October 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad

« Review of Austrian Economics 24 (1) Now Available | Main | Why Are The Big Questions In Development Being Avoided? »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Pete,

It does depend upon the historical circumstances.

For example, when I was traveling in the former Soviet Union doing consulting work on privatization and market reform in Lithuania, I often asked what might be done with those who had worked for the Soviet regime when the country was, again, independent?

There were many who wanted to hold the "collaborators" and "informers" accountable for their actions. But many told me that at least 25 percent of the population of Lithuania had been "compromised" as active participants with the masters in Moscow, or as paid or blackmailed informers, many of whom had gained various perks and benefits as a result.

But the general consensus was that the Soviet period, in general, had to be put aside as a closed chapter in the history of the country. Otherwise, it would tear the society apart in any post-Soviet era of independence and democracy.

Thus, virtually all those who had used, gained, or benefited from the Soviet form of "plunder" were left alone.


The cost of "justice" would have been too high a price in terms of society reconstruction and stability.

Richard Ebeling

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Books