Кто владеет информацией,
|6 dec 2016|
Мichael Delyagin: Milk Cow Is Rarely Beaten and Almost Never Killed
Anna Ivanova 01.06.2010
- Michael Gennadievich, important various readings in estimation of what occurs now in socioeconomic situation exist among the left opposition. If Zyuganov, for example, struggles with "non-Russian capitalism", trying to build some "Russian socialism", more consecutive left such as Baranov or Udaltsov consider that there's no power of bourgeoisie in the country, that we have neofeudal mode and bourgeoisie is not less deprived of civil rights, than other oppressed classes of a society.
- After the government in Russia was, as a matter of fact, privatized together with the most attractive factories in 90s years, pendulum swung to other part: full and implicit subordination of business to power. As a result already in the beginning of "zero" the Russian businessmen felt themselves not as "owners of the country" and not even as a source of development of society (that would be correct) but certain analogue of a milk cow...
- Naturally it's possible to talk about power of bourgeoisie the same way as about power of milk cows over shepherds?
- But I would not overestimate revolutionism of this social group. Many of them learnt to appreciate such position and to derive considerable pleasure from it. Really: milk cow should be fed and watered, it should be cleaned and looked after. Thus its extremely seldom should be beaten and that is especially actual in relations with ruling bureaucracy, it's almost never killed.
- It's obviously silly to talk about progress, modernizations in such situation?
- Yes: it's impossible to achieve "new heights" and fulfillments in position of milk cow - but there is a guarantee from absolutely mad lawlessness. Eventually, if someone from new owners of the country wants to take your business away, you will be asked at first - you will have time either to give it, or to escape from the country, or (that looks the most reasonable variant not to endanger relatives staying in Russia) to do both things.
- How do you think, if Medvedev understands this discrepancy?
- President Medvedev made attempt to rectify situation, having achieved legislative interdiction for imprisonment of people accused of economic crimes. It is clear that there are a lot of normal businessmen among them, racketeers in epaulets simply try to take their business away - however there no doubts that when this law will start to apply, it will improve position of swindlers also. Meanwhile, as judiciary practice (and not only in Khodorkovsky's case) shows, judges not always are guided by this law. Besides protection of people against power structures, after all it also directly contradicts accusatory ideology of modern judicial system (it's enough to recollect that in 1940 Stalin courts completely justified 12% accused! - while now this indicator does not reach 1%).
- That is 1937 came to businessmen?
- Exactly and urging businessmen to show "impudence" and "unpack suitcases" in these conditions, officials show either highest cynicism, or short-sightedness on the verge of full blindness. After all refusal of possibility to run in other countries means for modern businessman, as a matter of fact, refusal of unique possibility to rescue if not life, than freedom. The most severe exploitation of workers peculiar to today's Russia, is caused, seemingly, not only by avidity and moral decay of modern "businessmen" but also by their constant fear for life and necessity to pay enormous informal taxes (their regularity and commonness simply don't allow to call them using vulgar term "bribe").
- What about "sacred right of a private property"?
- Actually, as much as it's possible to understand, considerable part of the Russian business is private only under its name. So-called "oligarchs" after the case with "YUKOS", apparently, follow all instructions of corresponding representatives of bureaucracy not less disciplined, than the director of factories during Soviet times and small and mid-sized business pays when it's said and as much as it's said.
Yes, in 90th years the Russian business choked under criminality press - both organized and "wild". However, in 2000s years criminality disappeared, while press remained: gangsters were replaced, as it's possible to understand, by representatives of power structures - which condition makes such impression that soon we would call their fair employees "werewolves in epaulets".
- It's something unprecedented as the state system...
- There's nothing new and original in it, it is normal feudal system based on the right of force - and, probably, regress of our society will result us after a while to slave-ownership (at least guest workers in some cases are on position of slaves). However, references to participants of this system with appeals from absolutely not corresponding to it either communistic or capitalist lexicon look approximately as adequately as appeals to deepening of socialist morals to the prisoners of the Soviet camps.
© 1998-2016 FORUM.msk