Pavlo Kutuev.

Development of Underdevelopment: State and Modernization

Project in the post-Leninist Ukraine. In: Thinking Fundamentals, IWM
Junior Visiting Fellows Conferences, Vol. 9: Vienna 2000

Article Review – Tewabe Tadesse GSR-9319/16

Methodology

The article appears to rely on a combination of theoretical analysis and empirical evidence to
support its arguments. The author draws on the work of theorists in sociology and politics to
argue for the importance of understanding the unique social and political processes and cultural
milieu in post-Leninist Ukraine.

Abstract

Pavlo Kutuev in his article examines the relationship between societal spheres and political
regime developments in Ukraine post-Leninist modernization. He argues that the transformation
of Ukrainian society differs significantly from similar events in socialist international systems
and highlights the lack of a clear vision of transformation strategy, resulting in vague
particularistic accounts of post-Leninist regimes. The article emphasizes the need for sensitivity
to unique social and political processes and cultural milieu to understand the extinction of
Leninism.

Introduction

The paper introduces the topic of post-Leninist modernization in Ukraine and the challenges
associated with the lack of a clear transformation strategy and general theory. It sets the stage for
discussing the impact of societal spheres on political regime developments and highlights the
importance of understanding the unique social and political processes and cultural milieu in post-
Leninist Ukraine.

Main Thesis and Arguments

The main thesis of the essay is that Ukraine's democracy has lost its distinctiveness due to a lack
of social and economic content, leading to procedural electoralism. The stability of post-Leninist
Ukraine is attributed to the dismantling of the Soviet system and economic decline, but the
population shows dissatisfaction with deteriorating living standards and lacks trust in state
institutions. The influence of patrimonial domination on political development is noted, leading
to profit-oriented monopolism and bureaucratic administration. The article also discusses the
criticism faced by Ukraine's post-Leninist development project for failing to implement
modernization strategies due to institutional weakness and traditionalism. It highlights the
challenges of rapid marketization and capitalism and emphasizes the need to reverse polarization
and revive the middle class in post-Leninist societies.

Robust justification for the article

The paper effectively highlights the unique nature of Ukraine's post-Leninist modernization,
emphasizing the lack of a clear transformation strategy and a general theory to guide the process.
It also underscores the importance of understanding the unique social, political, and cultural
processes that have shaped Ukraine's post-Leninist regimes. The analysis of Ukraine's
democracy losing its distinctiveness due to a lack of social and economic content, and the
influence of patrimonial domination on political development, provides a strong argument for the
complex challenges faced by Ukraine in its modernization efforts.

The article's weak reasoning

The weak argument in the paragraphs lies in the lack of specific examples or empirical evidence
to support the claims made. While the paper outlines the challenges faced by Ukraine's post-
Leninist development project, it could benefit from providing concrete examples or case studies
to illustrate the institutional weaknesses and traditionalism that hinder modernization strategies.
Additionally, the argument regarding the challenges faced by Hungary appears to be opposing to
the main focus on Ukraine, potentially pessimistic from the coherence of the paper's argument.

Final Thoughts and Future Directions

In conclusion, the article emphasizes the need for Ukraine to address institutional weaknesses
and traditionalism in its post-Leninist development project. It also suggests the importance of
reversing polarization and reviving the middle class in post-Leninist societies as a way forward.
The paper underscores the complexity of Ukraine's modernization process and the challenges it
faces in becoming modern under the capitalist world system.