Liberalism and the State: Economic Growth and the Inequality
https://doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2020-2(89)-147-159
Abstract
The article provides a critical comparison of two opposing views on the socio-economic development of Russia: radical liberal and socio-state ideology. The reason for the comparison was the report of Professor V. V. Kossov at a meeting (December 6, 2019) of the International Organizational Sciences Academy (IOSN) (“Barriers to Russia’s Economic Growth”), which stated that the main barrier to economic growth in Russia was government interference in economic activity and insufficient respect for private property in the population. The article shows on statistical data that, firstly, GDP growth should not be considered the main indicator of a country’s success, and secondly, it is the weakness of the state that actually hinders socio-economic development. It is shown that such problems as the elimination of poverty and inequality cannot be solved without the active participation of the state. The main thing is not economic growth and direct democracy, but the satisfaction of the interests of all social groups and the achievement of social justice. This position is supported by an appeal to the research results of many Western economists. Criticizing the liberal position, the authors of the article remain supporters of the free development of the individual and the society of equal opportunities.
About the Authors
Victor A. Volkonsky
Institute of Economic Forecasting, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Yuri N. Gavrilets
Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexander V. Kudrov
Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow
References
1. Varshavsky L. E. (2019). The Analysis of socio-economic problems and challenges, concerning information & communication technologies. The Works of Institute of System Analysis, RAS, vol. 69, iss. 1, рp. 3–16 (in Russian).
2. Volkonsky V. A. (2018). Conscience guidelines and their role in history. Economics of Contemporary Russia, no. 3 (82), pp. 142–156 (in Russian).
3. Volkonsky V. A. (2020). Activization factors of economic development and the role of government in contemporary Russia. Studies on Russian Economic Development, no. 2 (in print) (in Russian).
4. Dzolo D. (2010). Democracy and complexity. Moscow, NRU HSE (in Russian).
5. Luman N. (2005). Media reality. Moscow, Praxis (in Russian).
6. Kossov V. V. (2019). Barriers to economic growth. Moscow, IAOS (in Russian).
7. Ovcharova L. N., Birukova S. S., Vardanjan E. G., Ter-Akopian S.A. (2014). Income, expenses and consumption of households monitoring. Moscow, NRU HSE (in Russian).
8. Scherbakova E. M. (2019). Criminality in Russia, 2018. Demoscope Weekly, no. 809–810 (in Russian). URL: http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2019/0809/barom01.php.
9. Scherbakova E. M. (2019). Demographic results of the first half of 2019 in Russia. Demoscope Weekly, no. 823–824 (in Russian). URL: http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2019/0823/barom01.php.
10. Acemoglu D., Rabinson J. A. (2008). Persistence of power, elites and institutions. American Economic Review, vol. 98, no. 1, pp. 267–293.
11. Arrow K. J.A. (1950). Difficulty in the concept of social welfare. The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 58, no. 4 (August, 1950), pp. 328–346.
12. Bollier D. (2002). Silent theft. The private plunder of our common wealth. New York: Routledge.
13. Congressional Budget Office (2011). Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007. URL: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress‑2011–2012/reports/10–25-householdincome0.pdf.
14. Congressional Budget Office (2019). Projected changes in the distribution of household income, 2016 to 2021. URL: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-12/55941-CBO-Household-Income.pdf.
15. Maxton G., Randers J. (2016). Reinventing prosperity – managing economic growth to reduce unemployment, inequality and climate change. Vancouver: Greystone Books.
16. Milanovic B. (2016). Global inequality: a new approach for the age of globalization. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
17. Nikoloski Z. (2015). Democracy and income inequality: revisiting the long and short-term relationship. Review of Economics and Institutions, no. 6 (2), pp. 1–24.
18. Olson M. L. Jr. (1965). The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
19. Scheve K., Stasavage D. (2017). Wealth inequality and democracy. Ann. Rev. Polit. Sci., no. 20, pp. 451–468.
20. Stiglitz J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: how today’s divided society endangers our future. New York: WW Norton & Company.
21. Sinn H.-W. (2003). The new systems competition. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
22. Stiglitz J. E. (2012). The price of inequality: how today’s divided society endangers our future. New York: WW Norton & Company.
23. Vitali S., Glattfelder J. B., Battiston S. (2011) The network of global corporate control. PLOS ONE, no. 6 (10), e25995.
24. Wilkinson R. G., Picket K. E. (2008). The spirit level. Why greater equality makes societies stronger. New York: Bloomsbury.
Review
For citations:
Volkonsky V.A., Gavrilets Yu.N., Kudrov A.V. Liberalism and the State: Economic Growth and the Inequality. Economics of Contemporary Russia. 2020;(2):147-159. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2020-2(89)-147-159
Views:
967
Email this article 