THE RELEVANCE OF THE TERM «NATIONAL BOURGEOISIE» FORRESEARCHINGTHE RULING ELITE IN UKRAINE

Keywords: ruling elite, national bourgeoisie, neopatrimonial democracy, oligarchy, corruption, capitalism

Abstract

The article demonstrates the relevance of the concept of «national bourgeoisie» in the context of researching the ruling elite in Ukraine. The main limitations of the current concepts of the Ukrainian ruling elite are an ahistorical approach, and treating it (elite) as an anomaly, pathology.

Particular attention is paid to the criticism of the concepts «neopatrimonial democracy», «oligarchy», «corruption», which constitute the core contents of the current concepts of the ruling elite in Ukraine. The concept of «national bourgeoisie» and the exposition of its evolution in Marxist theory serves as the basis for the criticism. It was determined that neopatrimonialism, and with it oligarchy and corruption, are concepts denoting the power of one faction unfavorable for theother faction of the bourgeoisie. These terms do not refer to any existing norm, alternative, do not imply the opposite, its otherness (democracy, the rule of law, but they are polemical, rhetorical figures in the class struggle. The theoretical content of these concepts acquires scientific meaning only when using the Marxian concept of the bourgeoisie (or the national bourgeoisie in the Marxist tradition), which presupposesthe rule of law insofar as it meets the economic interests of the bourgeoisie, and the state is a concentrated expression of these interests, as well as a foothold in the struggle of different factions of the bourgeoisie among themselves and against the oppressed classes (hence, bourgeois democracy). Power is not conceived outside of capital since capitalists are indirectly or directly related to each other and influence the authorities' decisions. Under the conditions of postcolonialism, or neocolonialism, the national bourgeoisie has resorted to more direct forms of protecting their interests through state, restricting foreign capital in the economy and political power. However, this does not mean the absolute independence of the national bourgeoisie from the transnational bourgeoisie, both in the political and in economic sense.

The study proves the necessity of using the concept of «national bourgeoisie» for researching the ruling elite in Ukraine under capitalism in general, and the intra– and interclass struggle in particular.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

І. В. Ільїн, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 4, Svoboda Sq., Kharkiv, 61022, Ukraine

Assistant professor, PhD in Philosophy.

References

ЛІТЕРАТУРА

Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. 1955. “Манифест коммунистической партии”, Сочинения/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 4. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 419-459.

Ishiyama, J. T., Breuning, M. (Eds.).2011. 21st century political science: a reference handbook (Vol. 1). Sage.

Johnson, A. G., & Bealey, F. 1999. The Blackwell Dictionary of Political Science. A User's Guide to its Terms. Blackwell.

Fatton, R. 1990. “Liberal democracy in Africa”, Political Science Quarterly 105(3): 455-473.

Brites, P. V. P., & Jaeger, B. C. 2019. “Behind the Myth of the National Bourgeoisie: A Comparative Analysis of the Developmentalist State in Brazil and South Korea”, AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations 8(16): 188-214.

Kumar, V. B. 2005. “Postcolonial State: an overview”, The Indian Journal of Political Science 66(4): 935-954.

Guo, Y. 2018. “Bringing politics into class analysis: state power and class formation in post-Mao China”, Australian Journal of Political Science 53(3): 370-384.

Vallejo, D. F. M. 2017. The Threat of Redistribution Under Democracy: Explaining Income Redistribution Based on Intersectoral Relationships of the Elites. The Cases of Honduras and El Salvador. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.

Hermet, G. 1975. “Dictature bourgeoise et modernization conservatrice: problèmes méthodologiques de l'analyse des situations autoritaires”, Revue française de science politique 25(6): 1029-1061.

Havrylyshyn, O. 2017. The Political Economy of Independent Ukraine: Slow Starts, False Starts, and a Last Chance?. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Van Zon, H. 2000. The Political Economy of Independent Ukraine: Captured by the Past. Springer.

Åslund, A. 2009. How Ukraine became a market economy and democracy. Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Пасхавер, О. Й., Верховодова, Л. Т. та Агеєва, К. М. (ред.), 2007. Великий український капітал: взаємовідносини з владою і суспільством. К.: Дух і літера.

Troost, M. 2018. Big Business and Foreign Policy: the Case of Oligarchs in Ukraine. Universiteit Leiden.

Мацієвський, Ю. В. 2010. “Еліти в Україні до і після „помаранчевої революції””, Політичний менеджмент 2:38-55.

Лісничук, О., Сушко, О. 2005. Чи є політико-економічні групи перешкодою для політичного розвитку України? Київ: Фонд ім. Фрідріха Еберта, Регіональне представництво в Україні, Білорусі та Молдові.

Михальченко, М., 2010. “Кланово-олігархічний режим: негативи і позитиви функціонування”, Наукові записки ІПіЕНД ім. І.Ф. Кураса НАН України 49: 83-94.

Avioutskii, V. 2010. “The consolidation of Ukrainian business clans”, Revue international ed'intelligence économique, 2(1): 119-141.

Korzhov, G. О. 2007.“Oligarchy as a Model of Social Organization in Conditions of Post-socialist Transformation”, Вісник Львівського університету. Серія соціологічна 1: 51-63.

Грабіна, Г. В. 2016. “Політична еліта України як уособлення субкультури влади”, Грані 3(131): 55-61.

Щедрова, Г. П. 2017. “Інституціональна дисфункція політичної еліти в Україні”, Збірник наукових праць «Гілея: науковий вісник», Політологія 120: 238-242.

Мачуський, В. 2017. “Політична еліта: визначення стратегічного курсу України на сучасному етапі”, Наукові записки Інституту політичних і етнонаціональних досліджень ім. І.Ф. Кураса НАН України 3(89): 168-182.

World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2019, 2019. International Labour Office. Geneva: ILO.

The Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report, 2018. Credit Suisse. Research Institute. Zurich.

Public good or private wealth? January 2019, 2019. Oxfam. Oxford.

Энгельс, Ф. 1955a. “Конституционный вопрос в Германии”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 4. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 42-60.

Энгельс, Ф. 1955b. “Прусская конституция”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 4. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 30-38.

Маркс, К. 1960a. “Капитал: критика полити-ческой экономии. Том первый”, Сочинения/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 23. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 43-784.

Маркс, К. 1956. “Классовая борьба во Франции с 1848 по 1850 г.”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 7. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 5-110.

Маркс, К. 1957a. “Чартисты”, Сочинения/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 8. М.: Изда-тельство политической литературы: 359-368.

Энгельс, Ф. 1955c. “Празднество наций в Лондоне”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 2. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 587-599.

Маркс, К. 1960b. “Наброски «Гражданской войны во Франции»”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 17. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 497-616.

Маркс, К. 1974. “О книге Ф. Листа «Нацио-нальная система политической экономии»”, Сочинения/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 42. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 228-259.

Маркс, К. 1957b. “Революционное движение”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 6. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 158-160.

Маркс, К. 1957c. “Британское владычество в Индии”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 9. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 130-136.

Маркс, К. 1957d. “Будущие результаты британского владычества в Индии”, Сочинения/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 9. М.: Изда-тельство политической литературы: 224-230.

Маркс, К. 1963. “Теории прибавочной стои-мости (IV том «Капитала»). Часть вторая (главы VIII—XVIII)”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 26. Часть 2. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 3-648.

Маркс, К. 1964. “Теории прибавочной стоимости (IV том «Капитала»). Часть третья (главы XIX—XXIV)”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 26. Часть 3. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 3-568.

Энгельс, Ф. 1956. “Дебаты по польскому вопросу во Франкфурте”, Сочинения/Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Том 5. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 335-388.

Маркс, К. 1960c. “Генеральный совет Феде-ральному совету Романской Швейцарии”, Сочи-не-ния/ Маркс, К., Энгельс, Ф. Изд. 2. Т. 16. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 402-409.

Ленин, В. 1973a. “События на Балканах и в Персии”, Полное собрание сочинений. Изд. 5. Т. 17. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 221-232.

Ленин, В. 1973b. “О праве наций на самооп-ределение”, Полное собрание сочинений. Изд. 5. Т. 25. М.: Издательство политической литера-туры: 255-320.

Ленин, В. 1973c. “Вариант проекта резолюции левых социал-демократов к первой междуна-родной социалистической конференции”, Полное собрание сочинений. Изд. 5. Т. 26. М.: Изда-тельство политической литературы: 383-385.

Ленин, В. 1973d. “О карикатуре на марксизм и об «Империалистическом экономизме»”, Полное собрание сочинений. Изд. 5. Т. 30. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 77-130.

Ленин, В. 1973e. “Империализм, как высшая стадия капитализма”, Полное собрание сочинений. Изд. 5. Т. 27. М.: Издательство политической литературы: 299-426.

Hirsch, J., Wissel, J. 2011. “The Transformation of Contemporary Capitalism and the Concept of a Transnational Capitalist Class: A Critical Review in Neo-Poulantzian Perspective”, Studies in Political Economy 88(1): 7-33.

Zedong, M. 1992. “Inscriptions Written in Harbin February 27 1950”. The Writings of Mao Zedong 1949-1976. Vol. 1. September 1945 - December 1955. Armonk, N.Y. ; London: M.E. Sharpe: 65-70.

Beckman, B.1981. “Imperialism and the ‘national bourgeoisie”, Review of African Political Economy 8(22): 5-19.

Swainson, N. 1977. “The rise of a national bourgeoisie in Kenya”, Review of African Political Economy 4(8): 39-55.

Poulantzas, N. 1976. Classes in Contemporary Capitalism. London: NLB.

Åslund, A. 2007. How Capitalism Was Built: The Transformation of Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia. Cambridge University Press.

Булеев, И. П., Брюховецкая, Н. Е., 2006. “Возможно ли разделение бизнеса и власти в странах с рыночной экономикой?”, Наукові праці ДонНТУ. Серія: економічна 103(1): 58-64.

Gottfried, S. 2019. Contemporary Oligarchies in Developed Democracies. Springer.

Formisano, R. 2017. American Oligarchy: The Permanent Political Class. University of Illinois press.

Laurens, S. 2017. Lobbyists and bureaucrats in Brussels: Capitalism’s brokers. Routledge.

Sekkat, K. 2018. Is corruption curable?. Palgrave Macmillan.

Кукурудза, I. 2017. “Соціальне партнерство держави, бізнесу та населення в Україні: стан і перспективи”, Вісник Черкаського університету, 2: 16-27.

Фісун, О. А. 2011. “Українська неопатримо-ніальна демократія: формування, специфіка та тенденції розвитку”, Вісник Харківського націо-нального університету імені В.Н. Каразіна. Серія: Питання політології 19: 45-51.

DeGrassi, A. 2008. ““Neopatrimonialism” and agricultural development in Africa: contributions and limitations of a contested concept”, African Studies Review 51(3): 107-133.

Pitcher, A., Moran, M. H., Johnston, M. 2009. “Rethinking patrimonialism and neopatrimonialism in Africa”, African Studies Review 52(1): 125-156.

Theobald, R. 1999. “So what really is the problem about corruption?”, Third World Quarterly20(3): 491-502.

Kravchuk, R. 2002. Ukrainian political economy: The first ten years. Palgrave Macmillan.

Nissinen, M. 1998. Latvia's transition to a market economy: political determinants of economic reform policy. Springer.

Bohle, D. and Greskovits, B. 2007. “Neoliberalism, embedded neoliberalism and neocorporatism: Towards transnational capitalism in Central-Eastern Europe”, West European Politics 30(3): 443-466.

Yurchenko, Y. 2012. ““Black Holes” in the Politi-cal Economy of Ukraine: The Neoliberalization of Europe’s “Wild East”, Debatte: Journal of Contem-porary Central and Eastern Europe 20(2-3): 125-149.

REFERENCES

Marx, K., Engels, F. 1955. “Manifesto for Communist Party”, Sochineniya / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 4. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 419-459 (in Russian).

Ishiyama, J. T., Breuning, M. (Eds.). 2011. 21st century political science: a reference handbook (Vol. 1). Sage.

Johnson, A. G., &Bealey, F. 1999. The Blackwell Dictionary of Political Science. A User's Guide to its Terms. Blackwell.

Fatton, R. 1990. “Liberal democracy in Africa”, Political Science Quarterly 105(3): 455-473.

Brites, P. V. P., & Jaeger, B. C. 2019. “Behind the Myth of the National Bourgeoisie: A Comparative Analysis of the Developmentalist State in Brazil and South Korea”, AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations 8(16): 188-214.

Kumar, V. B. 2005. “Postcolonial State: an overview”, The Indian Journal of Political Science 66(4): 935-954.

Guo, Y. 2018. “Bringing politics into class analysis: state power and class formation in post-Mao China”, Australian Journal of Political Science 53(3): 370-384.

Vallejo, D. F. M. 2017. The Threat of Redistribution Under Democracy: Explaining Income Redistribution Based on Intersectoral Relationships of the Elites. The Cases of Honduras and El Salvador. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.

Hermet, G. 1975. “Dictature bourgeoise et moder-nization conservatrice: problèmes méthodologiques de l'analyse des situations autoritaires”, Revue française de science politique 25(6): 1029-1061.

Havrylyshyn, O. 2017. The Political Economy of Independent Ukraine: Slow Starts, False Starts, and a Last Chance?. London: Palgrave MacMillan.

Van Zon, H. 2000. The Political Economy of Independent Ukraine: Captured by the Past. Springer.

Åslund, A. 2009. How Ukraine became a market economy and democracy. Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Paskhaver, O. Y., Verkhovodova, L. T. and Ageev, K. M. (Eds.), 2007. Big Ukrainian capital: relations with the authorities and society. K.: Dukh i litera (in Ukrainian).

Troost, M. 2018. Big Business and Foreign Policy: the Case of Oligarchs in Ukraine. Universiteit Leiden.

Matsievskiy, Yu. V. 2010. “Elites in Ukraine before and after the Orange Revolution”, Political Management 2: 38-55 (in Ukrainian).

Lisnichuk, O., Sushko, O. 2005. Whether political and economic groups are an obstacle for the political development of Ukraine?. Kyiv: Fond im. Fridrikha Eberta, Regional`ne predstavnicztvo v Ukrayini, Bilorusi ta Moldovia (in Ukrainian).

Mikhalchenko, M., 2010. “Clan-oligarchic regime: negatives and positives of functioning”, Scientific notes (I.F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine) 49: 83-94 (in Ukrainian).

Avioutskii, V. 2010. “The consolidation of Ukrainian business clans”, Revue internationaled' intelligenceéconomique 2(1): 119-141.

Korzhov, G. О. 2007.“Oligarchy as a model of social organization in conditions of post-socialist transformation”, Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series: Sociology1: 51-63.

Grabina, G.V. 2016. “Political Ukraine of Ukraine as a Separation of the Subculture of Power”, Grani 3(131): 55-61(in Ukrainian).

Shchedrova, G. P. 2017. “Institutional Dysfunction of the Political Elite in Ukraine”, Hylea: scientific announcer: collection of scientific works, Political Science 120: 238-242 (in Ukrainian).

Machusky, V. 2017.“The Political Elite: Defining Ukraine's Strategic Course at the Current Stage”, Scientific notes (I.F. Kuras Institute of Political and Ethnic Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine) 3(89): 168-182 (in Ukrainian).

World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2019, 2019. International Labour Office. Geneva: ILO.

The Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report, 2018.Credit Suisse. Research Institute. Zurich.

Public good or private wealth?January 2019, 2019.Oxfam. Oxford.

Engels, F. 1955a. “The constitutional question in Germany”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 4. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 42-60 (in Russian).

Engels, F. 1955b. “Prussian Constitution”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Volume 4. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 30-38 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1960a. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Volume One”,Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 23. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 43-784 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1956. “The class struggle in France from 1848 to 1850”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol.7. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 5-110 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1957a. “Chartists”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 8. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 359-368 (in Russian).

Engels, F. 1955c. “The Festival of Nations in London”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 2. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 587-599 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1960b. “Outline of the Civil War in France”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 17. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 497-616 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1974. “About F. Liszt's book, The National System of Political Economy”,Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 42. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 228-259 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1957b. “Revolutionary movement”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 6. M.: Izdatel-stvo politicheskoj literatury: 158-160 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1957c. “British Dominion in India”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 9. M.: Izdatel-stvo politicheskoj literatury: 130-136 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1957d. “The Future Results of British Dominion in India,” Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Volume 9. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 224-230 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1963. “Theories of Surplus Value (Vol. IV of Capital). Part Two (Chapters VIII – XVIII)”,Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Volume 26. Part 2. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 3-648 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1964. “Theories of surplus value (Volume IV of Capital). Part Three (Chapters XIX – XXIV)”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 26. Part 3. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 3-568 (in Russian).

Engels, F. 1956. “Debate on the Polish question in Frankfurt”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 5. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 335-388 (in Russian).

Marx, K. 1960c. “General Council to the Federal Council of Romanesque Switzerland”, Works / Marx, K., Engels, F. Ed. 2. Vol. 16. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 402-409 (in Russian).

Lenin, V. 1973a. “Events in the Balkans and in Persia”, Complete Works. Ed. 5. Vol. 17M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 221-232 (in Russian).

Lenin, V. 1973b. “On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”, Complete Works. Ed. 5. Vol. 25. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 255-320 (in Russian).

Lenin, V. 1973c. “Variant of the draft resolution of the Left Social Democrats for the first international socialist conference”, Complete Works. Ed. 5. Vol. 26. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 383-385 (in Russian).

Lenin, V. 1973d. “On the caricature of Marxism and on “Imperialist economism””, Complete Works. Ed. 5. Vol. 30. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 77-130 (in Russian).

Lenin, V. 1973e. “Imperialism, as the Highest Stage of Capitalism”, Complete Works. Ed. 5. Vol. 27. M.: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury: 299-426 (in Russian).

Hirsch, J., Wissel, J. 2011. “The Transformation of Contemporary Capitalism and the Concept of a Transnational Capitalist Class: A Critical Review in Neo-Poulantzian Perspective”, Studies in Political Economy 88(1): 7-33.

Zedong, M. 1992. “Inscriptions Written in Harbin February 27 1950”.The Writings of Mao Zedong 1949-1976. Vol. 1. September 1945 - December 1955. Armonk, N.Y. ; London: M.E. Sharpe: 65-70.

Beckman, B.1981. “Imperialism and the ‘national bourgeoisie”, Review of African Political Economy 8(22): 5-19.

Swainson, N. 1977. “The rise of a national bourgeoisiein Kenya”, Review of African Political Economy 4(8):39-55.

Poulantzas, N. 1976. Classes in Contemporary Capitalism. London: NLB.

Åslund, A. 2007. How Capitalism Was Built: The Transformation of Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia. Cambridge University Press.

Buleev, I.P., Bryukhovetskaya, N. E., 2006. “Is it possible to separate business and power in countries with market economies?”, Scientific Papers of State Higher Educational Institution “Donetsk National Technical University” 103(1): 58-64(in Ukrainian).

Gottfried, S. 2019. Contemporary Oligarchies in Developed Democracies.Springer.

Formisano, R. 2017. American Oligarchy: The Permanent Political Class. University of Illinois press.

Laurens, S. 2017. Lobbyists and bureaucrats in Brussels: Capitalism’s brokers. Routledge.

Sekkat, K. 2018. Is corruption curable?. Palgrave Macmillan.

Kukurudza, I. 2017. “Socialpartnershipofthestate, businessandpopulationinUkraine: conditions and pros-pects”, Bulletin of the Cherkasy Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University. Economic Sciences, 2: 16-27.

Fisun, O. A. 2011. “Ukrainian Neopatrimonial Democracy: Formulation, Specificity and Trends of Development”, The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: “Issues of Political Science” 19: 45-51 (in Ukrainian).

De Grassi, A. 2008. ““Neopatrimonialism” and agricultural development in Africa: contributions and limitations of a contested concept”, African Studies Review 51(3): 107-133.

Pitcher, A., Moran, M. H., Johnston, M. 2009. “Rethinking patrimonialism and neopatrimonialism in Africa”, African Studies Review 52(1): 125-156.

Theobald, R. 1999. “So what really is the problem about corruption?”, Third World Quarterly20(3): 491-502.

Kravchuk, R. 2002. Ukrainian political economy: The first ten years. Palgrave Macmillan.

Nissinen, M. 1998. Latvia's transition to a market economy: political determinants of economic reform policy. Springer.

Bohle, D. and Greskovits, B. 2007. “Neoliberalism, embedded neoliberalism and neocorporatism: Towards transnational capitalism in Central-Eastern Europe”, West European Politics 30(3): 443-466.

Yurchenko, Y. 2012. ““Black Holes” in the Politi-cal Economy of Ukraine: The Neoliberalization of Europe’s “Wild East”, Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe 20(2-3): 125-149.

Published
2020-07-07
How to Cite
Ільїн, І. В. (2020). THE RELEVANCE OF THE TERM «NATIONAL BOURGEOISIE» FORRESEARCHINGTHE RULING ELITE IN UKRAINE. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Issues of Political Science, 37, 76-87. https://doi.org/10.26565/2220-8089-2020-37-11
Section
PUBLIC POLICY AND POLITICAL COMMUNICATIONS