Suchergebnisse

The article comments on the concept of «socialism with Chinese specificity», which forms the ideological basis of the «Chinese miracle». The ideological origins of this concept, starting with Confucianism, are revealed. It has evolved to become increasingly pragmatic and to adapt to the realities of national and global development. The relation of this concept with the Marxist concept of socialism is shown. The article substantiates the fundamental theoretical thesis that in the objective-essential sense (in the elimination of, in particular, national specifics) Chinese society is a transitional form to socialism (a certain analogue of the Soviet society of the NEP period). The author talks about a «heterogeneous», «mixed» socio-economic system, the vector and nature of the future evolution of which will depend crucially on the strategic course of the CPC.

The article contains a commentary on the publication of G. A. Maslov «Scientific and technological progress and the advantages of socialism: the evolution of Soviet Economic thought» (Bulletin of the Moscow State University, Series 6. Economics, No. 3, 2021). Against the current difficulties in implementing national projects (criticism of their implementation was voiced at SPIEF-2019 and continues today), the publication of materials praising the organization of scientific and technological progress during the construction of the material and technical base of communism seems a nostalgic appeal. The glorification of real achievements does not raise protest. What is unacceptable is to silence equally evident failures. Here we mean the resolution «On the development of computer hardware production» (#1180-420) adopted at the meeting of the Communist party Politburo and the USSR Council of Ministers on December 30, 1967, which entailed the destruction of the Soviet industry that produced computer equipment for civil needs. This decision resulted in the replacement of Soviet-made computers with obsolete models of the largest US companies. We are still trying to correct the effect of this strategic mistake, but to recognize and, most importantly, draw necessary lessons both from the wrong decision and the accompanying processes is vital for successful implementation of today's national projects, primarily the Digital Economy Agenda.

Th e author focuses on a one-of-a-kind debate "On Socialism", which took place in the House of Lords of the British Parliament in the spring of 1935. For a long time, the upper chamber served as a barrier to the implementa-tion of bold social and political legislation. Until the beginning of the 20th century socialists had never been represented in the Parliament. As the Labor Party came into political spotlight and gradually strengthened its positions in the 1920s–1930s, the House of Lords was forced to adapt its composition to changing reali-ties. In 1924, the Labor faction was formed here for the fi rst time. A decade later, the Lords were prepared to seriously discuss the merits and demerits of the social-ist system. Th e article analyzes both the main arguments of the Laborites, who promoted transition to a new social system, and the theses put forward by Con-servatives and Liberals, supporters of the capitalist system. Particular emphasis is placed on the coverage and feedback which the discussion held in Westminster received on the pages of the British press of various political stances. Th e author comes to the conclusion that the arguments put forward by both supporters and opponents of socialism were in many respects similar to the theses that appeared in the course of the discussion in the Lower house of the UK Parliament in 1923. Th is discussion had a similar nature and was the fi rst of this kind in the British history. At the same time, the analyzed debate which took place in the House of Lords more than a decade later, bore an unmistakable imprint of a new era. Th e "Great Depression" of 1929–1933 had an important impact on the worldview of the generation, as it strengthened the conviction of left -wing politicians that capitalism was not the subject to improvement. Opponents of socialism, on the contrary, argued that a socialist future for Britain was not only economically un-tenable, but also dangerous, and incompatible with the unique English national character, based on individualism.

The article surveys the theories of national economy regulation introduced by eminent economists of the Stockholm School in the late XIX - early XX centuries and the social situation in Sweden during this period. The article also analyzes the transformation of Swedish economy during XX century from a relatively pure market economy to a modern "Scandinavian socialism", focuses on the role of government agencies and the influence of the political system on this process. In addition, the paper highlights those features which, according to the author, contributed to Sweden's shift from the raw materials supplier of the leading industrial powers in the late XIX century to a current world leader in technological development.

The October Revolution of 1917 profoundly influenced the course of the Indian freedom movement in multiple ways. It gave impetus to Indian political aspirations, widened the base of the freedom struggle by making industrial workers and peasants active participants, and endowed the movement with a progressive outlook. The revolution's principles resonated deeply among the people and leaders of the Indian freedom movement. In fact, many of the values enshrined in our Constitution, adopted post-independence, were inspired by the lofty ideals of the Russian Revolution. The most important event in Russia, influencing the course of the freedom movement in India, was the October Revolution in 1917. The revolution, its ideology, V. I. Lenin and his deep involvement with the issues confronting the people of the East, the transformation of Russia post 1917, and the overall attitude of the Soviet government and the Comintern towards India's freedom struggle deeply influenced both the people and the leaders of the Indian freedom movement. Though the multiclass national movement did not get converted completely to the cause of socialism, the fact remains that the legacies of the October Revolution influenced the course of the freedom struggle in multiple ways. Some of its legacies got imprinted in the Constitution that India adopted post-independence. The socialist component of the Constitution of India did not happen by accident. It was the outcome of the massive ideological churning that took place within and outside the Indian National Congress and that which by no small measure was triggered by the emancipatory ideals of the Russian Revolution of 1917. The Constitution of the Republic of India, adopted on 26 January 1950, was based on a set of principles and ideas that would achieve socialist reconstruction of society through democratic means. The right balance of the proper socio-economic rights with guaranteed democratic and civil liberties, based on the majority principle along with the right of minority opinions to exist and flourish in a secular state became the cornerstones of the Constitution that independent India adopted. Many of these values were clearly inspired by the lofty ideals of the Russian Revolution.