失语症还是科学革命?(1980 - 90年代苏联马克思主义与非马克思主义经济学家话语)

P. Orekhovsky
{"title":"失语症还是科学革命?(1980 - 90年代苏联马克思主义与非马克思主义经济学家话语)","authors":"P. Orekhovsky","doi":"10.17835/2076-6297.2023.15.1.043-059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The change of discourse among Soviet economists preceded the change in the social structure of the USSR. Due to these changes, there appeared a number of socio-economic phenomena that could not be described in terms previously known to economists of the time. This led to a painful disorder of the collective cognitive structure shared by Russian economists – aphasia. The changes that took place in the economy of the country could not be described in Marxist terms of progress: the latter did not allow the «restoration of capitalism» after many years of «mature socialism» domination. At the same time, barter, non-payments, and the financial pyramid built by the state did not fit into the liberal discourse either. The main force behind the delegitimization and destruction of the Soviet social order was the Marxists. They defined the phenomena they observed as «non-socialist», which led them to the conclusion that the bureaucracy and the nomenklatura dominated the USSR. From the ugly pseudo-socialist state, they suggested moving towards «true socialism». But the democratic transformations they proposed largely coincided with those that figured in the official authoritative Marxist discourse. Against this background the gradual transition to the dominance of the liberal economic discourse is quite natural. However, at the first stage of the political confrontation the calls for economic liberalization were accompanied by the sympathy of domestic liberals for authoritarianism A. Pinochet, which could not but cause their subsequent discredit. Nevertheless, after 1998 there was a rapid period of «normalization» of the discussion. Liberal discourse becomes the main one and acquires respectability, both in politicians’ discussions (including the communists) and in the academic environment. The discourse of Yu.V. Yaremenko made it possible to see the structural imbalance of the Soviet economy. Under these conditions, the transition to the market «cut off» most of the non-competitive industries leading to the fact that Russia was among the poor countries. The decisions to release prices and launch a decentralized mechanism for bank lending to investments were necessary to eliminate the main structural imbalances. This approach has been relegated to the periphery of economic discussions. The interpretation of the transition of speech practices from Marxism to the modern economic mainstream as a scientific revolution is a retrospective rationalization of the catastrophe that occurred. The period during which most of the judgments of Russian economists were poorly correlated with the observed phenomena. Most works of that time are now forgotten. The author characterizes now forgotten ways of discussing economic phenomena as aphasia.","PeriodicalId":43842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Institutional Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aphasia or Scientific Revolution? (Discourses of Soviet Marxist and non-Marxist Economists in the 1980–1990s)\",\"authors\":\"P. Orekhovsky\",\"doi\":\"10.17835/2076-6297.2023.15.1.043-059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The change of discourse among Soviet economists preceded the change in the social structure of the USSR. Due to these changes, there appeared a number of socio-economic phenomena that could not be described in terms previously known to economists of the time. This led to a painful disorder of the collective cognitive structure shared by Russian economists – aphasia. The changes that took place in the economy of the country could not be described in Marxist terms of progress: the latter did not allow the «restoration of capitalism» after many years of «mature socialism» domination. At the same time, barter, non-payments, and the financial pyramid built by the state did not fit into the liberal discourse either. The main force behind the delegitimization and destruction of the Soviet social order was the Marxists. They defined the phenomena they observed as «non-socialist», which led them to the conclusion that the bureaucracy and the nomenklatura dominated the USSR. From the ugly pseudo-socialist state, they suggested moving towards «true socialism». But the democratic transformations they proposed largely coincided with those that figured in the official authoritative Marxist discourse. Against this background the gradual transition to the dominance of the liberal economic discourse is quite natural. However, at the first stage of the political confrontation the calls for economic liberalization were accompanied by the sympathy of domestic liberals for authoritarianism A. Pinochet, which could not but cause their subsequent discredit. Nevertheless, after 1998 there was a rapid period of «normalization» of the discussion. Liberal discourse becomes the main one and acquires respectability, both in politicians’ discussions (including the communists) and in the academic environment. The discourse of Yu.V. Yaremenko made it possible to see the structural imbalance of the Soviet economy. Under these conditions, the transition to the market «cut off» most of the non-competitive industries leading to the fact that Russia was among the poor countries. The decisions to release prices and launch a decentralized mechanism for bank lending to investments were necessary to eliminate the main structural imbalances. This approach has been relegated to the periphery of economic discussions. The interpretation of the transition of speech practices from Marxism to the modern economic mainstream as a scientific revolution is a retrospective rationalization of the catastrophe that occurred. The period during which most of the judgments of Russian economists were poorly correlated with the observed phenomena. Most works of that time are now forgotten. The author characterizes now forgotten ways of discussing economic phenomena as aphasia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Institutional Studies\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Institutional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2023.15.1.043-059\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Institutional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2023.15.1.043-059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

苏联经济学家话语的变化早于苏联社会结构的变化。由于这些变化,出现了许多社会经济现象,这些现象无法用当时经济学家以前所知道的术语来描述。这导致了俄罗斯经济学家共有的一种痛苦的集体认知结构紊乱——失语症。该国经济中发生的变化不能用马克思主义的进步术语来描述:后者不允许在“成熟的社会主义”统治多年后“资本主义复辟”。与此同时,物物交换、不付款和国家建立的金融金字塔也不适合自由主义的话语。苏联社会秩序的非法化和破坏背后的主要力量是马克思主义者。他们将他们观察到的现象定义为“非社会主义”,这使他们得出结论,官僚和权庸统治了苏联。他们建议从丑陋的伪社会主义国家走向“真正的社会主义”。但是,他们提出的民主转型在很大程度上与官方权威马克思主义话语中的民主转型是一致的。在这种背景下,逐渐过渡到自由主义经济话语的主导地位是很自然的。然而,在政治对抗的第一阶段,经济自由化的呼声伴随着国内自由主义者对独裁主义皮诺切特的同情,这不能不导致他们随后的名誉扫地。然而,在1998年之后,出现了一段讨论“正常化”的快速时期。无论是在政治家(包括共产党人)的讨论中,还是在学术环境中,自由话语都成为主要话语,并获得了尊重。大学的话语。亚列曼科让人们看到了苏联经济的结构性失衡。在这种情况下,向市场的过渡“切断”了大多数非竞争性产业,导致俄罗斯成为穷国之一。为了消除主要的结构性不平衡,必须决定放开价格和启动分散的银行贷款投资机制。这种方法已被置于经济讨论的边缘。把话语实践从马克思主义向现代经济主流的转变解释为一场科学革命,是对所发生的灾难的回顾性合理化。在此期间,俄罗斯经济学家的大多数判断与观察到的现象相关性很差。那个时代的大部分作品现在都被遗忘了。作者把现在被遗忘的讨论经济现象的方式描述为失语症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Aphasia or Scientific Revolution? (Discourses of Soviet Marxist and non-Marxist Economists in the 1980–1990s)
The change of discourse among Soviet economists preceded the change in the social structure of the USSR. Due to these changes, there appeared a number of socio-economic phenomena that could not be described in terms previously known to economists of the time. This led to a painful disorder of the collective cognitive structure shared by Russian economists – aphasia. The changes that took place in the economy of the country could not be described in Marxist terms of progress: the latter did not allow the «restoration of capitalism» after many years of «mature socialism» domination. At the same time, barter, non-payments, and the financial pyramid built by the state did not fit into the liberal discourse either. The main force behind the delegitimization and destruction of the Soviet social order was the Marxists. They defined the phenomena they observed as «non-socialist», which led them to the conclusion that the bureaucracy and the nomenklatura dominated the USSR. From the ugly pseudo-socialist state, they suggested moving towards «true socialism». But the democratic transformations they proposed largely coincided with those that figured in the official authoritative Marxist discourse. Against this background the gradual transition to the dominance of the liberal economic discourse is quite natural. However, at the first stage of the political confrontation the calls for economic liberalization were accompanied by the sympathy of domestic liberals for authoritarianism A. Pinochet, which could not but cause their subsequent discredit. Nevertheless, after 1998 there was a rapid period of «normalization» of the discussion. Liberal discourse becomes the main one and acquires respectability, both in politicians’ discussions (including the communists) and in the academic environment. The discourse of Yu.V. Yaremenko made it possible to see the structural imbalance of the Soviet economy. Under these conditions, the transition to the market «cut off» most of the non-competitive industries leading to the fact that Russia was among the poor countries. The decisions to release prices and launch a decentralized mechanism for bank lending to investments were necessary to eliminate the main structural imbalances. This approach has been relegated to the periphery of economic discussions. The interpretation of the transition of speech practices from Marxism to the modern economic mainstream as a scientific revolution is a retrospective rationalization of the catastrophe that occurred. The period during which most of the judgments of Russian economists were poorly correlated with the observed phenomena. Most works of that time are now forgotten. The author characterizes now forgotten ways of discussing economic phenomena as aphasia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
33.30%
发文量
24
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
On Intra-Group Allocative Efficiency of Resources in Industrial Business Models The Role of Non-Rooted Social Institutions in the Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Regional Innovation System Empirical Analysis of Cheating Among Students on the Basis of Surveys Factors of the Emergence of Collective Actions of Russian Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic Budgetary Borrowings and Investments in Russian Regions: Regulatory Issues and Opportunities for Enhancement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1