Political economy as science arose in. Terms of Political Economy

Political savings - from-raise, in Lo-alive on-Cha-Lo Form-Mi-Mi-Mi-Che-Te-Mi-Bow-Mi-Che-Te-UK.

WHO NIK-NIE-EPE NIE-MII.

Co-Che-Nie Political Economy"Forward, I sing-Wamm in the head of the Kniki A. Mont-Kriend-E-on" Tat-Tat of Li-Thi-Cheka Eco-No-Mia "(1615) and Para-Zu-Vas-Lo Ras-Shi-Rea Ana Lie for Elas-North-Ka with Oba-Las T-Mo-Ho-Zyi-St (Oikonomia) on the organization of the Ho-Zyi-St-Va in the pre-de lah of the State Tse-Lo. In the Li-Te-Tu-re measures-can-Ti-Liz-Ma State-sub-Wa-Lo in a ni-ma-decision of political economy as on-bo-RA pre-Pi-Sa For Pra-Vi-Tel-Tel-St-Va in the Tse-Lyakh, the same-the-go-th-na-na-thor-th-th, Ba Lan-sa Uve-Li-Chered to-Ho-Dov Kaz-us with from-day-st-vius in Vla-de-Ni-Mo-Na-ka Rud-Ni-Ko-Rod Tal deals. But in the age-penny, a hundred different political savings, a different policy of political economy: "EU-Te-St-Venosh-Ko-Nov" , non-Ho-di for the exact SU-J-de-Sori-Ni-Ni-Tel-Nyu-North-Su-Darisi (U. Pet-Tyu); Is-up-to-the Eco-No-MIC muting-Mo-Vi-Si-Mi-Social Soci-Vi-Al-Bush (P. Boua-Gil -Be-ra, R. Kan-Til-O-O). Per-Sis-Te-Ma-Tichetic "IS-FE-QU-VAS-QU-POP Little-Ti-Cheko Eco-No-Mia" (1767) would be Sa-But Scottish Avt-Rum J. Stu-Arov Tom; He is SFOR-MU-Li-RO-Ta-Da-Chi Political Saving: "Webly, the OP-DE-Lyon-ny Foundation of Su-St-Ways for All te-leu, pre-dot-nephery all-cue the risk of WHO Ni-No-venera's non-voyage of these funds, ensuring all blah, not Di-MY for the satisy-led-re-re-latch, and give a question of all Libery. "

Under WHO-Da-St-Vi-Lo-Fi-Fii, the pro-Obosh, in Ev-Ro-ne, the pre-stakeholder about the continued Ho-Zyi- St-ve as about EC-punished in a row, in the one-ko-rh-vi-tel-v-vo, not honesty-si (french school -Al f-zo-edge), and about In-di-Vi de, pre-following in the Ho-zyaniy act-tel-no-ego-static in-ten - Out of own Paul ("Much-Much-les about the Li-Thi-Chest Eco-No-Mia" of the Italian Fi-Lo-Co-Fa P. Vel-Ri, 1771). These pre-leases of SDE-LAL state-sub-silence of A. Smith ("IS-FE-Du-Vasya about the RO-de and Proshi B-Gat- ST-VA Na-Ro-Dov ", 1776). Ran-nude of the IS-Town of Political Saving He Schem-Ma Ti-Rou-Val, as in the next-to-va-tel of three "SIS-Top": "Mer-Can-Til-Noi" (her Ti-Pich-Mi-Ra-Zi-La-Mi Smith on-eyed T. Ma-on and Zh.B. Kol-Ba-Ra, I-ni-Ruya Mont-Crow -E-on and stu-AR-TA), F-Zo-Kra-Ti-Chekoy and Sis-Te-We are the Sa-Morty Media. TATTAT MEDIA-TA PO-LU-SILE-EE-RO-PEY-SOCIENCE AS "RU-KO-QUI IN CO-ZERS-CAU-SU-SU-DAR- of the stubborn strength "(according to the N.P. Ru-Myan-Tse-va) and on-Cha-Lo" Nu-Schero ", or" Clas-Si-Chekoy ", political savings. With its influence, echo, either the influence of the Uti-Li-Ta-St-Skoy Fi-Lo-Co-Fii I. Ben-Ta-Ma, Pro-Veda She Once-li-mine political savings as Nau-Koi and as an IS-Cry-St-in Eco-No-Micn Little.

Since the beginning of the XIX century in ve-ly-co-brothers and France, Essay-beer in the Lo-su Pro-mouse-Lena Re-in-Luzi, Pro-Isos -The Al-Waiting-in-lemth of Clas-Si-Cheky Li-Ti-Thieh Eco-No-Mii with Dock Three Non-Fine-Tel va of state-owned in the activities of pre-at-Ma-te-lei, i.e., the Li-Thi Eco-No-Miche Li-Ra-Liz-Ma, under ZUN-GOM "LAISSEZ FAIRE" (POLE NEFT-SHA-TEL-ST-CO). The crucian-PHIM of the Teo-Re-Kom of the Eco-No-MIC Li-Ra-Liz-Ma, the Tre-Bo-Wav-ShiM of the removal of all pre-degrees with on-co-p-le Ka-Pi-Ta-la, became D. Ri-Car-to. The main thing in Pu-la-Ri-Rum was J.B. Say, his studies-ni-ki da-whether OS-no-Wu for the structure of the Kur-owl of political economy in the layer-seven-Sia in the 1st half of the XIX century, the euro-euro structure -The-re university-si-tet-go-go pre-di-va.

Ras-home schools in Li-Thi-Cheka Eco-No-Mia.

J.B. Say Op-re-de-de-de-de-ours about the "EU-Te-St-Venosh", Uni-Tel-Salny in the time of the time and pro-country-st-ve, for -Cost pro-from-water-ST-Va, Ras-pre-les and in demand-lesions of bo-guts; D. Ri-Kar-to You-Dv-Gal on the first plan of the Sre-Dach of the Political Saving of the IS-Fuck-up-to-Wait-Qii in Ras-Pre-Lea Public up-go-yes me-du Trem-Main Clas-Sa-Mi-St-Wa in Fore-Ma-Ra-Botno Plait-Whether and Ren -you. A. The media - that did not succeed to give a non-pro-ty-re-chief of the OP-DE-DE-NIE-EK-NOA OS-no-you -The "EU-Te-St-Vienna"); One-terr-pre-Ta-Qi-Troi-Du-Lo-Kar-to-Ki-to-Troi-Du-Troi-Ko-Key, and Saya - to theo-rii three fact -Be-from-water-stop. But both of them are co-headed with Form-Mu-Li-Koy T.r. Mal-Tu-Som-co-new on-up-to-on-levels and delay-diy-diya, from which Sde Lie Water-waters about OG-RA-NI-ESI of the Ra-Botnoye Platter Out-of-La -I (Theo-rye "Ra-Bo-Thista-yes", or, according to you, "Las-Sala-la," Same-Les-Kon Bottic Plat-you ").

On-Chav-Shea in Ang-Lii Cree's Industrial Pen-D-from-Water-St-Wa, which-rye zh.b. Say, up-to-half of his OP-Ti-Masp-Ta-Ta-Ta-Ta-Tala, Kea-Bow-Mi-Mi, Had-Di-Di-Di Ti An-Century Zh.Sh.L. De SIS-MON-DIC PE-RE-LED OS-NO-VAKI OF POLITICAL SAYS AND PRI WU-WU to its pre-erase in the theo-rhya blah-tel-tel - But. For a non-time-a-chie to go-go-theres and the country of disassemble, the political savings of the POLITICAL savings are also under-Verr. Lee Cry-Ke, pre-Ho-Div- To from-Ri-Thai, a si-on-te -e-whether uto-pi-che-th cozy-liz-ma. A series of English Avt-Khu-Unti-Zo-Vas-D.-up-to-home theory of the price-n-d. Ri-Car-to-to-to-be BO-THOSE TO THE POLANT PRO-DRAKT TRU-DAY ", YOU-DVY-NOV KA-THEN-RIA" PRIA-BA-I-NOCH PRICES "(W. Tomb-Son, "Is-up-to-availager about Pros-Pakh Ras-pre-de lesion of Bo-Gat-St-Va-Va-Ni-Tel-Na-Lo Ski-MU NAV-Stuya ", 1824) and with a call of the SO-Zada in the pro-Ti-Waiting of the Li-Ral-Ral-Ral" political economy of sob-stop-vest " "Long" political economy (T. Year-skin, 1827). Initu-ku Nizhi Kom-Pro-Miss Me-well Eco-No-Miche Li-Ra-Liz-Mom and his co-Qi-La-Stick Cry-Koy Sde-Lal, In addition to the SIS-Te-Ma T-Di-Kar-Di-An-Teo-Rii of Prices and Ras-Pre-Dee, J. Mill; His "Os-no-Ye." (1848) is a hundred-to-one-Ev-Ry-Ski Uni-Vi-Si-Tet- SKI COM-SOM is a li-ticker eco-no-mii.

In the time-shot-lynic gear of the sta-new-level political economy of Pro-Isa-Ho-Di-Lo under WHO Da-St-Vi-EM, with one hundred us, the mass-ti-en-st-va, with a friend, - Ka-Me-Ra-Li-Ki, that the foot-layer-wi-lo-pro-country is ne-the Si-no-ni-mos of political economy, as "on-Qio-Na-Naya Eco-No-Mia" (Natio-Nal-ÖConomie) and "Designation of on-Romal Ho-Zyi-St-ve "VOLKSWIHSCHAFTSLEHRE). KRO-IU, ON-RA-BOT-KA OF ECO-NO-MIC KA-THEN-RIA IN SAVI WITH AG-RO-NI-ENERY PRIA-LAK TO FOR-MI RO-Va Nia, Na-Naya with Ra-Bot I.G. The background of TJU-Na-on, the Oso-Bo-go-lease-lesion "Sel-Kho-Kyai-St-Vo-Noy Eco-No-Mia." Professor of Gay del Berg Skov-Ho University K.G. Rau in his chickens of political economy (1826-1837) once-de-lil ontoo-re-adequacy, from La-Gayu Uni-Veda-Ko-Kosh, and Passenger hours, Tre-Buchi-Tu Kon-Kretnya Us-Lo-Viy, - Eco-No-MIC Little Ti-ku and National Academy of Sciences sah. RAU OS-NO-VAL PER-BE-RIO-DICE DECIDE ON THE Political Economy - AR-Khiv in Li-Ti-Cheka Eco-No-Mia (1835-1853). In the next time, the variation of the political economy in the Her-Ma NII CO-KOY F. F. Lys Tom and Pre-Sta-Vi- La-Mi-Metz-Ko-Mo-Li-La Cos-Mo-Li-Tiz-Ma and Per-Pe-Tua-Liz-Ma (from Latin Perpetuum - "Eveny"; Under-Ras-Zu-Vasy-Sia "eternal" eco-no-mile in-ko) schools Zh.B. Saya and D. Ri-Car-to. Following the Las-Pi-Tel-Tel-Tel-Tel-Tel-Tel-Tel, as a non-oh-di-ME-RU Eco-No-Mic Little -Be with British Du-Mi-RO-Va-Ni-Farn-Val RO-Na-Calif political economy in the USA G.C. CE-RI, CO-VET-NIK OF PRIAN-DEN-TA A. LIN-KOL-ON ECO-NO-MICH ON-PRO SAM, CRI-TI-KO-WHA-CHE-CI-SIMIS -car-to and mal-ta-sa.

Introduction

Political Economy: Appearance and Evolution

Conclusion

List of sources used

Introduction

The theme of the work "Political economy: emergence and evolution."

The paper discusses the formation and evolution of political economy, the current state of the problem is critically analyzed.

Political economy is one of the oldest economy. IN Ancient Greece Xenophon (V- IV century. BC. Er) called this science "Oucosy" (from the Greek words "Okos" - a household and "NOMOS" - law). Consequently, it was about the laws of management of home slave-ownership. In such an understanding, Aristotle used him.

The name "political economy" was introduced into the scientific circulation by the French Mercantilist A. Monkeren, which in 1615 published the work of the work "Treatise of Political Economy" in Ruang. The term "politics" (from the Greek word "Politike" - public administration, public affairs) was used by A. Montconaire to emphasize the need for rational management of no household, but the state, national. After all, mercantlers were supporters of the state approach to the economy, as well as the need to understand and explain the state economic policy to the growth of the wealth of the nation. The name of science appeared earlier than its conceptual foundations were formed and its subject was determined.

As you know, K. Marx called the mercantilism of the first school of bourgeois political economy. However, the majority of foreign economists believe that mercantilism was not science, but only its prehistory. The researchers will focus on the fact that the political economy has been stamped from moral philosophy. It was the process of forming classical political economy. There was becoming her as science. It began her teaching at universities.

Political Economy: Appearance and Evolution

state political economy of mercantilism

The definition of political economy as science demanded the formulation of its subject. However, oddly enough, political economy from the very occurrence did not have a clear definition of its subject. She for a long time remained science of wealth, which was due to the name of the book by A. Smith "Research on the nature and causes of the wealth of peoples" (1776).

In the XIX century, due to the rapid development of capitalism, the ideas of classical political economy "do not work" in real life. Under these conditions, students and followers of the classics protrude with the criticism of capitalism and classical political economy, and, as a result, in the last third of the XIX century. The neoclassical direction is formed. IN scientific literature This transition was called "Margin Revolution".

The concept of A. Marshall, who saw his task to systematize the entire postrikardian political economy was becoming a kind of completion of marzhinalism. In 1890, he published the work of "Principles of Economic Science" ("Principles of Economics"), and in 1902 he proposed the leadership of the University of Cambridge instead of the course "Political Savings" to introduce the "Economics" course. It was meant to strengthen the applied nature of political economy.

In numerous responses to the specified work by A. Marshall, which leads J. M. Keynes, it was about the emergence of a "new political economy", the hopes were expressed that this work "will help revive the shameless authority of political economy." However, "Economics" is not political economics, although foreign economists are trying to identify them. So, the author of the famous textbook on the "economy" P. Samuelson wrote: "Economic theory, or political economy, as they are usually called." Of course, the "Economics" does not ignore the problems that political economics explores, but they do not determine its subject. True, "economics", as well as political economy, did not have and does not have a single definition of its subject. And P. Samuelson altogether believed that "no definition of the subject of economic theory can be accurate, but in this, in fact, and there is no need."

As Professor Chicago University F. Knight, "Economics" was replaced by a political economy. He became the leading university economy course. The differentiation of economic science occurs, micro and macroeconomics are formed. Industry economics separated from political economy. Separate schools and directions of economic science are developing. Canesianism and institutionalism appear. True, economists who investigated the history of economic thoughts write about political economy schools. In particular, B. Seligman, considering the development of economic theory with end XIX. c., writes about the English, Swedish and American political economy schools. Meanwhile, economists presented in studies are shown as the authors of individual theories.

And it is not by chance that scientists, not denying the presence of certain theoretical foundations of scientific schools, focus on the need for "general theory". It is the need for such a "common theory" determined the emergence of diverse "political economy".

Professor of the Frihibility University of Bortis (Switzerland) noted that after World War II, the section "Political and Social Sciences" accelerated, their specialization was deepened, and economic theory lost the historical component. This led to the predominance of a hypothetical approach in the formation of theoretical models, which, in turn, contributed to a better understanding of individual, isolated problems and limited the possibility of analyzing the functioning of the socio-economic system as a whole.

Gorthiis proclaims the "political economy of humanism", which he complies with a society organized on humanistic principles. By definition of a scientist, the leading role in its organization is played by the "Classic-Keynesian Political Economic" (he has a synthesis of works of Kene, Ricardo, Marx, Keynes). It is she who can solve interrelated problems of distribution of income and employment, which, as J. M. Keynes emphasized, is not able to solve society. Only a system of socio-political sciences in which political economy plays a leading role can solve these problems. Accordingly, G. Bortis treats such a system as a third way, the alternative economic theory of socialism and liberalism (neoclassic).

If Gorthis proclaims the political economy of humanism, then the famous English physicist, a specialist in the field of quantum physics and biophysics, doctor of philosophy D. hook (1942) made a quantum theory of political economy in which it is about the interaction of natural and public sciences. He explores and processes the influence of quantum physics on the development of political economy. D. hook opposed quantum theory Cartesian-Newtonian concept, which, according to him, is built on the principles of atomism and forms the abyss between human society and nature. Focusing on theoretical and methodological achievements of quantum physics, the scientist emphasizes that they can be used in the interests of the development of economic theory.

Received a significant development and recognition of the physical economy, in which it also is about combining physical and economic. Its founder is an outstanding Ukrainian scientist S. Podolinsky (1850-1891). It formulated a new scientific paradigm of civilizational development, putting energy theory in its framework, as well as submitting the interaction of world energy (object) and a person (subject) as the basis of life. The ideas of S. Podolinsky developed an outstanding Ukrainian scientist in the field of natural science V. Vernadsky (this is, in particular, on its research of the biosphere and noosphere). Significant contribution to the development of physical economy ideas was made by M. Rudenko (1920-2004). It was he who gave the name of this science, revealed the location of the energy source, which underlies the photosynthesis, and built the formula of "energy of progress".

At the same time, the evolutionary, realistic, critical and other branches of political economy was proclaimed. And what does it mean? As scientists believe, this means that the "end of classical political economy" came. It is of interest to the prophetic foresight of this process M. Tugan-Baranovsky: "There is a complete basis to recognize the fate of political economy, as a kind of science on the causal and functional relations of economic phenomena, closely associated with modern national economy. Together with him, she arose and developed and together with him. It should come off from the stage. There will be no place in the socialist strict for this science, although it is precisely in this particular practical knowledge relating to the field of economic policy, and all the necessary auxiliary scientific disciplines - for example, statistics - should receive extreme development. Political economy Part of the economic policy will turn into a part of the economic policy, and the part will be part of a more general science on society - sociology. "

The emergence of many "general theories" (political economy) did not solve the problem. It was again about the different theoretical foundations of the "Political Economy", the absence of a single definition of their subject. Only the name of science remained, under which "general economic theory" was formed.

Changes in economic life, global shifts in the development of global civilization require new theoretical generalizations. The established schools and directions of social thought are not able to explain them. There was a need for the transition to a new paradigm of ideas about the development of society. In particular, there was a need for a detailed analysis of the problem of the influence of political institutions and processes for the functioning of the economy. Classical political savings only partially took into account political factors. The next directions of this science did not include political processes in their analysis. Thus, the interest in traditional political economy was lost.

In the second half of the XX century. Interest in the study of political processes and their role in economic life, as well as the role of government in the state intensified. Accordingly, a change in the term "political economy" occurred. Scientists proclaim the ideas of the Renaissance Political Economy, about its reorientation, mainly to study the issues of the interaction of the state and the economy, for analysis and substantiation of economic policy. They note that the problems of the mutual influence of economic and political processes, the interaction of the economy and policies became one of the leading subjects of research in the sciences of society. A "... The most successful project in the field of political and economic research in modern social sciences can be considered political economy (NEW POLITICAL ECONOMY)."

The new political economy is a scientific symbiosis of political science and the economy that has formed on a general methodological basis, which is constituted several scientific theories, and above all - the theory of public selection. According to recognized leaders in this theory of J. Brennan and J. Buchanne, the theory of public selection "applies the technique and analytical apparatus of the modern economy to the study of political processes." The formation of a new political economy scholars are associated with the pioneering work of E. Downce "Economic Theory of Democracy" (1957), in which the subject of the study was the relationship of the economy and policies. And the sources (sources) of the new political economy, in addition to the theory of rational choice, were determined by the agency, international, spatial and other theories, "which a long time was independent instruments to study the impact of policies on the economy."

The second half of the XX century. Steel became the emergence of a whole series of works that marked the formation of new political economy. We are talking about articles U. Nord-House, E. Taffeta, D. Hibbs and P. Mosley on the problems of the theory of the political business cycle, about the monographs "Political Savings" T. Persson and D. Tabellini, "Political Competition" D. Remera and Dr.

Increases interest in the study of the government's role in state life, and, accordingly, the term "political economy" is filled with new content. Modern new political economy includes several directions. It is about the purely political and political and economic models of this science. For example, the spheres of political economy democracy, which began by E. Downes, are to study the impact of political processes and institutions on the formation of economic policy, research of the Institute for Competition of Political Parties in the elections and behavior of voters, determining the government and its functions.

The further development of the new political economy scholars are associated with the second stage (70s in the years of the XX century), which marked the emergence of a number of work on political business cycles. They were about the relationship of political and economic cycles, the hypothesis about fluctuating economic indicators was proclaimed synchronously with the elections. These problems were investigated by W. Nordhause, E. Taft, P. Mosley, and others. An important place in the new political economy is occupied by the constitutional political economy of J. Brennan and J. Buchenane. It originated almost simultaneously with the theory of public selection and a certain period was on the periphery of mainstream, and recently recently acquired relevance. As the authors of the constitutional political economy, its task and, accordingly, the research area is the analysis of the rules that need to be adhered to ensure that the efficient functioning of society is acceptable as such. Scientists emphasize the importance of this problem and conduct an analogy with classical political economy, in particular, with the theory of A. Smith, who "used the term" laws and institutions "." We need the rules, they write, because in everyday life without them we would have fought all the time. "The rules determine the boundaries of space, within which everyone can act as it seems necessary." From the study, the relevant conclusion is made: "We must remake our rules and our thinking", "to focus our attention on the right-handers limiting the activities of governments, and not on innovations justifying the ever-growing interference of politicians in the life of citizens." J. Bucanene also examines the practical application of constitutional economic theory. In particular, he allocates several areas of its practical application: this is the rules of taxation, budget policy, distribution of income and wealth and more.

The problems of the new political economy analyzes in their work "incentives and political economy" famous French economist J.-zh. Laffon. It defines political economy as "discipline arising from the need to delegate economic policy to politicians, and, therefore, is based on its problem of incentives." As the author notes, in this study he "raises a few questions about incentives arising from delegation to politicians to take socially significant solutions." To analyze traditional political economy issues, the author, as he himself indicates, uses the theory of contracts and the economy of information. Accordingly, the first and second sections of its work are devoted to the consideration of constitutions from the standpoint of both complete and incomplete contracts. In the third section, the scientist considers the agreement model in asymmetric information. They also offer a methodology that allows you to identify optimal changes in the Constitution. In addition, the author explores such actual problems as corruption, ecology, positive features and shortcomings of laws, etc.

New political economy is developing dynamically. According to the researchers of this problem, it represents "one of the most active areas of research in modern economic theory, since the introduction of political restrictions into standard economic models allows you to advance in understanding and explaining real economic problems".

The high assessment of the new political economy cannot serve as a sign of its high scientific level. She, like other directions of modern economic theory, is not able to give any answers to questions arising in the global economy of the XXI century. Nor scientific knowledge about them. Like the modern economic science as a whole, the new political economy is not structured. It is about individual theories - models of both purely political and political and economic. It does not give the idea of \u200b\u200bthe fundamental laws of the development of the modern economy.

And it's not by chance that in the scientific literature, the question of the "Renaissance" of political economy is not removed from the agenda. Because of this, some interest is a study of the said problem with Russian scientists who treat it as "fate of political economy." First of all, it should be noted that with the beginning of the restructuring, political economy was excluded from scientific and educational processes in the Russian Federation and replaced by the "economic theory" or "national economy". However, scientists did not stop the struggle for the restoration, Renaissance of political economy as science and as an educational discipline. In November 2002, a group of leading Russian economic scientists turned with an open letter to the Minister of Education of the Russian Federation with a proposal to "restore political savings as a general-life discipline and as a science in the Russian classification of sciences."

However, the question arises: if restoring political savings as general theoretical discipline, then, in fact, what? Does it talk about the classical, Marxist or some new political economy? The appeal of scientists was ignored, and in the scientific environment there were two directions - supporters and opponents of the Renaissance political economy. Opponents of the revival of political economy were focused mainly on the neoclassical "economy", arguing their position by a number of provisions, by the way - not scientific, but mainly organizational and practical. They opposed the restoration of political economy in the educational process, motivating their opinion by the fact that the regulatory documents in education give each university the opportunity to introduce disciplines into the educational process to their own discretion. Opponents of the Renaissance of Political Economics also proved the "practical inappropriateness" of this campaign, due to the fact that a lot of work has already been carried out on the creation of programs of training courses and the relevant documentation for "economic theory". They referred to the pan-European requirements, in particular, the Bologna process, in the program of which such an object, as a political economy, is absent. In turn, the supporters of the Renaissance Polytecconomy leanned towards the synthesis of different directions of economic theory (in particular - classical and neoclassical) under common title "political Economy". Such an attempt was implemented in a number of teaching aids (published at Moscow University), where it was about the coverage of unambiguous economic categories from various conceptual positions. However, this idea did not receive the support of scientists.

The new version of the synthesis of theories suggested S. Dzarasov, including classical, post-Octainsian, institutional and neomarxyism in a new, revived political economy. Consequently, the neoclassical synthesis is opposed to postclassical - "synthesis more high level"According to the author, a tool that would unite theories within the framework of a new course of political economy, the Marxist methodology should be, relying on this methodology and using the views of the leading representatives of these trends, you can" seriously promote political savings and submit an alternative "neoclassically-mainstream "Polyteconomic interpretation of modern society."

Without stopping at many unauthorized synthesis of the proposed synthesis, it should only be emphasized as Keynesianism, and institutionalism, as well as neoclassic, the Marxist methodology is alien, and therefore its application is not acceptable to them as a constituent of the new political economy.

In June 2004, an international scientific symposium was held at Moscow University "Economic theory: historical roots, modern role and development prospects. "Summing up the work of the Symposium, Professor V. Cherchovets stated with regret that he did not develop any agreed decision on the ways of restoring political economy as an independent learning discipline in universities." According to the scientist, the symposium and could not offer A specific draft solution to the problem, taking into account the state of economic science both in Russia and in the world educational and scientific space. Therefore, he puts the question: "What to do?" And allocates two problems, two tasks that, in his opinion, should be solved to decide Implement the restoration of political economy: "Of course, a special large-scale preparatory work, aimed, on the one hand, on political and economic research of the largest topical problems of socio economic Development,., On the other hand, on the development of accumulated issues of structuring the most economic theory in its modern condition".

In practice, solve the problem of the "model" of the Renaissance of the Political Economy The author offers by implementing two "subroutines":

1) preparation of textbooks and textbooks on this subject;

2) implementation of scientific research.

In such tutorials, it proposes to include the main political economic directions of modern economic theory, conducting a comparative analysis of their methodologies, interpretations of the most important problems and categories of the same name (such as "product", "utility", "cost", "money", "prices" "," Profit "and its sources). In fact, the scientist proposes to include all modern economic theories in these textbooks, turning special attention On classical political economy and Marxism.

In our opinion, the creation of a political economy textbook on such a basis is quite problematic. It will be more reminding the textbook on the history of economic teachings or on modern economic theories, especially since V. Cherchovets proposes a comparative analysis of the methodologies for the included directions of modern economic theory, as well as their economic categories. And since the methodology and determination of the economic categories of different directions are different things, it is difficult to imagine the content of such a textbook. As for the second part of the author's proposals, the analysis in the textbooks of the most pressing scientific problems is envisaged.

It is of interest to the position of supporters of Marxism, which are not a question about the resumption, Renaissance of political economy, but on the formation of a new political economy, which would meet the requirements of today, the calls of the XXI century. In this context, a scientific study of K. Molchanova is some of course, which connects the problems of socio-economic development with the development of social sciences, and in particular - political economy. Accordingly, this author, the transition to the "new political economy" is natural, due to the social and economic development. He traces the evolution of political economy, highlights its stages. The modern stage of the author is the fourth. Inherent patterns of development, new problems, and therefore, the tasks require new foundations of development, new theoretical developments and, accordingly, "new political economy".

According to K. Molchanova, political economy in her "old" understanding "lost" for society his meaning, without providing in the XX century. His mission (social development). Consequently, the political economy in his "old" understanding is exhausted. Thus, objectively arises the need for new political economy. The author suggests a new political economist, based on the Marxist-Leninsky "philosophical and economic heritage (but taking into account his re-demand and dialectical development) in conjunction with consideration and analysis of events and economic theories of the XX century, as well as taking into account new goals and requiring decisions. modern tasks"Consequently, the formation of a new political economy he intends to implement on the basis of Marxist-Leninist theory, taking into account modern problems and theories.

As for the rethinking of Marxism, K. Molchanov, first of all, refuses its fundamental thesis - class struggle. "... Class struggle, - he writes, is unacceptable as the basis of development at the turn of the XXI century.". He advocates confinitive, democratic development, which will take place in the future socio-economic formation, which the author is conditionally defined as the "formation of industrial social society". According to the scientist, the transition to the new formation will be accompanied by the transformation of some economic categories, in particular costs and surplus value. The lack of class struggle, he believes, will cause a new definition of surplus value - "political economic, and not political."

Summing up the study, K. Molchanov concludes that the socio-economic processes of modernity and, accordingly, the transition to the study and development of political economy through the stages and phases determine the need to "rethink knowledge and identify new analysis methods." In his opinion new approach And the relevant basics will ensure the formation of modern political economy. "Keeping the achievements of political economy of the XVII-XX centuries., Modern political economy is not reborn from the ashes of the predecessor, but appears in early XXI in. From the waves of the World Ocean of Knowledge and Historical Development experience, marking a new circle of development of science. "Consequently, the author has evolution, the development of political economy is a natural process due to socio-economic development, and its peculiar vision is a combination of Marxism with modern economic theories.

The opinion of scientists about the "end of classical political economy", which they associate with the weakening of class contradictions, cannot be circumvented. In March 2008, Professor M. Wayes was made at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, at a meeting of the round table, with a scientific report "Working and the end of the classical political economy. He connects political economy with a working question, which understands as a problem of confrontation of labor and capital. "The presence and existence of the working class, the author of the report emphasizes, is obviously, it is possible to directly associate with the fate of political economy." In turn, the irrelevance of "working matter" explains the irrelevance of political economy. "If the current Russian government," he proves, "not in words, and one will strive to create a social state, the importance of the working question will decrease and the political economy will lose its meaning." Consequently, the subject of political economy The Rapporteur associates with the class society and, accordingly, denies political economy in a broad sense. As for today, according to a scientist, the availability of class contradictions necessitates political economy for society. The report contains many nonsense, which was noted during his discussion 36. And what is interesting, the discussion acquired a predominant focus on finding out the working question, and not problems of political economy.

Negative assessment Materials of the Round Table received from representatives of the All-Russian public organization "Russian scholars of socialist orientation." In particular, in Article V. Budarin "Which Political Economy I need Russia" described in detail the speeches of both the speaker and opponents. First of all, the author of the article pays attention to the fact that neither the speaker nor the majority of actually set themselves in their task to prove the idea of \u200b\u200bthe inevitability and the need to dieting the classical political economy or somehow to resist her, and instead discussed different concomitant topics. He emphasizes that the speaker does not clearly determine the essence of the classical political economy and its chronological framework. Outstates V. Budarin and the fact that the speaker, analyzing Marxism-Leninism, does not even mention such "outstanding personalities who have made an invaluable contribution to the essential development of Marxist political economy as V. I. Lenin, I. V. Stalin, N. A. Voznesensky. "

Budarin also does not perceive the Rapporteur's assertion that the need for political economy is due to key contradictions, the class division of the company that arises only at the stage of bourgeois development and "having a property will ever end." Then the political economy will not need. The author of the article criticizes the speaker and for its definition of the subject of political economy, which he has a social conflict between capitalists and workers as a major conflict in the distribution of social product.

The question of solving the problem of the revival of political economy due to the synthesis of theories and the creation of the "integrative course of economic theory" was discussed for a long time on the pages of economic publications. Supporters of such integration understood its meaninglessness, disadvantages - in particular, the "danger of eclecticism, a mechanical association of essentially different and even opposite conclusions, provisions and assessments of real economic relations." They hoped to prevent this at the expense of "allocation of entities, the most adequate" modern economic relations. It is clear that this is not a scientific solution to the problem, but a synthetic course - fiction.

The diversity of opinions and proposals for the restoration of political economy has not changed the situation. In the Russian Federation approved a scientific program of research on "New Political Economy". This prompted scientists to develop relevant programs, a methodological base and training courses, as well as to prepare new benefits and textbooks. For example, A. Dankov, analyzing the evolution of the new political economy, determines its subject and allocates several stages in its development. He writes: "New political economy is a separate sector of social science, the subject of studying which is the impact of political institutions and processes on economic policy."

Educational and methodological materials and the program "New Political Savings" developed V. Busygin. In particular, 7 sections are allocated in this program, with the corresponding disclosure of their content.

Section 1. The role of the state in the modern economy. Political institutions and political restrictions. Section 2. Models of political processes and tools of political economics analysis. Section 3. Redistribution Policy. Section 4. Comparative analysis political systems. Section 5. The problem of temporary consistency of political decisions and approaches to its solution. Section 6. Monetary policy. Section 7. Political Saving Reforms. In our opinion, this is a rather modest list of issues under study by foreign economists. But, obviously, it cannot be otherwise. The fact is that economic theory is increasingly enriched, it grows and at the same time divided into separate conceptual parts, isolated from it. A "new political economy" is to some extent the national team name of the individual theories of the political and economic directions that are not yet structured. Therefore, researchers may include in their analysis of problems that are greater interest for them.

For those who studied Marxist political economy, such a structure of science is unusual. Indeed, in Marxist political economy, we are talking about a clear definition of the subject of science, the main and starting relationship, the economic laws and the system of economic categories are investigated, the main contradiction of the production method is distinguished and the ways of its permission are disclosed. This means the presence of systemic and clear logic in scientific analysis.

As for the "new political economy", then, at first glance, the distrost and diverseness of the content are affected. In it, political issues are put forward on the forefront, their influence on the economy. It seems that the study of the "new political economy" involves the knowledge of the classical, Marxist political economy with their interpretation of economic laws and categories. Meanwhile, "new political economy" successfully occurs. As for its assessment,, in our opinion, it is quite possible to agree with the findings of A. Dankova: "The new political economy is still a fertile object for criticism. The absence of empirical confirmations, on the one hand, and the arbitrary nature of the prerequisites, on the other hand, contributes to the junction of concepts and paradigms. Today, about new political savings, you can say the same thing that John Keynes said about the mathematical economy in the 1930s, namely, that she "is essentially a simple interhesion, as inaccurate, as well as those initial assumptions on which It is based, and the authors are able to forget about the complex relations and relationships of the actual world, closing in the maze of pretentious and useless characters ". At the same time, the author determines the importance of the latest economic research. In particular, he writes that "recognition of the fact that economic policy is formed within the framework of the political process, the political authors in the context of political institutions, and its maintenance and results are largely determined by the political" origin ", is the main result of the half-century efforts of many scientists and researchers united by the tradition of new political economy. "

Conclusion

Summing up said, you should pay attention to several problems. First of all, we are talking about structuring economic science and the definition of its subject. This problem emphasizes Professor V. Yeremenko, "makes up the essential characteristics of the most economics." In modern conditions there is no more or less unambiguous systematization and structuring of economic science. In scientific research, often we are often found with the identification of the concepts of "economy", "economic theory", "political economy", "Theoretical Economics", "Economic Science", etc. without defining the subject. This identification concerns, in particular, such fundamental concepts as "Economic Science", "Political Savings", "Economic Theory". In such identification, V. Yeremenko accuses, in particular, Professor P. Mainnesegen (Sydney University), who, according to him, identifies the concepts of "political economy", "Economic Science" and "Economic Theory" than "... even more aggravated the discussion "47.

In our opinion, it is advisable to make some comments. First of all, in the work of P. Mornesegen, we are talking about the study of the emergence and evolution of the term "political economy". "Discussion," the scientist writes, "... will be concentrated mainly around the definitions and to wear an ethiological character, emphasizing the lack of accurate definitions of the term" political economy "and its more modern synonym for" Economic Science ", that is," Economics ". The fact that we are talking about "Economics", indicate both the content of the work and its name. As for the term "Economic Science", this is an unsuccessful translation of the term "Economics", which makes a lot of confusion into scientific research. From our point of view, it is more expedient to leave this term without translation. At the same time, we implies the opinion of V. Yeremenko about that "that the concepts of" economic science "," economic theory "and" political economy "do not simply coincide, but are absolutely different." To the greatest extent, this identification concerns the concepts of "political economy" and "economic theory".

We regard such identification of concepts as illegal. After all, the term "economic theory" can and should be applied when it comes to individual theories (distribution, exchange, growth, etc.), and in their framework - about the set of individual theories. Therefore, analogically identify all the science of "political economy" so term. Obviously, the mass identification of terms can be explained by the fact that in the time of restructuring it is the term "economic theory" the term "political economy" was replaced. Scientists, trying to preserve at least the name of science, used such definitions such as "Economic theory (political economy)"; "Economic theory, political economics aspect", etc.

As for benefits and textbooks, they are usually built according to the "Economics" scheme. In our opinion, you can agree with the opinion of W. Aliyev, who proposes to call this discipline (political economy) "Theoretical savings (economy)" - according to the sample determination of the theoretical component in other sciences (for example, "Theoretical Mechanics", "Theoretical Mathematics") . The change in the name, of course, implies the need to scientifically substantiate a new concept by clarifying its subject. As you know, the political economy did not have and does not have a single definition of the subject. It changed in the process of socio-economic development, which will certainly continue. This is for the name of science. As for its content, this is a separate question.

Interesting thoughts on the evolution of economic science and its future expresses Professor D. Kolander (USA). First of all, it emphasizes the inevitability of changes in the economic theory, due to both technical progress and personnel changes in the composition of scientists. "Changes in technology," the researcher writes, "will cause significant transformations in the economic science of the future." They strengthen computational capabilities in scientific work. And "young, differently trained, economists come to replace the old, and the image of what economic science and its study is changing." D. Kolander predicts the development of new hybrid forms - such as psychoeconomics, neuroeconomics, socioeconomics, bioeconomics, etc. In his opinion, the importance of new specific sections of the applied economy - such as the economics of health, crime, etc., and "Economic Science will cease To exist as a totality of weakly related approaches. " Ultimately, a scientist believes, psychologists will disappear, sociologists, economists - only social scientists will remain.

As for the new political economy, its appearance can be viewed as a certain stage in the development of economic science. And its definition as a "new political economy" suggests that the name corresponds to the content and subject of science. Indeed, we are talking about "political economy", about combining politics and economics, whereas the name meant "laws of state and public administration" in orthodox political economy. "New Political Savings" explores complex and important problems of social development. However, it is not able to form (develop) the theoretical foundations of the modern economic and social Development, as well as a long-term socio-economic strategy. Therefore, it is not by chance that scientists emphasize the need to form political economy as a fundamental theoretical Basics Systems of economic sciences, the subject of which should be the essence of phenomena and processes of economic life, that is, economic laws.

List of sources used

1. Aliyev W. Once again about the terminological designation of the theoretical component of economic science. "Society and Economics" No. 4-5, 2003, p. 250.

2. Colander D. revolutionary value of the theory of complexity and the future of economic science. "Economy Questions" № 1, 2009, p. 98.

3. Keynes d g. M. Alfred Marshall. In the book: Marshall A. Principles of Economic Science. T 1. M., 1993, p. 33.

4. Samuelson P. Economy. M., "Progress", 1964, p. 26.

5. Seligman B. The main flow of modern economic thought. M., "Progress", 1968, p. 287, 355, 414.

6. Bortitis, the revival of old sciences about the state - the path to the system of humanistic socio-political sciences. In the book: Sottskalnі і Pol_tichnі science in SpevDruzhnosti inextricular powers. Rodok Zoustrich. Kyiv, 23-25 \u200b\u200bVesna 1998 r., P. 45.

7. Kornichuk L., Shevchuk V., Vorobyva L. physical economy. Ukrainian school. "Economics of Ukraine" No. 9-10, 2006.

8. Tugan-Baranovsky M. I. Basics of political economy. M., 1998, p. 37.

9. Libman A. Directions and Prospects for the Development of Political and Economic Research. "Economy Questions" No. 1, 2008, p. 27.

10. Brennan J., Buchanane J. Cause of Rules. Constitutional political economy. St. Petersburg, 2005, p. 12.

11. Dankov A.N. Retrospective of a new political economy (), p. 3.

28. Busygin V.P. New political economy. 2004.

29. Mainegen P. Political Economy and Economic Science (Political Economy and Economics). In the book: Economic theory (ed. J. Inteella). M., "Infra - M", 2004, p. 680.

30. Shubladze E.K. The issue of theoretical designation of economic theory. "Society and Economics" № 8, 2000, p. 189.

31. Salikhov B. Is the political economy of modern public realities adequate? "Society and Economics" № 3, 2006, p. 17.

32. Leonenko P. M. Methodologicnі aspects of the Istorії Ukraine Duma (XIX-XX Art.). K., 2004, p. 66.

Tutoring

Need help to study what language themes?

Our specialists will advise or have tutoring services for the subject of interest.
Send a request With the topic right now, to learn about the possibility of receiving consultation.

Political Economy.

P. E. - Science, which studies public relations, developing in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material benefits, and economic laws that manage their development in historically replacing each other in social and economic formations.

Name P. E. Comes from Greek words Politikós - state, public and Oikonomía - Household management (from óikos - house, household and nómos - law). The term "P. E." The French Mercantilist A. Montcastle in his work "Treatise to political economy" (1615) was introduced.

I. The emergence and development of political economy

The study of economic processes and phenomena was originated within the framework of a single and unintended science of antiquity. Formation of P. E. As independent science refers to the period of the formation of capitalism. The first attempts to comprehend the phenomena of capitalism and justify the economic policies of the state were made by representatives of mercantilism, reflecting the interests of the boring bourgeoisie, primarily trade. Mercantilism studied mainly foreign trade (appeal), seeing the main source of wealth in it; They were justified by the policy of protectionism. However, only the transfer of analysis from the sphere of appeal to the sphere of production and the study of its internal laws was marked by P. E. like science.

His higher development bourgeois P. E. Reached representatives of the classic bourgeois political economy in the works: U. Petty, A. Smith and D. Ricardo (United Kingdom), P. Buagilbera, F. Kene (France). They attempted to learn the objective laws of development of capitalism, find out the economic content of goods, cost, money, wages, profits and rent. The head of the physiocratic school of F. Kene in its "economic table" (1758) for the first time presented the process of capitalist reproduction as a whole (see Economic Table Kene). The merit of the classic bourgeois P. E. That she laid the beginning of the labor theory of value. The most consistently, this theory was revealed by D. Ricardo, which showed the opposite of profit on its basis and wages, arrived and rent. According to the characteristics of V. I. Lenin, the classical bourgeois P. E. - one of the sources of Marxism (see the full collection of Op., 5 ed., Vol. 23, p. 40-43). Classical bourgeois P. E. Expressed the ideology of the bourgeoisie in the period of the formation of the capitalist method of production and the underdeveloped class struggle of the proletariat (18 century). The critical content of the theory was directed mainly against the suspended, feudal orders. The assertion of the capitalist production method, the exacerbation of its contradictions, the growing antagonism between the futures and capital, the transformation of the bourgeoisie from the progressive class to the reaction was the basis of the occurrence of vulgar political economy (30th. 19th century).

Vulgar P. E. Take the beginning of the works of T. R. Malthus (United Kingdom), J. B. Say and F. Bastia (France). It refuses to analyze the objective laws of the development of the capitalist production method. And explores the area lying on the surface of economic phenomena. Vulgar P. E. denies the theory labor value: Sources of this cost announced "three factors of production": work, capital and land. Distillation of capitalism contradictions, Vulgar P. E. Proclaimed the "harmony of" class interests.

Economic interests and views of small commodity producers and the village of capitalist society expresses small-bourgeois political economy. Its emergence is associated with the works of J. S. L. S. Sismondi (Switzerland) and P. J. Proudon (France), who criticized the contradictions of the capitalist production method. However, the release of these contradictions, they saw not in motion forward, to socialism, and in return to the taught, archaic forms of economic life. With the development of capitalism, petty-bourgeois P. E. It becomes more and more utopian and reaction. In the 2nd half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. In the bourgeois P. E. There are several schools. Austrian school (K. Menger, E. Bow-Baberk, F. Vierz) put forward the theory of the utmost utility of goods, in accordance with which the value of economic benefits is determined by the benefit that the last (limit) unit brings, and also depends on their rarity ( See the limit utility theory) . In the UK, there is a formation of the staff of which A. Marshall Ecchatically combined the vulgar theories of production costs, demand and suggestions, performance and abstinence with the theories of utmost utility and limiting performance. In the US, J. B. Clark formulated the theory of limit performance, brought the "universal law" decreasing productivity of production factors (see the productivity of the theory) , According to which, with an increase in one or another factor, its performance decreases. This served as theoretical substantiation of the decline in wages of workers and proof of the need for unemployment. The entry of capitalism in the stage of imperialism and the development of the general crisis of capitalism caused profound changes in the bourgeois P. E. During this period, two main functions of Bourgeois P. Eh: Protecting the capitalist building and proof of its inviolability and eternity, in the form of a pronounced apologetics of capitalism, and the development of practical measures for state-monopolistic production regulation. The beginning of a new stage in the bourgeois P. E. associated with the works of J. M. Keynes (United Kingdom) and above all with the advent of its main op. "General theory of employment, percentage and money" (1936). Keynes showed the inability of the free competition mechanism to cope with the productive forces and laid the beginning of the development of the concept of regulated capitalism (see the regulated capitalism of the theory) . Keynesianism has become the main direction of modern bourgeois P. e. In 1913 A. Atetal (France) and in 1919 J. M. Clark (USA) put forward the "principle of acceleration", according to which each increase or reduction of income, demand or suggestions causes (or requires) a greater in relative (percentage) increase in the increase or Reduction of "induced" investment (see accelerator) . Subsequently, this principle was developed in more detail by R. Harrod (United Kingdom), J. Hicks, P. Samyuelson (USA) and included in non-Moscow economic growth models (see economic growth of theory) . The economic concept of the left Keynesianism is justified in the works of J. Robinson (USA). Econometric concepts received widespread. One of the most common varieties of modern apologetic bourgeois theories are the theories of "Transformation of capitalism", for example, the concept of "stages of the development of society" Rosto (USA), "Unified Industrial Society" R. Arona (France), "New Industrial Society" J. Golbreit (USA), the theory of "post-industrial society" D. Bella (USA).

Modern bourgeois P. E. He experiences a deep crisis. One of its manifestations - the occurrence of the theory, according to which there is a gradual rapprochement of two systems: socialism and capitalism. The most prominent representatives of this theory of J. Golbreit, Ya. Tinbergen (Netherlands), R. Aron refuse to proclaim the capitalism by the eternal and best social system and urge to take everything "good", which is in capitalist and socialist systems. At the same time, they turn to purely external similar moments or processes proceeding directly in the material and technical sphere (the development of the modern scientific and technical revolution and the growth of large industries, elements of the indicative, i.e., recommendatory, planning in capitalist countries, the use of commodity-money relations and inheress categories in socialist countries, etc.). Supporters of the theory of convergence ignore the fundamental opposite of socialism and capitalism, the domination of fundamentally excellent property relations for the means of production, indigenous differences in social structure Societies and for the purpose of developing social production, the presence of human use by man in the capitalist world and its complete elimination under socialism.

Crisis of modern bourgeois P. E. It also manifests itself in the appearance in capitalist countries, so-called. Radical P. E., whose representatives refuse the traditional dogmas of bourgeois scientists and in some cases make useful practical research. Vividness of petty bourgeois P. E. During the period of the general crisis of capitalism, it is explained by the presence in many countries of significant layers of small bourgeoisie (peasants, artisans, small traders, etc.). In the developing countries, small-scale colonialism and neocolonialism, the domination of foreign monopolies and the supporting independent development path can play a well-known progressive role.

Created by K. Marx and F. Engels Proletarskaya P. E., being truly scientific, is at the same time consistently party. She inherits and develops the best achievements of previous economic thoughts. K. Marx and F. Engels implemented in the development of P. E. The revolutionary coup, the essence of which was to apply to the economic life of a materialistic understanding of history, in the opening of objective laws of social development and creating the theory of surplus value - "... the cornerstone of the economic theory of Marx" (Lenin V. I., ibid, p. 45). K. Marx for the first time scientifically proved the historical limitations, the transit nature of the capitalist method of production. He opened and comprehensively explored the laws of the movement of capitalism. Genial economic analysis Capitalist building allowed K. Marx to make a discovery that has worldwide-historical importance, - on the inevitability of the revolutionary collapse of capitalism and the transition of society from capitalism to communism, about the historical mission of the proletariat as a grave of capitalism and the conventor of a new, communist society.

Originally Marxist (Proletarian) P. E. There was a science studying the production relations of the capitalist production method (P. e. In a narrow sense). Gradually, as knowledge of production preceding capitalism is accumulated, P. er has developed. In a broad sense, studying production relations historically replacing each other production methods.

A new stage in the development of Marxist P. E. Located with works by V. I. Lenin, who creatively developed the general theory of P. E. On the basis of the new historical experience of social development. Lenin created the doctrine of monopolistic capitalism (imperialism), revealed its economic essence and main features. Based on the analysis of the unevenness of the economic and political development of capitalism of the law in the Epoch of Imperialism, Lenin concluded that the victory of socialism was originally in several or even in one, separately taken, the country, developed in relation to the new historical era of the Marxist theory of the Socialist Revolution.

The greatest contribution of Lenin in economic theory Marxism is to create them the foundations of P. e. Socialism. He developed a solid theory of transitional period from capitalism to socialism, on the ways to build a socialist economy, on socialist industrialization, on the socialist reorganization of agriculture by production cooperation peasant farms (seecooperative plan V. I. Lenin), on the economic basis of socialism, on the forms and methods of socialist economic. Lenin developed the Marxist doctrine of the two phases of the communist society, about the transition from the first to the second - highest phase, about the essence and paths of creating the material and technical base of communism, on the formation of communist industrial relations. Lenin defined the main content of the modern era as the era of the transition of mankind from capitalism to socialism, foresaw the education of the global system of socialism, which will have a decisive impact on all global development.

Marxist P. E. - Creative, constantly developing science. It received its further development in the theoretical activities of the CPSU and the fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties, in documents jointly developed by the Communist and Workers' Party at international meetings. Significant contribution to the development of topical problems of P. E. Marxist scientists of the Soviet Union and other countries are made.

Marxist P. E. He was seriously enriched with research on the general crisis of capitalism and its new, modern stage, analysis of forms and methods of state-monopolistic regulation of the economy, studying the problems of world capitalist economy, and the currency crisis. Significant works were created on the economic problems of the "Third World" countries. The theory of the revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism was further developed, the analysis of the system of economic laws and categories of socialism was delivered, and the provision on the developed socialist society and the features of its economy were developed and was developed. scientific basis The economic policy of the socialist state is specified by the doctrine on the creation of the material and technical base of communism, justified and successfully develops the theory of socialist economic integration.

II. The subject and method of Marxist political economy

P. E. - One of the components of Marxism-Leninism (together with philosophy and scientific communism). V.I. Lenin wrote that "the most deep, comprehensive and detailed confirmation and application of the Marks theory is its economic teaching" (ibid., Vol. 26, p. 60).

The subject of studying the Marxist (Proletarian) P. E. There are production relations inherent in various, historically replacing each other methods of production. The theoretical expression of objectively existing production relations are economic categories. The most common, repeating, internal causal relations of economic phenomena and processes are expressed in economic laws. In the system of production relations, the property relations for the means of production are allocated as the basis of all other economic relations. Production relations are studied by P. E. In organic unity with the conditioning themselves forces and the superstructure of the relevant society. With the development of social production and the complication of economic relations there is an expansion of the subject P. E. In modern conditions, P. E. It cannot be limited to the study of production relations only in the framework of a particular method of production. The deepening of the global division of labor, the development of economic and political relations between the countries of various socio-economic systems, the economic competition between socialism and capitalism, expanding international economic cooperation - all this makes it necessary to develop the economic problems of the World Economy. These include: paths and forms of influence of world socialism on the development of the incomocialist part of the world, the nature of economic relations between countries various systems and the prospects for their development, the characteristics of the structure and social nature of economic relations and economic laws operating in the world. Here one of the main directions of the further creative development of the Marxist-Leninskaya P. E is running.

Selection of production relations as a subject of P. E. - The greatest merit of Marxism. Bourgeois P. E. Unable to rise to such a level. She studied the isolated processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, often replacing the analysis of economic relations with the study of the technical side of social proceedings, legal institutions and psychological factors.

Marxism has created and truly scientific method of knowledge - the method of materialistic dialectics (see Dialeclic materialism) and applied it to the study of the Company's production relations. Dialectic materialism sees the only criterion of truth in accordance with the science of conclusions of objective reality. This causes the creative character of Marxist P. E. In the process of knowledge of P. E. Takes for the original specific economic phenomenon and with the help of scientific abstraction it cuts out all the secondary, accidental, everything that characterizes its external signs, and step by step discloses the essence of economic processes. In the course of the further movement of scientific thought, climbing from the abstract to a specific, from simple to complex, is set out and analyzed the system of economic categories and laws. The method of scientific abstraction requires the study of economic relations in their most developed form, that is, when they achieve the highest degree of maturity, and at the same time suggests that they are considered in a state of movement, development, and not in the frozen form.

Method P. E. Uses the general philosophical techniques of scientific knowledge: analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, unity of logical and historical approaches.

The Marxist dialectical method requires the unity of high-quality and quantitative analysis of economic processes, in which primacy remains for high-quality, socio-economic analysis. The consistent application of the dialectical method involves and enrich the research process with modern scientific achievements (system analysis, the use of economic and mathematical models, etc.).

P. E. As science has a class, party character, for it studies production relations, closely related to the economic interests of classes (proletariat, bourgeoisie, small bourgeoisie). The coincidence of the interests of the working class with the interests of the majority of the population and compliance with their needs of the progressive development of productive forces allow the Marxist P. E. Combine partynost, direct and open protection of the interests of the proletariat with scientific objectivity. P. E. - ideological weapons in the hands of the working class in the struggle for the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of a communist society.

III. Political Savings of Protpalistic Formations

Exploring the capitalist production method and revealing it historically transient character, Marx and Engels based on accumulated science of knowledge, in particular L. Morgan (USA), laid the beginning of P. E. Protpalistic formations. These issues are devoted to the work of K. Marx "Forms preceding the capitalist production method", which is part of its economic manuscripts of 1858-59, and in particular the work of F. Engels "The origin of the family, private property and the state". The main contribution to P. E. Protpalistic formations V. I. Lenin (work "The development of capitalism in Russia").

P. E. Protpalistic formations include P. E. primitive, slave-owned and feudal system. It is primarily a historical process for the occurrence and development of production and exchange, private property and classes, the necessary and surplus product, investigates economic laws that manage the development of production, distribution of exchange and consumption in these historical stages of the development of human society, shows the decisive role of ownership of production (and to the employee) in the system of production relations. Such an analysis reveals the historical nature of economic categories and laws, in particular the historical nature of the emergence and existence of private property.

With primitive community, the public (generic, tribal) property on the means of production and the equalization distribution existed on the basis of the primitive development of the productive forces. With the improvement of labor instruments and the accumulation of labor skills and experience of the employee, as well as with the development of societies. Labor separation gradually grew productivity, initially sporadically, and then the surcharge product was regularly arising. The decomposition of the primitive community began, a private property appeared, the society split into antagonistic classes, a state appeared as a device for coercion, oppression and violence in the hands of the dominant class.

The basis of production relations in the slave-owner strictly forms a slave ownership of the property tools and full property to the employee - Slave. The combination of means of production with the workforce is carried out on the basis of non-economic coercion. Production of the surplus product due to the operation of the slave is regular. The entire surplus product, as well as a significant part of the required free of charge is assigned by the class of slave owners. The gradual improvement of working tools has increasingly conflict with the slave-owned ownership, with the full disinterest of the employee in the results of its labor. During the decomposition of the slave-owned building, the economies of transitional type arise in which the worker, remaining owned by its owner, receives independence in the use of production tools. Feodal comes to the place of slave dependence.

Under feudalism, the basis of production relations forms feudal ownership of the means of production and partial property to the employee - the peasant. The feudal method of production is also based on the use of relatively simple equipment. The surplus product assigned as a result of the operation of feudal dependent peasants, acts in the form of feudal rent (operating, product, money). The development of commodity-money relations and the growth of workshop production in cities gradually decomposed the foundations of the feudal method of production. Developing productive forces became closely within the framework of feudal production relations.

The period of decomposition of the feudal method of production is at the same time the period of the initial accumulation of capital. At this time, the main prerequisites of the capitalist production method are created: the cash capital accumulates in the hands of a few people and forms the army of workers' work - people deprived of means of production and legally free. By virtue of the same type of feudal and capitalist private property, the latter is initially in the framework of the feudal method of production.

Political economy of provenistic production methods has a matter of not only with historical material. In many areas of the globe and in the 20th century. The remains of not only feudal, but even earlier economic relations are preserved. This makes a very relevant development of the problems of P. E. Protpalistic production methods.

IV. Political economy of capitalism

P. E. Capitalism studies the patterns of occurrence, development and inevitable death of the capitalist method of production.

The system of laws and categories characterizing the capitalist method of production is disclosed by Marx in "Capital". The initial in the study of bourgeois production relations was an analyzer, since the goods, historically and logically precedes capital. The goods have two properties: cost and consumer cost, in which the dual character of labor creating a product is manifested. The disclosure of the dual nature of labor (as the work of abstract and concrete) is the basis for understanding P. E. capitalism.

Where bourgeois economists saw the relationship between things (exchange of goods on the goods), Marx revealed the relationship between people covered with a worker. He showed that the value of the value of the goods is determined by the socially necessary labor costs, and the usefulness of the goods, its ability to satisfy certain human needs, makes it a consumer value.

Analysis of the dual nature of labor allowed Marx to find out the development of value forms and disclose the origin of money, their essence, as a universal equivalent, to analyze their functions.

Capital is a special, historically definite production relation. Operation of workshop with capital is the source of the creation of surplus value. The capitalist buys in the labor market in accordance with his laws a specific product - labor, the consumption of which (work) is at the same time the process of creating value. Capital disintegrates into two parts: permanent capital, spent on the purchase of means of production, the cost of which changes without changing to the finished product, and variable capital spent on the purchase of labor. The cost of alternating capital changes, it increases in the process of labor at the amount of surplus value. The ratio of surplus value to variable capital characterizes the degree of exploitation of wage labor.

Marxist P. E. Disasters two ways to produce surplus value: the production of absolute and relative surplus value. In the first case, the increase in the production of surplus value is achieved at the expense of the working day's elongation, in the second (with the constant duration of the working day) - due to the reduction in the time required for the reproduction of labor, and increase the surplus working time. The reduction in the required working time is achieved by improving labor productivity and passes three historical steps: simple capitalist cooperation, manufactory, machinery. In the process of transition from cooperation to manufactory, and from the last to the capitalist factory, the formal subordination of labor to capital is replaced by his real submission.

The transformation of the part of the surplus value into capital is the accumulation of capital. A faster increase in permanent capital compared with the variables (the growth of the organic capital of capital) leads to the accumulation of wealth in one pole, on the other - poverty, generates a backup army of labor, unemployment. Production of surplus value is the main economic law of capitalism.

The surplus value created by the labor of hired workers is distributed among various groups of capitalists and takes the form of profits (entrepreneurial income), trading profits and loan interest. Specific form of surplus value in agriculture It is a land rent in the mining industry - a mountain rent.

The capitalist method of production leads to a significant increase in productive forces based on the use of machinery, the size of the enterprises is growing, the public division of labor is deepened. The increase in the composure of production and development of productive forces is a historical mission of capitalism. At the same time, the domination of private capitalist ownership of the means of production at a certain stage becomes the brake of the further development of the productive forces. The main contradiction of capitalism is deepened - between the social character of production and the private-capitalist form of assignment. Objective patterns of development require the permission of this contradiction: replacing the capitalist method of production of communist, based on social property tools. At the same time, within the framework of the bourgeois system, the force is growing capable of carrying out this replacement - the working class.

And Mother Mother Mary Medici). An excellent connoisseur of ancient languages \u200b\u200band literature, Monkeyene designed the term to designate the items of Jean Boden:

• « political"- Causes reminiscence and actually with politics, and with the Aristotelian treatise" Politics "(Greek. Πολιτικά ), whose name goes back to Greek. Πολίτευμα - State device.
• « saving"- with the" economy "of Dr. Greek. Οἰκονομικός , one of the reduced dialogs of xenophon, setting rules ( laws, νομος ) Hours of the economy (Dr. Greek. οikos. - house as a self-associated business unit; cf. home ownership).

It is possible to interpret the anagram "Political Savings" → "Economic Policy" as a movement from the rationale (theory) to the implementation (practice). However, by virtue of its fundamentality, political economy is not able to take into account all current risks and its conclusions may have a rather recommendation for politicians.

"Introduce a new term in everyday life," that is, confirms it in discussions with colleagues or at least see it in other people's writings, Montcastle was not destined - he died after 6 years (1621) after the release of his treatise.

The term "political economy" began to be used in the Epoch of Enlightenment at the end of the XVIII century. And until the end of the XIX century. It was used as a modern term "economic science". From the end of the XIX century. The term "Economic Science" (Economics) is already being used, the use of the term "political economy" stops.

At the beginning of the XX century. A number of economists tried to return to the definition of the subject, which studies economic theory, however, the discussion on this account continues until now, and many consider the theory only to the knowledge tool.

In the 1960s, the term "political economy" is reborn, but its content changes. Marxists never refused to use the term "political economy" in its initial meaning.

By the 1960s, the term "political economy" begins to be used by the law-donical libertarians from Chicago and the Center for Research in the field of public selection. The main question that is studied in the framework of modern political economy is formulated as follows: "How can economic science contribute to understanding the causes of this or that public problem?".

Subject and method

Category " political Economy"Is one of the elements of the category" economic theories"; Accordingly, these terms are unequivocal and not interchangeable.

Political economy is only one of the many sciences formulating economic theories. At the same time, within its framework, as well as "inside" any other science, they can arise, coexist and even compete several highly different aggregate private theories.

Groups of interrelated, mutually consistent theories developed within the framework of one science, on the basis of the same subject but different groups of scientists applying different methods and techniques are consigned to schools and flow Scientific thought. Over time, the discrepancy between them in the area of \u200b\u200bthe subject and method can reach a critical point, after which the emergence of new sciences is stated, with its mutually consistent definitions of objects and methods.

Subject of political economy : The object of the study will be society, social ties. But this object is studying psychologists, and sociologists, and political scientists, etc. The subject of political economics will be socio-economic phenomena, which add up in certain areas, which in different periods of time were in focus of political economy.

Method of science - Research techniques. Among methods, common With most other economic theories, political economy relies on:

Systems approach - not a separate method (as sometimes mistakenly indicate, along with analysis, synthesis, abstraction, deduction and induction), and all listed set of methods, allowing to consider a separate phenomenon or process as a system consisting of a certain number of interconnected and interacting elements.

Methods specific For political economy, which may not be absent or have secondary importance in other economic theories include:

However, political economy is not replaced by a story nor sociology, adopting these sciences not their specific methods and items, but only principles. Thus, historicism is the principle of knowledge of things and phenomena in their development and becoming in connection with the specific historical conditions that determine them.

Political economy studies the economy and developing relations in it in the part of its subject, which is thus determined by the category " Production relations" These are public relations, folding in the process of reproduction, including:

• consumption of material goods.

Political economy identifies patterns and formulates economic laws that manage the development of production relations at different historical stages of development economic activity mankind. In order to distinguish them, different techniques can be used to allocate qualitatively different states of the productive forces and production relations of the Company, in particular, a special category of socio-economic formations.

Identifying your subject and, thereby dealing with the preceding stages of the development of economic thought, in the XIX century political savings, based on compliance with this formula, is further sacrificed with other sciences and disciplines related to it in the area of \u200b\u200bthe subject. This, in particular: commodity, history of the right (including economic) and national economy of various countries and regions, economic statistics, etc. Interacting with them, and using materials, professionally and thoroughly studied by scientists in other areas, political economy and The very basis of the birth of new sciences: the history of the economy, econometrics, etc.

Specific elements corresponding to the definition of the subject of political economy appear in the works of "pioneers" of this science (U. Petty, P. De Bouagilber, etc.), receiving a final consolidation in the writings of A. Smith, D. Ricardo, K. Marx, J. -B. SEA, T. Malthus, Bastia and others, whose work refers to classical political economy. Despite the similarity of individual conclusions and laws formulated by different "classes", in the framework of political economy, various schools developed and the flow of economic thought. Of these, the largest among scientists, the editions of scientific papers and the duration of existence is marxist political economy (As part of which various schools and flows are also allocated).

From the XVIII-XX centuries to this day, political economy is a major, but not the only source of socio-economic theories. The distinction between political savings and other related sciences and disciplines is carried out for a number of criteria, among which the socio-historical component, the coverage of the interests of all social groups-subjects of production relations, the forecast of the results of one or another economic policy. These criteria are generally answered by a number of other economic schools of the XIX-XX centuries, one of which in this regard was the name "Neoclassical Economic Theory" (ascending to the classical political economy).

Genesis of the subject of political economy

The historical predecessor of political economy is mercantilism, the subject of the studies of which is the sphere of appeal. In the future, in the course of the development of political economy like scienceThe main focus shifts in the sphere of production.

A clear categorical apparatus, unequivocal definitions that predict the authors' arguments are important requirement of political economy. This is different from other works on economic topics that are not tied to a strict categorical basis. The well-known definition collision arises when considering mercantilism - the historical stage of the development of economic thought, chronologically preceding the emergence of political economy. There are two points of view on this score.

According to one of the historical and economic traditions, Adam Smith is the founder of political economy, and mercantlers (which he criticizes in its main work) is its predecessors. Indeed, in the form of filing the treatises of mercantilists - Pragmatic offers (often addressed higher power), the authors of which (among them - merchants, officials and other economists practices). Their main argument is purely arithmetic calculations, and not scientific and academic reasoning with transitions from specifics to abstraction and vice versa. Finally, according to the content, these are proposals for the change in economic policy; In other words, this is the doctrines. That is, preceding the political economy of mercantilism (its early stage is also called a monetary system) - not science in its strict understanding, but one of the stages of the genesis of economic thought; so to speak, prehistory of political economy.

In some other sources, mercantilism is attributed as one of the economic theories. Considering that the subject of economic theory is identified with the subject of political economy, the latter automatically loses the status historically, the first economic science. They may also be called economists (in the sense, scientists) and authors-mercantistists, although it is not only for the mercury, officials to some of them (merchants, officials), "practitioners in economic sphere Finance and trade. "

The subject of political economy in version A. Smith is formulated in the title of its main work: " Research on nature and the cause of the wealth of peoples». Wealth (English. Wealth) as the subject of Science understood D. Ricardo. Throughout the XIX century, Smith's work played as an educational role, and was the object of criticism, generating new concepts in science. Second meaning wealth - abundance (and at the time of Smith also "prosperity"). But the political economy returned to this meaning in the 20th century.

Coming to Smith in time critics - Simon de Sismondi (and then another representative economic romanticism, P. Prudon) argued that not the objects of wealth themselves (things), and their distribution (and redistribution) is the subject of political economy, and its special purpose is to ensure the justice of this process. A number of researchers allocate a special element of novelty, which SISMONDI brings into a method, namely - input moral-ethical element The principles of classical political economy:

Political economy - "Science is not a simple calculation, but moral science"; She enters into "a misconception when operates with bare figures, and leads to the goal only when the feelings, needs and passions of people are taken into account."

The country turned over as a pottery circle. Poor became rich, people - the poor ... who was looking for bulls for plowing, became the owner of herd; who did not have grain, hesides himself; Who did not master the boats, became the owner of the ships; the former owner looks at them, but they are no longer his

Ignore this problem suicide, because an alternative is social shocks, revolutions, bloodshed:

The dependent people became the owners of people ... who was on the parcels, sends the other himself ... Officials are dispersed throughout the country; The laws are thrown out and go on them, insignificant people roam back and forward at the main trilons; The chamber is opened, filled tales seized; The royal warehouses and lively became the property of any ... The handful of lawlessness deprived the country of the kingdom; What hid a pyramid, then empty: the king will be removed ...

This is the oldest documentary evidence of the first of the social revolutions known for today in the history of mankind. At the same time, this treatise - and the first attempt to indicate the most dangerous type of injustice, namely, in economic relations, in the relationship of property, in the distribution of goods. The same questions studied antique philosophers who have problems economic integrals from the problems of ethics and morality. In the new time, the task of transformation of society in socialist principles, the need for a fair reorganization of public relations (and including economic) is included in the subject of a special flow - the theories of utopian socialism (see reference). Although economic relations are one of their subjects, methodologically Proceedings of the Socialists-Utopists Domarix Persons are out of political economy: Along with the bourgeois political economy, utopian socialism is one of the preceding it. However, priority in the introduction of the task of eliminating social injustice among the most important target functions political economy - not for Karl Marx, and for his predecessor, S. Sismondi:

"People united into society ... to secure happiness"

The economy deals with certified facts, and ethics - with estimates and responsibilities. These two areas of research do not lie in the same plane of reasoning.

Original text (eng.)

Economics DEALS with Ascertainable Facts; Ethics with Valuations and Obligations. The Two Fields of Enquiry Are Not On The Same Plane of Discourse.

Categorical disagreement with this position expressed J. M. Keynes:

Contrary to Robbins, the economy is a moral and ethical science in its essence. She, so to speak, takes a self-surveillance method to serve and makes judgments about the price.

Original text (eng.)

AS AGAINST ROBBINS, Economics Is Essentially A Moral Science. That Is To Say, IT Employs Introspection and Judgement Of Value.

Political savings in the countries of the world

England. The first professor of the Department of Political Savings was Sir Thomas Robert Malthus.

Italy. Up to the present, political savings are developing as science and is studied as an item (see Economia Politica).

Pre-revolutionary Russia. Interestingly, from interrogations of the Decembrists was concluded that to curb the evil of liberty, it is necessary to withdraw political savings from curricula (although it did not reach this).

In Soviet economic science, Marxist political economy was considered as the basic principle of reference national economyIt was based on the planned nature of economic development with the ultimate goal of the abolition of commodity-money relations.

Political savings as science wore and is fundamental and is a methodological basis for other economic sciences. At the same time, it is limited in its subject research directly by economic relations. For example, it studies the cost relationship, but does not exercise cost calculation, he examines history and nature

Name Political Economy Comes from Greek words Politikós - state, public and Oikonomía - Household management (from óikos - house, household and nómos - law). Term " Political Economy"Was introduced by French Mercantilist A. Moncontene In his work "Treatise of political economy" (1615).
. The emergence and development of political economy. Study of economic processes and phenomena originated within the framework of a single and unintended science of antiquity. Formation Political Economy as independent science refers to the period of becoming capitalism. The first attempts to comprehend the phenomena of capitalism and justify the economic policy of the state were made by representatives mercantilism, Reflecting the interests of the emerging bourgeoisie, primarily trade. Mantilism studied mainly foreign trade (appeal), seeing the main source of wealth in it; they were justified politics protectingism. However, only the transfer of analysis from the sphere of appeal to the production area and the study of its internal laws marked the beginning Political Economy like science.

His higher development bourgeois Political Economy reached in representatives classic bourgeois political economy : U. Petty., BUT. Smith and D. Ricardo (United Kingdom), P. Buagilbera , F. Kene (France). They attempted to learn the objective laws of development of capitalism, find out the economic content of goods, cost, money, wages, profits and rent. The head of the school of physiocrats F. Kene in its "economic table" (1758) for the first time presented the process of capitalist reproduction as a whole (see Economic Table Kene). The merit of classic bourgeois Political Economy That she laid the beginning of the labor theory of value. The most consistently, this theory was revealed by D. Ricardo, who showed the opposite of profit and wages on its basis, profit and rent. According to the characteristics of V. I. Lenin, classical bourgeois Political Economy - one of the sources of Marxism (see the full collection of Op., 5 ed., Vol. 23, p. 40-43). Classic bourgeois Political Economy Expressed the ideology of the bourgeoisie in the period of the formation of the capitalist method of production and the underdeveloped class struggle of the proletariat (18 century). The critical content of the theory was directed mainly against the suspended, feudal orders. Approval of the capitalist production method, the exacerbation of its contradictions, growing antagonism between the futures and capital, the transformation of the bourgeoisie from the progressive class to the reaction was the basis of the occurrence vulgar political economy (30th, 19th century).

Vulgar Political Economy Takes the beginning of the work T. R. Maltus (United Kingdom), J. B. Say and F. Bastia (France). It refuses to analyze the objective laws of the development of the capitalist production method. And explores the area lying on the surface of economic phenomena. Vulgar Political Economy denies the theory of labor value: the sources of the cost of this announced "three factors of production": work, capital and land. Distillation of capitalism contradictions, vulgar Political Economy Proclaimed the "harmony" of class interests.

Economic interests and views of small producers of the city and the villages of the capitalist society expresses small bourgeois political economy. Its emergence is associated with the works of J. S. L. S. SISMONDI (Switzerland) and P. Zh. Proudon (France) who criticized the contradictions of the capitalist production method. However, the release of these contradictions, they saw not in motion forward, to socialism, and in return to the taught, archaic forms of economic life. With the development of capitalism petty-bourgeois Political Economy It becomes more and more utopian and reaction. In the 2nd half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. in bourgeois Political Economy There are several schools. Austrian school (TO. Menger, E. Bow-Baberk, F. Vizer. ) put forward the theory of the utmost utility of products, in accordance with which the value of economic benefits is determined by the benefit that the last (limit) unit brings, and also depends on their rarity (see Term utility theory ). In the UK, formed cambridge School, ancestor of which A. Marshall Eclectically combined the vulgar theories of production costs, demand and suggestions, performance and abstinence with theories of maximum utility and limiting performance. In the US, J. B. Clark formulated the theory of marginal productivity, brought the "universal law" decreasing productivity of production factors (see Theory performance ), According to which, with an increase in one or another factor, its performance decreases. This served as theoretical substantiation of the decline in wages of workers and proof of the need for unemployment. Entry of capitalism in the stage of imperialism and development the general crisis of capitalism caused deep changes in bourgeois Political Economy During this period, two main functions of bourgeois Political Economy: Protecting the capitalist building and proof of its inviolability and eternity, in the form of a pronounced apologetics of capitalism, and the development of practical measures for state-monopolistic production regulation. Start a new stage in bourgeois Political Economy associated with the works of J. M. Keynes (United Kingdom) and above all with the advent of its main op. "General theory of employment, percentage and money" (1936). Keynes showed the inability of the free competition mechanism to cope with the productive forces and laid the beginning of the development of the concept of regulated capitalism (see Adjustable capitalism theory ). Keynesianism has become the main direction of modern bourgeois Political Economy In 1913 A. Atephalong (France) and in 1919 J. M. Clark (USA) put forward "the principle of acceleration", according to which each increase or reduction of income, demand or suggestions causes (or requires) a greater in relative (percentage) expression or a reduction in "induced" investments (cm. Accelerator ). Subsequently, this principle was developed more detailed by R. Harrodom (United Kingdom), J. Hicks, P. Samuelson (USA) and included in non-Moscow economic growth models (see Economic growth of the theory ). The economic concept of the left Keynesianism is justified in the works of J. Robinson (USA). Econometric concepts received widespread. One of the most common varieties of modern apologetic bourgeois theories are the theories of "Transformation of capitalism", for example, the concept of "stages of society development". ROSTOU (USA), "Unified Industrial Society" R. Arona (France), "New Industrial Society" J. Golbreit (USA), the theory of "post-industrial society" D. Bella (USA).

Modern bourgeois Political Economy He experiences a deep crisis. One of his manifestations is the emergence convergence theory, according to which there is a gradual rapprochement of two systems: socialism and capitalism. The most prominent representatives of this theory of J. Golbreit, I. Tinbergen (Netherlands), R. Aron refuse to proclaim capitalism by the eternal and best social system and urge to take everything "good", which is in capitalist and socialist systems. At the same time, they turn to purely external similar moments or processes proceeding directly in the material and technical sphere (the development of the modern scientific and technical revolution and the growth of large industries, elements of the indicative, i.e., recommendatory, planning in capitalist countries, the use of commodity-money relations and inheress categories in socialist countries, etc.). Supporters of the theory of convergence ignore the fundamental opposite of socialism and capitalism, the domination of fundamentally excellent realization of property to the means of production, indigenous differences in the social structure of society and in order to develop social production, the existence of human use by man in the capitalist world and its complete liquidation under socialism.

Crisis of modern bourgeois Political Economy It also manifests itself in the appearance in capitalist countries, so-called. radical Political Economy, whose representatives refuse the traditional dogmas of bourgeois scientists and in some cases make useful practical research. Litness of petty bourgeois Political Economy During the general crisis of capitalism, due to the presence in many countries of significant layers small bourgeoisie (peasants, artisans, small merchants, etc.). In developing countries, small bourgeois Political Economy, exposing colonialism and neocolonialism, the domination of foreign monopolies and supporting an independent path of development, can play a well-known progressive role.

Created by K. Marx and F. Engels Proletarian Political Economy, being truly scientific, is at the same time consistently party. She inherits and develops the best achievements of previous economic thoughts. K. Marx and F. Engels implemented in development Political Economy The revolutionary coup, the essence of which was to apply to the economic life of a materialistic understanding of history, in the opening of objective laws of social development and the creation of theory surplus value - "... the cornerstone of the economic theory of Marx" (Lenin V. I., ibid, p. 45). K. Marx for the first time scientifically proved the historical limitations, the transit nature of the capitalist method of production. He opened and comprehensively explored the laws of the movement of capitalism. The brilliant economic analysis of the capitalist system allowed K. Marx to make a discovery, having worldwide-historical importance, on the inevitability of the revolutionary collapse of capitalism and the transition of society from capitalism to communism, about the historical mission of the proletariat as a grave of capitalism and the conventor of the new, communist society.

Original Marxist (proletarian) Political Economy There was a science examining the production relations of the capitalist production method ( Political Economy in a narrow sense). Gradually, as the knowledge of the preceding capitalism of production methods has been accumulated, Political Economy in wide sensestudying production relations historically replacing each other production methods.

New stage in the development of Marxist Political Economy associated with the works of V. I. Lenin, who creatively developed the general theory Political Economy On the basis of the new historical experience of social development. Lenin created the doctrine of monopolistic capitalism (imperialism), revealed its economic essence and main features. Based on action analysis the unevenness of the economic and political development of capitalism of the law In the era of imperialism, Lenin concluded that the victory of socialism initially in several or even in one, separately taken, the country, developed in relation to the new historical era of the Marxist theory of the Socialist Revolution.

The greatest contribution of Lenin into the economic theory of Marxism is to create the fundamentals Political Economy Socialism. He developed a solid theory about transition period from capitalism to socialism, on the ways of building a socialist economy, about socialist industrialization, on the socialist reorganization of agriculture by the production cooperation of peasant farms (see Cooperative Plan V. I. Lenin ), on the economic basis of socialism, on the forms and methods of socialist economic. Lenin developed the Marxist doctrine of the two phases of the Communist Society, about the transition from the first to the second - the highest phase, about the essence and ways of creating material and technical base of communism, On the formation of communist industrial relations. Lenin defined the main content of the modern era as the era of the transition of mankind from capitalism to socialism, foresaw world Socialism System, which will have a decisive impact on all global development.

Marxist Political Economy - Creative, constantly developing science. It received its further development in the theoretical activities of the CPSU and the fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties, in documents jointly developed by the Communist and Workers' Party at international meetings. Significant contribution to the development of topical problems Political Economy Marxist scientists contribute Soviet Union and other countries.

Marxist Political Economy He was seriously enriched with research on the general crisis of capitalism and its new, modern stage, analysis of forms and methods of state-monopolistic regulation of the economy, studying the problems of world capitalist economy, and the currency crisis. Significant works were created on the economic problems of the "Third World" countries. The theory of revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism was further developed, an analysis of the system of economic laws and categories of socialism was deepened, the provision on the developed socialist society and the characteristics of its economy was launched, the scientific foundations of the economic policy of the socialist state are being developed, the doctrine of creating a material and technical base is specified. Communism, justified and successfully develops the theory of socialist economic integration.
. The subject and method of Marxist political economy Political Economy - One of the components of Marxism-Leninism (together with philosophy and scientific communism). V.I. Lenin wrote that "the most deep, comprehensive and detailed confirmation and application of the Marx Theory is its economic teaching" (ibid., Vol. 26, p. 60).

The subject of studying Marxist (proletarian) Political Economy are relations of production, peculiar to various, historically replacing each other methods of production. Theoretical expression of objectively existing production relations are economic categories. The most common, repeating, internal causal relations of economic phenomena and processes are expressed in economic laws. In the system of production relations, the property relations for the means of production are allocated as the basis of all other economic relations. Production relations are studied Political Economy in organic unity with their conditioning production forces and the superstructure of the relevant society. With the development of social production and the complication of economic relations there is an expansion of the subject Political Economy In modern conditions Political Economy It cannot be limited to the study of production relations only in the framework of a particular method of production. Deepening of the worldwide division of labor, the development of economic and political relations between the countries of various socio-economic systems, the economic competition between socialism and capitalism, expanding international Economic Cooperation - All this makes it necessary to develop the economic problems of the World Economy. These include: the paths and forms of the influence of world socialism on the development of the incomocialist part of the world, the nature of the economic relations between the countries of various systems and the prospects for their development, the characteristics of the structure and social nature of economic relations and economic laws operating in the World Household. It runs one of the main directions of further creative development Marxist-Leninsky Political Economy

Allocation of production relations as a subject Political Economy - The greatest merit of Marxism. Bourgeois Political Economy Unable to rise to such a level. She studied the isolated processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, often replacing the analysis of economic relations with the study of the technical side of social proceedings, legal institutions and psychological factors.

Marxism has created and truly scientific method of knowledge - the method of materialistic dialectic (see Dialectical materialism ) and applied it to the study of the Company's production relations. Dialectic materialism sees the only criterion of truth in accordance with the science of conclusions of objective reality. This causes the creative character of Marxist Political Economy In the process of knowledge Political Economy Takes for the original specific economic phenomenon and with the help of scientific abstraction it cuts out all the secondary, accidental, everything that characterizes its external signs, and step by step discloses the essence of economic processes. In the course of the further movement of scientific thought, climbing from the abstract to a specific, from simple to complex, is set out and analyzed the system of economic categories and laws. The method of scientific abstraction requires the study of economic relations in their most developed form, that is, when they achieve the highest degree of maturity, and at the same time suggests that they are considered in a state of movement, development, and not in the frozen form.

Method Political Economy Uses the general philosophical techniques of scientific knowledge: analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, unity of logical and historical approaches.

The Marxist dialectical method requires the unity of high-quality and quantitative analysis of economic processes, in which primacy remains for high-quality, socio-economic analysis. The consistent application of the dialectical method involves and enrich the research process with modern scientific achievements (system analysis, the use of economic and mathematical models, etc.).

Political Economy As science has a class, party character, for it studies production relations, closely related to the economic interests of classes (proletariat, bourgeoisie, small bourgeoisie). The coincidence of the works of the working class with the interests of the majority of the population and compliance with their needs of the progressive development of productive forces allow the Marxist Political Economy Combine partynost, direct and open protection of the interests of the proletariat with scientific objectivity. Political Economy - ideological weapons in the hands of the working class in the struggle for the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of a communist society.

The surplus value created by the labor of hired workers is distributed among various groups of capitalists and takes the form of profits (entrepreneurial income), trading profits and loan interest. The specific form of surplus value in agriculture is land rent, in the mining industry - a mountain rent.

The capitalist method of production leads to a significant increase in productive forces based on the use of machinery, the size of the enterprises is growing, the public division of labor is deepened. The increase in the composure of production and development of productive forces is a historical mission of capitalism. At the same time, the domination of private capitalist ownership of the means of production at a certain stage becomes the brake of the further development of the productive forces. The main contradiction of capitalism is deepened - between the social character of production and the private-capitalist form of assignment. Objective patterns of development require the permission of this contradiction: replacing the capitalist method of production of communist, based on social property tools. At the same time, within the framework of the bourgeois system, the force is growing capable of carrying out this replacement - the working class.

In the 2nd Decade 20th. In connection with World War II, 1914-18 and the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, there is a general crisis of capitalism, covering the capitalist system as a whole, its economy, politics, ideology. It reflects the further growth of contradictions of capitalism, the process of gradual deposition from the world capitalist system of new and new countries, education and growth of the global system of socialism. In the era of the general crisis of capitalism, the colonial system of imperialism occurs.

The modern stage in the development of the capitalist production method is characterized by growth state-monopoly capitalism, Unifying the power of the state with the power of monopolies. The state-monopolistic regulation of the economy develops, its forecasting and programming. State-monopolistic capitalism, being a new step of the composure of production, even more sharpens the main contradiction of capitalism. In front of the Marxist scientists developing the theory Political Economy Modern capitalism, there are tasks related to the deep analysis of new phenomena and processes in the development of the economy of modern capitalism, which occur, in particular, under the influence of the modern scientific and technical revolution, with the study of the mechanism of impact of the bourgeois state to the processes of public reproduction

Article about the word " Political Economy"In the Big Soviet Encyclopedia was read 19810 times