В. И. Ульянов-Ленин
Convergent political economy of the “New socialism” by J. K. Galbraith |
In the evolution of Western-type and Soviet-type economies after World War II, there were many common points that prompted scientists to talk about the convergence of two ideologically alternative political and economic systems. Remarkable examples of a comparative analysis of both vectors of the development of national economies, based on the same conceptual premises, are the books of J. K. Galbraith “The new industrial state” and “Economics and the public purpose”. The inability of the neoclassical and neo-Keynesian theory to explain the socio-economic changes that took place initiated a scientifi c search in the Western economy for the properties of the Soviet socialist system of regulation, the planned organization of the national economy. The need for planning was predetermined by the nature of the use of time and capital in modern production, the specialization of enterprises, the needs of large corporate organizations, the problems of unstable functioning of the market in conditions of advanced engineering and technology. There are reasons to assume that J. K. Galbraith’s concept of the state-corporate economy contains a reminiscence of the theory of state-monopolistic capitalism, set forth in the most famous works of V. I. Ulyanov-Lenin “Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism” and “About food tax”. J. K. Galbraith outlined a logically holistic conceptual understanding of the objective conditionality of convergence in the development of Western-type and Soviet-type economic models. Decentralization in Soviet-style economic systems meant not a return to the market, but the transfer of some planned functions from the state to the fi rm. The convergence of the Soviet and Western systems cannot be understood as the return of the fi rst system to the market. Both systems have outgrown the market. There was a clear convergence in the direction of the same forms of planning. J.K. Galbraith discussed the possibility of reforming the American economy on the basis of the model of “new socialism”. |
Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2022, vol. 22, iss. 3 |
The dialogue about the new economic policy: J. M. Keynes and V. I. Ulyanov-Lenin |
Introduction. It is particularly interesting to study the achievements of outstanding personalities on the world scale, those who made a signifi cant contribution to economic science, played a crucial role in the international history of politics and economic activity, laid the prerequisites for the formation of original schools of economic thought, which were named after their founders. Such personalities were John Maynard Keynes and Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov-Lenin. Methods and concepts. The term “dialogue”, meaning a conversation, an exchange of statements in spoken and written speech, precisely characterizes the format of correspondence communication between J. M. Keynes and V. I. Lenin. Having no personal acquaintance with each other, no mutual sympathies, the interlocutors addressed each other in publications and public speeches, setting out and commenting on the words and thoughts, deeds and actions, moral values, social and political ideals shared by the vis-a-vis. The dialogue between the two prominent persons dealt with the problems of developing and implementing a new economic policy in the international sphere and in certain countries. Analysis and interpretation. The immediate reason for the beginning of the dialogue was the publication of J. M. Keynes’ book “Economic Consequences of Peace” in December 1919, which repeatedly mentioned the name of V. I. Lenin. The dialogue of J. M. Keynes and V. I. Lenin took place not only in the format of publicly addressing each other, indicating the name of the interlocutor, but also in a hidden form of reminiscence – memories of what was said and heard, written and perceived by the counterpart. Results. The communication between J. M. Keynes and V. I. Lenin was maintained in the “Ab voce, ad rem” mode – from words to deeds. Serious thoughts expressed by the interlocutors found their real embodiment. |
Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2022, vol. 22, iss. 1 |