DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2018-1-53-62

Contradiction between planning and neoliberalism in contemporary society

Konstantin А. Ilinykh
Ph.D. Student of the Department of Philosophy,
Head of Strategic Planning Branch of Strategic Development DepartmentPerm State University,
15, Bukirev str., Perm, 614990, Russia;
e-mail: asalariado@yandex.ru
ORCID: 0000-0001-7294-9715

The economic system develops through crises. After the Great Depression, capitalist and socialist countries applied state planning methods of economic development. Indicative and strategic planning was utilized by capitalist countries; directive planning based on the principle of democratic centralism was employed by socialist countries. In capitalist countries, the public sector was increasing, methods of corporate planning were developing; a contract system was formed so that government could directly intervene in market process. The 1970s energy crisis terminated the Keynesian method of economic regulation in capitalist countries; socialist countries began moving towards the market economy by shock therapy or state planning. Dominance of the neoliberal paradigm marked an end to government intervention in the market economy and state planning programs. The 2008 financial crisis challenged neoliberalism and deprived it of some influential advocates: Jeffrey Sachs, Paul Krugman and George Soros. Prolongation of economic recovery has led to neoconservative reaction across the globe. The analysis of the period when capitalist and socialist countries’ economies were regulated by state planning as well as comparison of this period achievements (economic miracles of the golden age of capitalism, USSR planning experience) with neoliberalism achievements demonstrates comparatively poor performance of neoliberalism from both economic and humanitarian perspectives. The reason for the ineffectiveness of neoliberalism is hidden deep in the fundamental principles of capitalism derived by Marx. Development of machines eventually leads to automation of production, which diminishes labor measured by labor time, or abstract labor. Since abstract labor is a substance of exchange value, market relations and capitalist mode of production itself deteriorate. Abstract labor erosion is a sign of the crisis of capitalism as a system. The 20th century demonstrates that planning is a practical alternative to the market. However, to avoid mistakes of the past, government functions should be delegated to civil society by developing direct democracy.

Keywords: planning, planning, neoliberalism, economic miracles, golden age of capitalism, USSR planning experience, neoconservative reaction, abstract labor, exchange value.

References

Chernikov G. (2009). Slavnoe tridtsatiletie. Gollistskaya model’ modernizatsii ekonomiki Frantsii posle Vtoroy mirovoy voyny pokazala sebya ves’ma effektivnoy  [Glorious Thirty. De Gaullist model of France economy modernization after World War II was very effective]. Ekspert [Expert]. Dec. 28. Available at: http://expert.ru/expert/2010/01/slavnoe_tridcatiletie/(accessed 26.10.2017). (In Russian).

Dostizheniya sovetskoy vlasti za sorok let v tsifrah. Statisticheskiy sbornik [Achievements of Soviet Government over the Period of 40 Years in Figures]. Moscow, Gosstatizdat Publ, 1957, 371 p. (In Russian). 

Fuchs Ch.(2013). Capitalism or information society? The fundamental question of the present structure of society. European Journal of Social Theory. Vol. 16, iss. 4, pp. 413–434. Available at: http://fuchs.uti.at/wp-content/infosocejst.pdf (accessed 31.10.2017). (In English).

Galbraith Jh. (2004). Novoe industrial’noe obshchestvo [The New Industrial State]. Moscow, St. Petersburg, AST Publ., Tranzitkniga Publ., Terra Fantastica Publ., 602 p. (In Russian).

Generalgovernment spending. OECD Data. Available at: https://data.oecd.org/gga/general-government-spending.htm#indicator-chart (accessed 23.01.2018). (In English).

Globalizatsiya kak faktor social’nykh peremen v sovremennom mire: sb. obzorov i ref. [Globalization as Factor of Social Changes in Contemporary Society: Collection of Reviews and Papers]. Moscow, RAS ISISS Publ., 2012, 224 p. (In Russian). 

Harvey D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford, Oxford UniversityPress, 247 p. (In English). 

Ivanchuk D.V. (2015). Nemetskoe «ekonomicheskoe chudo» i social’no-gosudarstvennoe stroitel’stvo v FRG v 1950-e gody» [German «Economic Miracle» and Social-State Development in FRG in 1950s]. Vektor nauki Tol’yattinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta  [Vector of sciences. Togliatti State University].No. 2–1(32–1), pp. 86–90. (In Russian).

Kotc D.M. (2003). Neoliberalizm i ekonomicheskoe razvitie SShA v 90-e gody [Neoliberalism and USA Economic Development in 1990s]. Mezhdunarodny zhurnal «Problemy teorii i praktiki upravleniya» [International Journal «Problems and Practices of Management»]. No. 1. Available at: http://vasilievaa.narod.ru/6_1_03.htm (accessed 26 October 2017). (In Russian).

Malahova O.A. (2011). «Yaponskoe ekonomicheskoe chudo» — proshloe ili budushchee? [Is «Japanese Economic Miracle» Past or Future?]. Problemy sovremennoy ekonomiki: materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. [Problems of Modern Economy: Materials of International Scientific Conference]. Chelyabinsk, Dva komsomol’tsa Publ., pp. 61–64. (In Russian).

Pokhishchenie Evropy. Kakuyu rol’ sygral plan Marshalla v vosstanovlenii poslevoennoy ekonomiki [The Kidnaping of Europe. The Role of Marshall Plan in the Recovery of Post-War Economy]. Lenta.ru. 2015, Mar. 21. Available at: https://lenta.ru/articles/2015/03/21/europa/ (accessed 26.10.2017). (In Russian).

Popov V.V. (2007). Pochemusnizhalis’ tempy rosta sovetskoy ekonomiki v brezhnevskiy period? [Why were Growth Rates of Soviet Economy Decreasing during Brezhnev Period?]. Neprikosnovennyy zapas [Emergency store]. No. 2(52), pp. 64–76. Available at: http://magazines.russ.ru/nz/2007/2/po6.html (accessed 26.10.2017). (In Russian).

Russia General Government Total Expenditure, % of GDP. Quandi. Available at: https://www.quandl.com/data/ODA/RUS_GGX_NGDP-Russia-General-Government-Total-Expenditure-of-GDP (accessed 23.01.2018). (In English).

Sulashkin S. (2013). Gosudarstvennaya i chastnaya sobstvennost’ [Public and Private Ownership]. Sulakshin Center, Jun. 27. Available at: http://rusrand.ru/analytics/gosudarstvennaja-i-chastnaja-sobstvennost (accessed 26.10.2017). (In Russian).

Veduta E.N. (1999). Social’no effektivnaya ekonomika [The Socially Effective Economy]. Moscow, PRUE Publ., 254 p. (In Russian). 

Vid L.B. Ivanov E.A. (1990). Novaya filosofiya planirovaniya [New Philosophy of Planning]. Moscow, Ekonomika Publ., 160 p. (In Russian).

Received 09.11.2017

For citation:

Ilinykh K.А.Contradiction between planning and neoliberalism in contemporary society // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2018. Iss. 1. P. 53–62. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2018-1-53-62