DOI: 10.33917/mic-3.116.2024.5-14

The recent campaign to seize large enterprises from private property based on appeals from the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation to the courts is causing a mixed reaction in the public consciousness. On the one hand, the people have long been yearning for a review of the results of privatization – unfair, unreasonable and criminal. On the other hand, the statute of limitations for challenging acts of privatization of state property in the 1990s. has long expired, and their abolition looks like an arbitrariness of law enforcement agencies, grossly trampling on basic property rights, which are considered the basis of the current economic structure. Let’s try to figure out if this is so.

References:

1. Civil Code of the Russian Federation dated November 30, 1994 No. 51-FZ (as amended on March 11, 2024). URL: https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_5142/

2. Analysis of the processes of privatization of state property in the Russian Federation for the period 1993-2003. Report of the Accounts Chamber. M.: Olita Publishing House, 2004.

3. Kleiner G.B. Managing corporate enterprises in transition economies. Economic issues. 1999;8:64 (In Russ.).

4. Kleiner G.B. Enterprise strategy. M.: «Delo» ANKh Moscow. 2008. 528 p.

5. Ouchi U. Methods of organizing production. Japanese and American approaches (brief translation from English). M.: Economics. 1984.

6. Glazyev S. Chinese economic miracle. Lessons for Russia and the world. M.: Iz-vo «Ves Mir», 2023. 406 p.

7. Kleiner G.B., Khabibullin R.I., Dementyev V.E. and others. Collective forms of management in modern economics. M.: Publishing House «Scientific Library», 2017.

DOI: 10.33917/es-3.189.2023.86-93

The author examines a number of topical aspects of socio-political practice and futurology of the ongoing process of cardinal transformations in post-Soviet Russia. It is shown that this process constitutes the essence of global trends of permanent renewal of state-public institutions, socio-political and production practices; it is associated with abandoning outdated ideologemes, economic concepts, with the elites change in the ongoing struggle for dominance in power structures.

References:

1. Kenko-khosi. Zapiski ot skuki [Boredom Notes]. Saint Petersburg, 2011, p. 11.

2. Khaidegger M. Istoki khudozhestvennogo tvoreniya (1935–1936): Izbrannye raboty raznykh let [Origins of Artistic Creation (1935–1936): Selected Works of Different Years]. Moscow, 2008, p. 421, available at: Haydegger_Istok-hudozhestvennogo-tvoreniya_RuLit_Me_515679.pdf.

3. Aron R. Etapy razvitiya sotsiologicheskoi mysli [Stages of the Sociological Thought Development]. Moscow, 1992, p. 256.

4. Knyazeva E., Kurdyumov S. Osnovaniya sinergetiki: Rezhimy s obostreniem, samoorganizatsiya, tempomiry [Fundamentals of Synergetics: Blow-Up Modes, Self-Organization, Tempo Worlds]. Saint Petersburg, 2002, pp. 306–308.

5. Makanin V. Pyataya knopka [Fifth Button]. Novyi mir, 2006, p. 10.

6. Rakitov A. Tsivilizatsiya, kul’tura, tekhnologiya i rynok [Civilization, Culture, Technology and the Market]. Voprosy filosofii, 1992, no 5.

7. Gesse G. Faust i Zaratustra. Doklad, sdelannyi v bremenskoi mestnoi gruppe Germanskogo soyuza monistov 1 maya 1909 g.: V kn. “Faust i Zaratustra” [Faust and Zarathustra. Report made in the Bremen local group of the German Monist Union on May 1, 1909: In the book “Faust and Zarathustra”]. Saint Petersburg, 2001, p. 23.

8. Yadov V.A. Teoretiko-kontseptual’noe ob”yasnenie “postkommunisticheskikh transformatsii” [Theoretical-Conceptual Explanation of “Post-Communist Transformations”]. Rossiya transformiruyushchayasya. Ezhegodnik, vyp. 6, Moscow, 2006, p. 124.

9. Davydov A.A. Mezhdu mistikoi i ratio [Between Mysticism and Ratio]. Moscow, 2006.

10. Kelly K. Fouth, Humanism and Technology. N.Y. — L., 1972.

11. Lisichkin V.A., Virin M.M. Informatsionnoe obshchestvo kak politicheskaya futurologiya [The Information Society as Political Futurology]. Moscow, 2009, p. 25.

12. Mesarovic M., Pestel E. Mankind at the Turning Point. N.Y., 1974, p. 40.

13. Sorokin P.A. Glavnye tendentsii nashego vremeni [Major Trends of Our Time]. Moscow, 1997.

14. Epshtein M. Znak probela [Blank Spaces]. O budushchem gumanitarnykh nauk, Moscow, 2004.

15. Horgan J. The End of Science: Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age. N.Y., Broadway Books, 1997, p. 7.

16. Kuznetsov V. Geokul’tura [Geoculture]. Moscow, 2000, p. 580–582.

17. Annan K. Predotvrashchenie voin i bedstvii: global’nyi vyzov rastushchikh masshtabov: Godovoi doklad OON za 1999 g. [Preventing Wars and Disasters: A Global Challenge of Growing Size: UN Annual Report 1999]. N.Y., 2000.

The lecture deals with Keynesian views on interaction between government and business — first, during the Great Depression, and then in the postwar period of economic recovery, when the role of the State in the Tandem increased, the State intensified its involvement in the business. The role of public investment into infrastructure as a cornerstone of future economic growth is characterized. Keynesian idea of the importance for economic development of investment in human capital is obtained. The features of neo-developmentalism (neo-structuralism) that have proliferated in the XXI century are analysed.

I come from the era called “dashing nineties”, I represent the team that is believed to have demolished the Soviet Union, destroyed the economy, led our people to poverty. Today they swipe us without trying to understand the essence of the processes, which took place in that period.

Top 50 of the most strategic appraisal companies in Russia.

What kind of financial system is it, in which incredible for other countries losses of foreign exchange reserves, acquired with such difficulty over the decades, occur? It is clear that such financial system needs major adjustments.

It’s possible to say surely that for many centuries two models of relationship in society co-exist — control (diktat!) or partnership, and predominance of one or another component determines the type of corresponding public formation.

Our economy today is not in a position to renounce hydrocarbon exports — either from political or economic reasons. And it would have been unjustified.