The main pathos of the article under discussion is the desire to prove the theoretical and practical inconsistency of the neoliberal mainstream in the modern world economy, including by contrasting it with more effective approaches to the development of the neoliberal economy.- 45 This article was prepared with the support of the RGNF under project 11-21-09002a/Vie page 119From the authors ' point of view, the Chinese development model is quite different. If the statement of the thesis about the failures of the mainstream was not very difficult due to its obviousness, then the promotion of the Chinese model as an alternative turned out to be, unfortunately, too difficult for the authors. The reason for this is that the Chinese model is viewed from a purely ideological, anti-liberal position, without a thorough analysis of its actual pros, cons and dynamics. Therefore, in this publication, we will focus on the last points. The confrontation between the Chinese model of development, on the one hand, and the theory and practice of global liberalism, on the other, has attracted wide attention of the world's expert and journalistic community in recent years. This attention is fully justified, because it follows from a natural desire to understand the origins of the strikingly different economic and social efficiency of the two models, including and especially in the context of global crises. According to the calculations of the famous Chinese publicist Ma Licheng, at least a hundred books devoted to the Chinese model have been published recently in China and abroad. Their authors do not question its specificity, but define the main characteristic features of the phenomenon under study in different ways. One of the first Western analysts who announced the emergence of a special Chinese model and gave impetus to its subsequent discussions was J. Ramo, a consultant to the largest American investment company Goldman Sachs and a professor at the prestigious Tsinghua Universit ... Read more