Mikhail F Chernysh & Valeriy A Mansurov

Ссылка при цитировании:

Аннотация

Russia is one of societies that make transition to a functioning market after many decades of dominance of egalitarian ideology and practice. Although the dominant ideology claimed a division of society into friendly classes there were no classes in Russia in the traditional understanding of the concept. Rather the Soviet society was based on the principle of status-related division propped up by the centralized system of distribution. The system made salient skill and authority-related inequalities. However the scale of inequality was contained by the dominant practice of centralized distribution and dominant ideology that stressed the equality of all citizens in the society that was constructing communism. After the collapse of “real socialism” the pendulum swung in the opposite direction. Privatization devoid of any moral or legal constraints boosted classed-based inequality. Russian society was rapidly evolving towards a society with sharp class-based contradictions. Now Russia is a fully-fling class society characterized by wide gaps between classes and other social groups. The majority of the Russia population hold jobs that enjoy little autonomy and little potential to influence the process of decision-making. The decile income distribution index rose in the last two decades from 4 to 36. Social services which in the past were rendered to the population free of charge are now provided on a commercial basis.  The class-based division that emerged during the transition years did not lead to the fruition of a new viable institutional system. The class relations are characterized by barely concealed hostility, the population is unwilling to accept the outcome of market-based reforms and privatization. The important task for Russia now is to remedy for the mistakes made in the first transition years and commit itself to the construction of viable institutions that can ensure that stability in economy and smooth functioning of politics. However it is a difficult task in view of the resistance to possible changes from the beneficiaries of reforms and weaknesses manifest in the policies of the government or  main opposition actors that are unwilling or incapable of putting up a program of reforms which is socially oriented and able to win societal consensus.

Ключевые слова:

Авторы:

Оглавление

Рубрики:

Возможно, вам будут интересны другие публикации:

• Информационно-аналитический бюллетень (ИНАБ). Социальные аспекты цифровых неравенств: результаты эмпирических исследований. 2022. № 1. 107 с. URL: https://www.fnisc.ru/publ.html?id=11462
• Константиновский Д. Л.
  Образование и рынок труда: новая ситуация // Не расстанусь с молодежью, буду... : сб . науч . статей к 80 - летию проф . Ю. Р. Вишневского / [под общ. ред. Ю. Р. Вишневского ; отв. за вып. Д. Ю. Нархов]. — Екатеринбург : Изд - во Урал. ун - т а, 2018. С. 268-274.
• Информационно-аналитический бюллетень (ИНАБ). 2019. № 4. Социальная адаптация молодежи на рынке труда. 131 с. URL: https://www.isras.ru/index.php?page_id=1198&id=7609
• Аникин В. А.
  Социальная стратификация по жизненным шансам: попытка операционализации для массовых опросов // Мониторинг общественного мнения: Экономические и социальные перемены. 2018. № 4. С. 39-67.
• Черныш М. Ф.
  Социальная политика и рынок труда // Наёмный работник в современной России / Отв.ред. З.Т. Голенкова. - М.: Новый Хронограф, 2015. - С. 74-100.

 

?

(none)