Bevezetés a Központosítás és piaci reform című kötethez = Introduction to the volume Centralization and Market Reform

Az alábbi írás Kornai János életműsorozata közeljövőben megjelenő harmadik kötetének bevezetője alapján készült. (A sorozat első kötete, A hiány és második kötete, A szocialista rendszer 2012-ben jelent meg.) Ritkán fordul elő, hogy életművét rendszerezve, egy szerző maga veszi tételesen sorra írásait, tárja fel az írások megszületésének körülményeit, és elemzi őket több évtized távlatából. Kornai János életműsorozatának összeállításakor erre a rendkívüli feladatra vállalkozott. A kötetben megjelenő 22 íráshoz fűzött gondolatainak közlésekor mai szemmel veszi górcső alá az egy kivételével a rendszerváltás előtt írt cikkeit, valamint 1956-ban írott első könyvét, A túlzott központosítást. Az írásokat rendszerező bevezető a központosításra és a piaci reformra összpontosítja a figyelmet - e témakörről bebizonyosodott, hogy korai még csupán a közgazdaságtani elmélettörténet fejezeteként számon tartani. A kötetben megjelenő írások egy része közvetlenül kapcsolódik a magyar gazdaság tapasztalataihoz, másik része pedig elméleti jellegű. Ennek megfelelően az itt közölt bevezetés is foglalkozik mind a magyar gazdaságtörténet máig is figyelemre méltó és tanulságos gyakorlati problémáival, mind pedig a szocializmust és a kapitalizmust, a centralizált és decentralizált formákat összehasonlító általános elméletekkel. ______ This piece forms the introduction to the forthcoming third volume of János Kor-nai s life s work series reissued in Hungarian. (The first and second volumes, Economics of Shortage and The Political Economy of the Socialist System, ap-peared in 2012.) It is rare for an author to arrange his own life s work, taking his writings item by item, presenting the circumstances in which they arose, and ana-lysing them decades later. His thoughts on the twenty-two writings in the volume, at the time of republication, involve scrutinizing with present-day eyes articles written, with one exception, before the change of system, along with his first book, Overcentralization, written in 1956. The introduction that systematizes these fo-cuses on centralization and on market reform - events show it is still too soon to see these subjects simply as a chapter in the theoretical history of economics. Some of the articles draw directly on experiences with the Hungarian economy, while others have a theoretical nature. So the introduction also deals both with practical problems of Hungarian economic history that remain notable and instructive, and with comparative general theories of socialism and capitalism and centralized and decentralized forms.

Hungary's U-Turn

For two decades Hungary, like the other Eastern European countries, followed a general policy of establishing and strengthening the institutions of democracy, rule of law, and a market economy based on private property. However, since the elections of 2010, when Viktor Orbán's Fidesz party came to power, Hungary has made a dramatic U-turn. This article investigates the different spheres of society: political institutions, the rule of law, and the influence of state and market on one another, as well as the world of ideology (education, science and art), and describes the U-turn’s implications for these fields and the effect it has on the life of people. It argues against the frequent misunderstandings in the interpretation and evaluation of the Hungarian situation, pointing out some typical intellectual fallacies. It draws attention to the dangers of strengthening nationalism, and to the ambivalence evident in Hungarian foreign policy, and looks into the relationship between Hungary and the Western world, particularly the European Union. Finally, it outlines the possible scenarios resulting from future developments in the Hungarian situation.

Hungary's U-Turn

For two decades Hungary, like the other Eastern European countries, followed a general policy of establishing and strengthening the institutions of democracy, rule of law, and a market economy based on private property. However, since the elections of 2010, when Viktor Orbán's Fidesz party came to power, Hungary has made a dramatic U-turn. This article investigates the different spheres of society: political institutions, the rule of law, and the influence of state and market on one another, as well as the world of ideology (education, science and art), and describes the U-turn's implications for these fields and the effect it has on the life of people. It argues against the frequent misunderstandings in the interpretation and evaluation of the Hungarian situation, pointing out some typical intellectual fallacies. It draws attention to the dangers of strengthening nationalism, and to the ambivalence evident in Hungarian foreign policy, and looks into the relationship between Hungary and the Western world, particularly the European Union. Finally, it outlines the possible scenarios resulting from future developments in the Hungarian situation.

Hungary's U-Turn

For two decades Hungary, like the other Eastern European countries, followed a general policy of establishing and strengthening the institutions of democracy, rule of law, and a market economy based on private property. However, since the elections of 2010, when Viktor Orbán's Fidesz party came to power, Hungary has made a dramatic U-turn. This article investigates the different spheres of society: political institutions, the rule of law, and the influence of state and market on one another, as well as the world of ideology (education, science and art), and describes the U-turn’s implications for these fields and the effect it has on the life of people. It argues against the frequent misunderstandings in the interpretation and evaluation of the Hungarian situation, pointing out some typical intellectual fallacies. It draws attention to the dangers of strengthening nationalism, and to the ambivalence evident in Hungarian foreign policy, and looks into the relationship between Hungary and the Western world, particularly the European Union. Finally, it outlines the possible scenarios resulting from future developments in the Hungarian situation.

China's Involvement in the Hungarian Revolution, October-November 1956

The 1956 crises in the Soviet Bloc states, and the Hungarian October events in particular, had a profound impact on China's international and domestic policies. The Chinese Communist Party leadership – party chairman Mao Zedong in particular – had by the end of mid-1950s begun to conceive of "a great Chinese revolution," which would largely take the form of large-scale industrial modernization. At the same time, China's awareness that it could develop into a leading player in the international socialist camp led Mao and his colleagues to actively intervene on the East European scene, posing an implicit challenge to the Soviet dominance in the bloc. The apparent desire of the Hungarian and Polish people to break free from Stalinist socialism, and the real risk, as Mao saw it, of the bloc foundering, convinced the Chinese Party that only reforming institutional socialism and revising the Stalinist pattern of inter-state relations could keep the camp intact.