In 1956, Khrushchev launched a movement to criticize the cult of personality, which began to "thaw" Soviet ideology, thus promoting the re-research and discussion of some major socialist economic theories. The system, content and viewpoints of the Soviet socialist political economy have undergone new changes.
There are three main research directions in economic mathematics: first, statistical research on the structural development of national economic sectors; second, macroeconomic models; third, consumer demand models.
Economists first theoretically demonstrated the shortcomings, limitations and nature of hindering the development of productive forces of the old planned economic system, and explored ways to improve the socialist economic system, especially exploring the use of new planned economic systems. The economic system replaces the old economic system with ways, policies and measures, thus providing a theoretical basis for economic reform.
Characteristics of the development of economic theory in the Soviet Union in the post-Stalin period: the theoretical pattern of breaking more and establishing less is not conducive to the in-depth development of reform; many theoretical viewpoints of the reform school were put forward from practice and after research and discussions have solved certain practical problems to varying degrees; many theoretical forbidden areas and old formulaic concepts have been impacted, making the Soviet economic theory circle extremely active; the analytical methods of marginal analysis and utility analysis of Western economics are rarely used , but adopts a systematic analysis method and strives to be systematic and complete. Study productivity and production relations as a system, and study economic laws as a system. Theoretical research on political economics pays more attention to the integrity of the system and structure.
New theoretical question: Is the transitional period over? Has socialism been established? What are the characteristics of the new historical stage? (Stalin’s point of view: After the collectivization of agriculture in the Soviet Union was basically completed in 1936, it was announced that classes had been eliminated, the transitional period had ended, socialism had been built, and the Soviet Union had entered a historical period of transition to communism.) Question: The Soviet Union at that time Complete socialist ownership has not yet been established (state ownership and collective ownership are only elementary forms of public ownership); the Soviet Union at that time did not yet possess huge productivity that exceeded capitalism; the Soviet Union at that time had not yet eliminated all classes and class differences (the difference between workers and peasants) ); Since there were still two different ownership systems in the Soviet Union at that time, the socialist distribution according to work principle of "equal amounts of labor receiving equal amounts of products" had not been fully implemented nationwide; there were still many ideological problems things of capitalism and the traditional forces of feudalism.
Khrushchev: The theory of "establishing communism" insists that the Soviet Union is in a period of transition to communism
Brezhnev: "Developed societies In his report commemorating the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution, he proposed for the first time that the Soviet Union had built a developed socialist society. It is necessary to evaluate the prospects of socialist construction realistically and scientifically. He also emphasized that many issues of developed socialism have only just been raised and need to be discussed in depth. “Profound changes in the scale of social production, economy, social structure and people’s living standards” “Strong economic potential, scientific and technological potential and high productivity levels” “The alliance of workers and peasants has developed” “The political and ideological agreement with intellectuals has become more "Consolidate" "the Soviet Union has become a country of all people" "basically solved the task of leveling the economic development level of various Soviet Union countries" "guaranteed the legal and practical equality of all ethnic groups" "the new historic nature of man" "One body - the Soviet people" Lenin's indicators: ① High development of productive forces; ② High perfection of social structure (not only the elimination of class antagonism, but also the elimination of class differences); ③ High maturity of the superstructure (the Soviet political system lacks In democracy, the people cannot be the masters of the country, and elections are just a formality. Citizens are indifferent to national politics, and there are still many problems in the construction of spiritual civilization, such as money, hedonism, selfishness, and individualism. universal development.
)
Andropov: "The starting point of developed socialism" discusses "the Soviet Union is at the starting point of the long historical stage of developed socialism" emphasizing the long-term and strategic significance of "improving developed socialism", saying that "improving "The central content of "is to "overcome weaknesses and difficulties, eliminate shortcomings so as to consolidate the foundation of the socialist mode of production"
Gorbachev: "Developing Socialism" on "Improving Socialism" "Theory" - "Socialism in Development" completely negates Khrushchev's theory of "building communist communism". Abandoned Brezhnev's theory of "building a developed socialism". Inherited and developed Andropov's theory of "the starting point of developed socialism".
1. The evolution of the theory of socialist ownership change in the Soviet Union: Regarding the connotation of the concept of ownership, it is proposed that socialist ownership "has rich content." Expose some shortcomings of ownership by the whole people and state-managed economy, and emphasize the continuous improvement of socialist ownership by the whole people (in the past, the state controlled and managed socialist property in the name of society. The result was the output and product types, price formation, technology and social policies produced by enterprises. Even every detail must be decided by the central government or some state agencies. Some scholars believe that public ownership itself cannot guarantee achievements, and when public ownership dominates, It is impossible not to have obstacles on the road to developing productive forces and mastering scientific and technological achievements). Point out the importance of interest relationships in ownership, and emphasize that the core of reform is to solve the problem of who is the real owner of the property of the whole people (making the main means of production the property of the whole people, the people have only obtained the power to be the masters, which is different from becoming the real masters Far from the same thing. The question that needs to be resolved here is: whether and how workers can exercise their power as masters, how they can assume responsibilities like masters, and whether they can obtain the benefits they deserve). Implement "separation of two powers" to create conditions for the development of commodity production. The so-called "two rights" refer to the ownership and management rights of the means of production. The existence of the two powers reflects the basic characteristics of socialist ownership by the whole people: ownership by the whole people is holistic. It is believed that collective ownership is not an "outdated" form of ownership and that the role of the collective economy should be fully utilized at this stage. Relax the policy of developing individual economy and recognize the status of "individual ownership". Decided to absorb foreign funds and actively establish joint ventures. The progress and relaxation of research on ownership issues that occurred in the 1980s
2. The development of Soviet market theory: from "natural economic theory" to "new content theory" of commodity-currency relations. "New content theory": The subject of commodity production has completely changed: commodity producers are no longer scattered individual owners, but are united into a unified production system in the form of national ownership and a producer collective with relative independence within this system. ; The nature of the relationship between commodity producers has undergone a qualitative change: planned and organized connections have replaced spontaneous market relations (the products of socialist enterprises are transferred to the hands of consumers when they are put into the market according to the prescribed planned price, and Not controlled by the market. There is no inherent competitive relationship between enterprises in commodity production, but a comrade-like relationship of mutual assistance and cooperation); the purpose of commodity production and sales has undergone fundamental changes: it is not to change the value form, but to change the value form. It is not to obtain surplus value, but to increase the quantity of use value and improve its quality to fully meet the needs of the people. This is the main motivation for producer activities. Most Soviet scholars emphasize the need to use commodity-monetary relations and market mechanisms on the one hand. On the other hand, it emphasizes that under socialist conditions, commodity-monetary relations and market mechanisms are special manifestations of the direct social nature of labor and a form of planned socialist economic development, and no longer have characteristics such as spontaneity and anarchy. Based on this understanding, Soviet scholars believe that under socialist conditions the market is a planned, organized and socialized market. "All elements of the socialist market - prices, buyer demand, commodity supply - must be regulated by planning." This puts the role of commodity-monetary relations and market mechanisms completely under planning, and fundamentally denies the law of value. and the regulatory role of market mechanisms.
There are a considerable number of scholars who hold this view, such as Rumyantsev, Chagolov, etc. Their views are the conceptualization of the Soviet economic system and represent the orthodox school of commodity-currency relations theory at that time. Why the market or the law of value is not the regulator of social production: First, the basic requirement of the law of value is that as the supply and demand relationship of commodities continues to change, commodity prices fluctuate around the value, thereby spontaneously regulating the production materials and labor force in social production. Proportional distribution among various departments. In the Soviet Union, the main factors of the market mechanism, such as the supply of goods and services, the total volume and structure of products, prices, taxes, and residents' income levels were determined by the state within the planning system. The balance of supply and demand was regulated by planning, and It is not achieved through spontaneous fluctuations in market prices around production prices. They believe that currency, price, profit, lending, economic accounting and other commodity value categories are all tools of socialist economic management and are tools that serve the centralized and planned leadership of the national economy. Second, the basic characteristic of the Soviet economy was a planned economy under public ownership, not a commodity economy. The establishment of public ownership of the means of production has enabled the entire national economy to form a unified complex. The entire economic activity can only have one regulatory center, that is, national planning is the direct regulator of social production and the central link and core of the leadership of the national economy. The final point promoted by Gorbachev: The market is the only common wealth of mankind. The market is not a patent of capitalism, but a unique content inherent in all stages of social development; the market economy is the most effective economic system; the market can eliminate the absolute monopoly and tyranny of producers and protect users’ right to choose; the market can Put economic life on the track of democratization.
3,