At the end of World War II, the international community became notably divided upon political and economic lines. While many countries in the West chose a capitalist democracy many in the East had chosen communism/Marxism as the central means for social development. Although both of these systems clearly have some merit, capitalism and democracy were able to triumph as communism fell in the early 1990s. With the fall of communism came the realization that the communist economic system would no longer work. As such, formerly communist countries had to officially enter the free market in an effort to rebuild their economies. Even though formerly communist states had shared similar ideals with respect to political and economic development, when it came to entering the free market, each state developed notably different policies for achieving international economic integration. Such is the case with China and Russia.
[...] Although the answer seems quite evident overall, the staunch adherence of the Chinese and Russian governments to the tenets of communism may serve as the basis to prevent this evolution for a number of decades. Thus, the ideological establishment of communism in the context of these countries becomes more evident. Until leaders are able to see beyond these issues, they will be limited in their ability to achieve stable economies. References Breslin, S.G. (1996). China: Developmental state of dysfunctional development. [...]
[...] Karatnycky goes on to note that the paradox of what has occurred in Russia can be easily explicated if one is willing to look beyond the surface and analyze the impact the new policies developed by the government have had on the development of the economy in Russia. According to Karatnycky, the reason why Russia has not seen stunning growth in terms of economic development stems from the fact that the government has not moved toward policies that would allow for the full development of capitalism in the state. [...]
[...] Conclusion When the economic and political policies of both China and Russia are examined on the surface, they appear to demonstrate two notably different approaches toward development. However, when compared, it becomes evident that there are indeed some similarities between both plans. In both China and Russia, former-communists governments have sought to retain the communist model of economic and political development. In China, this process has resulted in the creation of a hybrid state, somewhere between capitalism and communism. In Russia, however, the system that has been created is one that reveals considerable secrecy and deception on the part of the Russian government. [...]
[...] By keeping the social policies of communism in place and allowing for the development of the economy in terms of a capitalist state, the government of China has sought to create a new model of political and economic development; one that appears to be a hybrid between capitalism and communism. Breslin (1996) examines the specific policies undertaken by China in its efforts to advance the economic stability of the state while still adhering to the principles of communist development. According to this author, “This strategy has entailed the gradual dismantling of the instruments of state planning, and their replacement with market mechanisms, in an attempt to increase economic efficiency and productivity” (p. [...]
[...] Adding to the complexity of the issues impacting both Russian and Chinese economic development, Mandelbaum further notes that in the years following the end of the Second World War, both China and Russia became aware that the economies of communist states were struggling to compete in the international economy. leaders of China and the Soviet Union could hardly ignore the fact that the most dynamic economies on the planet were not Communist ones” (p. 5). This realization came sooner in China, as Chairman Mao instituted sweeping economic reforms in the 1970s that were supposed to lead to economic growth. [...]
using our reader.