Nevertheless, the reasons for Russia's economic recession in the 1990s still need to be analyzed. So, how did Russia's economic recession come about in the 1990s? Analysis, in addition to the inherent disadvantages of the planned economy system, the direct causes of Russia's economic recession in the 1990s are as follows:
1. Destruction of economic division of labor and cooperation system.
The former Soviet Union implemented a highly centralized centrally planned economy and expanded the scope of economic division and cooperation to all countries organized by "economic mutual aid associations". "Economic Mutual Aid Association" is a transnational political and economic cooperation organization. In this transnational cooperative body, the economy is also highly planned, and the demand for a certain product by countries in the "CMEA" is often produced and supplied by one or several specialized large enterprises in a certain country under the pretext of "big family". This kind of international division of labor has high planning and coordination ability, which exerts the maximum efficiency of the transnational planned economic system and is also conducive to improving product quality. However, it requires all countries to maintain the same planned economic system and obey the command and dispatch of the core countries, and at all times closely maintain the integrity of the national division of labor and cooperation system of the "Economic Mutual Aid Association". In the 1980s and 1990s, this system suddenly collapsed. After the transformation of the Soviet Union into the Commonwealth of Independent States, the original domestic trade became foreign trade, and trade barriers such as international settlement, exchange rate and customs appeared among CIS member States. However, after the dissolution of the "Warsaw Pact" and the "Common Economic Association", in order to obtain hard currency, Eastern European countries have chosen Western European countries as their main trading partners, applied to join the European Union, and participated in European economic integration, cutting off or weakening the traditional economic ties with Russia. This situation has caused a very heavy blow to the Russian economy. Many enterprises suddenly and permanently lose most of their sales targets, but at the same time they have to use foreign exchange to buy raw materials, spare parts or urgently needed special equipment instead of exporting them, which will of course lead to the suspension of production and the decline of output. According to the analysis of some economists, from 199 1 to 1995, more than 50% of the economic recession in CIS countries is the result of the disintegration of the former unified economic space. (Su Wen: The Enlightenment of Russian Transformation: A Review of Jelchin Times, February 2000 (No.57). Fortunately, thanks to the establishment of a new and more flexible and free economic mechanism, Russia recovered from this sudden blow and entered the track of normal development.
2. Economic restructuring and transformation lag behind.
In order to compete with the United States for hegemony, the former Soviet Union turned the national economy into a large arsenal and the economic structure developed abnormally. According to the estimate of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Soviet Union's defense-related products and services are close to 40% of GDP. After the Soviet Union and the United States signed an agreement on nuclear disarmament and conventional weapons disarmament, then withdrew their troops from Afghanistan, achieved Sino-Soviet reconciliation, and dissolved the "Warsaw Pact", the Soviet Union (Russian army) almost completely stopped its arms purchases. As a result, a large number of state-owned military enterprises have to switch from military products to production, and their structural adjustment is not only very slow, but also quite difficult. In this way, Russia has not yet enjoyed the "dividend" brought by peace, but it has suffered from overproduction, unemployment of workers and closure of enterprises. Among them, the most miserable situation is naturally the workers (strata) of "state-owned" large enterprises, especially military enterprises.
3. The negative role of profit-sharing groups in economic reform.
In the former Soviet Union, "benefit-sharing groups" have been formed, some of which are industrial (such as military industry, energy groups, banks and railway systems), some are regional, and some are huge corrupt networks composed of central government cadres and local leaders (such as interest groups that gain huge benefits by manipulating cotton production, processing and trade). Thus, in the process of Russian capitalism's power, the hidden "profit-sharing group" was transformed into an open oligarchic financial industrial group. Maidevijeff, a famous scholar, pointed out: "No matter in political organs or among the Russian rich, most of them were people who had close ties with the party and government organs and economic organs in the 1980s." Russian news media also bluntly said that 6 1% of the nouveau riche in Russia became rich through the privatization of state-owned enterprises, and nine-tenths of the bosses of private enterprises were former leaders of socialist enterprises. In this case, the factory was sold to the director at a very low price, and most of the "bankers" banks were established by government funds. Under the strong opposition of benefit-sharing groups, the "shock therapy" promoted by Gaidar government only lasted for half a year. 1in July 1992, the Russian parliament overthrew the government's tight budget, greatly relaxed monetary policy, made up the deficit by printing a lot of money, and increased subsidies for state-owned enterprises. These measures make the economy more difficult. Initially, the goal of price liberalization was to achieve a balanced price in the market. However, due to the powerful power of "profit sharing group", Russia's energy and raw material industries are controlled by monopoly oligarchs, and their price manipulation has aggravated hyperinflation. As Olson pointed out, "profit-sharing group" delayed the whole society's adoption of new technologies and new systems (social technology), hindered the redistribution of resources when the production situation changed, and thus reduced the economic growth rate. (Manqour olsen: The Origin of a Country's Rise and Fall-Economic Growth, Stagflation and Social Stiffness, Commercial Press, 1993, p. 7 1. )
4. Deterioration of terms of trade.
From the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, the energy prices in the world market plummeted, and the Soviet Union (Russia), which mainly exported oil and gas, reduced its foreign exchange income by several billion dollars every year, which had a great impact on the Russian economic recession. This is also the case. When the world oil price rebounded strongly in 2000, Russia immediately experienced a substantial increase in foreign exchange income, a significant improvement in its financial situation, and the first substantial economic growth in 10 years.
5. The influence of the deep-rooted old system and the nearly collapsed national economy.
The political and economic system, which was founded in the 1930s and characterized by high centralization, showed its drawbacks in the 1950s after experiencing the glory in the 40s. Compared with other socialist countries, the system established by the Soviet Union itself is more complete, the reform is more difficult and lasts longer. There was no fundamental reform until the end of 1980s, which seriously hindered the development of the Soviet Union. 199 1 On the eve of the drastic changes in the Soviet Union, the national economy of the Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse, so that Gorbachev had to ask the West for emergency help.
In addition, there are deeper reasons for Russia's economic decline, namely, the negative effects of centralized system and planned economy.
Under the centralized system, the former Soviet Union had a long-term arms race with the United States, so it attached too much importance to the development of heavy industry. Especially during the rigid ruling period after Khrushchev stepped down 18, the Soviet Union was beset with social contradictions, serious corruption and extremely backward agriculture and light industry. After Gorbachev took office, social contradictions and problems accumulated for a long time gradually surfaced by adjusting economic policies, relieving political pressure and carrying out political system reform. In other words, the difficult period of Russia is basically the result of long-term accumulation of problems arising under the centralized system, and the crisis will break out sooner or later. The implementation of "shock therapy" only accelerated the progress of the epidemic.
Planned economy not only curbed the vitality of the development of Soviet countries, but also blocked the audio-visual of Soviet citizens. The basic idea of "shock therapy" is based on the understanding that planned economy as a whole has failed. With this understanding, it established its goal as market regulation. Market is the core of shock therapy. In order to establish a truly complete market economy, it is necessary to completely privatize. The market absolutely excludes "state-owned" or "public-owned" enterprises, because the competition mechanism does not work for "state-owned" or "public-owned" enterprises, so the market is incompatible with "state-owned" or "public-owned" enterprises, and the premise of using market tools is to implement full privatization. There is nothing wrong with this reasoning. Moreover, in the process of privatization in Russia, it is fair to issue equity certificates to all citizens equally. Then, why did the "shock therapy" have problems in the process of implementation in Russia? The reason is that Russia has long implemented a planned economy. At that time, most Russian citizens had no perceptual knowledge about what the market was and what equity securities were, and they were even less clear about the significance of equity securities with no monetary value allocated to them by the government. Therefore, there have been cases of selling equity securities one after another. This situation will inevitably lead to the concentration of equity securities in the hands of some people. (Realistically speaking, these people may know a little about the meaning of equity securities, but most of them are certainly ignorant. They may just "subconsciously" think that there is no harm in holding this thing in their hands. You can associate the initial share issuance in China with publicity and encouragement. Leaders take the lead and employees share the responsibility. Generally speaking, they want everyone to buy it. As a result, few people buy it, and most people have the idea of "making some sacrifices" for "supporting the construction of the SAR" and "supporting reform". What about now? Imagine, if shock therapy is implemented in Russia today, will this phenomenon still occur? )
The Political Causes of "Russian Phenomenon"
Some scholars call Russia's political chaos, economic recession and various social problems since the 1990s "Russian phenomenon", which is believed to be caused by the failure of Soviet reform. Actually, it's not. The "Russian phenomenon" did happen, but it has nothing to do with reform. On the contrary, it is precisely because of social changes that a brand-new system has been established, which provides institutional guarantee for completely eliminating the "Russian phenomenon".
So, what caused the "Russian phenomenon"? The answer is: totalitarian politics has been practiced for many years.
According to Arbatov, a member of the Central Committee of the former Soviet Union, in the book Inside Soviet Politics, Witness of Insiders, the politics of the Soviet Union can be said to be a typical totalitarian politics.
Extreme power politics refers to such a political situation: under this political system, all the resources of the country are controlled by the supreme ruler, whose rule is not limited to traditional fields such as politics and military affairs, but also strictly controls economy, ideology, culture and even daily life; All members of society are not only deprived of all the most basic rights, but also must unconditionally participate in the will of the rulers, work, live and even die according to the will of the rulers, without any room for personal choice; If you refuse to participate or just don't actively participate (sometimes even suspected of not actively participating), you will be persecuted or even suppressed. Some scholars believe that totalitarianism is the highest form of Asian absolutism realized by modern ruling means.
During the Soviet period, the political system of ideological control, unity of public opinion, suppression of freedom of speech and dissent was a criminal offence, and the ideology of * * * became the ideological fossil used by the regime to maintain its monopoly position. The preaching in the official media and textbooks is completely divorced from real life, systematically cultivating and constantly strengthening the social atmosphere of lying and double-dealing. Under this rigid system, the whole society has completely lost its vitality, showing a state of numbness.
Such totalitarian politics has led to a series of bad consequences.
(1) one of the results of totalitarian politics-government incompetence.
The incompetence of the government is considered to be the most prominent manifestation of the so-called "Russian phenomenon".
According to the theory of comparative political sociology, it is not the degree of autocracy that measures a country's machine ability, but the energy, adaptability and effectiveness of its government organization, that is, whether the government organization is strong enough. From this perspective, an authoritarian state machine is not equal to an effective government organization; However, a state power that is restricted or "limited" by the Constitution, although quite "soft" in suppressing the people, can also effectively perform its statutory normal duties and functions.
The Soviet state machine in Brezhnev was a contradictory entity: it was tough and incompetent, and it was very tough on dissidents, but it did nothing in economic and social management decision-making, drifting with the tide and being at the mercy of the "benefit-sharing group". So the government at this time is a typical incompetent government.
The Russian government in Yeltsin's time was also quite "soft" and therefore quite weak. Yeltsin gained the upper hand in the struggle with parliament and achieved authoritarian and relatively stable rule. But at the same time, he gradually changed from a "radical" politician to a conservative politician, and the value orientation of his policies and actions was gradually replaced by vested interests. In this process, the transitional economy under authoritarianism provides the best soil for privileged capitalism. As some scholars have pointed out, Russia has not established a free market economic system, but a "semi-criminal oligarchy", which was basically formed in the former Soviet Union. After the fall of Su * *, she just changed her home like a snake shedding its skin. "Russian scholars believe that the oligarchs in the financial industry choose the form of' bureaucratic state capitalism'", "officials do not illegally occupy the capital of state-owned enterprises, but illegally use it within the state-owned departments"; Financial bureaucratic capital is not private ownership, but privately managed state-owned system, which is controlled by bureaucrats and used for personal gain because of the lack of democracy in the country. It can be seen that the necessary condition for the formation of oligarchy is not excessive privatization, but insufficient democratization. (Ding Xueliang, Law and Order in a Transitional Society: Russian Phenomenon, Lujiang Press, Tsinghua Sociological Review (Xiamen University), No.2, 2000. )
In this period of Soviet Union, political corruption led to the rise of a powerful "profit-sharing group", and the power of the powerful "profit-sharing group" further led to the incompetence and corruption of the government. Because there was no large-scale opposition organization or movement, the rulers belonged to the same powerful group in the whole period before the disintegration of the Soviet Union and in the early days after the disintegration. During this period, domestic politics showed obvious oligarchic characteristics, while the government was an incompetent government dominated by interest groups. From these facts, we can see that the incompetence of the government is entirely the product of the traditional system and has nothing to do with reform.
This situation was not fundamentally changed until the Putin era. However, if Yeltsin did not complete the fundamental transformation of the political system and realize the political democratization of the country, the "political light" in the Putin era would not appear.
② The second result of totalitarian politics-"enfeoffment system" and "criminalization".
"Russian phenomenon" also includes two trends: "enfeoffment system" and "criminalization".
"Opening the window" mainly refers to transferring the original state-owned property to the most powerful oligarch in a gray way that is not so clear, not so legal, but not so legal. This transfer process is not privatization or privatization as commonly understood. For example, the Russian government requires banks or investment funds entrusted by banks to take over huge state-owned enterprises, but these bankers and directors of investment funds have no assets, so the government chartered these people to set up banks or non-bank financial institutions, allowing them to pay little money symbolically to the government by issuing bonds and stocks and take over the assets of state-owned enterprises through karate.
Another manifestation of the "enfeoffment system" is that the government gives the right to exploit raw materials and export trade to some powerful groups to monopolize, and these people leave the foreign exchange obtained from Russian natural resources abroad for their own use. According to conservative estimates, the state-owned assets transferred through exports are about $25 billion each year. From 199 1 to 1999, at least nearly 200 billion dollars flowed out, while the total foreign investment attracted by Russia in the same period was less than one tenth of this bleeding figure!
As for the "criminalization" of Russian economy, observers' evaluation is: "In this world, there is probably no country like Russia, where organized crime and large-scale industry and commerce overlap to such an extent that it is often impossible to clearly say where criminal acts end and legal business begins." More than 40% of Russia's national economy is controlled by gangs. In several industries (such as banking, real estate and consumer goods market), gangs are the undisputed "leading bosses".
Analyzing the reasons, the culprit is totalitarian system. First of all, most of the most powerful oligarchs are department officials in charge of resources and state-owned assets in the Soviet era. In the early days of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, they took advantage of the intermittent collapse of the original planned system and the new market system to suddenly turn "state-owned" assets into private ones and become big business owners and consortia oligarchs. This result further illustrates the hypocrisy of the so-called "public ownership" and "ownership by the whole people" that the Soviet Union has long implemented, because if these wealth really belongs to the whole people, is it so easy for a very small number of people to grab it? Secondly, one of the reasons for the "enfeoffment system" is that the government has ceded the right to exploit raw materials and export trade to some powerful groups for monopoly. All this can only be done on the premise that the government has complete control over resources, which is one of the basic characteristics of the totalitarian system flaunting "public ownership" and "planned economy".
Let's talk about the "criminalization" of Russian society. There are two prerequisites for the "criminalization" of society. First, the legal system is extremely weak; Second, the general "barbarization" of the people. Both are the result of totalitarianism. Under totalitarianism, people rule without the rule of law. Once the system collapses, the law is almost blank, and of course crime prevails. According to some data, despite the long-term "* * *" education in the Soviet period, when the Soviet Union disintegrated, the civilization and moral level of the people were lower than those in the Tsar period. Therefore, the "hooliganism" and "evil deeds" of the people will naturally lead to the general "criminalization" of society.
Look at China again. Although there is no "Russian phenomenon" in China, the degree of corruption and criminality in China is not inferior to that in Russia. At present, corruption in China is "inexhaustible". Some scholars divide the current corruption in China into four categories: one is tax loss corruption, the other is underground economic corruption, the third is public investment and public expenditure corruption, and the fourth is rent-seeking corruption. The economic losses and consumer welfare losses are between 987.5 billion yuan and125.7 billion yuan every year, accounting for 13.2% to 16.8% of the national GDP. (Hu Angang: How big is the corruption loss: per year 1 trillion, Southern Weekend, March 22, 2006, 5438+0. Wu Jinglian, an economist, has stressed many times recently that the threshold of China's reform has not passed, and vested interests have become the resistance to deepening reform; It is necessary to avoid slipping into the privileged capitalist mud pit where the rule of law is not good, public rights are not obvious, and corruption is spreading. (Wu Jinglian: "The Pass of Reform Failed") If the powerful "benefit-sharing group" is too big because of incompetent decision-making and political rigidity, China's economic reform may give up halfway, and the "Russian phenomenon" will soon repeat itself in China. However, due to the serious lag of China's political reform, it will be much more difficult to overcome the "Russian phenomenon" and eliminate the reasons for it. Look at "criminalization" again. Some scholars have done statistics. From 1979 to 2003, the number of criminal cases per 10,000 people in China increased from 5.5 to 34. 1, an increase of six times, with an average annual growth rate of 7%. In addition, national morality is corrupted, honesty is lost, deception is rampant, and counterfeiting is prevalent. What's more, there is collusion between government and business. Therefore, although we don't use the concept of "Russian phenomenon" to describe China, the situation in China is not much better than that in Russia. What is even more worrying is that the situation in Russia has greatly improved, but China can't see any signs of improvement!
5. How should "shock therapy" be evaluated?
"Shock therapy" has brought many negative consequences because it advocates private ownership, opposes the government's supervision of economic activities and advocates "absolute" economic freedom. The biggest negative consequence is the extreme economic chaos in the country where "shock therapy" is implemented. Because of this, there are many people who criticize "shock therapy", including many heavyweights. Joseph E.Stiglitz, winner of the 200 1 Nobel Prize in Economics, a professor at Columbia University and former vice president and chief economist of the World Bank, is one of them.
Stiglitz put forward a series of opinions and suggestions on the economic reform of developing countries in his honorary annual speech delivered at the United Nations University in early 1998. His comments and suggestions are basically against "shock therapy". The main contents are as follows: ① Privatization and financial trade liberalization are not the purpose of formulating macroeconomic policies, but only the means to make the market more efficient and dynamic, and this means must be combined with the regulated competition policy. Here, "the key is not privatization or liberalization, but the need to establish a regulatory framework to enable the financial system to operate effectively and promote macroeconomic stability." (2) Without a competitive market, it is impossible to gain the benefits of financial and trade liberalization. "Private monopoly without competitors is equally inefficient and there will be no innovation." ③ "Policy should be a supplement to the market, and actions should be taken to make the market run better and correct market failures." It is necessary for the government to use more policy tools to achieve "broader goals", and "the increase of per capita GDP is only an integral part of successful development" is a "relatively narrow" goal. The so-called "broader goal" means "taking social development and change as the core goal", including improving living standards, achieving "sustainable development", "balanced development" and "democratic development", so that all social groups can share the fruits of development. There are several key words in these opinions and suggestions: supervision, policy, government and equality, which are directed at freedom, market, deregulation and de-government advocated by "shock therapy"
Stiglitz is not satisfied with "shock therapy" because it pays too much attention to the privatization of property rights and ignores fair competition. In his view, promoting fair competition is more important than reforming ownership. Stiglitz is representative.
It should be admitted that Stiglitz did accurately grasp the shortcomings of "shock therapy" and his opinions were very constructive. What I want to say here is that, first, "shock therapy" is only a temporary measure to deal with the crisis and an emergency plan, and no one has ever adhered to it as a long-term policy; Second, "shock therapy" also has successful examples; Third, in the process of system transition and the alternation of old and new societies, there will inevitably be some confusion in any country. The only difference is the duration and degree of chaos. Generally speaking, the more backward and stubborn the old social form is, the more difficult it is to transform, the longer the process of alternation, the longer the time of chaos and the deeper the degree of chaos.
It seems more appropriate to understand "shock therapy" in this way.