Azerbaijan: moral aspects of the socialized market economy and neo-conservatism

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

УДК 101.1:316

Azerbaijan: moral aspects of the socialized market economy and neo-conservatism

PhD student in Baku State University (Azerbaijan, Baku), matlabm@yandex.com

Annotation

soviet civilization azerbaijan

Keywords: neo-conservatism, liberalism, transnational corporations, international law, the state's liability.

Анотація

Мамедов Х. М., дисертант, Бакинський державний університет (Азербайджан, Баку), matlabm@yandex.com

Азербайджан: моральні аспекти соціалізованої ринкової економіки та неоконсерватизму

Падіння радянської цивілізації та інтеграція в нову духовно--економічну систему ставить перед Азербайджаном деякі невідкладні завдання. Ми перебуваємо як перед моральним, так і перед економічним вибором -- як визначити вектор майбутнього розвитку? Дана стаття в певному сенсі є спробою пошуку відповіді на зазначене питання. При цьому ми, йдучи від однобокого трактування процесів, виступили з позицій неоконсервативної моделі розвитку, що спирається на синтез передового і оптимального досвіду людства. У статті ми намагалися дати неоконсерватиське трактування Азербайджанської моделі розвитку з урахуванням порівняльного аналізу конкретного досвіду деяких країн.

Ключові слова: неоконсерватизм, лібералізм, транснаціональні корпорації, міжнародне право, державна відповідальність.

Мамедов Х. М., диссертант, Бакинский государственный университет (Азербайджан, Баку), matlabm@yandex.com

Азербайджан: нравственные аспекты социализированной рыночной экономики и неоконсерватизма

Падение советской цивилизации и интеграция в новую духовноэкономическую систему ставит перед Азербайджаном некоторые неотложные задачи. Мы пребываем как перед моральным, так и перед экономическим выбором - как определить вектор будущего развития? Данная статья в определенном смысле является попыткой поиска ответа на означенный вопрос. При этом мы, уходя от однобокой трактовки процессов, выступили с позиций неоконсервативной модели развития, опирающейся на синтез передового и оптимального опыта человечества. В статье мы старались дать неоконсерватистскую трактовку Азербайджанской модели развития с учетом сравнительного анализа конкретного опыта некоторых стран.

Ключевые слова: неоконсерватизм, либерализм, транснациональные корпорации, международное право, государственная ответственность.

Having left behind a few ten years spent on searches we are moving towards the new horizons of development. Azerbaijan society have been living for several decades the transition period from one civilization to another socioeconomic formation, the period of transformation from one system to another system which is based on completely different moral values. And this, in the first place brings up the question of the future development model of the country. It is quite natural that if 15-20 years ago the model of market economy of the West was accepted in the society unequivocally and without public criticism, now the specific development model of Azerbaijan is sounded by fairly reliable sources. The gaps of the western model of development clearly manifested itself in all, particularly, after the continuous outbreak of the crisis in Western countries, and consistently, a series of questions connected with the future development of our country have arisen which are necessary to be answered.

Both the head of the state and also other high-ranking officials have repeatedly stated to the public that there is an

Azerbaijan model of development, and this model is guided by the country's national interests. In this regard, Ramiz Mehdiyev's book “Azerbaijan model of development” can be considered as a program document [1]. At this point, it should be noted that at the presentation of the mentioned book head of the socio-political department of Presidential Administration Ali Hasanov rightly said: “The national leader Heydar Aliyev laid down the foundations of the development model. The growth of the state does not base only on economy. Economy is the basis for it. I believe that separate educational institutions, scholars will continue to debate the mentioned issues. The main point is that will of the Azerbaijan state is clear” [15].

In this regard, our researches are the continuation of discussions on the Azerbaijan model of development. And the key role of it is the concept “neo-conservatism”. What is neo-conservatism, which economic and moral principles this ideological-political trend is based on, what are the common and different features of liberalism and neoconservatism, what are the common and different features in their views on the issues as economic development and morality?

Head of the Presidential Administration Ramiz Mehdiyev answers these questions so: “As a modern ideological trend neo-conservatism offers social stability based on moral priorities of family and religion in the society, mutual moral responsibility and support between the citizens and the state, respect for rights and firm state discipline. According to this doctrine, the state should try to preserve the integrity of society, observing the legality and the rule of law to ensure adequate living conditions for individuals and to the development of civil society organizations. Neo-conservatism does not mean that such concepts as personal freedoms, human rights, freedom for economic and political democracy, the right of peoples to preserve their culture and social rights of disabled members of society are extraneous issues. It is known that neoconservatism accept the universality of these concepts and in this regard mixing with liberalism and socialism it creates the ideological harmony.

The difference of neo-conservator from the liberal is that if the first recognize the importance of traditional values for the social development, while the other ignores them or, at best, attaches a second-rate importance. If it is time for the reforms and it can help to strengthen supports of society, being a party to them neo-conservatism without longing for the past completely refuses from it, and based on the best traditions of the past becomes the ideology of radical reforms. This ideology maintains continuity of social development [2, p. 23].

It has been repeatedly stated in the official level that Azerbaijan is the country of market economy, and these principles will continue to function definitely, but it does not mean at all that we have to live with the morals and ethics of the market. On the contrary, it has been identified as the main target for the state government is to build umbrella of social maintenance to secure the citizens from the risks of economic relations of the market [13].

It is not just the social and economic issue, but it is rather the issue of morality. Since one of the main categories of morality is the category of justice, and it is so important matter that Aristotle emphasized it as a key feature that concentrate all the qualities in it. He wrote: “Justice incorporates all of the qualities in it” [14, p. 130].

But what is justice and its meaning at the time of Aristotle and currently is so different; this is a subject of separate issue. It should be noted in short that Aristotle characterized the concept of justice as an activity within the framework of the law. However, we should know that laws are not always fair, and while saying the law we also attribute the laws of overall development of society here. Therefore, there is no common and a single prescription or formula of the market economy for all countries. Each country chooses a model of its historical development in accordance with the peculiarities of own historical and national development, just in accordance with its local conditions, and these issues are increasingly becoming a problem of to-day [16]. In this respect neo-conservatist approach makes comparative analysis of various development models necessary, and only then we can advance the more specific considerations of Azerbaijani model of development.

Let us start analysis specifically, on the Norway model [10]. First of all, such a question arises, if the development of Norway is associated with capitalism, then, if it is right to say so, why until the 70s Norway dragged behind and remained behind the Soviet Azerbaijan for all social indicators? For example, Azerbaijan SSR got fairly ahead of Norway in the number of university graduates, as well as physicians and hospitals per hundred thousand people. So, the reason for Norway's wealth is neither capitalism nor social democracy, and what is then? How did it happen, a country known until the 70s for the poor fisherman huts is cited everyone as an example today? The reason can be summed up in a sentence; a very vast area, but very few people, no wars during the 200 years, peaceful life without any destruction and the huge oil and gas reserves. Though Norway's territory is 5 times larger than Azerbaijan, the population of Norway is 2 times less and the increase of population is almost zero. Pay attention, Norway's population was 4 million 106 thousand people in 1982, and 33 years passed away and the number of people recently reached to 5 million - and this is at the expense of the workforce imported from abroad [3]. Incidentally, a question arises here, surprisingly, why in the country promoted as a “paradise on earth” where the state opens a bank account on behalf of every newborn child and allocates 20,000 US dollars in local currency, and reserves work place of a woman for three years when she is pregnant and waits for a child; she gets her full salary for the first year and getting half of the salary for the second year she sits at home, women are not so interested in giving birth to a child? Logical deduction of it must be the opposite. It appears that the “Norwegian paradise” is rather exaggerated. First of all, this country is the “leader” in the world for high cost of living and heavy taxes. And the 20 thousand dollars allocated for personal account of newborn child is the equal to only one year's public services. Therefore, they do not want to be enticed with these privileges and to load up themselves with additional social problems and to have children. However, natural population growth in the Soviet time, in contrast to Norway was too high. Owing to it, a republic having 3 million of population that lost roughly half a million young men in World War II today has roughly 10 million people in the country. If not the war (1991-1996 years) and the sharp economic decay, the population of Azerbaijan would have been equal to 12 million. Moreover, if in the Soviet era Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic produced on the average 13-14 million tons of oil per year, Norway produces 100-150 million tons of oil, and also it should be taken into account, that it has almost 2 times less population than we [3]. Besides, if in the Soviet era in the best case, Azerbaijan SSR produced 7-10 billion cubic meters of gas per year, while Norway sells on the average 100 billion cubic meters of gas per year.

As the natural gas produced in Azerbaijan was not enough to meet the domestic demand and we bought every year 10 billion cubic meters of gas from Russia and Iran, Norway, on the contrary, sells 100 billion cubic meters of gas and now is the biggest country of the Europe and the second country after Russia for gas exportation [3]. In such an imbalance situation the Soviet Azerbaijan provides its population with free of charge housing, health care, state pension, education, employment and until the school age all the children are provided with child benefit every month, with social security through paying only symbolic amounts - limited with 80-90 kopecks for public utilities. At the Soviet time, children did not pay for urban transport. The list of this kind of benefits can be extended, but we noted only the most important. There are no even a half of these guarantees in Norway. In other words, none of these social rights and privileges of the people in Soviet socialism was not related to the oil factor, the fair laws and distribution system of socialist regime secured us with high social security. After the restoration of capitalism the population was fully or partially deprived from all these rights and privileges. Now they try to form such a public opinion in the society that the most successful development model for Azerbaijan is the Norwegian model. Is it true that Azerbaijan, guided by a certain country's model of development should completely give up its earlier traditions of development? Since the neo-conservatist approach accepts the relationship of inheritance in the development one might think such a radical approach cannot be so true. First of all, the standard of living in Norway is seen high just compared to our present state, and secondly, even in this case we do not have a chance to be as Norway. Simply, because we do not have such a potential that will reduce the number of population 2 times, and to increase the oil and gas production to 100 or 150 million tons or the production of gas to 100 billion cubic meters and we do not have such a luxury to be exempted from the military expenses like Norway. We live in such a region that like it or not the war is always over our heads as a sword of Damocles. According to official predictions in the best case, Azerbaijan can increase the production of gas up to 40 billion cubic meters per year, but oil production is declining, every year 170 thousand children are born in the country, but in Norway this figure is not more than 30 thousand [3].

Well, what to do? The only way for solution of social problems is the neo-concervatist approach, which considers the application of the best, most advanced features of the socialist and market economy models and the successful synthesis in it [1].

If we consider the international or local experience or a comparative analysis of both experiences a truth will be as clear as a day that capitalism is not interested in creating working places. Even 160 years ago, the founder of scientific communism, Karl Marx wrote that the war industry “has such a feature that the battles are won by reducing the working army than by increasing it. Generals- capitalists are competing with each other in dismissing more industrial soldiers” [4, p. 182].

Over 160 years have passed since these words, and this time we read the same thoughts from modern American sociologist Michael Parenti. Parenti writes: “It should be admitted that many actions of the corporations are focused on the elimination of working places. A quarter of the world's output is produced by 200 biggest corporations, but only less than 0,01% percent of the labor force of the earth population is used in this” [5]. Naturally, we can say the same ideas for the 500 biggest transnational monopolies that are controlling 70% of global trade. Only a few percent of the planet's population work in these 500 corporations that control 70% of planet trade. Parenti writes: “As many workers dismissed by the company today Wall Street loves it so much and the price of the shares is growing continuously.

A capitalist tries to increase income by reducing the number of employees, accelerating the rhythm of work (reduce in the number of employees forces workers to work speedy and hard), changing classification (in order to reduce the workers' wage he changes the category of work), applying the part-time working hours to employees (parttime working hours, part-time working week) and involving contractor workers (to give employment without benefits for length of service and compensation)”. Even during the crises such capitalists are getting sufficient profits. Basing on the experience of the United States Parenti writes: “Even during economic recession the rich grab larger pieces and enrich themselves. Thus, revenues of corporations during the recession in 1992 reached a record level. In addition to reducing wages and other payments the companies at the same time, exploited workers to the maximum extent... The economic recession is not incurable disaster for big capitalists. During the economic recession, they do away with the relatively weak opponents, the trade organization loses its authority and collapses, the strike movement subsides, the increasing number of the additional unemployed workers helps to reduce wages” [5].

Don't these facts said about the US state as one of the examples of the most successful application of the market economy in the world prove that societies based on extremely one sided market fundamentalism fall into the vortex of social problems? Since the wealth and rapid development in the output of the national product does not mean progress. A lot of successful countries in this area can be cited as example that is not strong enough to solve social problems. Liberals consider growth of the Gross Domestic Product in Azerbaijan as insurance from future crises. Can it be seen about 30 time's increase of national product from 2000 to 2013 years as insurance of the country from the crisis indeed? Liberals agreed in reducing dependence of the economy on oil and in the 2 times of increase of the Gross Domestic Products over the next 10 years due to non-oil sector. As if Azerbaijan economy can leave the strip of risk and achieve a sustainable development if this program executed. Liberals, of course, are wrong in their predictions, and they forget the elemental fact that the increase of national product in capitalism serves to a decline rather than to the development. By the increase of domestic product in capitalism grow the risks of crisis so much. For example, let us consider the example of Greece. The economy of Greece depend neither on the oil factor nor the minerals, that is the Greek economy is entirely based on the non-oil sector which our most optimist prognosticators can only imagine it for the next 50 years' Azerbaijan and can envy it. But Greece drags behind today. According to its population in the country today Greece can be considered as the 2025 year's Azerbaijan. As for the volume of the domestic product Greece gets at least 4 times ahead of Azerbaijan. And if all the things go well in 2025 and the 2 times of growth promised by the government is achieved, in the best case, Azerbaijan can produce up to half of the current production of Greece [6]. On the whole, Azerbaijan needs at least 40 years in order to achieve the volume of the national product of Greece. The question arises, if a small country like Greece with its 300 billion $ production is considered today as one of the weakest and virtually insolvent countries, then what can be better for Azerbaijan than to increase its national production from 70 billion $ to 100150 billion $ in the future? [16].

Thus, the development of an Azerbaijan model of market economic system is the undeniable reality. And at this time, the successful application of some features of the former Soviet heritage to the market development model, no doubt, makes necessary to keep some of the advanced features of the past. Ramiz Mehdiyev referring to this nuance writes: “The concept of “conservatism” stir up the sense of fear and panic in most people, as if the concept is perceived as the past. However, as is well known, conservatism is not directed on the radical destruction of relations, but namely on the preservation and revival of traditions” [2, p. 25].

This should consider, first of all, the increase of economic activity and the development of paternalistic model of society that President Ilham Aliyev has repeatedly emphasized in many speeches and stated the locomotive role of the state in the development of economy: “Special attention is paid and will be paid to the development of the industry. The process of establishing industrial parks is going fast. It is intended to create industrial parks in the regions - Ganja, Sumgait and Mingachevir [10]. At the same time, specific industry areas, industrial zones must be created in each town and cities. Since our economy, the industrial potential and the population is growing. More and more new working places must be established. Since there are some countries where the population is decreasing, so, there is not a serious problem for working places. However, we increased to more than 170 thousand people last year [7]. This growth is a very positive case - the manifestation of economic development. But, our economic potential, industrial facilities must conform to it. Therefore, in every city, probably in the surrounding of the towns must be special industrial zones. There, at the state expense of state must be laid infrastructure and communication lines, created opportunities for construction of new establishments in order the entrepreneurs could set up a business for themselves” [9].

This means that the state must play a leading role in industrialization, continue the execution of subsidization program to raise domestic production, which international organizations demand from us the opposite, and they claim that ostensibly this factor leads to unfair competition.

The stagnation or decline of the economy in capitalism is the worst, i.e. the crisis; the economic growth is bad because it leads to the crisis. Capitalist man has to choose between the bad and the worst; there is not good in his choice. You are either in crisis or on the way to the crisis. Today we consider ourselves lucky in comparison with Greece because Greece is in a swamp, while we are still going to this swamp. Therefore, it is not a sensible option, that even though we know the outcome of this hell called capitalism we are still waiting for our turn.

For example, we often hear that only 4% of the population is engaged in agriculture in the USA, or only 10-20% of the total population live in the villages in Sweden, the UK and other countries. This is, first of all, is the indicator of the concentration of agricultural lands in the hands of a handful of major agrarian corporations, and that's to say the indicator of forcing of millions small landowners from the market. For example, if 40 years ago there were 6 million farmer families in the USA, now the number of such farms are less than 2 million. So, 4 million farmers have become insolvent and destroyed over these 40 years. As a result, today in the US, “only 1% of food corporations control over 80% of the food industry assets which is about 90% of the profits. The remaining small family farms are owed to banks and work suffering losses. In this regard, the synthesis of liberalism and neoconservatism as an amplifying ideology completed with real socialist and democratic elements was successful ideological construction for Azerbaijan” [5, p. 24].

Of course, this is not only a purely economic issue, but also and first of all is a matter of morality, and the formation and preservation of sovereign national values [12]. There is no absolute morality, but the historical morality formulated by concrete historical conditions, the current socio-economic policies. Aristotle taught: “None of the merits come naturally, whatever is born does not change under the influence of a habit” [8, p. 323].

This means that morality is a product of society and social life, and the morality of society members is based on the principles which the society, economic and social laws are based on. In this case, the choice of liberalism as a model for the development of our society means that national values will completely succumbed to the wild laws of the market fundamentalism and corporative capitalism. In this regard, the neo-conservativist model which combines and synthesizes the advanced, positive experiences of the socialist and market economy shows itself as a successful model of the mixed system containing the national spiritual values formed by centuries along with the social and economic values of society.

References

1. Mehdiyev R. Inkijafin Azarbaycan modeli. - Baki: Oskar, 2010. - 204 s.

2. Mehdiyev R. XXI asrda milli dovbtfilik. - Baki: “XXI” - Yeni Nojrbr Evi, 2003. - 248 s.

3. http://www.ssb.no/www-open/english

4. Marks K., Engels F. Sefilmij osorbri. - Baki: Azarnajr. - Cild

1. - 656 s.

5. Maykl Parenti. Sefilmijbr u^un demokratiya. - Baki: Qajoglu, 2008. - 512 s.

6. http://www.statistics.gr

7. http://www.stat.gov.az/menu/6/statistical_yearbooks

8. Aristotel. Siyasat. Boyuk etika. - B.: “XXI” - Yeni Nojrbr Evi,

2006. - 432 s.

9. http://president.az/articles/10997

10. “Azarbaycan iqtisadiyyatinin strateji problemlari”. Respublika elmi-praktiki konfransi: 14-15 mart 2002: maruzalarin tezislari / Azarbaycan Dovlat Neft Akademiyasi; elmi katib. M. Oliyev. - B.: [s.n.], 2002. - 547 s.

11. Agayev M. M. Azarbaycan demokratik fikrinda insan konsepsiyasi. - B.: “Nurlan”, 2009. - 208 s.

12. Babayev Xanali. Azarbaycanfiliq, elmi-dini maariffilik, manavi ozunudark numunasi. - B.: Borfali NPM, 2004. - 144 s.

13. Badalov Rahman. Azarbaycanin Avropa sefimi: problemlar, perspektivlar. - B.: “Qanun”, 2010. - 143 s.

14. Aristotel. Nikomaxin etikasi. - Baki: “Qanun”, 2007. - 338 s.

15. http://www.mediaforum.az

16. Раджабов Н. Риски и перспективы, связанные с Азербайджаном в период глобализации // ХХІ век: итоги прошлого и проблемы настоящего. - Пенза, 2010. - №14. - С. 4146.

References

1. Mehdiyev R. inkijafin Azarbaycan modeli. - Baki: Oskar, 2010. - 204 s.

2. Mehdiyev R. ХХІ asrda milli dovlatfilik. - Baki: “ХХІ” - Yeni Najrlar Evi, 2003. - 248 s.

3. http://www.ssb.no/www-open/english

4. Marks K., Engels F. Sefilmij asarlari. - Baki: Azarnajr. - Cild 1. - 656 s.

5. Maykl Parenti. Sefilmijlar ufun demokratiya. - Baki: Qajoglu, 2008. - 512 s.

6. http://www.statistics.gr

7. http://www.stat.gov.az/menu/6/statistical_yearbooks

8. Aristotel. Siyasat. Boyuk etika. - B.: “ХХІ” - Yeni Najrlar Evi, 2006. - 432 s.

9. http://president.az/articles/10997

10. “Azarbaycan iqtisadiyyatinin strateji problemlari”. Respublika elmi-praktiki konfransi: 14-15 mart 2002: maruzalarin tezislari / Azarbaycan Dovlat Neft Akademiyasi; elmi katib. M. Oliyev. - B.: [s.n.], 2002. - 547 s.

11. Agayev M. M. Azarbaycan demokratik fikrinda insan konsepsiyasi. - B.: “Nurlan”, 2009. - 208 s.

12. Babayev Xanali. Azarbaycanfiliq, elmi-dini maariffilik, manavi ozunudark numunasi. - B.: Borfali NPM, 2004. - 144 s.

13. Badalov Rahman. Azarbaycanin Avropa sefimi: problemlar, perspektivlar. - B.: “Qanun”, 2010. - 143 s.

14. Aristotel. Nikomaxin etikasi. - Baki: “Qanun”, 2007. - 338 s.

15. http://www.mediaforum.az

16. Radzhabov N. Riski i perspektivy, svjazannye s Azerbajdzhanom v period globalizacii // ХХІ vek: itogi proshlogo i problemy nastojashhego. - Penza, 2010. - №14. - S. 41-46.

Размещено на Allbest.ru