Political economy. Political economy in Europe

29.09.2019

Political economy

P. e. - a science that studies social relations that develop in the process of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods, and economic laws, controlling their development in historically successive socio-economic formations.

Name P. e. comes from the Greek words politikós - state, public and oikonomía - household management (from óikos - house, household and nómos - law). The term "P. e." was introduced by the French mercantilist A. Montchretien in his work “Treatise of Political Economy” (1615).

I. The emergence and development of political economy

The study of economic processes and phenomena originated within the framework of a single and undivided science of antiquity. Formation of P. e. As an independent science, it belongs to the period of formation of Capitalism. The first attempts to comprehend the phenomena of capitalism and justify the economic policy of the state were made by representatives of Mercantilism and , reflecting the interests of the emerging bourgeoisie, primarily the commercial one. Mercantilism studied mainly foreign trade (circulation), seeing in it the main source of wealth; he justified the policy of Protectionism a. However, only the transfer of analysis from the sphere of circulation to the sphere of production and the study of its internal laws marked the beginning of P. e. like science.

At its highest development, bourgeois P. e. achieved in the works of representatives of classical bourgeois political economy (See Classical bourgeois political economy): W. Petty , A. Smith and D. Ricardo (Great Britain), P. Boisguillebert, F. Quesnay (France). They made an attempt to study the objective laws of the development of capitalism, to find out the economic content of goods, value, money, wages, profit and rent. The head of the school of physiocrats, F. Quesnay, in his “Economic Table” (1758), first presented the process of capitalist reproduction as a whole (see Quesnay’s Economic Table). The merit of classical bourgeois P. e. in that it laid the foundation for the labor theory of value. This theory was most consistently revealed by D. Ricardo, who on its basis showed the opposition of profit and wages, profit and rent. According to V.I. Lenin’s description, classical bourgeois P. e. - one of the sources of Marxism (see Complete collection of works, 5th ed., vol. 23, pp. 40-43). Classic bourgeois P. e. expressed the ideology of the bourgeoisie during the period of the formation of the capitalist mode of production and the undeveloped class struggle of the proletariat (18th century). The critical content of the theory was directed mainly against outdated feudal orders. The establishment of the capitalist mode of production, the exacerbation of its contradictions, the growing antagonism between wage labor and capital, the transformation of the bourgeoisie from a progressive class into a reactionary one served as the basis for the emergence of vulgar political economy (See Vulgar Political Economy) (30s of the 19th century).

Vulgar P. e. originates in the works of T. R. Malthus (Great Britain), J. B. Say (See Say) and F. Bastiat (France). She refuses to analyze the objective laws of development of the capitalist mode of production. but explores the area of underlying economic phenomena. Vulgar P. e. denies the theory labor cost: Sey declared “three factors of production” to be the sources of value: labor, capital and land. Denying the contradictions of capitalism, vulgar P. e. proclaimed the “harmony” of class interests.

The economic interests and views of small commodity producers in town and countryside in capitalist society are expressed by petty-bourgeois political economy. Its emergence is associated with the works of J. S. L. S. Sismondi (Switzerland) and P. J. Proudhon (France), who criticized the contradictions of the capitalist mode of production. However, they saw the way out of these contradictions not in moving forward, towards socialism, but in returning to outdated, archaic forms of economic life. With the development of capitalism, petty-bourgeois P. e. is becoming more and more utopian and reactionary. In the 2nd half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. in bourgeois P. e. Several schools are emerging. Austrian school (K. Menger, E. Böhm-Bawerk , F. Wieser) put forward the theory of marginal utility of goods, according to which the value of economic goods is determined by the benefit brought by the last (marginal) unit of the supply, and also depends on their rarity (see Marginal utility theory) . The Cambridge School was founded in Great Britain , the founder of which, A. Marshall, eclectically combined the vulgar theories of production costs, supply and demand, productivity and abstinence with the theories of marginal utility and marginal productivity. In the USA, J.B. Clark formulated the theory of marginal productivity and derived the “universal law” of diminishing productivity of factors of production (see Productivity theory) , According to which, as a factor increases, its productivity decreases. This served as a theoretical justification for reducing workers' wages and proof of the need for unemployment. The entry of capitalism into the stage of imperialism and the development of the general crisis of capitalism (See General Crisis of Capitalism) caused profound changes in bourgeois political economy. During this period, two main functions of bourgeois political economy began to become more and more apparent: defense of the capitalist system and proof of its inviolability and eternity, in the form of a pronounced apologetics of capitalism, and the development of practical measures for state-monopoly regulation of production. The beginning of a new stage in bourgeois P. e. associated with the works of J. M. Keynes (Great Britain) and, above all, with the appearance of his main op. "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money" (1936). Keynes showed the inability of the mechanism of free competition to cope with the productive forces and initiated the development of the concept of regulated capitalism (see regulated capitalism theory). Keynesianism has become the main direction of modern bourgeois economics. In 1913 A. Aftalion (France) and in 1919 J. M. Clark (USA) put forward the “acceleration principle”, according to which every increase or decrease in income, demand or supply causes (or requires) a larger increase or decrease in relative (percentage) terms in “induced” investments (see Accelerator). Subsequently, this principle was developed in more detail by R. Harrod (UK), J. Hicks , P. Samuelson (USA) and included in neo-Keynesian models of economic growth (see Economic growth theory). The economic concept of left Keynesianism is substantiated in the works of J. Robinson (USA). Econometric concepts have become widespread. One of the most common varieties of modern apologetic bourgeois theories are the theories of “transformation of capitalism”, for example the concept of “stages of development of society” by W. Rostow (USA), “unified industrial society” by R. Aron (France), “new industrial society” by J. Galbraith (USA), theory of “post-industrial society” by D. Bell (USA).

Modern bourgeois P. e. is experiencing a deep crisis. One of its manifestations is the emergence of convergence theory (See Convergence theory) , according to which there is a gradual convergence of two systems: socialism and capitalism. The most prominent representatives of this theory, J. Galbraith, J. Tinbergen (Netherlands), R. Aron, refuse to proclaim capitalism as the eternal and best social system and call for taking everything “good” that exists in the capitalist and socialist systems. At the same time, they turn to purely external similar moments or processes occurring directly in the material and technical sphere (the development of the modern scientific and technological revolution and the growth of large-scale industry, elements of indicative, i.e., recommendatory, planning in capitalist countries, the use of commodity-money relations and their characteristic categories in socialist countries, etc.). Proponents of the theory of convergence ignore the fundamental opposition between socialism and capitalism, the dominance of fundamentally different relations of ownership of the means of production, fundamental differences in social structure society and in order to develop social production, the presence of exploitation of man by man in the capitalist world and its complete elimination under socialism.

The crisis of modern bourgeois P. e. also manifests itself in the appearance in capitalist countries of the so-called. radical P. e., whose representatives reject the traditional dogmas of bourgeois scientists and, in a number of cases, carry out useful practical research. The vitality of petty-bourgeois P. e. during the period of the general crisis of capitalism is explained by the presence in many countries of significant layers of the petty bourgeoisie (See Petty bourgeoisie) (peasants, artisans, small traders, etc.). In developing countries, petty-bourgeois political economy, which exposes colonialism and neocolonialism and the domination of foreign monopolies and supports an independent path of development, can play a certain progressive role.

The proletarian political economy created by K. Marx and F. Engels, while truly scientific, is at the same time consistently party. It inherits and develops the best achievements of previous economic thought. K. Marx and F. Engels carried out the development of P. e. a revolutionary revolution, the essence of which was the application of a materialist understanding of history to economic life, the discovery of objective laws of social development and the creation of a theory of surplus value (See Surplus Value) - “... the cornerstone of Marx’s economic theory” (V.I. Lenin, ibid., p. 45). K. Marx was the first to scientifically prove the historical limitations and transient nature of the capitalist mode of production. He discovered and comprehensively studied the laws of motion of capitalism. A brilliant economic analysis of the capitalist system allowed K. Marx to make a discovery of world-historical significance - about the inevitability of the revolutionary collapse of capitalism and the transition of society from capitalism to communism, about the historical mission of the proletariat as the gravedigger of capitalism and the creator of a new, communist society.

Initially Marxist (proletarian) P. e. arose as a science that studies the production relations of the capitalist mode of production (Pe. in the narrow sense). Gradually, with the accumulation of knowledge about the methods of production that preceded capitalism, industrial economics emerged. in a broad sense, studying the relations of production of historically successive modes of production.

A new stage in the development of Marxist political economy. associated with the works of V. I. Lenin, who creatively developed the general theory of P. e. based on new historical experience of social development. Lenin created the doctrine of monopoly capitalism (imperialism), revealed its economic essence and main features. Based on an analysis of the effect of the uneven economic and political development of capitalism, the law in the era of imperialism, Lenin concluded that the victory of socialism was initially possible in several or even in one individual country, and developed Marxist theory in relation to the new historical era socialist revolution.

Lenin's greatest contribution to the economic theory of Marxism lies in his creation of the foundations of economic economics. socialism. He developed a complete theory about the transition period from capitalism to socialism (See), about ways to build a socialist economy, about socialist industrialization, about socialist reconstruction agriculture through production cooperation of peasant farms (see V.I. Lenin’s Cooperative Plan), on the economic basis of socialism, on the forms and methods of socialist management. Lenin developed the Marxist teaching about the two phases of communist society, about the transition from the first to the second - the highest phase, about the essence and ways of creating the material and technical base of communism (See Material and technical base of communism) , on the formation of communist production relations. Lenin defined the main content of the modern era as the era of humanity’s transition from capitalism to socialism, and foresaw the formation of a world system of socialism (See World system of socialism), which would have a decisive impact on all world development.

Marxist P. e. - creative, constantly developing science. It received its further development in the theoretical activities of the CPSU and fraternal Marxist-Leninist parties, in documents jointly developed by the communist and workers' parties at international meetings. Significant contribution to development current problems P. e. contributed by Marxist scholars Soviet Union and other countries.

Marxist P. e. seriously enriched by research into the general crisis of capitalism and its new, modern stage, analysis of the forms and methods of state-monopoly regulation of the economy, study of the problems of the world capitalist economy, and the currency crisis. Significant works have been written on the economic problems of the Third World countries. The theory of the revolutionary transition from capitalism to socialism was further developed, the analysis of the system of economic laws and categories of socialism was deepened, the position of a developed socialist society and the features of its economy was put forward and substantiated, the scientific foundations of the economic policy of a socialist state were developed, the doctrine of creating a material and technical base was concretized communism, the theory of socialist economic integration is substantiated and successfully developed.

II. Subject and method of Marxist political economy

P. e. - one of the components of Marxism-Leninism (together with philosophy and scientific communism). V.I. Lenin wrote that “the most profound, comprehensive and detailed confirmation and application of Marx’s theory is his economic teaching” (ibid., vol. 26, p. 60).

The subject of study is Marxist (proletarian) political economy. are Industrial relations , characteristic of various, historically successive methods of production (See Method of Production). The theoretical expression of objectively existing relations of production are economic categories (See Economic category). The most general, recurring, internal cause-and-effect relationships of economic phenomena and processes are expressed in economic laws (See Economic laws). In the system of production relations, relations of ownership of the means of production are identified as the basis of all other economic relations. Industrial relations are studied by P. e. in organic unity with the productive forces that determine them (See Productive forces) and the superstructure of the corresponding society. With the development of social production and the complication of economic relations, the subject of industrial economics expands. IN modern conditions P. e. cannot be limited to the study of production relations only within the framework of one or another mode of production. Deepening of the global division of labor, development of economic and political relations between countries of different socio-economic systems, economic competition between socialism and capitalism, expanding international economic cooperation - all this makes it necessary to develop the economic problems of the world economy. These include: ways and forms of influence of world socialism on the development of the non-socialist part of the world, the nature of economic relations between countries of different systems and prospects for their development, characteristics of the structure and social nature of economic relations and economic laws operating in the world economy. Here lies one of the main directions of the further creative development of Marxist-Leninist poetry.

Identification of production relations as a subject of P. e. - the greatest merit of Marxism. Bourgeois P. e. I couldn't rise to that level. She studied the isolated processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption, often replacing the analysis of economic relations with the study of the technical side of social production, legal institutions and psychological factors.

Marxism also created a truly scientific method of knowledge - the method of materialist dialectics (see Dialectical materialism) and applied it to the study of the production relations of society. Dialectical materialism sees the only criterion of truth in the correspondence of the conclusions obtained by science to objective reality. This determines creative nature Marxist P. e. In the process of learning P. e. takes a specific economic phenomenon as the initial one and, with the help of scientific abstraction, cuts off everything secondary, random, everything that characterizes its external signs, and step by step reveals the essence of economic processes. In the process of further movement of scientific thought, an ascent from the abstract to the concrete, from simple to complex occurs, a system of economic categories and laws is presented and analyzed. The method of scientific abstraction requires the study of economic relations in their most developed form, that is, when they reach the highest degree of maturity, and at the same time assumes that they are considered in a state of movement, development, and not in a frozen form.

Method P. e. uses general philosophical techniques scientific knowledge: analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, unity of logical and historical approaches.

The Marxist dialectical method requires the unity of qualitative and quantitative analysis of economic processes, in which primacy remains with qualitative, socio-economic analysis. Consistent application of the dialectical method also involves enriching the research process with modern scientific achievements(system analysis, use of economic and mathematical models, etc.).

P. e. as a science it has a class, party character, for it studies relations of production that are closely related to the economic interests of classes (the proletariat, the bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie). The coincidence of the interests of the working class with the interests of the majority of the population and their correspondence to the needs of the progressive development of the productive forces allows Marxist political economy. combine partisanship, direct and open defense of the interests of the proletariat with scientific objectivity. P. e. - an ideological weapon in the hands of the working class in the struggle to overthrow capitalism and build a communist society.

III. Political economy of pre-capitalist formations

Exploring the capitalist mode of production and revealing its historically transitory nature, Marx and Engels, on the basis of the knowledge accumulated by science, in particular the works of L. G. Morgan (USA), laid the foundation for economic development. pre-capitalist formations. These issues are addressed in the work of K. Marx “Forms preceding the capitalist mode of production”, which is part of his economic manuscripts of 1858-59, and in particular the work of F. Engels “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”. Important contribution to P. e. pre-capitalist formations were introduced by V.I. Lenin (work “The Development of Capitalism in Russia”).

P. e. pre-capitalist formations includes P. e. primitive communal, slave and feudal systems. It studies, first of all, the historical process of the emergence and development of production and exchange, private property and classes, necessary and surplus product, explores the economic laws governing the development of production, distribution of exchange and consumption at these historical stages of development of human society, shows the decisive role of ownership of the means of production (and the employee) in the system of industrial relations. Such an analysis reveals the historical nature of economic categories and laws, in particular the historical nature of the emergence and existence of private property.

Under the primitive communal system (See Primitive communal system), on the basis of the primitive development of productive forces, there was public (tribal, tribal) ownership of the means of production and equal distribution. With the improvement of tools and the accumulation of labor skills and experience of the worker, as well as with the development of societies. The division of labor gradually increased labor productivity, at first sporadically, and then regularly a surplus product appeared. The decomposition of the primitive communal system began, private property appeared, society split into antagonistic classes, the State arose as an apparatus of coercion, oppression and violence in the hands of the ruling class.

The basis of production relations under the slave-owning system (See Slave-owning system) is formed by the slave-owning form of ownership of the means of production and full ownership of the worker - slave. The connection of the means of production with labor power is carried out on the basis of non-economic coercion (See Non-economic coercion). The production of surplus product through the exploitation of a slave is regular. The entire surplus product, as well as a significant part of what is necessary, is appropriated free of charge by the slave-owning class. The gradual improvement of the tools of labor increasingly came into conflict with the slave-owning form of ownership, with the complete disinterest of the worker in the results of his labor. During the period of disintegration of the slave system, transitional type farms arise in which the worker, remaining the property of his owner, gains independence in the use of the means of production. Feudal dependence is replacing slavery.

The surplus value created by the labor of wage workers is distributed among various groups of capitalists and takes the form of profit (entrepreneurial income), trading profit and loan interest. A specific form of surplus value in agriculture is land rent, and in the mining industry - mining rent.

The capitalist mode of production leads to a significant increase in productive forces based on the use of machinery, the size of enterprises grows, and the social division of labor deepens. The growth of socialization of production and the development of productive forces is the historical mission of capitalism. At the same time, the dominance of private capitalist ownership of the means of production at a certain stage becomes an obstacle to the further development of productive forces. The main contradiction of capitalism is deepening - between the social nature of production and the private capitalist form of appropriation. Objective laws of development require the resolution of this contradiction: the replacement of the capitalist mode of production with a communist one, based on public ownership of the means of production. At the same time, within the framework of the bourgeois system, a force is growing that is capable of carrying out this replacement - the working class.

In the 2nd decade of the 20th century. In connection with the First World War of 1914-18 and the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, a general crisis of capitalism arises, covering the capitalist system as a whole, its economy, politics, and ideology. It reflects the further growth of the contradictions of capitalism, the process of gradual falling away from the world capitalist system of more and more countries, the formation and growth of the world system of socialism. In the era of the general crisis of capitalism, the colonial system of imperialism is collapsing.

The current stage in the development of the capitalist mode of production is characterized by the growth of state-monopoly capitalism (See State-monopoly capitalism) , combining the power of the state with the power of monopolies. State-monopoly regulation of the economy, its forecasting and programming are developing. State-monopoly capitalism, being a new stage in the socialization of production, further aggravates the main contradiction of capitalism. Before Marxist scientists developing the theory of P. e. modern capitalism, there are tasks associated with a deep analysis of new phenomena and processes in the development of the economy of modern capitalism, occurring, in particular, under the influence of the modern scientific and technological revolution, with the study of the mechanism of influence of the bourgeois state on the processes of social reproduction and modification of the economic cycle, price movements , inflation and currency relations.

V. Political economy of socialism

P. e. socialism is part of P. e. the communist mode of production as a whole. It studies the production relations of a mixed economy in the transition period from capitalism to socialism (See Transition period from capitalism to socialism) , reveals the patterns of development of social production inherent in the first phase of the communist mode of production (the system of socialist production relations, the operation of economic laws, their use in the practice of planned management of the national economy), and also studies the features of their manifestation at certain stages of the development of socialism itself. Building a developed socialist society in the USSR, characterized by high degree maturity of the material and technical base and the system of industrial relations, creates conditions for the most complete and sequential study and taking advantage of socialism. The maturity of socialist production relations, their achievement of the highest stage of development, is an important prerequisite for further in-depth analysis of their essence and forms of manifestation.

The main object of study of P. e. socialism are the production relations of socialism and, above all, the underlying social socialist ownership of the means of production, which characterizes the method of appropriating material and spiritual benefits in the interests of the working masses. In the USSR and other socialist countries, public socialist property exists in two forms - state and cooperative.

The dominance of public socialist property and the formation on its basis of united national interests determine the direction of development of socialist production - its subordination to the interests of ever more fully satisfying the material and spiritual needs of the people, the comprehensive development of all members of society. This finds expression in the basic economic law of socialism (See Basic Economic Law of Socialism).

Social ownership of the means of production also determines the emergence and operation of the law of planned, proportional development of the national economy, which characterizes the possibility and necessity of coordinated activity of society, the anticipation of the results of this activity, the planned management of social production, including the conscious development of goals of economic development and ways to achieve them.

P. e. socialism studies the features of the operation of economic laws under socialism that are characteristic of all or a number of socio-economic formations: saving time, law, increasing needs, law, accelerated (predominant) growth of production of means of production, law (See priority growth of production of means of production, law).

An important place in P. e. socialism is occupied by the study of commodity-money relations and the economic laws inherent in them (the law of value, laws money circulation etc.). Commodity-money relations under the conditions of the first phase of communism have a new, socialist content. They are systematically used by the socialist state at all stages and stages of socialist expanded reproduction, both within the framework of the national economy of each country, and in economic relations between the countries of the world system of socialism. The systematic use of categories of commodity production is the basis of economic calculation.

P. e. socialism studies the categories and laws inherent in social reproduction as a whole, as well as its individual spheres: production, distribution, exchange and consumption. Particular attention to modern stage socialist construction is devoted to the analysis of the relationship between two divisions of social production, the relationship between extensive and intensive factors of economic growth, the problems of increasing the efficiency of production and the entire economy as a whole based on accelerating the pace of scientific and technological progress, improving the organization of production and improving the management and planning of the entire economic mechanism. P. e. socialism reveals the socio-economic aspects of the modern scientific and technological revolution under socialism.

Planned management of the national economy under socialism is based on the knowledge and use of a system of objective economic laws, which ensures the organic unity of theory and practice, the development of the scientific foundations of the economic policy of the party and the state.

P. e. socialism studies the system of planned management of the socialist economy, a system in which the directive tasks of planning bodies and economic levers of influence on production (price, credit, wages, profit, etc.) are organically combined. A comprehensive study of the management of social production is carried out in close cooperation with representatives of economic and other sciences (law, sociology, etc.).

With the establishment of socialist property, the state turns into a body that systematically manages the development of the national economy. P. e. socialism studies the economic role and functions of the state, forms and methods of socialist management.

The formation of a world socialist economy brings to life a new sphere of production relations - international socialist economic relations. The study of these relationships and the laws inherent to them, the process of internationalization of production, and socialist economic integration significantly enriches pedagogical economics. socialism.

Along with P. e. an extensive system of economic sciences is developing: general economics (national economic planning, economic management theory, statistics, etc.), functional (finance and credit, labor economics, pricing, etc.) and sectoral (industrial economics, agricultural economics, transport economics, etc. .). P. e. forms the theoretical and methodological foundation of the entire system of economic sciences. Successful development economic sciences are possible only when they are based on the theoretical foundations and conclusions of Marxist-Leninist political economics. In turn, P. e. enriched with factual material that accumulates in the course of the development of specific economic sciences.

The development of the scientific foundations of economic policy and planned management of the national economy is the practical function of economic economics. socialism. This development is the more successful the deeper science penetrates into the essence of socialist production relations and laws and the more fully it reveals their system. Along with this, P. e. socialism performs important ideological functions - it serves as one of the main means of forming a communist worldview, equips workers with knowledge of the fundamental differences and advantages of the socialist economic system over the capitalist one, provides a clear orientation in the events of economic and political life and instills confidence in the inevitable triumph of communism. Study of P. e. socialism occupies a central place in the system economic education workers. Practical and ideological functions of P. e. are in organic unity, mutually complementing each other.

Considering the important and ever-increasing role of P. e. in the construction of socialism and communism, the CPSU constantly takes care of its further development. The Party focuses the attention of economists on developing the most effective forms and methods of using objective economic laws in the practice of planned management of the national economy, on improving long-term long-term planning, the problems of accelerating scientific and technological progress, intensifying and fully increasing the efficiency of social production, as well as on the most important issues development of socialist economic integration.

Lit.: Marx K., Towards a critique of political economy, Marx K. and Engels F., Works, 2nd ed., vol. 13; him. Capital, vol. 1-3, ibid., vol. 23, 24, 25; his, Theory of Surplus Value, (IV volume of “Capital”), ibid., vol. 26; him. Criticism of the Gotha Program, ibid., vol. 191; Engels F., Origin of the family, private property and the state, ibid., vol. 21; his, Anti-Dühring, ibid., vol. 20; Lenin V.I., Regarding the so-called question of markets, Complete. collection cit., 5th ed., vol. 1; him, Development of capitalism in Russia, ibid., vol. 3; him. Karl Marx, ibid., vol. 26; him. Imperialism, as the highest stage of capitalism, ibid., vol. 27; him. State and Revolution, ibid., vol. 33; him, Immediate tasks of Soviet power, ibid., vol. 36; him. The Great Initiative, ibid., vol. 39; him. Economics and politics in the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat, ibid.; him, On a unified economic plan, ibid., vol. 42; him, On the food tax, ibid., vol. 43; him, On the significance of gold now and after the complete victory of socialism, ibid., vol. 44; him, On Cooperation, ibid., vol. 45.

Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, M., 1974; Materials of the XXIV Congress of the CPSU, M., 1971; Political economy. Textbook, M., 1954; Political Economy, Part 1 - The Capitalist Mode of Production, ed. A. M. Rumyantseva, M., 1973; Political economy of socialism. Uch. allowance, 2nd ed., M., 1971; Political economy of modern monopoly capitalism, vol. 1-2, M., 1970; Course of Political Economy, 2nd ed., ed. N. A. Tsagolov, vol. 1-2, M., 1970; Cherkovets V.N., On the methodological principles of political economy as a scientific system, M., 1965; Rumyantsev A.M., On the categories and laws of political economy of the communist formation, 2nd ed., M., 1966; Pagikov A.I., Economic problems of socialism, M., 1970; Abalkin L.I., Political economy and economic policy, M., 1970; his, Economic laws of socialism, M., 1971; Ostrovityanov K.V., Selected works, vol. 1-Political economy of pre-socialist formations, vol. 2-Issues of the political economy of socialism, M., 1972-73.

Political science. Dictionary. - POLITICAL ECONOMY, a science that studies the foundations of social production, the laws of its functioning and development, problems of production, distribution, exchange, consumption of material goods at various stages of social development. Term... ... Modern encyclopedia

Political saving, political economy- one of the social sciences, the subject of which is production relations and the laws governing their historical development.

For the first time the phrase political saving used by playwright and writer Antoine Montchretien in his economic treatise “Traité d’ economy politique"(Treatise on Political Economy, 1615). Montchretien did not write economic works either before or after. Back in 1911, characterizing the degree of independence of the treatise, the Encyclopedia Britannica concluded: it is “mainly based on the works of Jean Bodin.” The circumstances that prompted the playwright to write the treatise were purely political (the author dedicated it to the young King Louis XIII and the Queen Mother Marie de Medici). An excellent connoisseur of ancient languages and literature, Montchretien constructed a successful term to designate the subject of J. Bodin’s research:

« political"- evokes reminiscences both of politics itself and of Aristotle’s treatise “Politics” (Greek Πολιτικά), the name of which goes back to the Greek. Πολίτευμα - state structure.
« saving" - with "Economy" in ancient Greek. Οἰκονομικός, one of Xenophon's Socratic dialogues setting out the rules ( laws, nomos) farming (Greek οikos - house as a self-sufficient economic unit; Wed home ownership).

Abstract, anagram " political economy» → “economic policy” corresponds to the movement from justification (theory) to implementation (practice). However, due to their fundamental nature, the conclusions of political economy could be more of a recommendatory nature for politicians.

Montchretien did not have time to “introduce a new term into use” - confirm it in discussions with colleagues, contribute to the emergence of a tradition of its use, or at least see this term with his own eyes in someone else’s treatise. Over the next 6 years before his death (1621), Montchretien did not write any other works on economic topics.

Category " political saving" is one of the elements of a subset of the category " economic theories» ( plural!); Accordingly, these terms are not equivalent and are not interchangeable. Political economy is only one of many sciences that formulate economic theories. Moreover, within its framework, as well as “within” any other science, several qualitatively different aggregates can arise, coexist and even compete. private theories. Groups of interrelated, non-mutually contradictory theories developed within the framework of one science, based on the same subject , But different groups scientists using different methods and techniques add up to schools And currents scientific thought. Over time, differences between them in the field of subject and method can reach a critical point, after which the emergence of new sciences is noted, with their own, less mutually contradictory definitions of subjects and methods.

Item science - a key, but not the only object of its study. What is important is the sum of objects from the field of the subject of science, a subset of the sum of the objects studied by it. Depending on individual conceptual settings, the depth of the study of objects that are not named as part of the subject of political-economic research of a particular political-economic school may vary, up to complete abstraction from their existence. In some cases, this may call into question the legitimacy of calling a “political-economic” school, where not only the subject, but also private objects of research ignore the categories essential to the definition of a given science.

Method science - research techniques. Among the methods general Like most other economic theories, political economy relies on:

Analysis And synthesis. Analysis is the division of a complex object into components. Synthesis is the integration into a single whole of parts, properties, relationships previously identified during the analysis. Synthesis complements analysis and is in inextricable dialectical unity with it;
Abstraction- after analysis, separation of essential characteristics (components) of a phenomenon from non-essential ones, carried out according to a certain (often quantitative) criterion.
Induction And deduction. Induction is a type of inference that provides a transition from single facts to multiple ones, from the particular to the general. Deduction, in a broad sense, is any conclusion in general; in philosophy - reliable proof or conclusion of a statement based on the laws of logic. In deductive inference, the consequences are found in the premises and are extracted from there through logical analysis. Induction and deduction are not separate, self-sufficient, but necessarily inextricably interconnected aspects of dialectical cognition.

System approach- not a separate method (as is sometimes mistakenly indicated, along with analysis, synthesis, abstraction, deduction and induction), but the entire listed set of methods, which allows us to consider a separate phenomenon or process as a system consisting of a certain number of interconnected and interacting elements.

Methods specific for political economy, which may be absent or of minor importance in other economic theories include:

historical And sociological method. Since a person enters into the subject of political economy both as a subject of economic relations, and as an active participant, and as a result of economic processes, this science is obliged to consider phenomena in historical terms, projecting them onto a sociological result. The inductive-deductive relationship between these methods was noted by V. Sombart:

However, political economy does not replace either history or sociology, adopting from these sciences not their specific methods and subjects, but only principles. Thus, historicism is the principle of knowledge of things and phenomena in their development and formation in connection with specific historical conditions, their defining ones.

Political economy studies the economy and the relationships that develop in it as part of its subject, which is thus defined by the category “ Production relationship" These are social relations that develop in the process of reproduction, including:

production,
distribution,
exchange and
consumption of material goods.

Political economy identifies patterns and formulates economic laws that govern the development of production relations at different historical stages in the development of human economic activity. In order to distinguish them, different methods can be used here to distinguish qualitatively different states of the productive forces and production relations of society, in particular, a special category of socio-economic formations.

Having formulated its subject, and thereby drawing a watershed with the previous stages of the development of economic thought, in the 19th century, political economy, on the basis of compliance with this formula, makes a further demarcation with other sciences and disciplines adjacent to it in the field of the subject. These are, in particular: commodity science, history of law (including economic history) and the national economy of various countries and regions, economic statistics, etc. By interacting with them, and using materials professionally and thoroughly studied by specialist scientists in other fields, political Economics itself becomes the basis for the emergence of new sciences: economic history, econometrics, etc.

Specific elements corresponding to the definition of the subject of political economy appear in the works of the “pioneers” of this science (W. Petty, P. de Boisguillebert, etc.), receiving final consolidation in the works of A. Smith, D. Ricardo, K. Marx, J. -B. Say, T. Malthus, Bastiat and others, whose works are classified as classical political economy. Despite the similarity of individual conclusions and laws formulated by different “classes,” within the framework of political economy, different schools and currents of economic thought developed. Of these, the largest in terms of number of scientists, circulation scientific works and duration of existence is Marxist political saving(within which various schools and movements are also distinguished).

In the 18th-20th centuries and to this day, political economy is a major, but not the only source of socio-economic theories. The distinction between political economy and other related sciences and disciplines is made according to a number of criteria, including the socio-historical component, coverage of the interests of all social groups-subjects of industrial relations, forecast of the results of a particular economic policy. These criteria are generally met by a number of other economic schools of the 19th-20th centuries, one of which in this regard was called “Neoclassical economic theory” (going back to classical political economy).

The historical predecessor of political economy is mercantilism, the subject of research of which is the sphere of circulation. Later, as political economy developed, How science, the main focus is shifting to the production sector.

The subject of political economy in A. Smith’s version is formulated in the title of his main work: “ Study O nature And reason wealth peoples». Wealth(English) wealth) was also understood by D. Ricardo as a subject of science. Throughout the 19th century, Smith's work played both an educational role and was the object of criticism, which gave rise to new concepts in science. Second meaning wealth- abundance (and in Smith’s time also “prosperity”). But political economists returned to this meaning only in the 20th century.

The closest critics to Smith in time are Simon de Sismondi (and then another representative economic romanticism, P. Proudhon) argued that not the objects of wealth themselves (things), but their distribution(and redistribution) is the subject of political economy, and its special purpose is to ensure the fairness of this process. A number of researchers highlight a special element of novelty that Sismondi introduces into the method, namely the input moral and ethical element into the principles of classical political economy:

Political economy is “not a science of simple calculation, but a moral science”; it leads into “misconception when it operates with bare numbers, and leads to the goal only when the feelings, needs and passions of people are taken into account.”

K. Marx considered Sismondi’s position to be petty-bourgeois, populist. In search of the fundamental, deep basis of economic processes, he followed the path of a philosophical and abstract understanding of their essence. Marx focused on the process of reproduction (production, distribution, exchange, consumption) as a single complex whole. In order not to be distracted by the particulars that make up the subject of special sciences (industrial economics, trade economics, marketing, etc.), Marx considered production relationship, which arise between people involved in these processes according to each person’s place on the steps of the social pyramid of society. These relationships are not subjective-psychological (person-to-person interpersonal relationships), but socio-legal. Taking this into account, the subject of political economy now is production relationship, That There is relationship By about production, distribution, exchange And consumption good.

Political Economy, political economy- one of the social sciences, the subject of which is production relations and the laws governing their historical development.

Etymology of the term

The phrase political economy was first used by playwright and writer Antoine Montchretien in an economic treatise « Traite d'economie politique» (“Treatise on Political Economy”, 1615). Montchretien did not write economic works either before or after. Back in 1911, characterizing the degree of independence of the treatise, the Encyclopedia Britannica concluded: it “ mainly based on the works of Jean Bodin" The circumstances that prompted the playwright to write the treatise were purely political (the author dedicated it to the young King Louis XIII and the Queen Mother Marie de Medici). An excellent connoisseur of ancient languages and literature, Montchretien created an apt term to designate the subject of J. Bodin's research.

Abstract, anagram " political economy» - « economic policy"corresponds to the movement from justification (theory) to implementation (practice). However, due to their fundamental nature, the conclusions of political economy could be more of a recommendatory nature for politicians.

Subject and method of political economy

Category " political economy" is one of the elements of a subset of the category " economic theories"; Accordingly, these terms are not equivalent and are not interchangeable. Political economy is only one of many sciences that formulate economic theories. Moreover, within its framework, as well as “within” any other science, several qualitatively different sets of particular theories can arise, coexist and even compete. Groups of interrelated, non-mutually contradictory theories developed within the framework of one science, on the basis of the same subject, but by different groups of scientists using different methods and techniques, form schools and trends of scientific thought. Over time, differences between them in the field of subject and method can reach a critical point, after which the emergence of new sciences is noted, with their own, less mutually contradictory definitions of subjects and methods.

The subject of science is the key, but not the only object of its study. What is important is the sum of objects from the field of the subject of science, a subset of the sum of the objects studied by it. Depending on individual conceptual settings, the depth of the study of objects that are not named as part of the subject of political-economic research of a particular political-economic school may vary, up to complete abstraction from their existence. In some cases, this may call into question the legitimacy of calling " political-economic“a school where not only the subject, but also private objects of research ignore the categories essential to the definition of a given science.

Method of science - research techniques. Among the methods common to most other economic theories, political economy relies on:

Analysis and synthesis. Analysis is the division of a complex object into components. Synthesis is the integration into a single whole of parts, properties, relationships previously identified during the analysis. Synthesis complements analysis and is in inextricable dialectical unity with it;
Abstraction- after analysis, separation of essential characteristics (components) of a phenomenon from non-essential ones, carried out according to a certain (often quantitative) criterion.
Induction and deduction. Induction is a type of inference that provides a transition from single facts to multiple ones, from the particular to the general. Deduction, in a broad sense, is any conclusion in general; in philosophy - reliable proof or conclusion of a statement based on the laws of logic. In deductive inference, the consequences are found in the premises and are extracted from there through logical analysis. Induction and deduction are not separate, self-sufficient, but necessarily inextricably interconnected aspects of dialectical cognition.

Systematic approach- not a separate method (as is sometimes mistakenly indicated, along with analysis, synthesis, abstraction, deduction and induction), but the entire listed set of methods, which allows us to consider a separate phenomenon or process as a system consisting of a certain number of interconnected and interacting elements.

Methods specific to political economy that may be absent or of minor importance in other economic theories include:

historical and sociological method. Since a person enters into the subject of political economy both as a subject of economic relations, and as an active participant, and as a result of economic processes, this science is obliged to consider phenomena in historical terms, projecting them onto a sociological result. The inductive-deductive relationship between these methods was noted by V. Sombart:

« The historical approach is an approach to the individual, one-time, while the sociological approach is to the repeating, i.e. to typical».

However, political economy does not replace either history or sociology, adopting from these sciences not their specific methods and subjects, but only principles. Thus, historicism is the principle of knowledge of things and phenomena in their development and formation in connection with the specific historical conditions that determine them.

Political economy studies the economy and the relationships that develop in it as part of its subject, which is thus defined by the category “ Relations of production" These are social relations that develop in the process of reproduction, including:

production;
distribution;
exchange;
consumption of material goods.

Political economy

POLITICAL ECONOMY

(political economy) Traditionally, the term “political economy” means that area of the art of management that is associated with the systematic study of the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, although at present it is often not entirely correctly used to characterize the political aspects of developing economic strategy. Since the 17th century this concept has been understood in different ways. Nevertheless, three traditional directions in political economy can be distinguished, which still influence political science. First, there is the tradition of classical political economy; secondly, the Marxist school, and finally, the branch of political economy, which uses statistics and modeling techniques to test hypotheses about the relationship between management and economics. The first recorded use of the term "political economy" dates back to the early 17th century (usually attributed to Antoine de Montchretien and dating from 1615). A combination of the word "economics" used in the French courts of the time of King Henry IV, which traditionally meant "household management" with the word "politics" ( politique) led to the creation of a new science of public management of state affairs. Under the influence of François Casney (1694–1774), physician to Louis XV, the principles of political economy were first systematically expounded in the works of the physiocrats. Disagreeing with the mercantilists that value is synonymous with money and that trade is productive in nature, the physiocrats defined value in terms of the production of material products, in which prosperity depends entirely on successful work agricultural sector. This point of view refuted the idea of the enrichment of merchants, favored by mercantilists, and, emphasizing the interdependence between individuals in society, made political economy a theory of national importance. By the mid-18th century, thanks to the Scottish Enlightenment philosophers, political economy had established itself as the forerunner of modern social science. Political economy began to be viewed as a science that studies the internal tasks facing statesmen and consisting in providing some reserves of subsistence for all members of society (James Stuart. “Principles of Political Economy” (“Principles of Political Economy”, 1767). Adam Smith defined political economy as “the branch of science of the statesman or legislator” engaged in the dual task of “providing for a high public revenue or subsistence of the people... and (to secure) to the state or commonwealth a revenue sufficient for the maintenance of the public service. This involves the enrichment of both the people and the sovereign" ("The Wealth of Nations", 1776). Smith, drawing on the work of his Scottish colleagues: Francis Hutcheson, Adam Ferguson, David Hume and John Millar , (put forward the idea that the key to understanding the development of human society is to determine the mode of existence dominant at each stage of human development. Although Smith worked with a poorly developed scheme that included only four stages (hunting, pastoralism, agriculture and trade), he carried out his analysis of the early stage of industrial capitalism led him to the conclusion that trade was the pinnacle of economic civilization, and that freedom was necessary for the development of trade. Smith argued that the human tendency to barter, to exchange thing for thing, led to the creation of the most perfect economic mechanism (a self-regulating market that satisfies both the interests of the individual and the needs of society. The advantages of the division of labor, this true source of social progress and personal well-being, were simply limited by the degree of development and the size of the market. Smith was therefore an advocate of free trade and a reduction in the economic role of the state, in contrast to the later marginalist approach to economics developed mainly by Stanley Jevons (1835–82), Carl Menger (1840–1921) and Leon. Walras (1834–1910), Smith did not view the economy as a self-propelled mechanism, isolated from the society of which it is a part. Representatives of classical political economy - from Sir William Petty to John Stuart Mill (Mill) (thought about how to define the social classes that make up society, identify the economic relations between them and discover the laws governing these relations. Thus, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe structure of society was based on an understanding its economic basis. This point of view was clearly formulated by William Robertson (1812), who argued that “in every inquiry into the activities of men united in society, the first thing to be looked at is their mode of existence. And as it is different, so are the laws. and the policies of different societies must differ." In addition to the economic theory of historical progress, the understanding of wealth including goods (and not just values), and the rationale for free trade based on the principle of an unrestricted worldwide division of labor, representatives of classical political economy developed the labor theory of value , which considered labor as a measure, and sometimes the source of all value. This last aspect of classical political economy was fully developed by David Ricardo (1772–1823), who, in his Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, attempted to define the laws governing the distribution of rent, profit and wages. . An ardent opponent of the “Corn Laws” and the old poor law, which, in his opinion, fettered the development of production and distribution, Ricardo improved the “embodied labor theory of value” and came to the conclusion that the national product received for distribution is determined mainly by the productivity and supply of labor. And although Ricardo believed that capitalism based on competition perfect shape society, his analysis of value allowed the so-called. Ricardian socialists postulated the existence of a conflict of interests between labor and capital, and his theory became an important weapon during the turmoil that led to the passage of the Reform Bill in 1832. The theories of classical political economy have a significant, if not always recognized, influence on modern political science. Definition social class(based on the division of labor) and the harmony of interests that is said to exist in relations between classes underlie many political liberal theories and norms of consensus. Most authors adhering to liberal views demonstrate the advantages of a market economy from positions similar to those developed by Adam Smith. In the field of international political economy, the liberal tradition draws heavily on the ideas of Smith and Ricardo to make the case for eliminating all forms of protectionism in the global economy. In particular, Ricardo's theory of "comparative advantage", which argues that the distribution of industry among nations should be regulated not by absolute but by relative costs of production, is central to liberal views on development and underdevelopment issues. In the second half of the 19th century. The theories of marginal (marginal) utility of Jevons and the Austrian school led by Menger appeared. Its supporters redefined economic theory, calling it the branch of praxiology - the science of rational action. Trying to create a mathematically precise discipline, political economy as an economic theory of society was turned into “positive economics.” Lionel Robbins later called it “the science concerned with the study of human behavior as the relationship between ends and limited means that can be used in alternative ways.” From then on, economic theory could be understood in a narrow sense as the isolated study of the behavior of utility-maximizing individuals expressing their subjective preferences in a given market situation. This left room for the development of additional disciplines that study social action (sociology) and political action (political science). The organic study of governance and society based on mode of existence, which we see in the classical authors, has evolved into the study of determining prices and allocating resources according to individual choice. Karl Marx, on the contrary, created his own organic concept of capitalist society, subjecting a thorough critique of classical political economy and restating its basic postulates. Marx's early economic and philosophical studies led him to question the natural historical basis of classical political economy. The mistake of the classical authors was to give a natural-historical (or universal) character to the historically specific social relations of capitalist society. Behind the formal abstractions of classical political economy (land, labor, rent-generating capital, wages, profit) there was hidden an unexplored historically specific phenomenon - private property. Only by accepting the existence of private property as a given were the classical writers able to suggest that classes technically arose from the division of labor. According to Marx, the best representatives of classical political economy gave an analysis (albeit incomplete) of value and its meaning, but failed to pose the all-important question: “Why did this content take such a specific form?” ("Capital". Vol. 1). Therefore, Capital begins with an analysis of the form of the commodity in order to emphasize, in contrast to the classics, that the products of labor become commodities only in historically determined, and therefore transitory, forms of society. On this historical and materialist basis, Marx built his theory of capitalist society, rooted in the concepts of value, surplus value and class. In Marx's view, liberalism's concept of the isolated individual is a travesty, since private interest is itself already socially determined and symmetrical exchange relations conceal exploitation; such an understanding undermines Smith's theory of the harmony of interests existing between classes. Capitalist society is based on a concrete social form production, within which production useful goods subject to the growth of surplus value. Therefore, although Marx agreed with the classics that “the anatomy of civil society lies in political economy,” his complete rethinking of classical concepts marked the beginning of a revolution in social and political theory, the results of which have yet to be incorporated into the mainstream of political science. Despite the dominance of a marginalist understanding of economics in most orthodox academic circles, radical Marxist political economy continued to develop in the early twentieth century, and in the early years of the post-war period (after 1945) was supported by the Keynesian critique of neoclassical economics in Western Europe and the USA. In addition, the new scientific discipline of international political economy has begun to study the interaction between politics and economics on a global scale, while radical environmental politics moves away from marginalist economics in favor of more clearly defined political concepts of the world economy, trying to separate themselves from the ideological associations that the term “political economy” evokes. larger number Political scientists now work in the political aspects of economics, studying primarily the role of politicians in the formulation of economic policies and the impact of their implementation on the popularity and electoral chances of governments. The methodology of the modern political field of economic theory relies heavily on statistical and econometric modeling and emphasizes that hypotheses must be logically stated and falsifiable. Thus, the political business cycle theory, according to which, in preparation for elections, governments temporarily abandon their chosen policies in favor of policies that increase their popularity among voters, is a well-known hypothesis from the political branch of economics. In the 20th century The classical and Marxist schools of political economy have not only survived, but continue to flourish, since the school of neoclassical economics often refuses to consider the political basis and social consequences of capitalist production and distribution. Political economy as a discipline that analyzes fundamental political problems, associated with the accumulation and distribution of surplus product under capitalism, represents a serious challenge to the narrowness of the subject, which is characteristic of modern social science.

Policy. Explanatory dictionary. - M.: "INFRA-M", Publishing House "Ves Mir". D. Underhill, S. Barrett, P. Burnell, P. Burnham, etc. General editor: Doctor of Economics. Osadchaya I.M.. 2001 .

Political economy

a science that studies the foundations of social production and the laws of its functioning and development, problems of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods at various stages of development of human society. The term political economy was introduced by A. Montchretien (1615). As an independent science, political economy was formed during the formation of capitalism (see Mercantilism) and was developed in the works of representatives of classical bourgeois political economy (W. Petty, F. Quesnay, A. Smith, D. Ricardo, etc.). In mid. 19th century Marxist political economy emerged. In the 2nd half. 19 - beginning 20th centuries Austrian, Cambridge, mathematical and other schools of political economy emerged. The main currents of modern economic thought: Keynesianism, neoclassical direction, institutionalism.

Political Science: Dictionary-Reference Book. comp. Prof. Science Sanzharevsky I.I.. 2010 .

Political science. Dictionary. - RSU. V.N. Konovalov. 2010.

See what “Political Economy” is in other dictionaries:

A science that studies the foundations of social production and the laws of its functioning and development, problems of production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods at various stages of development of human society. The term political... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

The science of national wealth. Political criminal, state criminal. Explanation of 25,000 foreign words that have come into use in the Russian language, with the meaning of their roots. Mikhelson A.D., 1865. POLITICAL ECONOMY The science of folk... ... Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language

POLITICAL ECONOMY, a science that studies the foundations of social production, the laws of its functioning and development, problems of production, distribution, exchange, consumption of material goods at various stages of social development. Term... ... Modern encyclopedia

- (political economy) The original name for what is now known as economic theory or economics. The term political economy is still used in some economic frameworks. One can argue that this is really the best... ... Economic dictionary

First of all, about the origin of the word “political economy”. It consists of the Greek words: “politeia”, which means social structure, and “oikonomia”, which in turn was formed as a result of the merger of two words: “oikos” - household and “nomos” - law. In the literal sense, the word “political economy” means the science of economic laws.

As an independent science, political economy began to develop with the emergence of capitalism - from the 16th century. Bourgeois scientists have made many attempts to define the subject of this science. To the greatest extent, issues of political economy were developed by the classics of bourgeois political economy, and primarily by the English scientists A. Smith and D. Ricardo.

But political economy became a true science after the revolutionary revolution carried out in it by the great teachers of the working class, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Where bourgeois economists considered economic phenomena - goods, money, capital - as relations between things, Marx revealed the relations between people, classes, relations that develop in the process of producing material goods. Marxist political economy provides the only correct, scientific explanation for the phenomena of the economic life of society.

The great successor of the work of K. Marx and F. Engels, V. I. Lenin, further developed Marxist economic teaching. Having generalized the new experience of the economic and political development of mankind, he created the doctrine of imperialism as the last stage of the development of capitalism.

Marxist-Leninist political economy studies the relationships that develop between people in the process of producing material goods, that is, production relations, the laws of their development.

But production relations exist in mutual connection with the productive forces. Therefore, political economy studies production relations as a form of development of the productive forces of each socio-economic formation. It reveals the internal contradiction between these two sides of a particular mode of production as the source of its movement.

Political economy is a historical science, since it examines economic relations in their emergence, development and disappearance. …Political economy,” wrote F. Engels, “is essentially a historical science. It deals with historical, i.e., constantly changing material; it investigates first of all the special laws of each individual stage of development of production and exchange, and only at the end of this study can it establish a few, completely general laws, applicable to production and exchange in general.”

We have books coming out of print, the topics of which are various issues: “Political Economy of Capitalism”, “Political Economy of Socialism”, “Political Economy of Pre-Capitalist Formations”. But this does not mean at all that there are different sciences - one for capitalism, another for socialism, etc. Marxist political economy is a unified science that studies the production relations of each mode of production in accordance with its specific economic laws. This is the task of political economy, to reveal the content of these laws, to show the nature of the production relations of a given method of production and its connection with the past and future development of mankind.

So, political economy is the science of the development of human relations of production. It clarifies the economic laws of development: production, distribution, exchange and consumption of material goods at various stages of social development.

Political economy is a class, party science. It cannot be otherwise: by clarifying the essence of production relations, it reveals the reason for the origin of classes, the content of class interests, and thereby shows the inevitability of struggle between classes with irreconcilable interests. The laws and conclusions of political economy affect the fundamental interests of all classes. And it is quite natural that each class interprets economic phenomena in its own way.

In a capitalist society there are two main classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Accordingly, bourgeois political economy and proletarian political economy were formed. The existence of various groups of the petty bourgeoisie determined the emergence of petty-bourgeois political economy.

During the period of struggle against feudalism, the bourgeoisie was the advanced class. Then she was interested in scientific coverage of economic phenomena, since her class interests coincided with the objective course of historical development.

But, having become the ruling class of society, the bourgeoisie ceased to be progressive. When the working class entered the historical arena, the bourgeoisie and its economists were interested in only one thing - to defend the capitalist system. Bourgeois political economy has become unscientific, reactionary, and vulgar. Dozens of different “schools” and “trends” of modern bourgeois political economy set themselves one single goal - to hide the contradictions of capitalism and thereby whitewash the bourgeois system. Lenin pointed out that “not a single professor of political economy, capable of giving the most valuable works in the field of factual, special research, can be trusted in a single word when it comes to the general theory of political economy. For this latter is the same party science in modern society as epistemology. In general, professors of economics are nothing more than learned clerks of the capitalist class, and professors of philosophy are learned clerks of theologians.”

The proletariat - the most advanced class of society - is vitally interested in the progressive development of humanity. This is explained by the fact that the class interests of the proletariat express the interests of the progressive development of society. That is why proletarian, Marxist political economy is the only scientific one, since it objectively and truthfully reveals the laws of economic development of society.