Abstract
This chapter explores the evolution of economics as a form of research where the tension between foreign influence—as higher status and a source of skills and knowledge for Russia—and domestic political needs was central. Russian economics was torn between claims to universality (i.e. a method for seeking Truth outside historical experiences) and local historical experiences, both of which influences questions, methods, and aims. The creation of a “national school” of economics in Russia was driven by desires of state officials and intellectuals oriented to Russia itself (e.g. Slavophiles) to create a science to address Russia’s economic issues on its own terms, without subordinating Russian intellectual thought to foreign fields. The influence of German economics—not only as an intellectual for in itself, but also as concrete actors bringing their own ideas to Russia—was clear, but Russian economists applied new knowledge to their own context to an economics attuned to their own institutions and political culture. Russian economics, like Russian identity, has been torn between affinity with Europe and a sense of belonging to a European intellectual community, and a desire for status from uniqueness.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In this chapter, I equate the ethnic label “Russian” (russkii) and the legal label “Russian” (rossiiskii) when I refer to schools of economic thought. Strictly speaking, there are differences between the two, given the complex ethnic composition of the country’s population and possible discrepancies between different cultures. While this point warrants its own discussion, for sake of space, I elide it here. Note that I also take for granted the idea of a “nation” and “national,” when nations are political constructions. A national school of economic thought presumes a “nation,” and nation-building is obviously related to economy-building and theory-building. But this is a complex theme for another work.
- 2.
Again, it might be possible to incorporate contextual specifics (of social space and time) into a general theory, as a set of variables. However, if context matters in this way, then those particular variables and causal relations are no longer invariant. Prediction would only work if those contextual specifics themselves are fairly constant. So, while some issues might be addressed invariant “laws” (e.g. regarding inflation), others might not (e.g. the effect of state activity in the economy).
- 3.
Thus, the process of creating a Russian school of economic thought paralleled the process of designing industrial policies: “latecomers” could copy earlier modernizers (Gerschenkron 1962).
- 4.
Zweynert (2008) chose 1805 as the starting point of his analysis, noting that in this year the first textbook on political economy was prepared by Christian von Schlözer—dismissing earlier originality.
- 5.
Ministers of Finance for the Russian Empire who were German by birth included E. F. Kankrin, P. F. Brokh, M. Kh. Reitern, S. A. Greig, N. Kh. Bunge, S. Iu. Witte , and P. L. Bark.
- 6.
From its creation in 1725 up to the end of the eighteenth century, the Academy of Sciences was made up of more foreigners than Russians. In 1799, of 111 members of the Academy, 76 were foreigners, of whom 68 were Germans. Only 26 were Russian. Russians began to dominate the Academy only in the second half of the nineteenth century.
- 7.
The first departments of political economy were created at Moscow University and Kazan University (1804), and then at St. Petersburg University (1819).
- 8.
As an example, Marx’s Das Kapital enjoyed great success in Russia, which Marx himself noted in a letter to Sorge in November 1880. In Russia he was “more read and appreciated than anywhere else…” (Marx and Engels 1964: 380). At the same time, during Marx’s life, Kapital was not translated into English, even though he wrote it while living in Great Britain and using Britain as his empirical case. The first volume was translated into Russian in 1872, and it was his first translation into a foreign language. The English edition appeared only in 1886 after his death (1883).
- 9.
Cf. Bolshaia biographicheskaia entsiklopediia (Moscow, 2009), at http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_biography/.
Works Cited
Abalkin, L.I. 2003. Ocherki istorii rossiiskoi ekonomicheskoi mysli. Moscow: Nauka.
Alekseeva, E.V. 2007. Diffuziia evropeiskikh innovatsii v Rossii (XVIII–nachalo XX v.). Moscow: Rosspen.
Barnett, V. 2005. A History of Economic Russian Thought. New York: Routledge.
Bourdieu, P. 2005. Sotsialnoe prostranstsvo: polia i praktika. Moscow: Institut eksperimentalnoi psikhologii.
Carpi, G. 2012. Dostoevskii—ekonomist. Ocherki po sotsiologii literatury. Moscow: Falanster.
———. 2016. Istoriia russkogo marksizma. Moscow: Common Place.
Fligstein, N. 2013. Arkhitektura rynkov: ekonomicheskaia sotsiologiia kapitalisticheskikh obshchestv v XXI veke. Moscow: Higher School of Economics.
Gerschenkron, A. 1962. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Greenfeld, Liah. 1992. Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Iakovets, Iu.V. 2003. Rossiiskie ekonomicheskie shkoly. Moscow: MFK.
Iakutin, Iu.V. 2010. Rossiiskaia shkola sotsialno-ekonomicheskoi mysli: istoki, printsipy, perspektivy. Moscow: Ekonomicheskaia gazeta.
Ilin, I.A. 1992. O russkoi idee. In Russkaia ideia, ed. M.A. Maslin, 436–443. Moscow: Respublika.
Istoriia russkoi politicheskoi mysli, vol. 1. 1955. Mosacow: Politizdat.
Kireevskii, I.V. 2007. Dukhovnye osnovy russkoi zhizni. Moscow: Institut russkoi tsivilizatsii.
Leshkov, V.N. 1855. Iz vospominanii 12-ro ianvaria 1855 goda: Uchebno-literaturnye stati professorov i prepodavatelei Imperatorskogo Moskovskogo Universiteta, izdannye po sluchaiu ego stoletnego iubileia. Moscow: Universitetskaia tipografiia.
Marx, K., and F. Engels. 1964. Sochineniia. Vol. 34. Moscow: Politizdat.
Pokidchenko, M.G., and E.N. Kalmyzhkova. 2003. Istoriki ekonomicheskoi mysli v Rossii: V. V. Sviatlovskii, M. I. Tugan-Baranovskii, V. Ia. Zheleznov. Moscow: Nauka.
Ryazanov, V. 1998. Ekonomicheskoe razvitie Rossii. Reformy i rossiiskoe khoziaistvo v XIX–XX vv. St. Petersburg: Nauka.
———. 2010. Russkaia shkola ekonomicheskoi mysli: universalno-vseobshchee i natsionalno-osobennoe. Vestnik SPbGU. Seriia Ekonomika 3: 66–84.
Shtein, V.M. 1948. Ocherki razvitiia russkoi obshchestvenno-ekonomicheskoi mysli XIX–XX vekov. Leningrad: Leningradskii gosudarstvennye universitet.
Spengler, O. 1993. The Decline of the West. Form and Actuality. New York: Knopf.
Wuthnow, R. 1989. Communities of Discourse. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Zweynert, Joachin. 2008. Eine Geschichte des ökonomischen Denkens in Rußland 1805–1905. Marburg: Metropolis Verbag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ryazanov, V. (2018). Compulsion and Resistance: Origins of the Russian Research Tradition and Political Economy of the Special. In: Hass, J. (eds) Re-Examining the History of the Russian Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75414-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75414-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75413-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75414-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)