Acta Oeconomica 44. (1992)
1992 / 3-4. szám - KÉRDÉSEK ÉS VÁLASZOK - Lengyel László: Debate on the Transition of Post-Communist Economies to a Market Economy
322 DEBATE: LÁSZLÓ LENGYEL LÁSZLÓ LENGYEL* “The age of cactuses and sand is approaching” György Petri: Inscription Why does the transition from the dictatorial socialist planned economy into a liberal mass democratic market economy seem to be failing or at best succeeding with great difficulty? A timely and valid question. Yet some East European sceptic might even put the question: why should it succeed at all? Can it succeed? In other words: are we not searching for a way where there is in fact none, or are we not attempting something that is impossible? When, before the change in 1989-90, we asked each other and ourselves whether existing socialism could be reformed, and whether a socialist market economy could be realized, our questions came to the same impasse. At that time many observers answered that there could be no such thing as a socialist market economy and thus it was not even a possibility. Just as then it was said that existing socialism could not be turned into some kind of socialist market economy, so today it is said that existing socialism cannot be turned into a liberal capitalist market economy; in other words, it cannot be reformed and it cannot be revolutionalized. However, I think it typical that those who try to answer the question today, do not say this straight out. The experience of the past two or three years have been bewildering and the East European societies have been disappointed not only in Gorbachev’s perestroika and reform-socialism, but also in the ideas of a liberal market economy. It seems that the attempt at a liberal market economy has only continued the poor results of the reform-socialism. Yet, just as earlier it was not thought fitting to criticize Gorbachev’s socialist market economy, so today it is not becoming to malign the solutions of a liberal market economy. It is not seemly to openly declare that there is no way leading to this type of economy. Also, it is not at all popular to say that there is no leap from a shortage economy into an economy of abundance, or from a centralized economy into an individual market economy. It is like saying to the believers that there is no redemption. Yet the fact seems to be that in Eastern Europe there is no redemption, either of a socialist, or of a liberal type. From this, one should not draw the conclusion that a market economy is not, historically, more effective than a centralized planned economy or that a society of mass democracy and a constitutional state do not provide better living standards than one or another type of dictatorship or authoritarian division of rights. However, just because something implies a better life, it does not mean that it is easier to attain it. It was in 1988 that C. Castoriadis summarized why the big leap is impossible. It is true that at that time he was speaking about reform-socialism, but we can see * Financial Research Inc., Budapest “Gravitation” Acta Oeconomica 44> 1992