Abstract
It is not difficult to foresee that the article published below will produce a reaction close to shock in many readers, so sharp will be the dissonance it will sound even in today's cacophony of political thought. We foresee the perplexed rejoinders as well: Is it fitting for a democratically oriented journal to publish material to which today no one—neither the adepts of the administrative and planned economy, nor the champions of the philosophy of statism (the unconditional subordination of the individual to state interests) or of the idea of Russia's special historical path, its exclusivity—would risk affixing his signature without the greatest of reservations? Must we subject our still not solidified belief in the correctness of the choice of a market or a parliamentary model of a socioeconomic system to some superfluous trial?