Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Postcommunist divergence: A comparative analysis of the transition to capitalism in Poland and Russia

  • Articles
  • Published:
Studies in Comparative International Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article critiques the dominant neoliberal transition paradigm. The implementation of neoliberal reforms in the postcommunist world has fostered the creation of two different types of capitalism. Rather than enabling a transition to Western European-style capitalism, these reforms have produced divergence within the postcommunist world. This article uses comparative firm-level case studies from Russia and Poland to construct a “neoclassical” sociological alternative to neoliberal theory that can explain this divergence. In this account, intra-dominant class structure (the pattern of alliances between the Party bureaucracy, the technocracy, and humanistic intellectuals) at the time of the transition produces different “paths to capitalism,” or policy regimes, which, in turn, have different effects on the ability of firms to restructure. In Russia, this creates a system of “patrimonial capitalism” that will produce long-term economic stagnation. In Poland, a variety of modern rational capitalism emerges. This latter system is distinguished by its very high levels of dependence on capital imports in comparison to the advanced capitalist countries. As a result, this type of economy will be quite vulnerable to economic shocks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aslund, Anders. 1991. “Principles of Privatization.” Pp. 17–31 inSystemic Change and Stabilization in Eastern Europe, ed. Laszlo Csaba. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1995.How Russia Became a Market Economy. Washington The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aslund, Anders, P. Boone, and S. Johnson. 1996. “How to Stabilize: Lessons from Postcommunist Countries.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 81, 1: 217–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balcerowicz, Leszek, Barbara Blaszczyk, and Marek Dabrowski. 1997. “The Polish Way to the Market Economy 1989–1995.” Pp. 131–160 inEconomies in Transition: Comparing Asia and Europe, eds. Wing Thye Woo, Steven Parker, and Jeffrey D. Sachs. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltowski, Maciej and Tomasz Mickanwicz. 2000. “Privatization in Poland: Ten Years After.”Post-Communist Economies 12, 4: 425–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, Michael H. 1993.The Origins of Democratization in Poland: Workers, Intellectuals, and Oppositional Politics, 1976–1980. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, Olivier, Rudiger Dornbusch, Paul Krugman, Richard Layard, and Lawrence Summers. 1991.Reform in Eastern Europe. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, Robert. 1976. “Agrarian Class Structure and Economic Development in Pre-industrial England.”Past and Present 70: 30–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, Rogers. 1984.The Limits of Rationality: An Essay on the Social and Moral Thought of Max Weber. London, Boston: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, Michael. 1996. “The State and Economic Involution: Russia through a China Lens.”World Development 24, 6: 1105–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, Michael and Pavel Krotov. 1992. “The Soviet Transition From Socialism to Capitalism: Worker Control and Economic Bargaining.”American Sociological Review 57: 16–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, Michael and Janos Lukacs 1992.The Radiant Past. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, Michael and Katherine Verdery. 1999.Uncertain Transitions: Ethnographies of Change in the Postsocialist World. Boston: Roman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlin, Wendy, John Van Reenen, and Toby Wolfe. 1994.Enterprise Restructuring in the Transition: An Analytical Survey of the Case Study Evidence from Central and Eastern Europe. Working Paper No. 14. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, Randal. 1980. “Weber's Last Theory of Capitalism.”American Sociological Review 45, 6: 925–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Melo, Martha and Alan Gelb. 1996. “A Comparative Analysis of Transition Economies in Europe and Asia.”Post-Soviet Geography and Economics 37, 5: 265–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Melo, Martha, Cevdet Denizer, Alan Gelb, and Stoyan Tenev. 2001. “Circumstances and Choice: The Role of Initial Conditions and Policies in Transition Economies.”The World Bank Economic Review 15, 1: 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domhoff, G. William. 1978.Who Really Rules? New Haven and Community Power Re-Examined. New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1990.The Power Elite and the State. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericson, Richard E. 1991. “The Classical Soviet-Type Economy: Nature of the System and Implications for Reform.”Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 4 (Fall): 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). 1996, 1999, 2001.Transition Report. London: EBRD.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2000.Transition Report Update. London: EBRD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyal, Gil. 2000. “Anti-politics and the Spirit of Capitalism: Dissidents, Monetarists, and the Czech Transition to Capitalism.”Theory and Society 29: 49–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyal, Gil, Ivan Szelenyi, and Eleanor Townsley. 1998.Making Capitalism Without Capitalists. New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 2001. “Neoclassical Sociology: From the End of Communism to the End of Classes.”American Journal of Sociology 106, 4: 1099–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filer, Randall and Jan Hanousek. 2001. “Data Watch: Research Data from Transition Economies.” William Davidson Working Paper 416.

  • Fischer, Stanley and Alan Gelb. 1991. “The Process of Socialist Economic Transformation.”Journal of Economic Perspectives 4: 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, Stanley, Ratna Sahay, and Carlos A. Vegh. 1996. “Stabilization and Growth in Transition Economies: The Early Experience.”Journal of Economic Perspectives 10, 2 (Spring): 45–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frydman, Roman and Andrzej Rapaczynski. 1994.Privatization in Eastern Europe: Is the State Withering Away? Budapest: Central European University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frydman, R., C. Gray, and A. Rapaczynski. 1996.Corporate Governance in Central Europe and Russia. Budapest: CEU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frydman, Roman, Andrzej Rapaczynski, and Joel Turkowitz. 1997. “Transition to a Private Property Regime in the Czech Republic and Hungary.” Pp. 41–102 inEconomies in Transition, eds. Wing Thye Woo, Steven Parker, and Jeffrey D. Sachs.

  • Frye, Timothy and Andrei Shleifer. 1997. “The Invisible Hand and the Grabbing Hand”American Economic Association (Papers and Proceedings) 87, 2: 354–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcelon, Marc. 1997. “The Estate of Change: The Specialist Rebellion and the Democratic Movement in Moscow, 1989–1991.”Theory and Society 26: 39–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greskovits, Bela. 1998.The Political Economy of Protest and Patience. Budapest: CEU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker-Cordon, Casiano. 2001. “Global Injustice and Human Malfare.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University.

  • Hanley, Eric, Natasha Yershova, and Richard Anderson. 1995. “Russia—Old Wine in a New Bottle? The Circulation and Reproduction of Russian Elites, 1983–1993.”Theory and Society 24: 639–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraszti, Miklos. 1977.Workers in a Workers' State. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helf, Gavin and Jeffrey Hahn. 1992. “Old Dogs and New Tricks: Party Elites in the Russian Regional Elections of 1990.”Slavic Review 51, 3: 511–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Simon, Daniel Kaufmann, and Andrei Schleifer. 1997. “The Unofficial Economy in Transition.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (forthcoming).

  • Kennedy, Michael D. 1987. “Polish Engineers' Participation in the Solidarity Movement.”Social Forces 65, 3: 641–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1992. “The Intelligentsia in the Constitution of Civil Societies in Post-Communist Regimes in Hungary and Poland.”Theory and Society 21: 29–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, Lawrence P. 2001a. “Making Markets: A Comparative Study of Postcommunist Managerial Strategies in Central Europe.”Theory and Society 30, 4 (Aug): 494–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 2001b.The Basic Features of Postcommunist Capitalism: Firms in Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. Westport, CT: Praeger Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, Lawrence P. 2001c. “Shock Privatization: Neoliberal Policy and Postocommunist Economic Performance.” Paper presented at the Department of Sociology, Cornell University, February 23.

  • King, Lawrence P. and Ivan Szelenyi. 2001. “The New Capitalism of Eastern Europe: Towards a Comparative Political Economy of Postcommunist Capitalisms.” Paper presented at the conference, “Economic Sociology of Capitalism,” Cornell University, September 28–29.

  • Klebnikov, Paul. 2000.Godfather of the Kremlin. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konrad, George and Ivan Szelenyi. 1979.Intellectuals on the Road to Class Power. New York and London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korbonski, Andrzej. 1999. “East Central Europe on the Eve of the Changeover: The Case of Poland.”Communist and Post-Communist Studies 32: 139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornai, Janos. 1993. “Transformational Recession: A General Phenomenon Examined Through the Example of Hungary's Development. Discussion Paper No. 1, Collegium Budapest/Institute of Advanced Study.

  • Kosolowski, Rey. 1992. “Market Institutions, East European Reform, and Economic Theory.”Journal of Economic Issues 26: 673–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Mark. 1995. “Polish Workers and the Postcommunist Transition.”Europe-Asia Studies. 37, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, Steven and Lucan Way. 1998. “Between a Shock and a Hard Place: The Dynamics of Labor Backed Adjustment in Poland and Argentina.”Comparative Politics 30: 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linz, Juan and Alfred Stepan. 1996.Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, David and Jeffrey Sachs. 1990a. “Creating a Market Economy in Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1: 75–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1990b. “Privatization in Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2: 293–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, Michael. 1986.The Sources of Social Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev Roy. 2000.Post-Soviet Russia. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Barrington. 1966.The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murrell, Peter. 1993. “What is Shock Therapy? What Did it Do in Poland and Russia?”Post-Soviet Affairs 9, 2: 1111–1140.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996. “How Far Has the Transition Progressed?”Journal of Economic Perspectives 10, 2: 25–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naughton, Barry. 1995.Growing out of the Plan: Chinese Economic Reform, 1978–1993 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ost, David. 1990.The Politics of Anti-Politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popov, Vladimir. 2000. “Shock Therapy Versus Gradualism: The End of the Debate (Explaining the Magnitude of Transformational Recession).”Comparative Economic Studies XLII, 1: 1–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996.Poland's Protracted Transition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddaway, Peter and Dmitri Glinski. 2001.The Tragedy of Russia's Reforms: Market Bolshevism Against Democracy. Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, Jeffrey. 1991a. “The Economic Transformation of Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland” (The Frank E. Seidman Distinguished Award in Political Economy acceptance paper). Memphis, TN: P. K. Seidman Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, Jeffrey. 1991b. “Accelerating Privatization in Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland.” World Bank Annual, Conference on development Economics, 25–26 April.

  • —. 1994.Understanding Shock Therapy. London: Social Market Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996.Reforms in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union in Light of the East Asian Experiences. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1997. “The Transition at Mid Decade.”American Economic Review 86, 2: 128–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, Jeffrey and David Lipton. 1992. “Prospects for Russia's Economic Reforms.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2: 213–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, Jeffrey and Andrew Warner. 1996. “Achieving Rapid Growth in the Transition Economies of Central Europe.” Stockholm Institute of East European Economics, Working Paper 116 (November).

  • Schlucter, W. 1989.Rationalism, Religion, and Domination. Berkeley and Los Angeles: The University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selowski, Marcelo and Richard Martin. 1997. “Policy Performance and Output Growth in Transition Economies.”American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings) 87, 2 (May): 349–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shlapentokh, Vladamir. 1990.Soviet Intellectuals and Poltical Power. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Adam. 1976.An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staniskzkis, Jadwiga. 2001. “Post-communism: The Emerging Enigma (The Polish Case as a Warning).” Paper presented at Yale University, Fall.

  • Stark, David. 1992. “Path Dependence and Privatization Strategies in East Central Europe.”East European Politics and Society 6, 1: 15–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996. “Recombinant Property in East European Capitalism.”American Journal of Sociology 101, 4: 993–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stark, David and Laszlo Bruszt. 1998.Postsocialist Pathways: Transforming Politics and Property in East Central Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szelenyi, Ivan. 1978. “Social Inequalities under State Redistributive Economies.”International Journal of Comparative Sociology 1, 61: 87.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1982. “The Intelligentsia in the Class Structure of State-Socialist Societies.”American Journal of Sociology 88 (Supplement): 287–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szelenyi, Ivan and Szonja Szelenyi. 1995. “Circulation or Reproduction of Elites during the Postcommunist Transformation of Eastern Europe.”Theory and Society 24: 615–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szelenyi, Ivan and Balasz Szelenyi. 1995. “Why Socialism Failed.”Theory and Society 23: 211–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Development Program. 1999.Human Development Report for Europe and the CIS. New York: UNDP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorobyov, Alexander and Stanislav Zhukov. 2000. “Russia: Globalization, Structural Shifts and Inequality.”CEPA Working Paper Series I No. 19: 2–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasilewski, Jacek and Edmund Wnuk-Lipinski. 1995. “Poland: Winding Road from the Communist to the Post-Solidarity Elite.”Theory and Society 24: 669–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1978.Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1988.Agrarian Sociology of Ancient Civilizations. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wedel, Janine. 2001.Collision and Collusion. New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Lawrence King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Lawrence King is an assistant professor of sociology at Yale University. His book includeThe Basic Features of Postcommunist Capitalism in Eastern Europe (2001) andAssessing New Class Theory (with Ivan Szelenyi, forthcoming). He is currently working on a book entitledPostcommunist Capitalisms.

I am grateful for a Yale Junior Faculty Research Fellowship, and the support of the Yale Center for Comparative Research, the Social Science Research Fund at Yale, and the Yale Center for International and Area Studies. I would also like to thank Aleksandra Sznajder and Evgenia Gvozdeva for their invaluable research assistance, and Ivan Szelenyi, Andrew Schrank, Hannah Brueckner, Alison Pollet, and the editors and anonymous reviewers atStudies in Comparative International Development for their comments and suggestions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

King, L. Postcommunist divergence: A comparative analysis of the transition to capitalism in Poland and Russia. St Comp Int Dev 37, 3–34 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686229

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686229

Keywords

Search

Navigation