, investment, savings, consumption, etc. This task is performed by “general economic model”, which is given in a training course at the Economics Faculty of Moscow State University since 2007. The article gives basic information on subject and method of general model. |
| | 157 Georgy N. Tsagolov |
| | The Enduring Stars (N. A. Tsagolov, S. M. Menshikov and S. S. Dzarasov: Contribution to the National Political Economy) |
| | | The paper discusses the contribution of N. A. Tsagolov, S. M. Menshikov and S. S. Dsarasov in the domestic political economy. |
| POLITICAL ECONOMY AND ECONOMIC POLICY: USSR–RUSSIA |
| | 176 Victor V. Boukreev, Emil N. Rudyk |
| | Collective Enterprises as a Tool of Socialization of National Economy |
| | | The paper argues the need for creation of various forms of collective enterprises in Russia and abroad, rejection of privatization as the main method of improving the competitiveness of enterprises. Measures on the socialization of enterprise management process within the national economy and the strategy of creation a social state in Russia. |
| | 189 Andrey I. Kolganov |
| | Political Economy of Russian Capitalism’s “Jurassic Park” |
| | | The author sets out to show that the reason for the extensive and asocial variety of involution found in Russia lies in the specific nature of the economic relations and institutions that have become established within the country’s “Jurassic capitalism” – a highly individual caricature of the “late capitalism” found in the West. Within “Jurassic capitalism” the main economic and political authority belongs to clan-corporate groups (“dinosaurs”) that are integrated with the corrupt apparatus of the state. The article will reveal the nature, structure and mechanisms of power of these “dinosaurs”, along with the system of property rights and relations that is peculiar to the Russian economy. |
| | | Within Russian capitalism, the dominant mode of coordination which determines the proportions in the economy is the semi-legal struggle between these “dinosaurs”, who not only exercise particular power in the marketplace, but who also generate “fields of dependency”, local regulating influences which have the effect to some degree of subjugating other producers and consumers. The main parameters for the competitiveness of these structures do not have to do with the price and quality of goods, but with the degree of control that is exercised over information, financing, and access to raw materials and other national resources. |
| | | The author poses the question of the degree to which this model is peculiar to post-Soviet society, and to which it is merely a caricature of the system of relations of late capitalism, a caricature in which the discontents associated with the modern Western economy are multiplied. |
| | 207 Rifat I. Khabibullin |
| | Collective Enterprises in Russia and America: from Theoretical Controversy to Practical Consensus |
| | | The article presents the results of the author's study of present state of collective enterprises (joint-stock companies with employees as shareholders). It is noted that in Russia this form of business is not sufficiently developed. The study discusses the experience of organizing the employee-owned companies in Lipetsk region: their governmental support, functioning and commercial efficiency. The article provides a comparative analysis of activities of employee-owned companies and companies functioning on the basis of other business models. It considers the economic efficiency of collective firms in Russia (collective enterprises – CE) and the USA (enterprises based on Employee Stock Ownership Plan – ESOP model). |
| | | It was demonstrated that employee-owned companies have considerable over the enterprises of other forms of ownership concerning better control of production due to participative management, more comfortable psychological climate and higher competitiveness. We show that the factors of socio-economic sustainability of such enterprises are based on interest of the labor collective in the products of their work. The origin of such interest is an opportunity for each employee to participate in management of the company and his high social security. |
| | 218 David B. Epstein |
| | Soviet Socialism: Politico-Economic Analysis |
| | | The article analyzes the economic achievements as well as shortcomings and problems caused, first of all, the mismatch of economic governance system of the USSR in the 60–80s to the requirements of scientific and technological progress. During this period the country had made significant progress in creating conditions for the full development of a human being in education, health, culture and recreation. Analysis of the dynamics of wages and distribution of the social product demonstrates that it was carried out in the interests of the society, of all the classes and strata, rather than the layer of managers and officials. This meets the requirements of socialism. On this basis the concept, describing the Soviet Union as a system of dictatorship “of the Party and state bureaucracy” or “state capitalism” is criticized. |
