Introduction

1. Neoliberaleconomic concept as a result of the historical development of classical liberalism

2. Representatives neoliberal directions

2.1. The concept of social market economy L. Erhard

2.2. Economic theory of L. Mises

2.3. Economic views of F. Hayek

2.4. M. Friedman

3. Basic provisions of monetarism

Conclusion

Economic theory is one of the most ancient sciences. Certain elements of economic knowledge appeared in the ancient world. Even when a person began to think about how to rationally use natural resources. However, ancient thinkers did not create complete systems economic views. The true beginning of the heyday economic science associated with the development of productive forces. At historically different times, economists had to deal with different economic realities, the economic behavior of people in which changed, and therefore economic theories also changed.

The development of modern economic science contributes not only to the development of traditional areas of economic thought (international trade, taxation, etc.), but also to the creation of completely new areas of economic knowledge (monetary theory, contract theory, etc.) Modern stage The development of economic theory is characterized by the presence of many directions and schools. Among these areas, there are alternative directions and concepts that differ, for example, in their views on the need to regulate market relations and state intervention in the economy.

Among many trends and concepts, neoliberalism occupies a significant place. Neoliberalism is a direction in economic science and the practice of business management, whose supporters defend the principle of self-regulation, free from excessive regulation.The neoliberal concept is based on the principle of state non-interference in the economy. Supporters of this direction believe that the market mechanism is capable of regulating the economy itself, establishing a balance between supply and demand, between production and consumption. Neo-Keynesianism, on the contrary, declares the need for the state to influence economic processes in order to adapt economic relations to new conditions.

In the mid-50s. within the framework of the neoliberal concept, monetarism arose - an economic theory that attributes the money supply in circulation to the role of a determining factor in the process of formation of economic conditions and establishing a causal relationship between changes in the amount of money and the value of the gross final product. But, despite the wide range of views, in recent years economists have increasingly come to the conclusion that it is necessary to combine government regulation and free stimulation of production. The concept of combining state and market regulation of the economy (the concept of neoclassical synthesis) was put forward. The combination of state production and private enterprise produces a mixed economy.

But, nevertheless, the neoliberal concept occupies a leading position in economic science and practice in many countries around the world.

1. Neoliberal economic concept as a result of the historical development of classical liberalism

The modern world economy is a complex combination of many interdependent markets, different monetary systems and the economies of different states, in which prices and exchange rates of national currencies can be set by both government authorities and market mechanisms. And as a result, the economic analysis of the modern economy turns out to be quite complex, as are the theories of modern economics. This could not but affect liberal economic theories. Classical liberalism, which emerged several centuries ago, was gradually modernized. And the result was neoliberalism, which is the modern version of liberalism. Neoliberalthe concept is based on the principle of self-regulation of a market economy, free from excessive state regulation. Neoliberals follow two traditional positions. Firstly, they proceed from the fact that the market, as the most efficient economic system, creates the best conditions for economic growth; secondly, they defend the priority importance of the freedom of economic agents. The state must provide conditions for competition and exercise control where these conditions do not exist.

Neoliberalthe economic concept began to take shape in the 1930s simultaneously with Keynesianism. Within neoliberal economic direction there were several centers in Germany, the USA, England: the Freiburg school, of which L. Erhard is a prominent representative; Chicago School (or monetary school) - M. Friedman; London School - F. Hayek.

At all times, there was no single recipe for the successful functioning of the economy and no consensus among various representatives of various directions economic thought. Origins neoliberal The economic concept must be sought in classical liberalism, which has a centuries-old history. From the point of view of traditional liberalism of the 18th and 19th centuries, its ideology was largely based on a mixed economy with significant state participation. Liberal economic policy of the second half of the 20th century is based on the need to minimize state participation and focus not on a mixed economy, but on an economy based on private property.

Liberalism is, first of all, economic freedom. Economic freedom means freedom of enterprise, liberation from any feudal, corporate-guild and administrative-command restrictions. This is freedom, first of all, from state dictate. State dictate can be implemented in different ways, and its fiscal form (increasing the tax burden and budget redistribution to finance government obligations) is the most harmless. But there are forms of state dictatorship that are much more dangerous for economic freedom. These are various forms of state monopoly (on foreign trade, foreign exchange transactions, property, etc.). Also on licensing and regulation of various types of activities, distortion of basic market criteria and parameters (prices, exchange rates, efficiency criteria, etc.).

On early stage development of liberalism, it was believed that the most important condition for the prosperity of the state is its non-interference in the economy. The essence of the ideology of liberal economic policy was formulated in his time by Adam Smith: “In order to raise the state from the lowest level of barbarism to the highest level of prosperity, all that is needed is peace, light taxes and tolerance in government, the natural course of things will do the rest.” . But does it follow from this that Vietnam is a more liberal country than Norway, and that Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan have carried out more liberal reforms than Poland and the Czech Republic? It is important to pay attention to tolerance in management. That is, the state should be neutral regarding business and other forms of private life, unless one form of private life begins to suppress another. In this case, the state must intervene to ensure a level playing field for everyone. Smith in his works showed that individual interests must be put at the forefront, i.e. “the natural desire of every person to improve his situation.” The growth of social wealth and the priority of social values ​​will then be established by itself (market self-regulation of the economy).

However, after the depression of the 30s in the USA and Western Europe, such views find fewer and fewer supporters. During these years, new concepts emerged - neoliberalism and Keynesianism. Theoretically substantiated the need government regulation market economy English economist John Keynes. He considers the economy and the market to be non-self-regulating systems. Therefore, his theories rely on government intervention, which regulates the downturns and booms that occur during business cycles, primarily through fiscal policy. Keynes's theory "points out the vital need for the creation of centralized control in matters that are now mainly left to private initiative... The state should will exert its guiding influence on the propensity to consume partly through an appropriate system of taxes, partly by fixing the rate of interest, and perhaps in other ways.” Keynes's views are not close to liberals, but over time the views of liberals also changed. From the initial denial of state regulation and intervention in the economy, liberals and then neoliberals began to move to recognizing the permissibility, even the necessity, of state intervention in the socio-economic sphere. But neoliberals, unlike Keynesians, recognize government regulation not in the form of government orders, price regulation, public investment, etc., but in the form of soft regulation of economic processes. They support government intervention in the economy to promote economic stability, curb inflation, reduce unemployment, and support the national currency, but they prefer selective and pragmatic intervention. Neoliberals came to the conclusion that spontaneous market forces are not always able to ensure the normal process of reproduction on their own, and there is a need for stabilizing intervention from the outside.

Neoliberalismtook a leading position in liberalism in the 80-90s. This trend requires the rationalization of state socio-economic regulation, in particular, it declares the goal of pragmatic social policy to be the optimal reproduction of “human capital”, rather than the establishment of general prosperity (this involves the use of social spending primarily for the development of labor retraining systems, rather than increasing benefits for the poor and unemployed ). This newest trend in liberalism does not deny that its main function in modern times has been to maintain a balance between economic freedom and socio-economic equality.

The range of opinions on these issues is very wide. There is an almost opposite understanding of liberalism in the European and American traditions. In America, the word “liberal” is almost synonymous with the word “socialist.” Liberalism in this tradition is support for state social programs and, accordingly, an increase in taxation, support for national, religious, and social minorities. American liberalism is more political than European. In Europe, the word “liberal,” on the contrary, is the antonym of the word “socialist.” The European liberal advocates small government and limiting government intervention in the economy. European liberalism is more economic in nature (although its political component is also very important - constitutional liberalism, the rule of law and the protection of rights and freedoms).

Liberalism is not only freedom of enterprise, free prices and open markets, it is, first of all, a set of intellectual, cultural, moral, political and economic attitudes focused on recognizing the individual, his freedom, highlighting man as a semantic center, emphasizing the value of man in contrast to team values. Early liberalism defended individual rights and freedoms solely as a means to the greatest good: “the greatest welfare for the greatest number”, i.e. it was believed that rights and freedoms were ultimately beneficial for achieving the economic well-being of the state, but, starting with Kant, they began to acquire independent value. One of the main postulates formulated by the neoliberal F. Hayek is the concern for creating conditions for the free development of the individual: “In pursuit of this goal, a liberal should treat society like a gardener who needs to know as much as possible about the life of the plants he cares for.”

In their economic policies, neoliberals make demands to reduce wealth inequality through social welfare programs and other forms of redistribution. One of the basic principles of neoliberalism, proposed by the generally accepted ideologist of liberalism J. Rawls, is formulated as follows: “social and economic inequalities should be smoothed out in such a way that they lead to the greatest benefit of the least successful.” Statistics show that in industrialized countries that implement the liberal concept, there is a constant decrease in the difference between the incomes of the richest and lowest paid citizens.

2. Representatives neoliberal directions

2.1. The concept of social market economy L. Erhard

Ludwig Erhard (1897-1977) is one of the main authors of the concept of social market economy. According to Erhard, modern liberalism cannot avoid a prominent role for the state in economic processes:

· firstly, it is necessary to limit the activities of monopolies;

· secondly, " stateless» The market economy creates an excessive gap in income and insecurity for certain social groups, which leads to political and social instability. Therefore, the state must carry out a partial redistribution of income in favor of the poor and finance a number of social programs.

In exceptional cases, the state can even regulate prices for critical goods and services (food, energy, transport).

Erhard practically used this concept for the post-war economic renewal of Germany. Hyperinflation reigned in war-torn Germany. Money ceased to fulfill its function, and cigarettes (mostly American) were considered the most reliable “currency”. In 1948 it was held currency reform(including banking reform). As a result, the volume of nominal money supply (cash and deposits) decreased fourteen times. Structural changes made it possible to effectively use significant foreign aid. The state found funds for investment tax breaks, to maintain the coal and metallurgical industry, as well as the electric power industry. As a result, the rise in prices quickly stopped, and by the beginning of 1950 the pre-war production level was surpassed.

Subsequent economic growth and a moderate but consistent redistribution of part of the budget in favor of less affluent social strata created the conditions for a significant increase in the living standards of all social groups in Germany.

2.2. Economic theory of L. Mises

Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) – professor at the University of Vienna, emigrated to the USA in 1940. He rejected the theory of general equilibrium; he was mainly interested in adaptive processes in the economy and competition in changing economic conditions.

In 1922, Mises published Socialism, in which he argued that centrally set prices made it impossible to achieve economic equilibrium in a planned economy. If price does not equalize supply and demand, then it cannot be used to select efficient combinations of factors of production. Therefore, a centralized economy, not governed by freely changing prices, is governed by the arbitrariness of officials who, even if they are absolutely honest and competent, do not have at their disposal the tools of effective planning. A socialist society will never be able to achieve rational use of resources because it cannot have a real price system.

Free prices play a key role in the efficient functioning of a market economy. However, to do this, they must be driven by demand, and not by the depreciation of money. Hence Mises's interest in inflation.

He came to the conclusion that in conditions of inflation, the winners are those social groups that receive cash flows first, and all others are the losers. The result is a redistribution of property and income in favor of those who “know how to get ahead of others in raising prices for goods and labor. Next to the best organized cartels are the best organized labor unions. The losers will be the classes that are difficult to organize.”

Misesopposed price and wage controls and low growth rates money supply as the basis of anti-inflationary policy. The whole point, he believed, is that when inflation heats up the economy, producers and investors receive incorrect signals from banks in the form of a low interest rate. As a result, there is an unjustified redistribution of resources between industries. Manufacturing industries are moving forward. Their workers' incomes are rising, but this growth is not matched by corresponding growth in consumer goods. This leads to an increase in their prices. The cause of inflation, therefore, is the inflexibility of relative prices, and an effective fight against it requires structural changes in economics, restoring the sensitivity of relative prices to changes in economic conditions.

2.3. Economic views of F. Hayek

Friedrich von Hayek (1899-1992). He was born in Vienna, moved to England and then to the USA. In 1974 he received the Nobel Prize in Economics. In his works, he developed A. Smith's idea about the possibility of the emergence and existence of spontaneous order in the economy. Smith believed that spontaneous order is created by the invisible hand of competition, which regulates prices in the market. According to Hayek, competition through the price mechanism informs market participants about the opportunities that they can take advantage of to effectively use the resources that society has. At the same time, the market contributes to the concentration of knowledge, skills and abilities that are scattered in society and can be used to produce goods.

IN In his latest book, Hayek characterizes the market as complex highly organized system where the process occurs “ unconscious self-organization" Hayek believed that economic problems should be solved through accumulation and spreading information (knowledge). If information spreads unhindered, then competitive prices bring the economy to an optimal state. From here, in his opinion, it follows that the highest human value is one’s own food. Only it can guarantee that a person can independently manage his knowledge. In a competitive environment, this leads to the effective use of knowledge and thereby to a high level of economic well-being.

Economic Freedom for Hayek is, first of all, the individual freedom of each individual person with the only limitation that does not allow him to limit the individual freedom of other people. The basis of economic freedom lies not in a more or less uniform distribution of material goods carried out by the state and subordinating this distribution to individuals, but in the right of each individual to freely dispose of capital and their abilities, which creates risk and responsibility manager

System private property is the main guarantee of freedom. While control of property is distributed among many independent people, no one has absolute power over them. On the contrary, in a society where everything is planned from above, the well-being of everyone will depend not on him, but on the decision of the highest authority.

An alternativestate regulation is served by the construction of spontaneous order. Hayek abandoned the use of the concept of economic equilibrium. Instead, he uses some approximation to economic equilibrium called order. To maintain order, two rules are especially important:

· refusal from appropriation of someone else's property;

· execution voluntarily assumed contractual obligations.

But at the same time, Hayek allows for a much greater role of the state in the economy than traditional liberalism, primarily in relation to the share state expenses . Liberalism, in his opinion, consists of ensuring maximum information transparency of state actions in economics and politics, excluding “privatization” of the state by individuals or small groups with political power or the power of wealth. Such pressure groups (lobbyists) may include trade unions, political parties, industrial concerns and banks. The goal of lobbyists is to obtain individual benefits and privileges for their group. These could be tax benefits, subsidies from state budget, etc. In all these cases it happens redistribution monetary, information and material resources in favor of lobbyists. Hayek argued that group egoism (lobbying of group interests) violates free competition and the efficiency of resource allocation in the economy decreases.

Simultaneously he had a negative attitude towards excessive government intervention in the economy, especially in the processes pricing. The state, in his opinion, should mainly develop legislative framework functioning competitive market.

Especially he strongly opposed expansion financing growing budget deficit. Moreover, in his monograph “Private Money” (1976), Hayek proposed to abolish state monopoly on the issue of money. Money should be considered an ordinary commercial commodity, and should be issued by private issuers (commercial banks). Competing with each other. Such competition “will lead to the discovery of as yet unknown possibilities inherent in the phenomenon of money.” However, for this to happen, competition must be informationally transparent, and all information must be published daily in the financial press. The main harm from state The monopoly on the issue of money lies in the fact that, due to excessive growth of the money supply, it distorts relative prices and thereby violates the efficiency of the free market. [ 2, p.221].

2.4. M. Friedman

Milton Friedman was born in 1912, became a professor at the University of Chicago, winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1076, and a fellow of the American Hoover Institution. Friedman is an adherent of the idea of ​​freedom, based on the existence of an internal connection between freedom of enterprise and freedom of society. To increase freedom, the role of the state must be reduced. It should not be allowed to create wealth, regulate output, employment and prices. The only thing it can and should do in the economy is to regulate the amount of money in circulation.

Friedman believes that changes in the monetary sphere have a decisive impact on the economic environment. The price level in an economy depends significantly on the supply of money (coins, notes, and checks), and every significant increase in the price level is preceded by a significant change in the rate of growth of the money supply. Therefore, the correct tool for economic analysis is the quantitative theory of money.

Friedman's opponents argued that what he really was saying was that money is the only thing that matters. In fact, to clarify his point, Friedman argues that money serves:

· the main reason for changes in real income in a short period of time;

· the only reason for changes in nominal income over long periods of time.

Long-term economic growth, in contrast, is determined by resources, technology and consumer preferences.

According to Milton Friedman, “The market is a simple mechanism that can be used to achieve any number of goals. Depending on how it is used, the market can contribute to or hinder social and economic development. Every community - communist, socialist or capitalist - uses the market in one way or another. The issue of private property is significant. Who are the market participants and on whose behalf do they act? It is possible that these are government bureaucrats acting on behalf of the state. Or are they individuals working for themselves.”

3. Basic provisions of classical monetarism

Monetaristsattach special importance to money and believe that it is the money supply that is a significant factor determining the level of production, employment and prices. In their general views on the economy and its development, monetarists are close to the old classical theory; they also believe that it is market competition that ensures the flexibility of prices and wage rates, and changes in total expenses directly affect the prices of goods and resources, and not the real volume of production and employment. Based on this, monetarists reject government intervention in economic life, and even believe that such interference is more likely to harm society than to benefit it.

Monetarists, like the classics, proceed from the equation of exchange:

Mx V=P x y ,

Where M– money supply, V– velocity of circulation of money supply, P– price level, y– real volumeproduction

Since the product of the volume of production and the price level at which goods are sold on average constitutes the net national product (NNP), the velocity of money is determined from the equation of exchange as the quotient of NNP divided by the money supply.

But the views of monetarists on the role of money and monetary theory significantly different from the classic ones. This is as follows:

· First, they believe that the velocity of money is not constant, but variable. The classics take this speed as a constant value. Monetarists argue that the velocity of money depends on two factors: the interest rate and the expected rate of inflation.

· Secondly, as studies by Friedman and Anna Schwartz have shown, the relationship between changes in the money supply and the absolute price level is asymmetrical, i.e. these parameters do not coincide in time.[6, p.250-251]

The monetarist principles of economic regulation, along with the concept of the business cycle, are based on the theories of inflation and unemployment they developed. Treating inflation as an exclusively monetary phenomenon, monetarists believe that its development is based on changes in the correspondence between the money supply in circulation and the population’s real need for funds, i.e. the relationship between the supply of money and the demand for it. The monetarist theory of inflation and unemployment and related recommendations for regulating the economy were formed as a response to Keynesian analogues. Monetarists subjected to critical analysis the concept of Phillips curves, which substantiates the relationship between short-term and long-term changes in the unemployment rate and the inflation rate, and the need for short-term regulation. They oppose this concept, recognizing only a short-term relationship between the unemployment rate and the rate of “unforeseen” inflation resulting from misguided economic policies. The need for short-term regulation is categorically denied. Phillips curves, monetarists believe, do not reflect a stable relationship and quantitative relationship between changes in unemployment and prices over a long period or in conditions of high inflation. Consequently, this concept cannot be used by the state as an effective tool for forecasting and regulating the rate of inflationary price growth.

MonetaristsIn their concept of inflation, they distinguish between expected and unexpected inflation. The first assumes a long-term rate of price growth that corresponds to the rational expectations of agents of the economic system in relation to price changes. Rational expectation refers to individual long-term forecasts of price dynamics, which are used to make market decisions about the value of factors of production. In this case, the rationalism of inflation expectations consists in their adequacy to the principles of rational behavior of an economic individual in the market.

As a result of the action of the expected inflation factor, according to monetarists, the inflation process will always significantly exceed the rate that should follow from Phillips' concept. Thus, whenever the government tries to increase employment and the unemployment rate falls below the “natural” rate, expected inflation will overlap with the actual rate of price growth, causing inflation to rise sharply.

Monetaristsassume that employment is associated only with short-term unexpected inflation, since it deviates the unemployment rate from the natural one. She considers unexpected inflation to be a consequence of erroneous activities of government bodies. The content of the monetarist concept of the natural rate of unemployment is that in equilibrium conditions a stable and optimal for the economy is maintained. natural level unemployment. According to well-known monetarists M. Friedman, T. Sargent, and R. Lux Jr., natural unemployment does not depend on macroeconomic factors and is determined only by microeconomic ones. They believe that reducing the natural rate of unemployment through government regulation can only be achieved by reducing spending on social programs and strict fiscal policy. Other government measures to regulate employment - establishing minimum wage rates - inevitably contributes to the growth of inflation.

Monetaristthe theory of unemployment, which denies the regulatory impact of macroeconomic factors on employment, is also refuted by them. Being a product of capitalist accumulation, a condition for the development of a market economy.

Monetaristthe explanation of the causes of inflation solely by monetary factors and government regulation of employment is poorly consistent with reality. Inflation is generated state-monopoly structure, the elements of the mechanism of which are a hidden form of capital flow, the growth of government spending and the formation of chronic state budget deficits in connection with this, the growth of public debt and essentially inflationary methods of covering it, excessive credit expansion commercial banks, foreign economic policy. This entire rather complex mechanism of the modern economy, through its functioning, generates and deepens inflation.

Based on the theory of inflation and unemployment, monetarists recommend the state a whole range of regulatory measures: reducing government spending by reducing social programs and expenses for paying various types of benefits; maintaining minimum wage rates; weakening influence of trade unions; adaptation of the tax system to anti-inflationary policy(tax reduction); ensuring stable growth of the money supply; reducing the growth of the federal budget deficit, including through defense spending.

The main provisions of classical (Friedman) monetarism are as follows:

1. Changing the money supply, not the level aggregate demand is the main reason for changes in the price level, and therefore the value of nominal income. Therefore, the connection between the rate of growth of the quantity of money and the rate of growth of nominal income, which can be expressed through one or another version of the quantity theory of money, is essential. However, this connection is not instantaneous. The lag between changes in the money supply and income is quite large (from 3 months to 3 years).

2. A change in the quantity of money has a contradictory effect on the interest rate at which loans are taken: an increase in the supply of money will first cause a decrease in the interest rate, and then an increase in costs and inflation increases the demand for loans, which leads to an increase in the interest rate. Therefore, the rate of interest is high in those countries where there is rapid growth of the money supply.

3. In long-term equilibrium, money is neutral. This means that there is a long-term proportionality between money and prices, based on the stability of the money millet (or its inverse - the velocity of circulation of money) - see the equation of exchange. Therefore, in the long run, the interest rate is determined by real factors, productivity and frugality.

4. In short and medium periods of time (up to 5-7 years), money, on the contrary, is not neutral and can cause real changes in the economy. Changes in the demand for money affect the speed of its circulation. The latter depends on the interest rate and inflation rate, as well as on the income of the population.

5. A change in the money supply affects the amount of income. A monetary crisis that reduces the money supply leads to a major depression. Accordingly, Friedman argued that the Great Depression in the United States was caused by a 35% contraction of the monetary supply in 1933 compared to 1029.

6. The relationship between deposits and cash is quite stable and predictable. This means that Central Bank can regulate the total amount of money in circulation.

7. What is decisive is not fiscal policy, but monetary policy.

8. Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it can only arise when the quantity of money grows faster than the level of production.

9. Monetary policy is more important than fiscal policy. However, because there are unpredictable lags in the relationship between money, income and prices, fine-tuning policies based on carefully designed monetary policy are difficult to implement. Therefore, it is better to use a simple rule of annual increase in the money supply at a constant rate proportional to the annual rate of economic growth (for the USA this is 3-5% per year).

Monetaristsmade a certain step in the study of the economic mechanism of the modern economy, in the study of functional connections and factors influencing the dynamics of inflation and unemployment. Classical economic theory and some of its new variants absolutize the processes of self-regulation and self-organization of the market and therefore oppose state intervention in the economy, believing that the market is able to regulate itself. Monetarists, like the classics, strongly oppose government intervention in the economy, considering it not only useless, but also harmful due to incompetence, bureaucracy and suppression of people's economic freedom.

At the same time, monetarists are typical representatives of the exchange concept. They see the root cause of economic processes not in production, but in circulation. Monetarists are unable to explain the internal content and origins of the trends in classical economics under consideration. Relying on empiricism, they recommend determining the size of the money supply close to the growth rate of output. The question of how this factor affects the dynamics and results of production is essentially left in silence, since the authors of the concept cannot answer it. References to many years of experience and statistical data from the history of monetary circulation are perceived with skepticism by many.

NeoliberalThe economic concept is the result of the historical development of the liberal direction of economic thought. The neoliberal economic concept of the second half of the 20th century is based on the need to minimize state participation, to focus not on a mixed economy, but on an economy based on private property. This the concept is based on the principle of self-regulation of a market economy, free from excessive state regulation. Neoliberals follow two traditional positions. Firstly, they proceed from the fact that the market, as the most efficient economic system, creates the best conditions for economic growth; secondly, they defend the priority importance of the freedom of economic agents. The state must provide conditions for competition and exercise control where these conditions do not exist.

Neoliberal the concept, like all economic theory, is increasingly influencing the real economy. Hayek's proposal to be repealed state the monopoly on the issue of money has already been partially implemented in modern national monetary systems, although Central banks retain a monopoly on the issue of banknotes:

· Firstly, in open economies the foreign currencies, competing with the national currency, foreign banks compete with national banks;

· secondly, the state monopoly extends only to the issue of the monetary base, and not to the supply of money;

· thirdly, public opinion has largely already realized the harmfulness of excessive money emission and its connection with inflation.

It is already almost obvious that Hayek is right in the main thing - maintaining and enhancing the efficiency of the economy requires further deregulation monetary system and money market. But the question of how to do this better technically remains open.

Monetaristthe government regulation program found a wide response among the governments of the USA, Great Britain and Germany. To a certain extent, their concept had a positive impact on the development of anti-inflationary measures in the USA and Great Britain in the 80s. The monetarist assessment of the negative manifestations of the Keynesian theory of government regulation in terms of deficit financing and excessive issuance of money into circulation is worthy of attention. But applying monetarists’ recommendations in practice does not always give tangible results and causes serious criticism from economists who express serious doubts about its final effect, since monetarists assume a classical market, which does not exist now. The monetarist model, like the classical one that preceded it, pays main attention to the processes of self-organization of the economic system in general and the market mechanism in particular. But, at the same time, they do not forget the immutable fact that such a system is not entirely self-organizing, it cannot fully regulate itself.

In relation to Russia, its own modification was developed neoliberal the doctrines of the Washington Consensus, called “shock therapy.” Simplified, it can be reduced to three postulates: liberalization, privatization and stabilization through strict formal planning of the money supply. But in practice, the doctrine of the Washington Consensus turned out to be inadequate to the real problems of economic development of our country.

But despite the failures that befell liberal reforms in Russia, the liberal economic concept, which has already existed for several centuries, has stood the test of time and proven its viability. One of the basic principles of neoliberalism, proposed by the generally recognized ideologist of liberalism J. Rawls, is formulated as follows: “social and economic inequalities should be smoothed out in such a way that they lead to the greatest benefit of the least successful.” Statistics show that in industrialized countries that implement the neoliberal concept, there is not only economic growth, but also a constant decrease in the difference between the incomes of the richest and lowest paid citizens. Illiberalism focuses not only on the successful development of the economic system, but also on solving social problems (the growth of the middle class and the elimination of poverty).

LITERATURE:

1. JeffreySachs The failure of Russian reforms / Project Syndicate, August 1999 // "Nezavisimaya Gazeta" 09/16/1999

2. KostyukV.N. History of economic doctrines - M.: Center, 1997.- 224 p.

3. MiltonFriedman Politics interferes with reforms / Project Syndicate, June 1999 // "NG - Political Economy" No. 10, June 1999.

4. Movsesyan A. Liberalism in Russia // "Nezavisimaya Gazeta" 05.27.1999

5. Nikolsky S. Liberal and society//"Nezavisimaya Gazeta" 06/23/1998

6. RuzavinG.I., Martynov V.T. Course of market economics /Ed. G.I. Ruzavina - M.: Banks and exchanges, UNITY, 1994.- 319 p.

7. UlyukaevA. Post-socialist liberalism // "NG - Political Economy" No. 11, July 1999.

8. HayekF. Detrimental arrogance - M.: News, 1992.

9. HartzL. Liberal tradition in America: Trans. from English, total. ed. Sogrina V.V. - M.: Progress - Progress Academy, 1993.- 400 p.

10. YadgarsI'M WITH. History of economic teachings - M.: INFRA-M, 1999.- 320 p.

Neoliberalism as an independent system of views on the problem of state regulation of the economy, alternative to Keynesianism, was formed in the 1930s. In theory and practice, neoliberalism is based on the idea of ​​​​the priority of conditions for unlimited free competition, not despite, but thanks to a certain intervention of the state in economic processes. Keynesianism requires active government intervention in the economy. Neoliberalism is relatively passive government regulation. The main principles of neoliberalism include:

Economic liberalization;

Using the principles of free pricing;

The leading role in the economy of private property and non-state economic structures.

Neoliberals see the role of the state in regulating the economy as the functions of a “night watchman” or “sports referee”. The credo of neoliberalism was perfectly expressed by L. Erhard (1897-1977): “Competition wherever possible, regulation where necessary.”

The largest centers of neoliberalism in Germany, the USA and England are respectively called the Freiburg, Chicago and London schools.

In 1938, trying to develop a unified scientific and practical platform, neoliberalists proclaimed their principles at an international conference in Paris, which today is called the “Lippmann Colloquium” - due to the consonance of the approved principles of neoliberalism in A. Walter Lippmann’s book “The Free City” (USA, 1938).

The essence of the general principles of the neoliberal movement adopted in Paris boiled down to the declaration of the need for state assistance in returning the rules of free competition and ensuring their implementation by all economic entities. The condition of the priority of private property, freedom of transactions and free markets could be revised by state actions only in extreme cases, such as war, catastrophe, natural disaster, etc.

The most prominent representative of the Austrian tradition, a thinker who opposed the intellectual current of his time, an ardent defender of liberal values ​​and a critic of the socialist worldview is Friedrich von Hayek (1899–1991).

In the first period of his scientific activity, F. Hayek paid great attention to determining the boundaries of knowledge and the possibilities of influencing social phenomena. In this regard, he is interested in the forms and extent of state regulation of the economy. Research in the field of theoretical psychology (“The Structure of Perception”, 1952), criticism of scientism in the social sciences (“Counter-revolution of science”, 1952), analysis of the legal principles of a liberal society (“Constitution of Freedom”, 1960), as well as criticism of modern Western democracy, not corresponding to the ideals of a free society, in the trilogy “Law, Legislation and Freedom” (1973-1979) brought Hayek wide fame and at the same time brought him into conflict with many scientists and liberal politicians. Therefore, Hayek’s theories did not become widespread at first, and only in the late 70s and early 80s did a kind of renaissance of his ideas take place, since by this time it became clear that he was right in many respects.

F. Hayek is one of the creators of the modern theory of money, he made fundamental contributions to other areas of economic science, he is considered the founder of the so-called neo Austrian school in economics. In addition to those mentioned, his works “Competition as a Discovery Procedure” (1989), “The Road to Serfdom” (1944), “Prices and Production” (1931), “Detrimental Conceit. Mistakes of socialism" (1988).

The main premise of knowledge in the philosophical concept of F. Hayek is the provision of fundamental limitations human knowledge, its dispersion among people, each of whom has a certain share of this knowledge. Much of this knowledge is intuitive and informal. This situation follows from real life.

The consequence of this is the recognition of the impossibility of developing an objective and complete picture of the world and the economy, since any specific information about the system, including the economic one, is always limited and reflects only part of it. The knowledge accumulated in society is embodied in habitual ways of thinking and acting, traditions and norms, which are transmitted in the process of education and are taken for granted. However, these established institutional forms play an important role in society, its functioning and development. They form a social order that is maintained and created through the purposeful actions of people, but is the result of spontaneous coordination. This order, which F. Hayek called “expanded” or “spontaneous”, arises in the process of evolution, its existence is not subordinated to any goal, but it is important for achieving many individual goals that guide people and which are collectively unknown to anyone .

An important part of the organic social order is the market and the institutions on which it directly relies, in particular the institution of private property. The market, like any social order, is formed naturally without any guiding force, but the well-being of the entire society depends on its existence, including the guarantee of the most important social value - individual freedom. Therefore, F. Hayek declared the main goal of economic science to be the study of the market as a system of voluntary exchange.

F. Hayek, as a successor to the tradition of the Austrian school, builds his concept on the basis of the following principles: subjectivism (reliance on the assessments and ideas of an individual), apriorism (science is based on axioms that are obtained intuitively) and methodological individualism (any social phenomena are derived from individual actions ).

Hayek's ideas have had and continue to have a great influence on the economic theory and practice of the West. Conducted in the 80s of the XX century in Western countries ah, the denationalization of property and its privatization is the result of this influence. It is no coincidence that UNESCO decided to publish a 22-volume collection of the works of F. Hayek, and this project has already been implemented.

Neoliberal ideas began to take shape in Germany in the 1930s. and became most widespread in the post-war period, when the old totalitarian regime collapsed, and the “barter economy” managed to appear in the form of anarchy and the “black market”.

In the German neoliberal movement of the 1940-1950s. Two groups should be distinguished, the views of whose representatives deserve special attention: the ordoliberals, or the Freiburg school, led by W. Eucken and F. Böhm, and supporters of the theory of the social market economy, among whom the leading figure was A. Müller-Armack.

Ordoliberals proposed their own doctrine of the national economy based on a synthesis of the ideas of the new, or young, historical school, the neoclassical concept and traditional liberalism. Methodologically, this direction is closest to the ideas of the new historical school, which considers the process social development from the point of view of gradual changes, evolution. Representatives of both movements use a single terminology to characterize the economic life of different societies: “orders”, “steps” and “styles”.

Ordoliberalism is related to the neoclassical movement by marginalism, the provisions of which are taken into account, but are not used as the most important research tool. The focus of the ordoliberals is not on quantitative, but on qualitative, institutional problems, the solution of which is considered a sufficient prerequisite for eliminating the most important quantitative imbalances in the reproduction process.

The central idea of ​​the illiberal concept is the recognition of the importance of the active influence of the state on the institutional matrix of economic life in order to create reliable general conditions for conducting a market economy and a strict framework for competition.

The basis of ordoliberalism is the doctrine of two types of economic order (system), which is an economic modification of M. Weber’s theory of ideal types of social systems. Its author, V. Eucken, defines economic order as a set of implemented economic forms, in which everyday specific economic processes take place. He believes that human society throughout history has been characterized by two main types of economic systems: a centrally controlled economy and an exchange economy, more often referred to as a market economy. He, in turn, divides the centrally managed economy into individual, or natural, and centrally administrative. The pure types he identified are realized in specific conditions in various forms, combining elements of both types and differing in the relationship between them.

The main idea of ​​the ordoliberal concept is that a strong state is limited to the formation and maintenance of economic order, i.e., the institutional environment, and the regulation and course of the economic process occurs spontaneously. This idea is enshrined in the slogan of the Freiburg school of neoliberalism: “State regulation of economic forms - yes, state planning and regulation of the economic process - no!”

Central to the ordoliberal doctrine is a well-functioning competition system, understood as a state institution that must be protected from the encroachments of monopolists, since it was their actions that provoked the serious crisis that hit the economies of Western countries in 1929–1933. Implementation antimonopoly policy should be carried out by an agency consisting of independent policy experts.

The Ordoliberal concept gained recognition among business circles in West Germany immediately after the war, but it could not be fully implemented for two reasons:

1) a deeper intervention in the economy was required than the ordoliberals assumed;

2) it did not have support among the general population.

These circumstances allowed another version of neoliberal theory - the concept of a social market economy - to become the ideology of the ruling circles. Thus, the creation of a model of a social market economy as the main goal of economic policy was announced by German Chancellor K. Adenauer in the preface to W. Repke’s work “Is German Economic Policy Correct?”

When developing this theory, its authors relied on post-Marxist analysis of capitalism and research from the historical school. The term “social market economy” first appeared in 1947 in the work of A. Müller-Armack “Regulation of the Economy and the Market Economy.”

Theory of social market economy differs from ordoliberalism in that it modifies the concept of capitalism, stating the need for social balancing, putting forward the idea of ​​a universal economic order, and recognizing the possibility of insufficiency or failure of the principles of the market system, such as market failures or monopolization.

The main difference between a social market economy and capitalism, according to A. Müller-Armak, is the active social policy pursued by the government, subject to the principle of “social compensation”: “This market economy becomes social due to the fact that ... the “functional distribution” arising from the production process “Property is transformed through social policy into a socially desirable “personal” distribution of income.”

A. Müller-Armak considered the main instrument of “social compensation” to be progressive taxation of persons with high incomes and the redistribution of funds received in favor of the less wealthy in the form of budget subsidies for the maintenance of children, payment of rent, construction of their own housing, etc. In this way it was intended to reduce gap between high and low incomes. Other forms of social policy were also proposed, for example the creation of a developed social insurance system and infrastructure worthy of people.

In the 1950s the provisions of the theory of social market economy were specified and supplemented by the slogans “welfare for all” and “property for all” put forward by the ruling parties CDU/CSU. In 1965, L. Erhard, at the CDU party congress, announced the completion of the program for creating a social market economy in Germany, which had transformed the country into a “formalized society.”

The doctrine of a formed society, according to L. Erhard and his associates, is a search for a better natural economic order, which can be achieved through the creation of a social market economy. Realizing the impossibility of the automatic functioning of the latter, W. Repke and L. Erhard recognized the need to counter any manifestation of anarchy of production with appropriate measures of government intervention that would ensure a synthesis between a free and socially obligatory social system. The role of the state is compared to the position of an arbitrator (judge) on the field: it strictly monitors the actions of economic entities in accordance with certain rules, but does not have the right to directly participate in the game.

In the United States, the Chicago School of neoliberalism became an alternative to Keynesianism. Her monetary ideas originated in the 20s. And American monetarism gained leading importance in the neoliberal movement in the late 50s - early 60s with the advent of the publications of Milton Friedman, the future Nobel laureate in 1976.

In 1958 A.U. Phillips derived an empirical curve characterizing the relationship between the annual percentage change in wages in monetary terms and the level (shares) of unemployment in England for the period 1861-1913. Its analysis and discussions raised quite serious doubts among academic economists about the need for “simplified economic recommendations politicians typical of the Keynesian revolution."

M. Friedman and his colleagues, having analyzed the Phillips curve, came to the conclusion that this curve is far from stable, especially taking into account the economic realities in the world in the late 60s, when rising inflation, contrary to the logic of the curve, was accompanied not by a decrease, but by an increase in unemployment , and in the early 70s there was even a simultaneous increase in both inflation and unemployment.

Friedman revived the importance of money, money supply and monetary circulation in economic processes. His monetary concept, tested under Nixon in 1969-70, had the greatest success under Reagan, weakened inflation while the dollar actually strengthened, and this policy was called “reagonomics.”

The theoretical novelty of M. Friedman's concept of government intervention in the economy lies in the fact that government intervention in the economy was limited to tight monetary policy, which was linked to Friedman's “natural rate of unemployment.” A positive result is achieved through a constant and stable growth rate of the amount of money in the amount of 3-4% per year, regardless of the state of the market, taking into account the average growth rate of the US gross national product over a number of years, according to which the maximum possible level of the national economy is established.

The neoliberals blamed the Keynesians and neo-Keynesians for the expanded scale of the public sector of the economy, the restriction of the conditions of free competition, and the reduction of investments in the most important areas of the economy, contrary to their own teaching of the “multiplier and accelerator effects.”

In conclusion, it should be noted that neoliberalism is an economic and political doctrine that largely influenced the course of history at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries. Current global economic crisis, as leading experts admit, was the product of neoliberal policies. Definitions of this doctrine may differ, but in any case it can be said that neoliberalism is a theory according to which the system of capitalist market relations and market exchange is applicable to any spheres of human activity and is the basis of ethical standards sufficient to regulate human behavior in any circumstances.

In accordance with this doctrine, state intervention in the economy and social relations should be minimal. Capital must be free from any restrictions. The state must abandon most social programs and minimize taxes on corporate profits, abolish the progressive scale of income taxes, and carry out large-scale privatization. Maximum profit and freedom of private economic initiative are priorities in all areas, but if environmental or social regulations interfere with this, they must be abolished. Apologists of neoliberalism are supporters of limiting the rights of trade unions. Neoliberals usually adhere to the doctrine of freedom of private life, but are sometimes quite loyal to limiting the political rights of citizens (even establishing a dictatorship) in cases where this happens in the interests of large corporations. It is often noted that neoliberals are supporters of short-term contracts in all areas - from labor to family relations.

At the same time, neoliberalism differs from a number of other doctrines similar in name. Thus, it is distinguished from classical liberalism by a more tolerant attitude towards authoritarian regimes. From social liberalism - the denial of a significant role of the state in the economy and social guarantees. In addition, it is worth remembering that in American journalism, liberals (without the prefix “neo”) are often called representatives of social liberal movements, and sometimes in articles by authors from the United States one can find the statement that socialist and communist ideology are also forms of liberalism. In Russia, on the contrary, when speaking about liberals, they often mean supporters of the neoliberal doctrine.

The opportunity for neoliberals to influence real policy appeared in the 1970s, when Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister of Great Britain in May 1979. In October of the same year, the chairman of the Federal reserve bank Paul Walker became the United States, and Ronald Reagan took over the White House in January 1981. As a recipe for combating the severe economic difficulties facing their countries, these politicians announced tax cuts and sharp cuts in social safety nets - leading to confrontations with trade unions and mass protests.

On the periphery of the capitalist world, neoliberals were able to implement their economic theories for the first time in Chile. General Augusto Pinochet, who came to power in this country in 1974, recruited the “Chicago boys” (a designation for neoliberal reformers) as economic advisers to his government. Since then, the Chilean leader has become a hero to many neoliberals who dream of an "enlightened dictator" who will provide cover for reforms carried out by "enlightened economists."

Today, the ultra-right (including domestic ones) like to remember the hotbeds of ethnic crime in New York. Meanwhile, it was neoliberal reforms that gave birth to the “criminal revolution,” the first testing ground of which this city became in the mid-1970s. Then leading creditors refused to renew loan agreements for the city, and US President Gerald Ford, under the influence of his Treasury Secretary William Simon, refused financial support to New York. As a result, the city, which found itself on the verge of bankruptcy, actually came under external control financial institutions that began to determine its economic policy.

The most important instruments of neoliberal policy have become international financial organizations - the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization, etc. (although even the IMF, for example, has sometimes been criticized by theorists of neoliberalism). The basis of the policy of the IMF and the World Bank was the provision of loans to countries of peripheral capitalism in exchange for carrying out neoliberal reforms there. The first example of such practice was the situation in Mexico, which in 1984 agreed to accept the conditions of external financial institutions. Then this practice was repeated several times - including in the case of post-Soviet Russia. The result was almost the same everywhere. Countries that accepted the conditions of the IMF and the World Bank experienced rising unemployment and falling workers' wages, while this allowed the country's economy to be revived only for a short time. However, transnational corporations were able to buy objects of interest to them practically for next to nothing. On the other hand, countries that refused to accept IMF recommendations (like Malaysia and South Korea during the Asian crisis of 1997–1998), managed to restore their economy before their “obedient” neighbors.

Thus, neoliberalism has indeed gained beginning of XXI century significant influence. In the academic and expert environment of many countries, it has become one of the dominant economic doctrines. The tenets of neoliberal policy were even accepted by many social democratic European politicians, who in the 1990s began to dismantle institutions social state, created by the same Social Democrats several decades ago. The provisions of neoliberalism regarding individual freedom turned out to be attractive to some people who were close to left-wing beliefs. In turn, the neoliberals’ defense of the interests of large corporations allowed their ideas to find understanding among conservative forces (in particular, US Republicans).

The end of the 20th century was marked by an increase in corporate income and social stratification in those countries where the doctrine of neoliberalism was adopted. The dominance of neoliberalism has given enormous power to finance capital and financial sector at all.

However, vulnerability financial policy neoliberal economists ultimately gave rise to the global economic crisis of the 2000s, which became the reason for talk about the end of neoliberalism. However, they started talking about this perhaps too early. Firstly, most of the “fathers of neoliberal economics” did not lose their positions and authority after the crisis. Secondly, in many countries, under the slogan of “the return of Keynesianism,” policies are being pursued in the interests of corporations and banks, rather than the population - which is quite in the spirit of neoliberalism. And finally, thirdly, in the neoliberal doctrine many see the revival of those principles that already dominated the economies of Western countries at the beginning of the 20th century, but lost authority after the Great Depression, but since the 1970s they have still begun to regain their positions. Thus, it seems too early to say goodbye to neoliberalism and its apologists.

Basic concepts: principles of neoliberalism; ordoliberalism; ideal types of farming; economic order; constitutive principles of economy; regulating principles of farming; social market economy; formed society.

Security questions

1. Prerequisites for the emergence of neoliberalism.

2. “Lippmann Colloquium” in economic literature.

3. The essence of the monetary concept Chicago school.

4. The concept of social market economy.

Abstract topics

1. Neoliberalism in Germany.

2. Chicago school of monetarism.

3. M. Friedman as the founder of modern monetarism.

4. Economic views of V. Euken.

5. Economic views of F. Hayek.

Tests

1. Name, in contrast to which direction, the neoliberal direction stands: a) neoclassical; b) Keynesian; c) Cambridge school; d) marginalism. 2. Name the representatives of the neoliberal movement: a) D. Ricardo; b) F. Liszt; c) A. Smith; d) W. Lippman; f) J. M. Keynes; g) M. Friedman; h) W. Mitchell; i) V. Oyken; j) K. Menger; k) K. Bucher. 3. Neoliberalism, unlike Keynesianism, assumes:

a) government measures to invest in unprofitable and low-profit sectors of the economy;

b) economic liberalization;

c) growth in the volume of government orders, purchases and loans;

d) free pricing;

e) priority of private property.

4. Which type of economy, according to Eucken, does not belong to the ideal: a) centrally managed economy; b) free market economy; c) mixed (real) economy; d) there is no correct answer. 5. Name societies that gravitate toward a free market economy: a) capitalism of perfect competition; b) capitalism imperfect competition; c) socialist society; d) slavery; d) feudal estates. 6. Do representatives of neoliberalism allow state intervention in economic life: a) allows; b) does not allow; c) there is no correct answer. 7. The term “social market economy” was first used by: a) J. Keynes; b) A. Muller-Armand;

c) M. Friedman;

d) P. Samuelson;

e) K. Menger.

8. The Freiburg school of neoliberalism in the concept of a social market economy adheres to the principles:

a) competition wherever possible, regulation where necessary;

b) automatic functioning of a “free market economy”;

c) synthesis between free and “socially obligatory social order”;

d) concentration of power and collectivism;

e) social equalization through fair distribution.

9. The leader of the Chicago School of neoliberalism, M. Friedman, in his concept of state regulation of the economy, considers the following principles to be fundamental:

a) priority of non-monetary factors;

b) priority of monetary factors;

c) stability of the “Phillips curve”;

d) instability of the “Phillips curve”;

e) stability of the growth rate of the quantity of money, taking into account the “natural rate of unemployment”.

10. Name the determining factors of Friedman’s formula for the additional annual supply of money:

a) average annual rate of inflation expectations;

b) average annual growth rate of GNP;

c) average annual growth rate of national income;

d) average annual growth rate of unemployment.

Neoliberalism - direction in economic science and practice of economic activity, based on the principle of self-regulation of the economy, free from excessive regulation.

Liberalism how the system of views originates from the English classics A. Smith and D. Ricardo. Liberalism is based on the recognition of the leading role of individual activity, determined by personal interest. Government intervention in individual economic activity should be limited.

Another source of neoliberalism, and in particular its Freiburg school, is the historical school of Germany. Its representatives for the first time began to consider political economy as a science about the national economy.

Modern representatives of economic liberalism follow two traditional positions: Firstly, they proceed from the fact that the market (as the most efficient form of management) creates the best conditions for economic growth, and, secondly, they defend the priority importance of the freedom of participants in economic activity.

The state must provide conditions for competition and exercise control where these conditions do not exist.

The Chicago (M. Friedman), neo-Austrian (F. Hayek), and Freiburg (W. Euken, L. Erhard) schools are usually classified as neoliberalism. Supporters of neoliberalism usually criticize Keynesian methods of regulating the economy.

In the United States and some other countries, modern neoliberal policies are based on a number of economic approaches that have received the most recognition. These are monetarism, supply-side economics, and the theory of rational expectations.

Historical and Freiburg schools of Germany

The historical school arose in Germany in the middle of the 19th century. where the classical school was not widespread. Representatives of the historical school believed that the economy of each country develops according to its own laws, which are related to its geographical conditions, historical development, national and cultural traditions and national character traits. They considered the general economic laws of production, exchange, and distribution to be an invention of the British.

Methodological features of the historical school:

• taking into account the influence of the social environment on the economic development of the country, including the human factor;
• identifying the relationship between economic and non-economic factors;
• determining the place and role of non-class criteria in the study of phases and stages of development of society.

According to representatives of the historical school, economic laws should not be identified with natural ones, which invariably manifest themselves due to the stable nature of the previously known elements and components that cause their action. Therefore, contrary to the classics, they point to the non-universal nature of political economy and the dependence of the effectiveness of economic processes not only on economic (basic), but also on non-economic factors, i.e., as they say, on factors of the social environment: national characteristics and traditions, historical accident, geographical conditions country, characteristics of national culture, psychology, religion.

Among the classics, non-economic factors are determined by the influence of economic factors, i.e. the higher the level of productive forces, the more developed the social environment will be. In the works of German authors, economic and non-economic factors are considered in interrelation. This position led to the emergence of the idea of ​​the uniqueness of the German national spirit.

Among the classics, historicism is manifested through the criterion of identifying, at various stages of the evolution of peoples and states, higher and lower, main and non-main classes of society. German authors used a purely economic approach.

In the process of evolution of the historical school of Germany in literature, three stages are distinguished:

First stage: 40-60s XIX century was called the “Old Historical School” (W. Roscher, F. Liszt, B. Hildebrandt, K. Knies).

Second stage falls on the 70-90s. XIX century and is called the “New Historical School” (L. Brentano, G. Schmoller, K. Bücher).

Third stage: first third of the twentieth century. “The newest historical school” (W. Sombart, M. Weber, A. Spiethof).

The merit of the representatives of the old historical school lies, first of all, in the formation of methodological provisions alternative to the classical school, which then formed the basis of the methodology of the social-institutional direction.

"Old" historical school

The founder of the historical school is considered Friedrich List (1789-1846). In his main work « National system political economy"(1841) he opposed the English classics. The focus of his work is the national economy as a whole, in its relationships with the external environment. Main ideas of the book:

1. The theory of productive forces. The growth of social wealth is achieved not through scattered, but through the coordinated activities of people who must preserve and multiply what was produced by the efforts of previous generations. True wealth lies in the development of productive forces, and not in the quantity of exchange values. The task of politics is to unite people, to ensure the industrial education of the nation; this will facilitate the rise of productive forces. The increase in productive forces begins with the individual factory and then extends to a national association.

2. The concept of economic progress of a nation in accordance with the doctrine of stages of production. The stages proposed by List are quite conventional: “state of wildness”, “pastoral life”, “agricultural economy”, “agricultural-craft economy”. As a result, nations reach the final stage in which agriculture, industry, and trade develop harmoniously. The meaning of the “theory of stages” is that each stage must correspond to its inherent economic policy, aimed at increasing production and developing the productive forces of the nation. This thesis is directed against the universal recipes of the classics: their theory of free trade met the interests of England, but contradicted the needs of an economically weak and politically fragmented Germany at that time.

3. Justification of the active economic policy of the state. List wrote that it is impossible to understand the national economy as an organic whole if the state economy is excluded from it. The national economy becomes a national economy if the state embraces an entire nation that has independence, the ability to acquire stability and political significance. State power coordinates and directs the efforts of individual parts of the national economy in the name of the long-term fundamental interests of the nation.

The same views were shared by Wilhelm Roscher (1817-1894), who published the book “Brief Basics of the Course of Political Economy from the Point of View of Historical Method” in 1843, Bruno Hildebrandt (1812-1878), whose main work was “Political Economy of the Present and Future ”was published in 1848 and Karl Knies (1821-1898), who outlined his views in the work “Political Economy from the Point of View of Historical Method” (1853).

"New" historical school

She developed the methods of the “old” school in new conditions. Germany was already a single national state; there was no longer any need to prove the vital importance of unification and strict protectionism. But nationalist motives and the cult of the state remained traditional features, fueled by the foreign policy aggressiveness of the German state. Gustav Schmoller (1838-1917) in his works “The history of small craft production in Germany in the 19th century.”(1870), “National economy, the science of national economy and its methods”(1897) was firmly convinced that political economy could become a dominant social science only when it established strong scientific connections with ethics, history, sociology, and political science.

Schmoller identified three spheres of activity in economic practice: private economy, state economy, and charitative economy. In the first type, personal interest dominates, in the second - public interest, based on the principle of coercion, in the third - charity. In areas of the first type, abuses and other extremes are possible, which must be regulated by the state and moral standards. In the third, moral motives predominate. Among the functions of the state, representatives of the “new” historical school named the following: care for mental and aesthetic education; health; development of communication routes; patronage of the elderly, children; assistance to injured workers.

Luyo Brentano (1844-1931) in the works “Modern workers’ guilds (1871-1872), “On the relation of wages and working time to labor productivity” (1877), "Agrarian Policy"(1897) put forward ideas about a radical change in the situation of workers and the elimination of inequality through the organization of trade unions, consumer cooperation, and factory legislation.

"Newest" historical school

Extremes in the application of the historical method are characteristic of works Werner Sombart (1863-1941). Over his long life, Sombart went from Marxism to fascism. In progress "Heroes and Merchants"(1915) Sombart contrasts the “nation of traders” (English) with the “nation of heroes” (Germans) and justifies the right of the latter, with the help of military force, to conquer for themselves what the former acquired through the development of trade and industry. In progress "German socialism"(1934) Sombart formulates the social ideal for Germany in the form of “state socialism,” which for him is equivalent to “planned” or “organized” capitalism. The main elements of this model - a corporate state planning the national economy, strict centralization of management, strict hierarchy and class division - were adopted by German fascism and became part of its socio-economic policy.

Max Weber (1864-1920) in 1919-1920 gave a course of lectures at the University of Munich, which were published in book form "History of the economy"(1923), where the concept of ideal types of economy is used to compare the ideal design with reality. By comparing the ideal “model” with the actual process of economic development, Weber tracks the degree to which the real system deviates from the ideal. This is a method for studying the historical development of peoples, comparing national practices and a general theoretical model.

Weber showed the importance of religious norms and ethics of behavior for the formation of commodity-capitalist relations. In work " Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism" he reveals the influence of religion on the economy. The Protestant religion contributed to the development of business acumen and entrepreneurial activity. She helped to develop frugality, prudence, enterprise, resourcefulness, and the ability to take risks. It was from among the Protestants that the class of entrepreneurs—owners and organizers of production—was formed. The result was a “rationalist” form of capitalism.

The historical school, with rare exceptions, has not made a noticeable contribution to the development of economic science in its modern sense, but, nevertheless, it has done a lot to define the range of problems that this science is called upon to find solutions to. At the end of the 19th century. economic science was divided into theoretical (positive) and practical (normative) parts. The first studies what is happening in the economy, the second studies what needs to be done to achieve certain goals. The period of formation of the foundations of the theoretical part of economics coincided with the period of the emergence and development of the historical school, which set the direction for the development of the applied part precisely when the theoretical part moved away from the discussion of practical problems. Thus, from the point of view of the evolution of economic science, both trends turned out to be interconnected and complementary.

The line drawn by the German historical school found a kind of continuation in American economic thought of the late 19th - first third of the 20th centuries. — institutionalism, as well as in ordoliberalism.

Freiburg School (ordoliberalism)

Ordoliberalism attempted to create its own doctrine of the national economy on the basis of a synthesis of the ideas of the new historical school, neoclassicism and traditional liberalism.

Methodologically, ordoliberalism is closest to the new historical school, which is characterized by the interpretation of the process of social development as a slow, gradual evolution.

Unlike neoclassicism, marginalism does not occupy a place in the methodological tools of ordoliberalism. independent place. It is counted as common in Western concepts theoretical method.

Ordoliberalism has in common with traditional liberalism the idea of ​​individual freedom based on the comprehensive strengthening and encouragement of private ownership of the means of production. At the same time, neoliberals, unlike their predecessors, assessed the processes of economic life from macroeconomic rather than microeconomic positions. In addition, ordoliberalism differs from the liberalism of the era of free competition capitalism in that it advocated active government influence on the economy. Moreover, the ordoliberals, unlike the Keynesians, considered the object of this intervention not the reproduction process itself, but the institutional foundations of the mechanism of profit and competition.

The basis of ordoliberalism is the doctrine of the system of competition and the concept of a social market economy. The doctrine of two types of economic system belongs to Walter Eucken (1891-1950) and outlined in his works "Foundations of National Economy"(1947) and "Basic principles of economic policy"(1950).

Economic system - a set of economic forms implemented in practice in which everyday specific economic processes take place.

Eucken believes that the key to the analysis of all economic systems known in history can be obtained by identifying two main types of economic systems. Firstly, a centrally managed economy, and secondly, a communication economy, or a market economy. They are never found in pure form, but always in the form of some mixture with a predominance of one of them.

The task of economic research is to find which of the possible economic orders was implemented in a given place at a given time. Having solved this problem, you can get answers to two questions: what is the structure of the economic order and what are the processes occurring in it.

If Keynes explained the ills of capitalism by a chronic lack of effective demand, which, with non-intervention of the state in the economy, deprives this system of incentives for development, then the ordoliberals saw the source of troubles in the undermining of perfect competition and monopolization. Monopoly is a deviation from the model of perfect competition. He classified trade unions as monopolists, thereby justifying the legality of entrepreneurs and the state taking restrictive measures against them.

From the passivity of the state, Eucken deduced the undermining of perfect competition and the social costs of capitalism, which can be eliminated with the help of the state.

The main direction of state economic policy is the formation of an economic system: regulation of monopoly and competition, the relationship between private and state property, direct and indirect measures of intervention in the economy, establishment of legal norms for business.

Basic principles of competition according to Eucken:

• inviolability of private property;
• currency stability;
• open markets;
• freedom of all transactions and contracts;
• imposing financial liability on those responsible for the actions of business units;
• constancy of economic policy.

Ordoliberals contrasted the constancy of economic policy with the ideas of Keynes, who considered a flexible fiscal and countercyclical monetary policy necessary. The ordoliberals allowed state influence on the economic process only in exceptional cases associated with the action of exogenous factors.

The Ordoliberal theory could not be used in West Germany after the war for two reasons:

• due to the objective need for a more flexible state influence on the economy than the ordoliberals allowed;
• the system of competition did not find support among the general population due to the crisis of the 20-30s.

These circumstances were taken into account by theorists of the “social market economy”. This term first appeared in 1947 in the work of A. Müller-Armak, “Regulation of the Economy and the Market Economy.”

If Eucken proclaimed the crown of social justice to be the market distribution of income under conditions of perfect competition, then Müller-Armack advocated active social policy, subject to the principle of social compensation, which was the main difference between the social market economy and capitalism.

Müller-Armak considered the main instrument of social compensation to be progressive taxation of persons with high incomes and the redistribution of these funds in favor of the poorer strata in the form of budget subsidies for the maintenance of children, payment of rent, and construction of their own homes. Among other forms of social policy, he included the development of a social insurance system: for unemployment, for illness, and a social infrastructure worthy of a person.

He played an outstanding role in the practical implementation of ordoliberal ideas. Ludwig Erhard (1897-1977), Vice-Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany under Adenaur and Chancellor after his death. In the book "Prosperity for all"(1956), which was a report on the transformations carried out, Erhard notes that the main goals of the social market economy are freedom and justice, and economic freedom is impossible without political freedom, without state guarantees ensuring human rights and freedoms, without social security and social justice.

Neoliberalism is a concept that every sociologist should understand. Most often, “neoliberalism” is understood as a kind of new version of liberalism. On the one hand, this is true. However, today liberalism is understood rather as an economic interpretation of the term - individual freedoms, competition, private property and free markets.

Liberalism, as a philosophical and socio-political movement, with which the meaning of the term “liberal” is associated, implies something different - promoting equality, valuing the collective good and protecting civil liberties such as speech, religion, the press and the right to hold meetings.

History of neoliberalism

According to David Harvey, whose book A Brief History of Neoliberalism is considered one of the most important statements on the topic, neoliberalism is “a political economic practice", which promotes complete free will of individuals as economic entities. Neoliberals advocate "strong private property rights, free markets and free trade" with minimal government intervention and regulation. Adherents of economic neoliberalism seek to privatize institutions such as education, health care and social services, as well as deregulate industries such as energy, communications, food, pharmaceuticals and finance.

British writer George Monbiot, building on Harvey's critique, argues that neoliberalism is at the root of all our problems because it reduces human relationships to cold competitive battles, relegates individuals to the group of mere consumers, and assumes that democracy mainly works only for the betterment of purchase and sale of goods and services. The most sinister neoliberals assume that "the market" is a natural and objective force that will solve all our problems. Unfortunately, people do not take into account that the market is fraught with power relations: “what the market wants” usually means what corporations and their bosses want.

“The end result of neoliberal ideology,” continues Monbiot, “is that we believe in the myth of the self-made man: the rich convince themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit alone, ignoring advantages such as education, inheritance and belonging.” wealthy social class who may have helped provide it.

The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when there is little they can do to change their circumstances. Such slogans begin to sound like mantras: “Ignore structural unemployment, if you don’t have a job, it’s only because you are lacking initiative and lazy.” “Don't worry about unaffordable housing costs if your credit card has no limit.” And it doesn’t matter that your children no longer have a school playground for which there is no money, it doesn’t matter that they are getting fat - it’s all your fault. In a world governed by competition, those who fall behind become, by self-definition, losers—losing losers.”

Criticism of neoliberalism

Harvey and Monbiot's analysis and critique of neoliberalism is illustrated in sociologist Jennifer Silva's book Brief Essay: Working-Class Occupations in an Age of Uncertainty. Drawing on 100 wide-ranging, in-depth interviews with young people in Massachusetts and Virginia, Silva examines how working-class people understand and explain their inability to find success in their jobs and families.

Instead of identifying external variables such as economic restructuring and downsizing (which affect job opportunities), cultural transformations in the meaning of love and marriage (which affect romantic relationships), and long-term stagnation in wealth and income attainment for all Americans except the elite 1% ( which affects financial stability, or rather instability), these people are more likely to take an individualistic perspective and directly place the blame for their shortcomings on themselves. In other words, they cherish neoliberal ideology to explain their shortcomings and failures, even if they are not familiar with it and have never heard the term.

Neoliberal values ​​of respondents

The trend among respondents in Silva's study is an overwhelming reluctance to acknowledge that external and structural obstacles, such as economic injustice, may explain their personal failures. Even as they experience regular frustrations in achieving stable employment, establishing strong family ties, and gaining some degree of financial stability, “the cultural logic of neoliberalism resonates at the deepest level of their self-awareness.” They came to believe that their success depended entirely on two mutually reinforcing ideas: self-confidence and rugged individualism.

The logic of neoliberalism or lack thereof

The logic of neoliberalism may seem complex and incomprehensible to the uninitiated. However, it can be understood more simply by recalling S. Wright Mills' famous statement on personal and public issues. In The Sociological Imagination, Mills points out that many people do not see that their problems - unemployment, family discord, financial debt - are being experienced by millions of other people at the same time. If you suffer from the same "private" problem that affects a large segment of the population, isn't it better to think of the problem as a public problem? And, if our personal problems are better understood as extensions and manifestations of a larger societal problem, then shouldn't we seek social explanations and social solutions to those social problems?

When we accept, without realizing it, the cultural logic of neoliberalism, we become blind to the whole picture of the problem. We do not have an understanding of how power is unevenly structured and how it is distributed in society, especially in the sense that it helps some but holds others back. In this sense, the idea of ​​neoliberalism seems rather illogical and even anti-sociological. However, it is still common in the United States and is used to explain people's socioeconomic positions. This is why it is important to understand neoliberalism. We need to have the intellectual acumen and analytical information to avoid being swayed by the unjust principles of neoliberalism as described above.

One of the areas of modification of the orthodox neoclassical doctrine was the emergence and development of the neoliberal direction of economic theory. In contrast to previous neoclassical analysis, neoliberalism pays much more attention to the problems of macroeconomic regulation and the role of the state in the economy. Traditional microeconomic problems remain on the periphery of research.

In its development, neoliberal economic theory went through several stages. The emergence of this trend should be attributed to 1938, when representatives of orthodox neoclassical science gathered in Paris in order to criticize the book by J. M. Keynes, “The General Theory of Interest, Employment and Money,” published shortly before. The organizer of the neoclassical congress was a prominent American scientist and political figure W. Lippman, after whom the meeting was named "Lippmann Colloquium". The “color” of neoclassicism of that time came to see it - F. von Hayek, L. von Mises, R. Aron, B. Lavernier, J. Rueff and many others.

The common theme of all speeches was criticism of the newly emerged Keynesianism. But along with this, Lippmann's colloquium formulated the basic principles of a new direction of neoclassicism, which was called neoliberalism. Its feature was a gradual transition from the construction of abstract theoretical schemes to real problems of economic policy.

Principles neoliberalism can be reduced to the following.

• 1. The state must develop clear and consistent laws according to which economic activities in society are carried out, unique “rules of the game”.
• 2. The government should strictly monitor the implementation of these rules, trying not to revise them too often.
• 3. The most important direction of state policy should be the fight against monopolies of all types, both public and private. This thesis follows from the neoliberals' understanding of the role of competition. Competition is interpreted as the only force for social progress and economic development. Any restriction of competition causes stagnation and other negative phenomena. Therefore, the fight against monopoly and the creation of conditions for the development of competition is the most important component of state policy.
• 4. By creating and maintaining the “rules of the game,” the government must at the same time minimize direct interference in economic life, and above all in the pricing process. This intervention is permissible only in extreme cases - during wars, natural disasters, etc. This idea was later embodied in "the principle of a football referee", formulated L. Erhard, – the state itself does not participate in economic activity, but only maintains a pre-announced order.
• 5. General economic equilibrium is achieved on the basis of the spontaneous action of the price mechanism. As a result, optimal proportions are established in the economy and the activities of all economic entities are regulated. In the market, a balance is achieved between supply and demand.
• 6. The state must fight against the influence on prices from individual economic entities (both monopolists and speculators).

As can be seen, Lippmann’s colloquium did not formulate anything fundamentally new in comparison with traditional neoclassical principles. However, he clearly defined the main directions of state policy, which represent a logical development of the idea of ​​economic non-intervention in the conditions of the 20th century.

Late 1930s was not the most favorable period for the further development of neoliberalism. A year later, World War II began, and in almost all the countries participating in it, governments were forced to switch to active regulation of the economy.

The situation changed dramatically in the second half of the 1940s. The collapse of National Socialism and fascism in Germany and Italy became a kind of catalyst for a sharp departure from the policy of active state intervention in the economy of not only the losers, but also the victorious Western countries. Truly neoliberalism, both as a theory and as a policy, emerges and develops precisely during this period. The center of its influence becomes West Germany, which later turned into the Federal Republic of Germany.

There were a number of factors contributing to the rapid development of neoliberalism in the post-war period in West Germany.

• 1. The transition to economic liberalism was a natural reaction to the collapse of the National Socialist administered economy. A significant part of the population has the opinion that only a policy diametrically opposed to Hitlerism can lead the country out of the impasse. An important role was played by the desire to imitate the victorious countries - England, France and, first of all, the United States, whose prosperity was in those years an unattainable dream for the German people.
• 2. Germany, which lost the world war, did not claim an active social policy. The situation of the main part of the population was characterized by the proverb “I don’t care about fat, I wish I was alive.” The state could not pursue an active social policy and not support incapacitated members of society, paying them significant unemployment benefits, and make other large expenditures from the state budget (for example, on the maintenance of the armed forces).

This, in turn, made it possible not to intensify the search for profitable budget items and create a favorable tax climate for private entrepreneurship.

• 3. The country had strong capitalist traditions. The institution of private property, although it was limited during the years of Nazi rule, nevertheless continued to exist. The consciousness of the bulk of the population strongly approved of this. The necessary financial institutions existed for the private capitalist functioning of the economy.
• 4. West Germany received external assistance under the Marshall Plan, which made it possible to intensify the investment process in the country.

The social need for the development of neoliberal theory was realized in the works of economists Freiburg school. It included V. Repke, A. Rüstow, F. Boehm, L. Erhard(the latter was a prominent politician and in the future – Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany). W. Eucken, who made a significant contribution to the formation of neoliberal doctrine, was recognized as the head of the school. Institutionally, West German neoliberals grouped around the scientific journal published since 1948. ORDO" ("Build").

Walter Eucken became famous not only as a prominent neoliberal, but also as almost the only economist of the 20th century who created an entire system of theories, rather than exploring one or several isolated problems.