IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v1y1989i1p77-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coercion, Corruption, and Reform: State and Society in the Soviet-Type Socialist Regime

Author

Listed:
  • Antoni Z. Kaminski

Abstract

This paper offers an institutional and evolutionary interpretation of the Soviet-type state. Coercion, corruption and reform are treated as three distinct principles organizing the system of rule and the developmental potential of the state. The strong reliance on coercion characteristic of Stalin's period gave way to the corruption of the society by the elites, and vice versa. This mutual adjustment between the ruling classes and the society is one of the reasons for the declining efficiency of the Soviet-type regimes, particularly in the economic domain. The solution to this is the market reform and political changes that are necessary to make it work. The reform problem is examined from two perspectives: (1) the Soviet world system; (2) internal factors that help or block the reform efforts. The general theoretical analysis is illustrated with a discussion of the Hungarian, Polish and Czechoslovak cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Antoni Z. Kaminski, 1989. "Coercion, Corruption, and Reform: State and Society in the Soviet-Type Socialist Regime," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 1(1), pages 77-102, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:1:y:1989:i:1:p:77-102
    DOI: 10.1177/0951692889001001006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692889001001006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951692889001001006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kornai, Janos, 1986. "The Hungarian Reform Process: Visions, Hopes, and Reality," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1687-1737, December.
    2. Bauer, Tamas, 1987. "Reforming or perfectioning the economic mechanism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-2), pages 132-138.
    3. Làszlòs Csaba, 1985. "Joint investments and mutual advantages in the CMEA—retrospection and prognosis," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 227-247.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chari, Murali D.R. & Banalieva, Elitsa R., 2015. "How do pro-market reforms impact firm profitability? The case of India under reform," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 357-367.
    2. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2021. "Introduction: a special issue in honoring Janos Kornai," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 1-13, April.
    3. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2022. "In Janos Kornai’s memory," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(3), pages 265-271, March.
    4. Dhanji, Farid & Milanovic, Branko, 1991. "Privatization in Eastern and Central Europe : objectives, constraints, and models of divestiture," Policy Research Working Paper Series 770, The World Bank.
    5. Yingyi Qian, 1999. "The Institutional Foundations of China's Market Transition," Working Papers 99011, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    6. Winiecki, Jan, 1991. "Privatisation debates in Poland before and after communist demise: A comparative perspective," Kiel Working Papers 472, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    7. Nhu Tuyên Le, 2009. "Liens Entre Comptabilite Et Systeme Economique : La Transition Vietnamienne," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-00460227, HAL.
    8. John Marangos, 2005. "A Political Economy Approach to the Neoclassical Gradualist Model of Transition," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 263-293, April.
    9. Tesche, Jean, 1995. "Alternate adjustments to external shocks in Hungary," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 615-637, December.
    10. Tamás Vonyó & Alexander Klein, 2019. "Why did socialist economies fail? The role of factor inputs reconsidered," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 72(1), pages 317-345, February.
    11. Yingyi Qian & Chenggang Xu, 1993. "Why China's economic reforms differ: the M‐form hierarchy and entry/expansion of the non‐state sector," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 1(2), pages 135-170, June.
    12. Raiser, Martin & Nunnenkamp, Peter, 1993. "Output decline and recovery in Central Europe: the role of incentives before, during and after privatisation," Kiel Working Papers 601, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    13. Deepak Lal, 1991. "Social Policy After Socialism," UCLA Economics Working Papers 641, UCLA Department of Economics.
    14. Klaus Uhlenbruck & Klaus E. Meyer & Michael A. Hitt, 2003. "Organizational Transformation in Transition Economies: Resource‐based and Organizational Learning Perspectives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 257-282, March.
    15. Xu, Cheng-Gang, 2017. "Capitalism and Socialism: Review of Kornai’s Dynamism, Rivalry, and the Surplus Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 11866, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Monasterolo, Irene, 2012. "Analysing the effect of the EU membership on agricultural and rural areas: the case of Hungary," Rural Areas and Development, European Rural Development Network (ERDN), vol. 9, pages 1-21.
    17. Chenggang Xu, 2017. "Capitalism and Socialism: A Review of Kornai's Dynamism, Rivalry, and the Surplus Economy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 191-208, March.
    18. Maria Csanadi, 2011. "Varieties of System Transformations and Their Structural Background Based on the IPS Model," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 1, pages 33-63, March.
    19. Yingyi Qian, 2002. "How Reform Worked in China," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 473, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    20. Chenggang Xu, 2011. "The Fundamental Institutions of China's Reforms and Development," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1076-1151, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:1:y:1989:i:1:p:77-102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.