К вопросу о целях,задачах и методологическом аппарате экономики и юриспруденции
The article is devoted to the analysis of goals, objectives and methodological apparatus of economics and law. The paper notes that, despite the mismatch of tasks and the difference in the methodological apparatus, economics and jurisprudence are complementary scientific knowledge. The importance of economic analysis in the study of the effectiveness of law is indicated. The author summarizes the conclusions and judgments in the study area.
This book directly confronts uncomfortable questions that many prefer to brush aside: if economists and other scholars, politicians, and business professionals understand the causes of economic crises, as they claim, then why do such damaging crises continue to occur? Can we trust business and intellectual elites who advocate the principles of Realpolitik and claim the "public good" as their priority, yet consistently favor maximization of profit over ethical issues?
Former deputy prime minister of Russia Grigory Yavlinsky, an internationally respected free-market economist, makes a powerful case that the often-cited causes of global economic instability—institutional failings, wrong decisions by regulators, insufficient or incorrect information, and the like—are only secondary to a far more significant underlying cause: the failure to understand that universal social norms are essential to thriving businesses and social and economic progress. Yavlinsky explores the widespread disregard for moral values in business decisions and calls for restoration of principled behavior in politics and economic practices. The unwelcome alternative, he warns, will be a twenty-first-century global economy in the grip of unending crises.
Grigory Yavlinsky is a Russian economist and founder and member of the Russian United Democratic Party (YABLOKO). As deputy prime minister of Russia in 1990, he wrote the first Russian economic program for transition to a free-market economy, 500 Days. He lives in Moscow.
“Grigory Yavlinsky’s book is an important contribution to understanding the interplay between social norms and modern economy. The current global crisis makes his analysis especially relevant.”—George Soros
“Reading Grigory Yavlinsky's remarkable book, I was reminded of Adam Smith, also a moral philosopher concerned with the correlation between individual aspirations and the enlightened evolution of society. It is invaluable to have the perspective of an intellectual such as Yavlinsky writing in the shadow of swiftly moving events on the global stage. He explains how market mechanisms influence international developments ranging from instability in European markets to the recent ‘Great Recession’ in the United States.”—Vartan Gregorian, President, Carnegie Corporation of New York
“Yavlinsky provides a new and in-depth interpretation of the events leading to the current recession and broader interpretations of how to avoid future ones. Realeconomik has my enthusiastic endorsement.”—Michael D. Intriligator, University of California, Los Angeles
“With clarity and eloquence, Yavlinsky argues that the deepest cause of the global recession was the erosion of the world economy’s moral dimensions. As a professional economist who has long been a leader of the Russian opposition, he knows how to splice politics and economics. As a politician who has repeatedly declined high office on grounds of principle, he lends the book additional authority. Realeconomik is a work that will, I believe, help to spark a public debate on issues of profound importance for humankind.”—Peter Reddaway, George Washington University
Arguing about the juridical nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, taken in particular constitutional review, the author of this article concludes that the acts in question constitute a normative interpretation case law, equal in their legal power to forceverifiable the rules and have in some cases retroactive.
The article concentrates on Chicherin, a Russian philosopher and lawyer, and his views on the correlation between liberty, law and morality. The author comments on Chicherin's ideas in the context of other views existing at the turn of the 19th and the 20th centuries. These are the views of such representatives of the Russian socially political, legal and philosophical ideas as Kavelin, Novgorodtsev, Struve, Alekseev and others, including modern researchers. Special reference is maid to Chicherin and Solovyov's polemics, which is important step in the history of Russian philosophy. Pointing out a constant connection between law and morality, that often complement each other on the basis of common values, Chicherin strongly insisted on differentiating between these notions. He was sure that the only way to a moral ideal was freedom, not an outward compulsion. And our past historical experience is the best confirmation of this idea. The work also focuses on the fact that the peculiarity of Russian law philosophy is its concentration on the questions of morality and law, the attempt of becoming closer to a moral ideal.
The economic crisis has revealed three particularly vulnerable development in Russia in the last decade: a growing resource of expertise, aging equipment and the lag in scientific and technological progress, institutional obstacles to the growth of the market economy. The article discusses the components of economic growth. How quickly evolving new economy and whether overcome monocultural specialization of the country? How to make this growth sustainable and irreversible, everything been done to enhance scientific and technological potential of the Russian Federation, that these arguments comes from the myths that Russia - the best country in the world, and that reflects the actual trends that and that helps prevent the escalation of Russia from the industrial society to a post-industrial society.
The article examines the role of an abstract interpretation of acts of the highest courts in the context of the unity of judicial enforcement, due to the need to implement the constitutional prohibition of discrimination enshrined in the administration of justice. Arguing about the validity of acts of abstract interpretation, the author concludes that their binding may be deemed constitutionally justified only if the current system of legal regulation in the mechanism of denial of constitutional jurisdiction.