Поиск по этому блогу

Klark651

Loading...

понедельник, 20 апреля 2015 г.

Once again on the restructuring after 30 years

 Perestroika. Shootout. Redrawing
 
Thirty years marks these days event which has changed almost beyond recognition our country. Yes, and not only ours. In April 1985, at the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU then new Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev declared a "decisive course of the party on the large-scale reforms", denoting their capacious word "perestroika".Many, as they say, water has flowed since then. Do not become the Soviet Union (and with it the German Democratic Republic, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia). On the ruins of a great country, new public education, including still not recognized - Dnestr Moldavian Republic, the Republic of Abkhazia, the People's Republic of Karabakh. Warsaw Pact collapsed decades provides military parity in the world ...


But not for the same restructuring was started? Something positive has brought it into our lives? Or is it an empty: the aspirations of the country's multi-million dollar, the unlimited patience of people suddenly found themselves on the brink of poverty, the cost of the reform of billions of new highly truncated borders of the new state with a gap related and even family ties?Told "SP" talked experts put, we can say half of my life in the study of the phenomenon called "perestroika in the USSR."- Now, many in Russia are nostalgic for the Soviet past, - says Andrey Stolyarov, a well-known writer in St. Petersburg, a cultural geopolitics. - But in the late 1980s, these feelings even imagine it was difficult. It is not only in line for toilet paper, was acute and moral fatigue of the endless power of demagogy, inconsistencies that speaks to the crowd and that it really is. In my opinion, the need for large structural reforms did not come under Gorbachev, and in the early 1970s, when our rich as it was considered a world power began to buy abroad food and goods. Suddenly it became clear that a socialist economy can not provide the necessary people."SP": - By the way, why did this happen?- In the economy that had many shortcomings, one of the most important - the party leadership. Each regional committee was interested in a quick report on progress. For example, in the seed of the villagers demanded to sow the field as quickly as possible, no matter the weather allows it or not, the main report. Area gets into foremost, received the award. And then had replanted. Can you imagine what the cost! Quality is almost required. Were the main volumes. For instance, the Soviet Union held the world record for the number of tractors. And no one is bothered that most of these tractors were too heavy, which destroyed the fertile layer of the fields. We held the first place in the world and for the production of iron and steel. But steel is made of high quality too. West in those years already moved into new, more economical ways of casting and production of almost all mechanisms. Therefore, "their" technique was easier to ours, more convenient, cheaper. And so almost everything."SP": - But on the part of the defense, space we were in front of ...- Yes, about 40% of the state budget was spent on the army. Our ocean-going fleet was comparable to the US. But his entire output in the seas and oceans has not been possible, very expensive.In addition, there was a big help to developing countries. As soon as a developing country to announce that it is building socialism as poluchalabezvozvratny credit. Hence the inevitable increase in the deficit. And by 1986, more and oil prices collapsed - up to $ 10 per barrel (about 20 at the current rate - Ed.). And kept at a minimum of 13 years. No products, no food and buy it, as petrodollars rapidly melting. The country was on the brink of economic disaster. It was only about whether we can make disaster-driven, that is, to minimize its effects, or there will be chaos. In this situation, began restructuring."SP": - Personally, you know what to expect from her?- Liberty, interesting and full of life. I disliked Soviet split consciousness. All this, like rust eating away at both the society and the state.- Expectations of change in the country were universal, - says Dmitry Travin, scientific director of the Center for Modernization Studies at the European University in St. Petersburg - in those years I actively lectured on Society "Knowledge". They were carried out in enterprises, institutions, in the countryside. Never one of the students told me that he was against the promised changes. Apart from the case in the Leningrad region, where one lineman shouted from the audience: "Yes, what restructuring - Stalin country needs!". When Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in March 1985, said the need to change a life, it's the whole country was taken on the "cheers". All was bad, and everyone believed: a new leader knows how and what to do. But unfortunately he did not know.The first half of the year the General Secretary spoke about the reforms very often, very much and very vague. While speaking, the situation in the country deteriorated. Only in the spring eighty-seven, he turned finally to economists from academic institutions to develop a program of reforms. From 1988 she began to act. But so bad was prepared such were inconsistencies between its separate mechanisms that the situation did not improve. Is that money in people becoming more and fewer goods. And the charm of restructuring, rather, the fact that it initially promised, have gradually become a great disappointment."SP": - In addition to the fact that "everything has gone into conversations" that the restructuring program was untenable, about which more errors we can say that if they do not, then everything would have turned out?- When the end of the 1980s, Gorbachev felt that losing popularity due to the deceleration in the transformations, he decided to carry out political reform. Namely - to consolidate his power by partial democratization of the society. Feared that can be removed from the post of party colleagues Khrushchev in 1964. As a result, became the head of the Communist Party and, and, thanks to the people's deputies of the USSR State. As the deputies elected by the people, then release from the presidential powers could only him. Tactically planned correctly. A strategic mistake again. Because this reform has led to a dual power: on the one hand - the deputies, on the other - the party. And each of these two branches of the main considered herself. More - more. In 1990, elections were held in the Union republics. And, in particular, in Russia there was troevlastie. More year later passed the Russian presidential election. A fourth power in the face of Yeltsin, who considered himself the chief of the Soviet Union, as its "just-elected all the people." Hence the political crisis of August 1991, the Emergency Committee."SP": - This "emergency committee" is also considered himself the "chief in the USSR" ...- Yes, the fifth power, even if only for a few days. All of this eventually led to the bloody events of October 1993Following the economic mistakes "reformer of the CPSU" followed policy. That "the bottom line"? "Bialowieza Forest", the collapse of the USSR, the protracted crisis of the 1990s."SP": And - the end has not received restructuring.- This is where I disagree with you. Because, as an economist, do not believe it did not happen. Substandard reform, decided not to aggravate the problem of shortage and some others that have somehow solved, all contributed to the dismantling obsolete. If the economy, and with it an outdated system of organization of life in the country, while not completely destroyed, there would be no further reforms. And would live now in total deficit on everything. It is in the best case."SP": - Above you mentioned that the political crisis Gorbachev era led to the bloody events in Moscow in 1993. But it is believed that the restructuring had already two years as ended.- Purely chronologically restructuring ended with the departure from the Kremlin, Mikhail Gorbachev. But in fact it's what brought revolutionary changes in the political system of the country. Revolution lasted from 1989 to 1993., Allowing blood and the establishment of Yeltsin rigid sole authority.Many of those who today remembers the restructuring, examines the events of that time, spoken mainly about the deficit in the USSR of goods and products. But not by bread alone, as you know, man alive. For purely domestic difficulties our Russian (Soviet) the person does not get used. It was, perhaps, something else that required fundamental changes in our society. What's all the same in the first place did not suit people?- For me, the answer is obvious: not suit split consciousness, a split life, splitting power - meets Marina Mackiewicz, a senior fellow at the Sociology Institute. - People are mentally tired from all this. From childhood to old age, we all felt a sharp discrepancy between what we can say officially, and what has been said in the kitchen. In the late 1980s, the abolition of Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution, which proclaims the "leading and guiding role of the Communist Party" were the overwhelming majority of the population not only machines, but also members of the Communist Party. Despite the fact that changes were initiated by herself in the face of Gorbachev. It is true that power really did not know how to implement these changes. In those years, loved to quote Zhvanetskogo: "It is not necessary - everyone knows how to - no one knows." As a result, the Communist Party leaders began differences. Incidentally, these differences resulted eventually in that the memory of restructuring at all different depending on to which social group the person belongs.For some it's thick journals, publication before the forbidden literature, legal watching movies, for which the Soviet Union before it was possible to get a term, etc. And for the other - rich food and goods shelves, no queues, the opportunity to travel abroad. It reminds relation to 1960. For the villagers while there was no "thaw", all of these books and movies. They remembered bans on farms, the construction of personal houses, bans on trade in the market. Mitigating the censorship of their little worried."SP": - And if you look at the stratification of society - then and now, on the material resources of the party elite and the current "big bosses"?- In the Soviet Union the "big bosses" have a lot of opportunities. Could, for example, with just one call to throw the person in jail. But to build a palace on the Cote d'Azur, have several luxury apartments in the capital, they could not, even if I would very much wanted to. The income level of the current governor was unreachable for their predecessors as regional leaders - secretary of the city and province. The system does not allow it. Which also affects, of course, on the idealization of the country, which went along with the restructuring."SP": - Still, that was its main "driving force" for the citizens of the USSR - moral priorities or sausage deficit?- Of course, moral priorities, the desire to live in an open, fair country. Although, if they were to what all will, I think, would hardly have started it.Mottos and sayings times of reorganization"You can not live!", "Acceleration", "Glasnost", "More socialism!", "Strike while the iron until Gorbachev," "Boris, you're wrong!".A popular anecdote since perestroika"At first restructuring. Then - a skirmish. Then - roll. "
Ludmila Nikolaeva  




"TASTE OF THE THEORY" and the ideology of perestroika. RETRO - Philosophy I (4)
 
A long time ago, even 27 Congress of the CPSU was made correct and timely decision: to educate the staff to the theory of taste. Since that time the years indicate, however, to the contrary - in the ideological life prevailed not taste and bad taste. And it makes sense to speculate on the topic: WHY ?!Translated from the Greek word "theory" means - consider, examine, contemplate the divine ... But what did not refer to this worthy word! Call them cut off from life reasoning; or non-binding suggestions; the existence of some information about a welcome subject for small talk; arguments about the meaning or the vanity of life; thoughtful silence and great inflation of the cheeks; apologetic justification for the higher opinion of their superiors or simply ordinary "tip of shadows."Meanwhile, theorize - then simply think, always and everywhere to speak on the merits. More precisely, culturally competent and apply their thinking, living in a group, among people ... In practice, this means the ability to see the various facts unity of the whole. The words - thoughts. The thoughts - things, and for business - interests. Do not hesitate, when supporters say differently. But make no mistake, if people with different interests equally obviously say.Taste of the theory, therefore, is the need and the ability to look "at the root." Moral courage, in a choice between truth and subjective opinions of superiors, this truth is definitely preferred. Understood in this way, the theory is the epoch, caught up in thoughts. So respect to the theory, and indeed indifferent or negative attitude towards it - is also, so to speak, an epochal fact.Somehow recalling his meeting with Vladimir Lenin on one party congress Gorky wrote: "According to the account of time he spoke less of speakers who spoke before him, and by the impression - much more; not one I felt it behind me whispered excitedly:- Gusto says ...And so it was; his every argument deployed by itself - the power is enclosed in it.The Mensheviks did not hesitate to show that Lenin's speech is unpleasant to them, and he - more than unpleasant. What he convincingly argued the need for the party to rise to the height of the revolutionary theory in order to thoroughly check the practice, the embittered interrupted his speech.- The Congress is not the place for the philosophy!- Do not teach us, we - not a schoolboy!
... It was very strange and sad to see that it excites hostility to such a natural idea: only the height of the theory of the party can see the reasons for disagreement among it. "Strangely, however, this is nothing. After all, to approach life from a height of theory - means to approach it in principle. That is consistent sharpening contradictions and engaging in fundamental relationships with other people. For what kind of "humanity" - a lack of principle! That is why a request for a good theory, and usually happens in an era of escalating social struggle. "A good theory" - this is the thinking at the level of problems of its era, its sharpest conflicts and indigenous issues. Today, as yesterday, it is Marxism-Leninism, quietly Changeling apologists stagnation on the ideology of the cult of personality immediate superiors.Taste the theory grows out of a taste for thinking. In the analysis of social forms of human life "can not be used any microscope or chemicals. Both to replace the power of abstraction "- wrote in his" Capital "by Karl Marx. But when you look at the historical question, it is clear that, it appears, and the very kind of "power of abstraction," so sorely needed us today, in a given period of social development has its degree and its prevalence or happy, or, conversely, bitter fate.... Has just met at one of the city of Sverdlovsk. "The role of the worker in restructuring" - this was a stormy hours of conversation. Well remembered several workers - among others, they stood out hot temperament, nekriklivoy sharpness. We easily and quickly found a common language.Meeting is over, but people still do not diverge and then someone touched me on the arm. Looked - it was party secretary. - In a minute ... - he nodded to me. We moved.- Tell me, why did you come here?- Engage in science - I replied.- Is in his chair with the students engaged in it not?- It is possible, of course. But science is something we have a special - Marxism-Leninism.
 
He is essentially a reflection of the scientific interests of the working class.The chair is not working out is ...- Oh well. And why exactly to our factory frequent? Whether that other factories in Sverdlovsk little?- Plant a lot, but these tadpole working me so far only managed to meet you.- Who! Etih7! Why, their own little!- Not, of course ... But what we have done with you, to make it as much as possible?Party secretary made a gesture of annoyance head, then leaned toward me confidentially, and with an almost fatherly warmth, whispered:- Why, if they would be a lot, then you and I will have nothing to eat tomorrow, I will not need us ...In short, the very thing that we met once in the New Year's satire Michael Zhvanetskogo. Remember? ... Shopping with us sellers. Aircrafts for employees of "Aeroflot", and hairdressers for hairdressers. So here. Deep, independent thought working on his working practice in restructuring caused frank confusion. Why?Yes, because sometimes even the ability to think we have seen as a monopoly. Monopoly and this requires appropriate institutionalization, personnel policy, for example. (See.: V.Bakshutov "Do I need a philosopher seniority?" Socialist Industry, 17 September 1988) And so here: thinking for ... philosophy, science ... for scientists, for ideology ... ideologists and scientific socialism ... for professors scientific communism.Just so ... What would happen if borscht yes burgers cook would do only for themselves ?!No coincidence that during the considerable number of so-called "stagnation years" the reader, picking up a journalistic or scientific article tells about the life of sharp conflicts of our socialism, certainly met her in a kind of categorical imperative of the author (editor): Do not generalize! And, in obedience to the authority of the printed word, he, of course, can not be generalized for many years ...What, however, these things demand really mean? It can mean only one thing - not a thought! And let's think about it, what it is we really and inevitably leads?However, an exhaustive answer to this question is more 120 years ago, Karl Marx gave us. "Public relations between people - he said - is possible only to the extent to which people think and have this ability to abstract from sensory details and accidents". And, consequently, on the contrary: those who do not take an expert in, who knows only "special cases" and does not see the trees for the forest, they "do not yet know what human social relations are different from the relationship between animals. They themselves - animals "- Karl Marx concludes.Hence the fundamental importance of the conclusion: in contrast to the private ownership of the means of production, private ownership of the ... ability to think, that is, "Generalize" is the most refined, and therefore omnipresent and, at the same time, historically the last form of private property. It is invariably accompanied by all, without exception, are known to us in the history of forms and methods of exploitation of man by man, one class - the other. That's why "for a complete abolition of classes is necessary not only to overthrow the exploiters, the landowners and capitalists, not only cancel their property, it is necessary to cancel the still and all private ownership of the means of production, it is necessary to destroy the distinction between town and country, so the distinction between physical and people of brainwork "- not accidentally Lenin warned.The result of our immunity to prevent this is obvious: the last decades of the declared "public ownership" of the means of production (at the same time shout: do not generalize!) - Has led to the fact that they fall into the hands of those from whose lips the cry and broke: to ideological priests and administrative control of the property.Widely known in the public consciousness, fashionable nowadays the term "administrative system" today reflects historically fact. To put it more correctly, it should be poimenovat private form of public ownership of the means of production. Or, equivalently, total (collectively, the Group) form of private ownership of them.Historical price and the consequences of this fact is well known. This - raskrestyanivaniya peasant; rasproletarizatsiya ("atomization") business; intellectual transformation - in tradesman with a diploma, which, being admitted to the authorities, inevitably turns into a bureaucrat; loss of worker status and a sense of ownership, change his psychology podёnschiny; substitution of proletarian internationalism - stereotypes ideology of transnational corporations; substitution of Soviet power - absolute power of administration and proletarian socialism and communism - the ideology of the cult of personality superiors.Socialism without ... WORKING-CLASS MOVEMENT! Or a mixture of "socialization" and "nationalization" ... To be more precise, formal socialization of socialist property - as in modern scientific language called this state of affairs.Hence inevitably grows, and it also corresponds to a well-defined political form of this socialization. This - nomenclature system selection and placement offering collectively (= "Party comradeship") function of real ownership and disposition. Nomenclature system has grown more from the practice of "war communism" and by the beginning of 1923 was issued in its outline. And after one and a half decades, and she gave birth to an extreme example of the "nomenklatura discipline" - the so-called now "Stalinism" ... # Item expression formal socialization of socialist property now known writer Ivan Vasiliev analyzed as a "managerial elite district community" (see. However, October 2, 1988 g)... Formation of the ideology of perestroika largely associated today with the elimination of "white spots" of our history. But these spots is the result not only of suppressing the facts. To a great extent they are the result of the "scientists blindness", which stems from a confusion of nomenclature history of our socialist society with a history of the people.Do not look at the history of socialism just as the history of the socialist bosses! - That's the point. Otherwise, exposing and indignation, we can come to apologetics that so disturbs us in the day yesterday. Namely, the criticism of the personality cult of the authorities to replace criticized Stalin's personality cult. One cult to replace another.It is a taste for thinking will help us to understand that at the logic of things, just as not everyone who criticizes the formalism of public property doing it for real socialization - and not everyone who is angry against Stalin, Lenin's doing it for. And here's why.The reader will remember the article journalist Arkady Vaksberg in "Literary Gazette" of the Deputy Attorney General of the USSR Naidenova. When was the last "left" on pet Secretary Brezhnev Krasnodar Regional Committee Medunov and caught him, they say, in the act, the following happened. Medunov promptly flew to Moscow, organized challenge to the Kremlin and the prosecutor struck at the host with an angry speech convinced "anti-Stalinist." "Satisfied with the persecution of the party cadres? It will not work! This is not '37! "- With a false pathos he shouted. Moreover, today, in the "anti-Stalinist toga" victims of the cult of personality sometimes disguise themselves and ex-felons who have had their scores simply with the State. (See. Socialist Industry, May 2, 1988)Here is another example. For about ten years, does not work very Turbomotor Ural Plant. Voroshilov, increasingly losing its former glory. There are serious problems with the party leadership team, and his administration, there are unresolved issues and many others. And what?Perhaps democratic public Sverdlovsk city and its ideologues are sounding the alarm? Of course! The local press is full of anxious and angry comments about what works ... still bears the name of Voroshilov. "All (or almost all have), which is associated with the name of Stalin, renamed ... But the names of his" faithful companions "are still in their original locations," - writes one reader in the newspaper "Evening Sverdlovsk" (for the June 21, 1988 )Asked the opinion of the workers. One of them said:- Well, the question is, of course, important. Just shoot something today in the first place to those leaders who have brought the company to the point. And what is it really? The question of who to shoot for the collapse of production and collective hard substitute the question of whether to shoot or not to shoot the sign from the factory ... Dodgers! In my opinion, if and to remove the sign, then in any case, not instead of them, and after them!This, we have a working answer. And there is a serious reason to answer this. If you look closely to the ideological situation adjustment period, it can be seen as a false flag of anti-Stalinism goes sequential dismantling the ideology of Leninism, and the last and Marxism. After all of the distortions and deformations of socialism can eliminate two mutually exclusive ways: either go from Stalinism, as monstrously distorted Leninism - Leninism undistorted. Or get rid of the distortion of Leninism, getting rid of Leninism in general.It is this second way, flashy and aggressive, cleverly disguises itself in a transparent manner. In the practical affairs of his methods he acts '37: denunciations to the authorities and hanging the political labels. "Stalinist" - Mark this for the needs of today invented by him. And it was just Yarlykova ideology and does not need to work with facts. She did not need a man's ability as the ability to think, therefore, to generalize ...V. Molchanov, Scientific Secretary of the Ural BranchPhilosophical Society of the USSR Academy of Sciences of the USSR,teacher Sverdlovsk Medical Institute."Science of Ural», № 40 (440) October 12, 1989, edition of 8769.
("Taste of the theory of 'first column," On the Watch! "October 31, 1986, circulation 155,000)

Комментариев нет:

Отправить комментарий