journal article Show
Slavic Review Vol. 60, No. 2 (Summer, 2001) , pp. 336-366 (31 pages) Published By: Cambridge University Press https://doi.org/10.2307/2697274 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2697274 Read and download Log in through your school or library Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free. Already have an account? Log in Monthly Plan
Yearly Plan
Purchase a PDFPurchase this article for $34.00 USD. How does it work?
Abstract Using new evidence from forty-seven formal in-depth interviews conducted with Russian citizens in 1998 and 2000, this article dissects Russian popular attitudes toward democracy. Rather than asking the usual question-are Russians democratic enough for their new institutions-Carnaghan examines what Russians find troubling or difficult about their new political institutions and what they would change. Listening to Russian voices makes it clear that much of what looks like flawed support for some aspects of democracy, particularly the operation of legislative institutions and the role of law in organizing society, can be better understood as a fairly nuanced critique of the flawed operation of those institutions. Carnaghan's respondents like democracy in the abstract better than they like the version they have at home. Yet their disillusionment regarding the ability of ordinary citizens to influence officials also means that they are unwilling to work very hard to improve those institutions or to deepen the democracy they have. Journal Information Slavic Review is an international interdisciplinary journal devoted to the study of eastern Europe, Russia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia, past and present. Publisher Information Cambridge University Press (www.cambridge.org) is the publishing division of the University of Cambridge, one of the world’s leading research institutions and winner of 81 Nobel Prizes. Cambridge University Press is committed by its charter to disseminate knowledge as widely as possible across the globe. It publishes over 2,500 books a year for distribution in more than 200 countries. Cambridge Journals publishes over 250 peer-reviewed academic journals across a wide range of subject areas, in print and online. Many of these journals are the leading academic publications in their fields and together they form one of the most valuable and comprehensive bodies of research available today. For more information, visit http://journals.cambridge.org. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. journal article Neoliberalism and the Russian transitionReview of International Political Economy Vol. 20, No. 2, Dreaming with the BRICS? The Washington Consensus and the New Political Economy of Development (April 2013) , pp. 332-362 (31 pages) Published By: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42003296 Read and download Log in through your school or library Purchase article $51.00 - Download now and later Purchase a PDFPurchase this article for $51.00 USD. How does it work?
Abstract This article aims to assess the role of neoliberal ideas in shaping Russia's transition to a market economy. Prevailing ideas of the Washington Consensus undoubtedly encouraged Russia's leaders to embrace radical reforms, but Russia's reformers were not blindly following an ideological agenda set for them in Washington, DC. The actual policies that were implemented diverged considerably from the prevailing neoliberal orthodoxy and were heavily shaped by the self-interest of the elites who were making the policy decisions. While prices were freed and international trade and currency flows opened up, an insider-dominated privatization process left the Russian economy in the hands of a narrow circle of oligarchs. Russia's corrupt, oil-dependent and state-centered economy is far removed from the decentralized, competitive market system that the reformers had envisaged. Democracy, which was initially seen as integral to the transition process, also fell by the wayside. While critics argue that Russia suffered from an overdose of 'market fundamentalism', neoliberals themselves still insist that Russia did not go far enough in unleashing genuine market forces. Either way, Russia has now joined the global market economy, while at the same time preserving many of the institutional features that are the product of its unique geography and historical heritage. Journal Information The Review of International Political Economy (RIPE) has successfully established itself as a leading international journal dedicated to the systematic exploration of the international political economy from a plurality of perspectives. The journal encourages a global and interdisciplinary approach across issues and fields of inquiry. It seeks to act as a point of convergence for political economists, international relations scholars, geographers, and sociologists, and is committed to the publication of work that explores such issues as international trade and finance, production and consumption, and global governance and regulation, in conjunction with issues of culture, identity, gender, and ecology. The journal eschews monolithic perspectives and seeks innovative work that is both pluralist in its orientation and engages with the broad literatures of IPE. Publisher Information Building on two centuries' experience, Taylor & Francis has grown rapidlyover the last two decades to become a leading international academic publisher.The Group publishes over 800 journals and over 1,800 new books each year, coveringa wide variety of subject areas and incorporating the journal imprints of Routledge,Carfax, Spon Press, Psychology Press, Martin Dunitz, and Taylor & Francis.Taylor & Francis is fully committed to the publication and dissemination of scholarly information of the highest quality, and today this remains the primary goal. Rights & Usage This item is
part of a JSTOR Collection. How did Gorbachev's reforms help to move the Soviet Union toward democracy quizlet?Explain how Gorbachev's reforms helped to move the Soviet Union closer towards democracy. He helped move the soviet union closer towards democracy by passing polcies such as glasnost that encouraged openness and many other things.
What changes did Gorbachev introduced in the Soviet Union quizlet?What kinds of reforms did Gorbachev introduce in the Soviet Union? He pledged himself to a course of dramatic reforms known as PERESTROIKA, or restructuring, and GLASNOST, or openness.
What was the purpose of Mikhail Gorbachev's policies of glasnost and perestroika quizlet?Glasnost created greater freedom of expression; perestroika reformed the government and economy. governments in Eastern Europe introduced reforms. Gorbachev initiated glasnost, the Hungarians introduced reforms, East Germans protested, and the Berlin Wall fell.
Which of the following best indicates why a free press is essential to democracy quizlet?Why is freedom of the press essential to democracy? Freedom of press ensures legitimacy and power of the people towards government.
|
Which of the following statements best describes Mikhail Gorbachevs importance to Russias transition to democracy?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 defrojeostern Inc.
