How Does the Political Corruption Affect the Business Environment in Russian Federation?

Many historians argue The Emancipation of the Serfs in 1861, to be a key turning point within Russian history. It drastically altered Russia’s economic, political and social stipulation. One could propose the argument that this event lead to the fall of communism in 1990, further more suggesting the extent to which this event affected Russia. Hence this is ‘perhaps the most defining moment in Russian history, with its impact being seen many years after the event itself’. Although historians identify short term effects of this event, the significance to which this event

The division of society into bourgeoisie and proletariat in Russian revolution brings conflicts and disputes among the classes .The bourgeoisie annihilated fundamental rights of the

Throughout its long history, Russia has been trapped in a continuous cycle of authoritarian regimes; only interrupted briefly with periods of tumultuous democratic transitions that were plagued by poor bureaucracy and weak institutions. Therefore, time and time again, Russia has turned towards authoritarianism. In the late 1900’s to early 2000’s, Russia again saw the fall of democracy coincide with the rise of a competitive authoritarian regime. This rise of competitive authoritarianism in Russia in the late 1900’s to early 2000’s was largely the result of the resource curse which granted Putin’s Administration false economic performance legitimacy. This in turn reinvigorated past strongman ideals, while at the same time solidified negative

This case portrays the widely propagated and accepted phenomena of bribes and corruption in developing countries. Specifically how it affects every sector of the Ukrainian society, therefore making it difficult for the American investors to establish companies there and to prosper solely on doing good business. The case describes the types of obstacles and ethical dilemmas being created for the investors as a result of bribery and extortion.

Similar to other dictatorships, one of the momentous changes that happened under Stalin was the cultural change that was present in society. Importantly the peasantry ceased to be the national social unit as urbanisation took its effect. Urbanisation occurred due to the use of collective farming in agriculture sector and due to the rapid industrialisation of the cities. As the demand for workers increased many moved to the industrial heartland of the Soviet Union. Under Stalinism both industrial and agricultural industries began to be looked at as sing societal units. Urbanisation changed the way people lived their lives thus adding to the controls that Soviet policy was already introducing.

Vladimir Lenin was important in the development as well as introduction of The New Economic Policy which achieved much. Peasants became satisfied with their ability to gain a small amount of profit from their hard work and harvests. It brought an awaited solution to

Russia was a country rich in raw materials that had been undisturbed by modern extraction and refining techniques until then, however, the majority of the countries resource rich areas were nowhere near any railways, with the bulk of the heavy materials such as steel, iron, coal and copper being in the Urals, almost 1,000km away from the nearest railway system in 1860. Oil, another key ingredient in industrialisation was almost 1,500km away to the south, in the Caucasus area3. This lack of transportation in a period when steam powered machines were producing the goods and steam powered trains were delivering them and leading the industrialisation in other countries like Britain, the USA and a future foe in Germany is an indicator of the distance that Russia was behind its rivals under the leadership of the Tsar. So the Tsar’s Russia was largely an agrarian one, but even in the agricultural sector Russia was lagging far behind the rest of the West in terms of the methods employed by farmers, little fertiliser was used and the labour saving machines used in countries with enormous agricultural output like the US were nowhere near as widespread in Russia. The weaknesses of the Tsar’s management of the agricultural sector were highlighted in 1891 when famine hit. Due to the heavy tax on consumer goods, peasants had been forced to sell more of their

This decree passed all the land, whether it be state, monetary, peasant, church, private, or public, on to those who could cultivate it. As long as one is able to cultivate the land, they were able to maintain possession of the land. This is backed by number 4 of the decree stating “The right to use the land shall be accorded to all citizens (without distinction of sex) desiring to cultivate it by their own labor, with the help of their families, or in partnership, but only as long as they are able to cultivate it.” In the result of disability, a village is able to assist one in the cultivation of their land for up to two years or until they are able to cultivate it again themselves. In the result of old age or permanent disability, one loses their right to the land and also receives a pension from the state. Along with Lenin, Joseph Stalin, the dictator of the USSR from 1929-1953, also highlights the issues he believed were the greatest problems with the “free market” ideologies of capitalism in “The Tasks of Business Executives.” Through this source, Stalin talks of the government that they wish to establish in Russia as “a system which is free of the incurable diseases of capitalism and which is greatly superior to capitalism” (document 79, page 349). Stalin wished to reform the USSR economy because he recognized distinct issues within the free market ideology. He refers to the issues with the free

The Russian state has been characterized by its strong heritage of powerful, autocratic leadership. This domination by small ruling elite has been seen throughout Russia's history and has transferred into its economic history. Throughout the Russian czarist period, to the legacy of seventy years of communism; Russia has been a country marked by strong central state planning, a strict command economy and an overall weak market infrastructure (Goldman, 2003). Self-interest, manipulation and corruption have all been present in the Russian economy, and have greatly helped the few as opposed to the many. To this day, Russia still struggles with creating a competitive and fair market.

Its been estimated that the markets corruption has almost exceeded 260 million in 2006. Russian police institutions are far more centralized than the U.S. police, which could mean that Russians' views of the police are closely associated with their views of other federal government institutions rather than their personal experiences Corruption (Feifer, 2003). Russia corruption started around the 18th century when the government official would perform Kormlenie corruption, which means authority receiving fees, goods, and services from interested areas (Marenin, 1997). Since 1715 accepting a bribe in Russia was considered a crime. Official started to abuse this power and started to receive fixed salaries. At that time Peter the Great had increased so many fixed salaries that irregularity and bribes where out of control especially for official. Even official of lower rank were able to get these fix’s salaries. By 1922 bribery was considered a counter- revolutionary activity was a criminal code punishable by death.

It is reported that entire villages were executed by the Cheka for being even vaguely associated with counter-revolution. Due to the reforms of the Tsars, peasants’ landholdings increased at a slow pace but without violent disturbances, which ensured a steady growth of production and prosperity. This cannot be said about peasant life under the Bolsheviks. Under Bolshevik rule

Corruption has been seen as a major obstacle of rapid economic growth and development. It is a complex phenomenon whose roots lay in political and bureaucratic institutions and affects the economic growth of different countries. It makes the governments intervene where they do not need to, and it weakens the ability of the government to enact and implement policies in areas in which government intervention is needed. Over the years, the dispute of the economic consequences of corruption on economic growth has been a topic of analysis. The analysis is focused on the effect of corruption on economic growth. Several studies have generally found a negative correlation between corruption, economic growth, inequality, governance, income distribution and business environment. At the same time also some positive correlation with economic growth has been found to exist.

The economy was important to keeping control of the country from the living standards of people. Lenin had his “New Economy Policy”to solve their problems. After the World War I, “Agricultural and Industrial production were down from the levels of 1913. Perhaps a third of Russia 's working horses had been diverted towards direct

Oligarchy as it is known in Aristotle’s politics; is a government run by a small group of people, ‘elites’. However, the oligarchy which this essay addresses is currently referred to in Russia as “a very wealthy and politically well-connected businessman...one who is the main owner of a conglomerate of enterprises and has close ties with the president” (Aslund and Dabrowski, 2007; 144). In the 1990s Russia’s economic reforms are said to have created the rise of a small group of oligarchs who gained an overwhelming amount of power and control. By 1997, this small group of previously unknown businessmen and bankers, often with gangster ties, had acquired control of many of the key parts of the Russian economy. Why did they emerge? It is argued by David Satter that three processes facilitated the emergence of the oligarchs. The first was hyperinflation and the social, economic and political consequences. The second was the process of privatisation, and finally the third was criminalisation (Satter, 2003). However, were these powerful oligarchs just a phase during the transition from Soviet to Post-Soviet Russia? Even with Putin’s efforts and declaration to distance the oligarchs from politics and power, and start a war against them exemplified by the Khodorkovsky affair, are oligarchs still significantly powerful in contemporary Russia? What is the role they play in Russia? It seems that the power of those original oligarchs of the 1990s has decreased or been concealed in

Corruption during the 1990’s increased and expanded with the developments of the Russian Mafia. “Many Russians believed that the unbridled pursuit of individual interests during the 1990s gave rise to