Russia: property and state. The history of post-Soviet law enforcement (Part I)
https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(3).5-15
Abstract
The subject. The relevance of the article is stipulated by the gap in the study of property and the state as a consistent system.
The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove the hypothesis that each way of organizing property such as private, mixed (corporate) and general (collective) potentially stimulates the existence of a certain state structure.
The methodology. The author uses normative structuralism. This methodology is created by the author and is based on the idea that property as the main system-forming goal of the state’s existence genetically predetermines principles of rationing its structure.
The main results of the research. Each way of organizing property in a particular social time period can acquire the quality of the main backbone in the organization structure of the state. Each way of organizing property provides proper social function: private way of organizing property provides function of social development; mixed (corporate) way provides function of social compromise (convergence); general (collective) way provides function of social security in the broadest sense. If private way of organizing property genetically programmed for the production and reproduction of social competition, mixed (corporate) and common (collective) ways are determined by the idea of its limitations and leveling. When the private way of organizing property becomes the main system-forming one it begins to fully stimulate the existence of a democratic structure of state organization. In turn, when mixed (corporate) and common (collective) ways of organizing property become the main system-forming ones, they stimulate the existence of a wide structural range of state functioning: from various regimes of democratic orientation to specific non-democratic regimes. Conclusions. The study of property as the main system-forming goal of the state existence through the normative structuralism concept allows us to conclude that that each way of organizing property stimulates the existence of a certain state structure.
About the Author
Alexander V. ButakovRussian Federation
Doctor of Law, Professor, Department of Theory and History of State and Law, RSCI SPIN-code: 9843-0789; AuthorID: 683256
References
1. Andreev E. M. New social reality: methodological problems of integrative socio-philosophical and sociological analysis. Obshchestvo i pravo = Society and law, 2009, no. 5, p. 13-20.
2. Orlov B.P. Goals of medium-term plans and their implementation. Ekonomika i organizatsiya promyshlennogo proizvodstva = ECO Journal, 1987, no. 11, p. 34-53.
3. Kazannik A. I., Kostyukov A.N. (eds.). Constitutional law. University course. Textbook. Vol. 1. Moscow, Prospekt, 2015. 432 p.
4. Sulakshin S.S. (ed.). State economic policy and economic doctrine of Russia. Towards a smart and moral economy. Vol. 2. Moscow, Scientific Expert Publ., 2008. 1048 p.
5. Kudrov V.M. (ed.). Europe and Russia: experience of economic transformations. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1996. 471 p.
6. Bychkov A.I. Legal regulation of the economy of joint consumption. Moscow, Infotropik Media, 2019. 136 p.
7. Mokhov V.P. Nomenclature as a political institution in the history of Soviet society in the second half of the XX century, in: Mokhov V.P. (ed.). Nomenclature and nomenclature organization of power in Russia of the twentieth century. Perm, Perm State Technical University Publ., 2004. P. 33-50.
8. Shakhray S.M. Constitutional law of the Russian Federation. Moscow: Statut Publ., 2017. 624 p.
9. Isakov V.B. Who and how broke up the USSR. Chronicle of the largest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century. Moscow, Knizhniy Mir Publ., 2012. 379 p.
10. Khasbulatov R.I. Half-Life of the USSR. How the superpower was destroyed. Moscow, Yauza Press, 2011. 509 p.
11. Ryzhkov N.I. The main witness. The case of the collapse of the USSR. Moscow, Algorithm-Book Publ., 2009. 237 p.
12. Semenko A.B. Legislative regulation of cooperation as a fundamentally new form of management in the second half of the 1980s and its significance in the liberalization of economic relations in the USSR. Obshchestvo i pravo = Society and law, 2011, no. 5, p. 39 - 42.
13. Yavlinskiy G. A., Mikhailov A.Yu., Zadornov M.M. 400 days of trust. Moscow, Nedra Publ., 1990. 61 p.
14. Yasin E.G. Russian economy: course of lectures. Book 1: The origins and panorama of market reforms. Moscow, Higher School of Economics Publ., 2019. 448 p.
15. Andreev V.V. New trends in domestic economic development in the second half of the 1980s - early 1990s (on the example of the republics of the Middle Volga region). Istoriya gosudarstva i prava = History of State and Law, 2009, no. 18, p. 25-27.
Review
For citations:
Butakov A.V. Russia: property and state. The history of post-Soviet law enforcement (Part I). Law Enforcement Review. 2020;4(3):5-15. https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(3).5-15