The role of the state in economic life (socialism). Functions of the state in the economy

The USSR is deciphered as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It is logical to assume that everyone who has lived in this country for a little while, perfectly understand what socialism is. Definition in the textbook is a thing, of course, useful, but it's a theory. But life in the USSR is a practice! Is there much in common?

The theory of socialism

Socialism as a philosophical concept exists not one millennium. It was not invented by Karl Marx. Plato also wrote about socialism, it was a very popular concept in ancient Greece. Very highly appreciated the ideas of socialism Campanella and Thomas More. And only then did Karl Marx express his opinion on this issue.

What are the main ideas of socialism? Denial of the idea of private property and centralized redistribution of benefits. In the opinion of socialist theorists, just such an organization of society will create the most just, free society in which all citizens will be equal. True, the question arises: who will distribute the accumulated benefits between equal citizens? Even more equal citizens? And will not they have much more power in their hands than any monopolist-bourgeois or absolute monarch?

Disadvantages of the theory

This question is far from the only one. There are many such logical inconsistencies in the theory of socialism. That is why it always existed only as a philosophical concept, and the authors of the works devoted to it were called idealists and utopians. The definition of "nonviable" is most accurately described by classic, refined socialism.

Karl Marx himself, a staunch supporter of this philosophical trend, believed that for the introduction of this theory, humanity must make an evolutionary leap. And in the existing reality, the basic ideas of socialism in a pure, primordial form are inapplicable. Because they enter into direct contradiction with the basics of the human psyche. Alas, people are not perfect, they do not belong in a utopia.

Countries that tried to build socialism

The idealistic philosophical concept is the definition that most accurately characterizes socialism. According to the history of this current, it can be concluded that attempts at its practical application are very risky. Very few countries that have chosen this path have achieved success.

More precisely, only one - Sweden. The countries of South America and Africa can serve as an anti-advertisement of practical socialism, and the USSR, although it has achieved certain successes, has gone too far from the basic principles of the doctrine.

Sometimes China, as an example of a country that has achieved success in this area, is called China. But one can hardly consider Maoism as one of the branches of socialism. The Chinese themselves have always considered themselves communists and nationalists. And the ideas of humanism, on which classical socialism rests, Maoism is alien.

Therefore, considering the experience of practical implementation of the theory of universal equality in life, it is better to rely on the experience of two countries: Sweden and the USSR. They went in different ways and interpreted the doctrine of socialism differently. Yes, and the results were exactly the opposite. But the more curious it is to compare them.

Economy and state regulation

Any political theory is always based on the economy. It is the blood and flesh of the system, the roof and the walls. The role of the economy in society is decisive. And if at first political opinion can form economic and financial relations, then the situation changes to the exact opposite. The economy plays a leading role in the life of society, and the sooner the country's leaders understand this, the better. A classic example of this situation is Russia of the 1920s. The political will destroyed the old economic order and tried to artificially create a new ideology. And indeed, for a while this cadavr existed. But a crisis broke out, and the government was forced to correct ideology and take measures to revive the economy. NEP directly contradicted all the dogmas proclaimed. But it had to be introduced. It is necessary. This was the only way to stabilize the situation. So in the battle of "money-idea" the idea lost. Marx was right, matter is still primary.

Planned economy as a monopoly of the state

But the means of production must be in collective ownership. And the goods produced are distributed, and, obviously, centralized. This, in fact, is socialism. The role of the state in the economy, therefore, must be decisive.

In the USSR, things were exactly like this. After the collapse of the NEP policy, a planned economy was introduced, based on the direct control of the state over the country's economic life. The market in the western sense of the word in the USSR was not present as a phenomenon. No self-regulation of supply and demand, no competition. All this replaced the central planning and artificial regulation. Such was the role of the state in economic life. Socialism in the Soviet Union was understood as "accounting and control." And this expression had a literal meaning. Any demand, any need was carefully calculated, and the production capacities received a clear order. We need so much steel, there are so many tractors and so many pairs of children's sandals.

Problems of state regulation

The production time of the ordered rate took five years, then the cycle was repeated. The economy of this type of socialism did not exist by itself. She was in the role of performer in the state machine.

Usually the economy is compared with the body. Healthy or not, strong or weak. But - alive, not in need of instructions: "Heart, beysya, blood - teki!" The functions of the state in the economy of the Soviet Union were so extensive that there could be no question of any similarity in the organism. Unless it is not quite a living organism connected to a dialysis machine, an artificial lung and a pacemaker simultaneously. And, continuing the analogy, instead of blood, he has some sort of sterile plasma. Because the Soviet ruble was not just inconvertible. He existed outside the course, in an economic vacuum.

Artificial foreign exchange market

The functions of the state in the economy of the USSR were so extensive that the official exchange rate of the national currency was in no way connected either with the real purchasing power of the currency or with external quotes. The ratio of 1 ruble to 1 dollar existed only within the country, it was impossible to exchange rubles anywhere at that price anywhere in the country. And in the Soviet Union this ratio was real only within the limits of official transactions. The prices of the black market were completely different. And as soon as the country abandoned the policy of tight regulation of the currency market, the ruble rate collapsed - more precisely, it took the position that it had to occupy without artificial support.

In this and the trouble of artificial regulation of the economy - the existence of an isolated incubator with a sterile environment makes the body completely unviable. It is necessary either not to leave the safe zone, or to prepare for the fact that reality will overwhelm the fragile glass world.

Excessive static production

The same problems exist for the economy that exists in the regime of strict regulation. Of course, it is stable - market crises hardly concern it. But the payment for sustainability is exceptional rigidity. This economy is not capable of reacting to inevitable changes in reality. Both production and consumption are regulated in manual mode and, consequently, correspond not to actual requests, but to representations about these requests, living in the imagination of the governing structure. This is the role of the state in economic life. Socialism of the Soviet model could provide citizens with free apartments, but could not produce funds for women's hygiene. Simply because the need for apartments is significant on a national scale, and the need for gaskets is a trifle that can not be considered from the height of state administration.

Social guarantees in the USSR

But, along with such obvious shortcomings, the socio-economic system of the USSR was unique in its way. Yes, there were no gaskets - but there were apartments! The level of social guarantees in the USSR was at an extremely high level.

Free housing, free medicine, free education, guaranteed employment for graduates ... There was a curious paradox: on the one hand, the average standard of living in the USSR was significantly lower than in Europe or the US. On the other hand, it was really average - that is, there were neither luxurious villas for millionaires, nor homeless people in cardboard boxes. It can be said that the quality of care in an ordinary Soviet hospital for an unprivileged patient was lower than that in France or England. But you can remember that in France or England a person without insurance practically loses the right to medical care, and in the USSR it was one of the social guarantees for all.

Many graduates in the Soviet Union were dissatisfied with the distribution: remote regions, non-prestigious enterprises. Now, perhaps, not one student would envy this practice. Guaranteed work, free housing, even in the hostel, the prospect of getting your own apartment.

The social and economic system existing in the USSR, despite all its shortcomings, set exceptionally high standards in the sphere of the state's concern for man. And the ideal is simply unattainable.

The Swedish alternative

But the role of socialism in economic life may be different. Sweden did not refuse either private property or market economy. But it was they who built "socialism with a human face", achieved the goal to which the Soviet Union was for more than 70 years.

The Swedes took from the philosophical conception the best - caring for a person, attention to his needs and needs. And they abandoned the potentially dangerous goals due to their unfulfillable goals: the abolition of private property and centralized distribution. The Swedish model presupposes state control over social and economic life - but only in the sphere of social guarantees. After all, this does not need to monopolize the means of production and destroy the free market. It is enough to create an effective redistribution system.

Support of entrepreneurship

This is the role of the state in economic life. Socialism in Swedish is a just system of taxation and a reasonable, justified redistribution of funds.

In contrast to the Soviet Union, this country as much as possible encourages private production, especially small and medium. After all, this is the ideal option! Man provides himself and work, and livelihood, and even pays taxes. And you do not need to dictate to anyone how much to grow cabbage, but how much to sew shirts. With this, consumer demand will perfectly cope. The more earning, wealthy citizens, the more taxes they can pay, and consequently, the greater will be the infusions into the social sphere. At the same time, the taxation system is built in such a way that it is advantageous for entrepreneurs to increase production volumes, modernize and expand enterprises.

Socialism in Swedish

But this does not mean that the Swedes exclude the regulatory role of the state in economic life. Socialism as a concern for a person is achieved not through monopolization of production, but by optimizing the legislative base. The idea of equality found practical implementation in Sweden. Qualified and unskilled workers, men and women - anyone who does a certain job, receives money for it strictly in accordance with objective factors, such as the complexity of the job and the quality of the result. This is the result of the activity of the Swedish trade unions, with which the state cooperates closely.

In addition, the overall level of tolerance is exceptionally high in the country. Discrimination on the basis of gender, race, religion is almost impossible - punishment in this case is not only severe, but also inevitable.

In Sweden, there is no system of universal social guarantees, as in the USSR, but there is a system of state social insurance, which applies to all residents. Every citizen of the country, regardless of the level of his income, can count on public support if necessary.

In this way, the Swedes were able to implement the utopian theory of universal equality and security, without giving up either private property or the ideas of free trade and entrepreneurship.