This paper argues that there is a spurious correlation between social capital and economic development in the regions of post-communist Russia. This argument rejects Robert Putnam’s collectivist hypothesis that social capital is the ubiquitous cause of economic growth. Rather, the data presented in this paper indicates that individualistic behavior in the form of entrepreneurialism, has been the prerequisite for growth in post-communist Russia. While social capital may slow or accelerate economic growth, it will not cause it. Without entrepreneurialism, social capital cannot be harnessed for economic development. In essence, social capital does not create wealth, entrepreneurs do.

One of the most difficult dilemmas that post-authoritarian societies face in the early years of democracy involves the treatment of those authoritarian officials who are guilty of gross violations of human rights. Should a new democracy prosecute and punish or should it forgive and forget its former “torturers”? The process leading to a resolution of this “torturer problem” is complex and often misunderstood. This paper argues that the correlation between the “democratization process” and the outcome of the “torturer problem” is a specious one in the East European context. The unfolding of events in the last several years has demonstrated that a much stronger correlation exists between the variables of “exit” and/or “voice” under communism and the outcome of the “torturer problem.”