“华盛顿共识”根据货币主义理论 ,为经济政策规定了一整套标准措施。一开始 ,其目标是基本上实行了市场经济的发展中国家。后来被机械地挪用于后共产主义国家。然而 ,两者之间至少存在两方面的差别。首先 ,后共产主义国家的经济基本上是非市场经济 ,在最初的阶段仅仅打破统一计划 ,放开价格 ,无法改变这种经济的性质。其次 ,后共产主义国家与发展中国家不同 ,前者是工业化经济 ,其资源配置方式不符合市场原则。也就是说 ,它们向市场转型时 ,面临着全面重新分配生产要素的独特问题。在俄罗斯实施华盛顿共识的结果 ,是出现了一种怪异的、混杂的准市场体系 ,它对市场信号及宏观经济政策做出反常的反应 ,而且无法克服史无前例的经济危机。于是 ,尽管说起来似乎矛盾 ,但华盛顿共识的支持者开出的药方 ,反而使俄罗斯经济体系无法成为真正的市场经济。因此我们需要彻底变一变了 According to the monetarist theory, Washington Consensus provides a set of standard measures for economic policy. From the outset, its goal was to basically implement the market economy in developing countries. Later it was mechanically diverted to post-communist countries. However, there are at least two differences between the two. First of all, the economy of the post-communist countries is basically a non-market economy. Only the unification plan was broken in the initial stage and the price liberalization could not change the nature of the economy. Second, the post-communist countries are different from the developing countries in that the former is an industrialized economy and its resource allocation does not conform to market principles. In other words, they face the unique problem of the full re-distribution of factors of production when they are transformed into markets. The result of the Washington consensus in Russia is the emergence of a bizarre and hybrid quasi-market system that has reacted abnormally to market signals and macroeconomic policies and failed to overcome the unprecedented economic crisis. Thus, despite their seemingly paradoxical terms, the prescriptions out of Washington’s consensus supporters have rendered the Russian economy a real market economy. So we need to change completely