The end of the cold war does not mean the establishment of a more peaceful world order. The well known British socialist theoretician, the editor-in-chief of International Socialism gives a detailed analysis of the economic growth and the changes of power positions in the world since World War II. He proves that the arms build up did not really decrease when certain disarmament treaties were achieved. He shows the key role of mititarism in the capitalist economy without which capital is unable to keep a balance and that it is exactly this, which undermines the economic balance. He calls attention to the dangers of the instability of the international power relations and the competition of the capitalist power centres.

On the basis of his research and the literature of this issue, he answers such questions as: against what do the households have to defend themselves?, what are traditional methods of defence?, whether these work today?, is it an advantage or disadvantage to be backward in development when it comes to defence?, are there methods of defence that can be learnt?, does the economy of households differ from macro-economy? is there a Hungarian specific method of defence by the households?, what are the basic differences of defence between families of different social status?

It is a survey of the changes in expenditure by households in the past two years on the basis of statistical data. She makes a specific analysis of the changes and the transformation of demands on the basis of social-sociological groups and of the items of the family budget. She draws attention to the economic policy dangers which selects between the bad alternative of leaving the poorest people alone or dissolving the middle classes.

The noted socialist politologist reviews the course and data of the elections in 1990 and the consequences drawn from them. He stresses the significance of the changes of power relations that took place during the year and tries to pinpoint the political mistakes and conditions that reduced the number of voters of the individual parties, and especially of the left wing parties.

On the basis of a wide range of opinions expressed on modernisation in the past decade, the author presents the modernisation theory as a paradigm competing with the ideology of state socialism. He criticises the modernisation theory arguing that it was formulated according to the interests of the highly advanced region only and as such, it is nothing else but the programme of transition from state socialism to state capitalism. The author states that this theory is unable to provide a perspective today and for this reason, his final conclusion is that turning to the postmodern theories can be more fruitful also for the East European region.