Modern Russian rulers and their ideologists now prefer not to spread about what we have a state and whose interests it expresses more to say about the GDP, exchange currency, national projects, roads, debts, taxes and so on, as little as possible to touch upon this important question. Recorded in the Constitution, that Russia - a democratic federal law state with a republican form of government and all here.
The last one was noted by an attempt to approach the question of the state, from a cohort of leaders of the CPSU and the post-perestroika time was Mikhail Gorbachev. Then this figure, nothing new has managed to come up, pulled the light of day worn concept of "state of the whole" and there was always trumps them, pretending that he has mastered and understood the modern state. In the end, this "state of the whole, somehow fell into crisis, the people did not want to defend" their "state, and it is without problems, thanks to the same figures of the Communist Party, has become a bourgeois, so even with an oligarchic form of government. After these transformations do not fit in the narrow-minded view of the state, our professors and politicians more decided not to raise this issue in order not to amuse people. But here suddenly, Yevgeny Yasin, the scientific director of the Higher School of Economics and an active participant in privatization, the newspaper Kommersant »№ 145, raised this issue and shared his delusions about the state, passing them off as scientific concepts than yet again confirmed the well-known saying of Engels that the professor was not a scholar, and scientist Professor. So what is in Russia for the state, according to Yassin? "Professional discussion (Professor advance preparing their own protection, trying to limit the scope of its discussions the terminology, and their views on the state) requires recognition by certain assumptions, which are not in dispute, and its base. Their only four. First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should go at all. Second, differences in views are to those functions that are recognized by the state. The major ones - to ensure law and order, macroeconomic stability, defense and security, the formation of the necessary public institutions, provision of public services (health, education, etc.), social protection, environmental security, promoting economic development (which is just called structural and industrial policy), the elimination of "defects of the market (including through the direct control of prices, wages, etc.), state enterprise (production of goods and services that may be made by private companies). Third, in life are circumstances that make it appropriate for the State of any of these functions in a given volume. Sometimes increase the state's role should be and brings a positive effect. But the government better cope with their tasks, the better understanding on what the directions should focus on. And finally, fourthly, the choice of the optimal level of state involvement in the economy should take into account the conditions and stage of development, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions. " That's how much the professor uttered platitudes about the state, and in fact said nothing significant. And what begins! "First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should go at all." By this statement, you can add that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, that the moon revolves around the Earth and the Earth around the Sun, etc. And not only begins, but throughout his article, Professor gives many obvious and meaningless statements: "capitalism has passed through the industrial stage and entered the postindustrial era", "large corporations have crossed national borders, and the like. But later, when the professor is taken to talk about the features that are recognized by the state, even more interesting. The main problem that, according to Yasin, the state does - is to "ensure law and order." Indeed so. But most importantly, in defining and understanding the state, not what the state provides the rule of law and order, and then in whose interest the laws are written, and which is supported by the order. I must admit that not only in Russia but in Germany, and France, and in Mexico there are republican form of government, but the results of this board are very different. Today in Russia we see that the laws in force, time and again, provide enriching a small part of the population and the poverty of the majority. To understand this is not necessary to deepen and particularly in the theory. Quite enough to impartially assess the events.
Whose interests, one wonders, to protect members of the prosecution of Surgut, trying to influence the trade union chairman of the independent trade union "Surgutneftegaz" Alexander Zakharkina requiring pay increases? No less colorfully characterizes modern Russian state and the government's attitude to the hunger strike of workers of the Voronezh excavator plant, which the plant's management owes a huge amount of salary. And the thousands of protests, workers from other companies.
Pay in most cases, education and medical care, beggarly pension and benefits, along with extremely high-income individual oligarchs, do not talk about the direct care of the State? On social welfare, education and health authority allocates a penny, but the lion's share of revenue it spends on providing its domination. And in another way, when this system of government, can not be. Yevgeny Yasin worth before talk about the rule of law and order, look at what our laws are passed by the Duma, and what a wave of protest these laws cause the people. Get at least, the new Housing Code. Yes, and the social composition of the Duma is already says a lot. Yes, it would not hurt to ask about the legality of ownership, individual oligarchs and bureaucrats, a huge complex of property and finances of the country. The arguments of Professor at the "provision of public services (health, education, etc.), social protection, environmental security, are not worth a penny, as it does not show the balance of costs, the share of social spending in general, the product of the nation. According to expert INDEM, annual bribe Russian officials to exceed 316 billion dollars And a sharp increase (13 times) occurred in the past five years. You just wait for it - 316 billion dollars! Three of the national budget! One budget goes to maintain the army, the payment of civil servants and the provision of public services, and the three settle into the pockets of officials. If we add the earnings of big capitalist monopolies, then all the arguments Yasin, the state, as representatives of the whole society, the state acts as "night watchman" in the rule of law, burst like a soap bubble. With regard to "promote economy, there can be noted only that the modern Russian state and contributes to the economy. But assists in keeping with its oligarchic nature, raising tariffs on monopolies and giving them, and including myself, a huge profit. The last two remarks of Professor Yassin, on the basic assumptions for the determination of the state, can be regarded as the top demagoguery. Professor informs readers that: "... in life are circumstances that make it appropriate for the State of any of these functions in a given volume. Uncertainties about which readers have to guess yourself, do seem like a vague and indefinite extent, but advisable, to perform any functions. But in order to achieve the uncertainty of the outcome, continues to Yassin, we must "take into account the conditions and stage of development, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions." That's it! Science deal - it's not you turn the thimble. In their testimonies, Professor Yassin has once again repeated the old bourgeois pacifier, trying to convince readers that the state - is not a class institute that provides power to the ruling class, and universal institution, intended to ensure "law and order." Apparently assuming that there are eternal laws that stand above the interests of certain individuals, compliance with which the state should provide. One word stood on the point of progressives who argue that there is always the potential for development, the existing state. Just what is meant by the development of the state if this development rests on exploitation, that is not the development of the main mass of the people.
Professed their views on the state has long been disproved, the most recognized minds of humanity to refute such a philistine view of the state, and by the history of social development. But as we see, today's ideologues of the Russian state, ready to use every old, for the sake of strengthening the power of the bourgeois state, headed by liberal bureaucrats who wish to present Yassin as a nation-wide. Acquainted with opus Yevgeny Yasin, who did not who did not clarify inadvertently pose the question: why Professor Yasin, suddenly began to write on the state and what is the purpose of this article? And, after a careful viewing is the answer, which concluded just a few sentences.
It turns out that under current conditions to strengthen the state, where power, for fear of being overthrown, and in anticipation of the upcoming presidential election and is forced to limit the appetite of the oligarchs and big monopolies, Yasin was important to declare "that the state - a bad businessman." "In the past three years, the real increase government's role in modernizing the economy has not happened." "The state did not achieve notable success in the main function of" night watchman ", a statement of the rule of law." "Obviously the tendency to weaken the macroeconomic policy. - Continues to escalate the negative assessment of the state, Professor Yasin. - Institutional reforms are mostly frozen. At the same time promoting economic development, useful structural changes implemented in insufficient levels, in particular, by the shortcomings of the state apparatus. But growing public sector, state enterprise takes precedence. During this time, according to conservative estimates, the state has acquired the assets of approximately $ 35-40 billion, including Yuganskneftegaz, Sibneft, Power Machines. Hence, it clearly does not. " All this shows that Professor Yasin no not an economist and ideologue of oligarchic capital. His statements he is trying to hammer into the heads of the readers thought that today the state and its leaders do not come true, not what they do. That of the state apparatus, many drawbacks. With the modernization of the economy has not happened. That those non-oligarchs, sucking up the country's resources, there have been more appropriately and to limit their predatory interests is not a matter of state. The state, in the words of the ideologue, should act as a "night watchman", that is to make potty for Abramovich or Vekselberg, and not to interfere in their affairs.
Such a state Yassin and his companions and built. Only here's a little flash in the pan out, as some government officials have not agreed to the role of night workers, with the oligarchs. Somehow be quite improper for the oligarchs, whose property was completely stolen. And why should serve them, when in the hands of a real power? Let them serve as Yassin and other leaders from science, and true citizens and scientists to present it to anything.
Vitaly Glukhov
The last one was noted by an attempt to approach the question of the state, from a cohort of leaders of the CPSU and the post-perestroika time was Mikhail Gorbachev. Then this figure, nothing new has managed to come up, pulled the light of day worn concept of "state of the whole" and there was always trumps them, pretending that he has mastered and understood the modern state. In the end, this "state of the whole, somehow fell into crisis, the people did not want to defend" their "state, and it is without problems, thanks to the same figures of the Communist Party, has become a bourgeois, so even with an oligarchic form of government. After these transformations do not fit in the narrow-minded view of the state, our professors and politicians more decided not to raise this issue in order not to amuse people. But here suddenly, Yevgeny Yasin, the scientific director of the Higher School of Economics and an active participant in privatization, the newspaper Kommersant »№ 145, raised this issue and shared his delusions about the state, passing them off as scientific concepts than yet again confirmed the well-known saying of Engels that the professor was not a scholar, and scientist Professor. So what is in Russia for the state, according to Yassin? "Professional discussion (Professor advance preparing their own protection, trying to limit the scope of its discussions the terminology, and their views on the state) requires recognition by certain assumptions, which are not in dispute, and its base. Their only four. First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should go at all. Second, differences in views are to those functions that are recognized by the state. The major ones - to ensure law and order, macroeconomic stability, defense and security, the formation of the necessary public institutions, provision of public services (health, education, etc.), social protection, environmental security, promoting economic development (which is just called structural and industrial policy), the elimination of "defects of the market (including through the direct control of prices, wages, etc.), state enterprise (production of goods and services that may be made by private companies). Third, in life are circumstances that make it appropriate for the State of any of these functions in a given volume. Sometimes increase the state's role should be and brings a positive effect. But the government better cope with their tasks, the better understanding on what the directions should focus on. And finally, fourthly, the choice of the optimal level of state involvement in the economy should take into account the conditions and stage of development, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions. " That's how much the professor uttered platitudes about the state, and in fact said nothing significant. And what begins! "First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should go at all." By this statement, you can add that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, that the moon revolves around the Earth and the Earth around the Sun, etc. And not only begins, but throughout his article, Professor gives many obvious and meaningless statements: "capitalism has passed through the industrial stage and entered the postindustrial era", "large corporations have crossed national borders, and the like. But later, when the professor is taken to talk about the features that are recognized by the state, even more interesting. The main problem that, according to Yasin, the state does - is to "ensure law and order." Indeed so. But most importantly, in defining and understanding the state, not what the state provides the rule of law and order, and then in whose interest the laws are written, and which is supported by the order. I must admit that not only in Russia but in Germany, and France, and in Mexico there are republican form of government, but the results of this board are very different. Today in Russia we see that the laws in force, time and again, provide enriching a small part of the population and the poverty of the majority. To understand this is not necessary to deepen and particularly in the theory. Quite enough to impartially assess the events.
Whose interests, one wonders, to protect members of the prosecution of Surgut, trying to influence the trade union chairman of the independent trade union "Surgutneftegaz" Alexander Zakharkina requiring pay increases? No less colorfully characterizes modern Russian state and the government's attitude to the hunger strike of workers of the Voronezh excavator plant, which the plant's management owes a huge amount of salary. And the thousands of protests, workers from other companies.
Pay in most cases, education and medical care, beggarly pension and benefits, along with extremely high-income individual oligarchs, do not talk about the direct care of the State? On social welfare, education and health authority allocates a penny, but the lion's share of revenue it spends on providing its domination. And in another way, when this system of government, can not be. Yevgeny Yasin worth before talk about the rule of law and order, look at what our laws are passed by the Duma, and what a wave of protest these laws cause the people. Get at least, the new Housing Code. Yes, and the social composition of the Duma is already says a lot. Yes, it would not hurt to ask about the legality of ownership, individual oligarchs and bureaucrats, a huge complex of property and finances of the country. The arguments of Professor at the "provision of public services (health, education, etc.), social protection, environmental security, are not worth a penny, as it does not show the balance of costs, the share of social spending in general, the product of the nation. According to expert INDEM, annual bribe Russian officials to exceed 316 billion dollars And a sharp increase (13 times) occurred in the past five years. You just wait for it - 316 billion dollars! Three of the national budget! One budget goes to maintain the army, the payment of civil servants and the provision of public services, and the three settle into the pockets of officials. If we add the earnings of big capitalist monopolies, then all the arguments Yasin, the state, as representatives of the whole society, the state acts as "night watchman" in the rule of law, burst like a soap bubble. With regard to "promote economy, there can be noted only that the modern Russian state and contributes to the economy. But assists in keeping with its oligarchic nature, raising tariffs on monopolies and giving them, and including myself, a huge profit. The last two remarks of Professor Yassin, on the basic assumptions for the determination of the state, can be regarded as the top demagoguery. Professor informs readers that: "... in life are circumstances that make it appropriate for the State of any of these functions in a given volume. Uncertainties about which readers have to guess yourself, do seem like a vague and indefinite extent, but advisable, to perform any functions. But in order to achieve the uncertainty of the outcome, continues to Yassin, we must "take into account the conditions and stage of development, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions." That's it! Science deal - it's not you turn the thimble. In their testimonies, Professor Yassin has once again repeated the old bourgeois pacifier, trying to convince readers that the state - is not a class institute that provides power to the ruling class, and universal institution, intended to ensure "law and order." Apparently assuming that there are eternal laws that stand above the interests of certain individuals, compliance with which the state should provide. One word stood on the point of progressives who argue that there is always the potential for development, the existing state. Just what is meant by the development of the state if this development rests on exploitation, that is not the development of the main mass of the people.
Professed their views on the state has long been disproved, the most recognized minds of humanity to refute such a philistine view of the state, and by the history of social development. But as we see, today's ideologues of the Russian state, ready to use every old, for the sake of strengthening the power of the bourgeois state, headed by liberal bureaucrats who wish to present Yassin as a nation-wide. Acquainted with opus Yevgeny Yasin, who did not who did not clarify inadvertently pose the question: why Professor Yasin, suddenly began to write on the state and what is the purpose of this article? And, after a careful viewing is the answer, which concluded just a few sentences.
It turns out that under current conditions to strengthen the state, where power, for fear of being overthrown, and in anticipation of the upcoming presidential election and is forced to limit the appetite of the oligarchs and big monopolies, Yasin was important to declare "that the state - a bad businessman." "In the past three years, the real increase government's role in modernizing the economy has not happened." "The state did not achieve notable success in the main function of" night watchman ", a statement of the rule of law." "Obviously the tendency to weaken the macroeconomic policy. - Continues to escalate the negative assessment of the state, Professor Yasin. - Institutional reforms are mostly frozen. At the same time promoting economic development, useful structural changes implemented in insufficient levels, in particular, by the shortcomings of the state apparatus. But growing public sector, state enterprise takes precedence. During this time, according to conservative estimates, the state has acquired the assets of approximately $ 35-40 billion, including Yuganskneftegaz, Sibneft, Power Machines. Hence, it clearly does not. " All this shows that Professor Yasin no not an economist and ideologue of oligarchic capital. His statements he is trying to hammer into the heads of the readers thought that today the state and its leaders do not come true, not what they do. That of the state apparatus, many drawbacks. With the modernization of the economy has not happened. That those non-oligarchs, sucking up the country's resources, there have been more appropriately and to limit their predatory interests is not a matter of state. The state, in the words of the ideologue, should act as a "night watchman", that is to make potty for Abramovich or Vekselberg, and not to interfere in their affairs.
Such a state Yassin and his companions and built. Only here's a little flash in the pan out, as some government officials have not agreed to the role of night workers, with the oligarchs. Somehow be quite improper for the oligarchs, whose property was completely stolen. And why should serve them, when in the hands of a real power? Let them serve as Yassin and other leaders from science, and true citizens and scientists to present it to anything.
Vitaly Glukhov
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий