If you call a spade a spade, then social reality is pushing a fifth of the Russian population straight into the grave, believes the famous historian and publicist Andrei Fursov. But there is a way out... We are publishing Andrei Fursov’s interview with the newspaper “Zavtra”.
Andrey FEFELOV. My first question, Andrei Ilyich, is to you, as a historian of modern times. We are talking about a kind of ultimatum that was delivered by the West to the Russian oligarchs. We know that this ultimatum ends in February, on Valentine's Day. What do you see behind this ultimatum? – the struggle of international elites, global elites with regional ones?
Andrey FURSOV. There are several overlapping trends that can be seen here. On the one hand, this is a struggle between global elites, the elites, with national-regional, national-state ones, on the other hand, this is increasing pressure on Russia, more precisely, on the existing power-economic regime, from a certain part of the ruling circles of the West, such as formal and informal - the so-called “deep power”, which in the West is not only deeper, but also wider and more powerful than formalized state structures. Here it is important to talk about trends, and not about individual events and facts, because, as CIA chief Allen Dulles once correctly noted, a person can be confused by facts, but if he understands trends, then he will not be confused.
One of the trends of the past 2017 is the increasing pressure of global elites on elites at the national-state level. This process has been going on for a long time, but it was clearly voiced, in fact, by declaring war on October 12-13, 2012, by Christine Lagarde in Tokyo at a joint meeting of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Then she said that it was necessary to provide a legal and moral basis for the seizure, i.e. expropriation of ill-gotten “young money”. “Young money” is precisely the money of the oligarchs of Russia, China, Brazil, etc. and high-ranking officials associated with them, made, as Christine Lagarde said, from trading in raw materials.
Immanuel Wallerstein would argue very simply here. At one of the meetings of the Moscow Economic Forum, Wallerstein said the following. Yes, of course, in the developing world, including in Russia, there is corruption, but judge for yourself, corruption is greatest where there is the most money, and the most money is in America, it’s just that corruption there is wrapped in the “packaging” of lobbyism.
Andrey FEFELOV. Of course, there is a global wallet where regionals put their money, and it would be a sin for globocrats not to use this wallet.
Andrey FURSOV. A field of miracles in the land of fools. Moreover, once upon a time, in the years of “fat financial cows,” you could put them in this wallet, and they were told to bring your money. And then, when the struggle for the future began in earnest, the essence of which is who will cut off whom from the public pie - here, as the hero of one Soviet film said, there is no time for petty honor, here big fish devour small ones. And the seizure of property begins. It is justified in different ways: some are accused of being oligarchs associated with some big boss, some are simply corrupt, some do not take the position that the owners of the world game need. At the core is a simple fact: in the post-capitalist future there will not be enough social pie for everyone, this future itself will not be enough. And this concerns not only the lower and middle classes, but also the upper classes. And there is no doubt that this post-capitalist future is approaching, or more precisely, a certain part of the world elite has brought it closer and is bringing it closer as best they could and can. It is symbolic that in the year of the centenary of the Great October Socialist (i.e., anti-capitalist) Revolution, the Club of Rome published a report postulating the necessity and inevitability of a change in the world’s existing mode of production and consumption and the (neo)liberal ideology that shapes it. The end of capitalism and the coming left turn is an agenda that is becoming mainstream, but does not reach the Russian people, who apparently believe that pineapples and hazel grouse are forever.
A serious, and double, external-internal contradiction arises here. Dismantling capitalism requires a left turn, and we are already hearing the steps of this Global Commander, but the Russian elites - these “children” of the 1990s, the criminal redistribution and Yeltsin’s betrayal - do not want to hear these steps, they are scared. They did not even dare to adequately celebrate the centenary of the October Revolution (but the French bourgeoisie, for example, was not afraid to celebrate both the centenary and bicentennial of the bloody French Revolution, which, among other things, demonstrated its historical maturity). This is outside the country. But leftist sentiments are growing and spreading within the country - especially among young people. This can be seen in surveys of attitudes towards Stalin (more than 70% of positive responses in the 18-24 year old cohort), and in surveys of who would be supported in the revolution and civil war - the Bolsheviks or their opponents (more than 90% for the Bolsheviks). It seems that the government and the population, the people, are moving in different directions not only socio-economically, but also ideologically, and this is very dangerous.The bottom line is: a significant part of the Russian elite is increasingly under both external pressure in the short term - from the right (sanctions, etc.), in the medium term - from the left, and under internal pressure, and pressure on both sides will increase as the geopolitical crisis intensifies situation (“partners” will try) and as the economic situation worsens. In principle, a left turn should become the basis of a new government program. As he said on the eve of his “left” turn, i.e. abolition of serfdom by Alexander II, it is better to abolish this from above than it happens from below. The situation is similar now. “From above” is really preferable. I really don’t want the upheavals into which the authorities in Russia have already plunged the country three times - at the beginning of the 17th century, at the beginning of the 20th and at the end of the 20th century. Believers say that God loves the Trinity, but nothing is known about the fourth time. In the end, at least there must be an instinct for conservation and “experience, the son of difficult mistakes” must suggest something, otherwise again one will have to hope that “chance, God the inventor” will happen, but his “wonderful discoveries” may turn out to be very unpleasant and will upset some people beyond belief.
It is necessary to note one more point that aggravates the problems of the Russian Federation. On the one hand, Russian oligarchs have the same “young money” that Lagarde spoke about. At the same time, Russia is the only country with such a ruling elite that has nuclear weapons. This makes Russia the main target, and to a greater extent, the more nervous the Americans are about the loss of their hegemony. When the US declares the Russian Federation, China and Iran “revisionist states”, i.e. states focused on revision, revision of the American-centric monopolar world, they thereby record their weakness - no one will audit a world that has strength. China advances the United States in the economic sphere, and the Russian Federation in some regions in the military-geopolitical sphere, while having a weak economic base. In other words, post-Soviet Russia is paradoxically targeted by a combination of strength and weakness. Russia's weakness, compared to China and India, lies in the huge gap between rich and poor. Of course, it exists in India and China too.
Andrey FEFELOV. He's probably bigger in these countries, Andrei Ilyich?
Andrey FURSOV. It depends on what indicators. The indicator of concentration of wealth in the hands of 1% of the Russian population is 1:71, followed by India - 1:49, the world average - 1:46.
Andrey FEFELOV. So, we still don’t have a middle layer?
Andrey FURSOV. However, the middle class in China and India is a rather difficult question. An editorial dedicated to India in one of the latest (January 13–19, 2018) issues of the London Economist magazine is called “The missing middle class.” But experts, including Indologists, have been convincing us for many years that India has a powerful and constantly growing middle class. The article makes a clear point: growing inequality in India is hampering the development of the middle class. From 1980 to 2014, the top 1% of Indians pocketed almost a third of all additional income associated with economic growth. India has moved from a wage of $2 a day to $3, but has not taken the next step to $10 or even $5, the article says. Only 3% of Indians have ever flown on an airplane, only slightly more than 2% own a car or truck; Of the 300 million Indians that HSBC (Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation) classifies as middle class, many live on just $3 a day. And this is called the middle class? Throughout the world, the size of the middle class is declining and its economic situation is deteriorating. There can be no other way in criminal-financialized capitalism: it fundamentally does not reward those who work. The subtitle of G. Standing’s book “The Corruption of Capitalism”, published in 2017, is very indicative: “Why rentiers thrive and work does not pay.” We in Russia have been observing this situation since the early 1990s. And the “middle class,” which was promised to us by rogue reformers reminiscent of the King and Duke from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, turned out to be a hearth painted on a canvas from another famous work.
If in post-Soviet Russia there was no middle class (and, obviously, there will not be), then in the West over the past 30 years it has been increasingly shrunk - its happy life turned out to be very short. In essence, the departure of this class undermines capitalism as a system. A leading expert on global economic inequality, author of the bestseller “Capitalism in the 21st Century” T. Piketty explains this simply: it is the presence of the middle class that ensures mass consumption, mass demand and massive investment in construction.
Unlike the 1950s–1970s, in the last 20–30 years families formally classified as middle class have been unable to afford the purchase of housing. They are forced to rent, which makes their situation even worse: for example, in the UK in 2013, housing costs grew 5 times faster than wages. Economists estimate that families who rent their home all their lives in the UK lose £561,000 more than homeowner families; in London this figure is even higher - 1 million 360 thousand! However, despite this, property turns out to be unaffordable. The loss of property by the middle class - isn't this indirect expropriation in disguise, I ask? In other words, the disappearance of the middle class leaves a huge hole into which capitalism falls.
As for Russia, we still live with the achievements and legacy of the socialist era. Therefore, the poverty that is typical for India, the countries of Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as for many areas of New York, Paris, London, is unimaginable not only in Russia, but even in the current Central Asian “countries”, the former Central Asian republics of the USSR , which the Soviet Union dragged into civilization and statehood and whose leaders, who managed to get from their villages and villages to Soviet cities and owe their careers to the USSR, the CPSU and the Russians, today throw mud at both the Russian Empire and the USSR. It is enough to compare Dushanbe, Tashkent and Astana, on the one hand, and Mumbai, Kolkata and Dhaka, on the other.
Suffice it to say that 732 million Indians - 54% of the population, this is the official Indian statistics - do not have access to toilets, either public or private. In China this figure is 25%, that is, 340 million. Well, in countries like Ethiopia, it’s 93%.
Of course, Russia's situation is completely different. It is enough to drive through a large Russian city, relatively speaking, Togliatti or Irkutsk, and through the city of Mumbai and compare where civilization is and where it is not. At the same time, in different countries, depending on their historical past and culturally characteristic ideas about social justice, “moral and economic” ideas about acceptable poverty, about where poverty ends and poverty, exclusion and deprivation begin, vary.
One of the recent reports from the Higher School of Economics states that 8% of the Russian population does not have access to medicines, and 17% do not have enough to eat. I think that these 8% are included in the 17, but in any case we get 20% of people who, in general, social reality is pushing, to call a spade a spade, into the grave. There are no medicines, no food, a weakened body - the whole bunch of diseases associated with malnutrition and these misfortunes. That is, in this regard, Russia is vulnerable. And it is absolutely clear that if the economic situation in Russia worsens, as economists say, both liberal and illiberal, this gap will increase.
On the other hand, the Russian Federation has nuclear weapons and you cannot talk to it the way you can talk to Brazil or South Africa. Therefore, the West, in putting pressure on Russia, is following the path not of a conventional war, but of an ersatz war, a hybrid war, the fronts of which are everywhere. For example, in the field of elite sports, which has long turned into a mixture of business, crime and politics. The Russian Federation received a serious blow on such a front of the new Cold War as the Olympics, a very sensitive blow. The logic here is simple: is sport important to you?! have you invested in sports?! - then we will force you to come under the white flag of surrender, repent and, on top of that, pay reparations of -15 million dollars.
Andrey FEFELOV. With the Olympics, by the way, everything is mysterious: the fact that this is an act of war is something that those who made the decision to allow the athletes to go under the white flag cannot help but guess about. It was immediately clear that they would be bullied there.
Andrey FURSOV. I don’t understand only one thing - how could the officials who are responsible for this sway for so long, stupidly and irresponsibly? It was clear that the Russian Federation, after long humiliations, would not be allowed to attend the Olympics, and it was necessary to respond stasis and harshly. For example: they have a “Magnitsky list”; they should have immediately rolled out a “list” of Bach or someone else, rather than chewing snot and bowing. Unfortunately, regarding the Olympics, our top officials, as on many other issues, are only wiping themselves off, and there is more and more spitting, because in the West they are used to wiping themselves off. How not to wipe yourself off? Children in England, money in the States, yachts in Monaco.
Now Russian athletes are going to the Olympics without representing the country, and all the talk about the fact that we know that they are ours is little consolation for idiots and careless officials. We can know anything, but it is neither an international legal nor an international state fact. The cowardly and incompetent bureaucratic bastard has squandered the situation and is trying to save his own skin by sending athletes under any flag, under any sauce, so that if they win, they will hide in it.
Perhaps a correct, but harsh, decision would be this: Russia does not go as a state, the athletes are told: guys, you can go, we can’t forbid you, but you go at your own expense, because in this case you do not represent the state of the Russian Federation. But then it turns out that athletes who are not guilty of anything are punished because of officials. Why aren’t sports officials punished with misery and disgrace? I repeat: I don’t blame the athletes – it’s the officials who are to blame. And it’s very strange that these officials still hold their positions; it was necessary to kick them out of these positions in disgrace, because they are the ones to blame... What is the demand from the West? - this is the enemy, he should act this way, but why expose himself to these blows? This means that you are fighting poorly, you have lost the battle on this front. I am afraid that a similar action regarding the World Cup is not far off. In the West, people are understanding. And if from the very beginning there had been a harsh reaction from Russia, then the West would have behaved differently. The West understands power very well. Strength and will were not demonstrated. There was a lack of will and a willingness to turn the cheek or other part of the body to the offender.
Andrey FEFELOV. Let's return to the global trend of social stratification. We affected the Russian Federation and India. And China?
Andrey FURSOV. In China - of course, with Chinese characteristics - the same thing is happening as throughout the world. The growth of inequality in China has reached such a level that it has already been reflected even in science fiction novels. Hao Jingfang's science fiction novel Folding Beijing was recently released in China and won the Hugo Award, a prestigious international science fiction award. The novel shows the near future of Beijing in this way. There are three population groups in China: the upper class, the middle class and the lower classes; their numbers in Beijing are 5 million, 25 million and several tens of millions, respectively. The differences between the groups are not only of a property nature, but much deeper, affecting sociobiology - the right to life functioning in form of wakefulness. Representatives of the elite in the novel stay awake for 24 hours, 24 hours - from 6 am one day to 6 am the next. Then they take the medicine and fall asleep. And then the middle class wakes up, awake from 6 am to 10 pm of the same day, i.e. less. Then the lower classes wake up, they only have 8 hours - from 10 pm to 6 am.
Here, in a science-fiction form, a social process that concerns life itself is shown. In this regard, I remember the film “Time”, where social differences are also connected with time, that is, with life, with the time allotted for it. But in essence, class differences have already been transformed into sociobiological or, if you like, anthropological. Just look - the average life expectancy, say, in Rome was 22-25 years. But the Romans from the higher groups lived 75–80 years. The English aristocracy also lived long, with an average life expectancy of 45 years in England at the end of the 19th century. That is, the rich and noble have been living 80-85 years for the last 2-3 thousand years. This means that their socioeconomic status is transmitted throughout their lifetime; this means that, among other things, exploitation is the appropriation not only of someone else's economic product, but also - through time - of someone else's life. And if in the “happy thirtieth anniversary” (1945–1975) this process reversed, now, especially after the disappearance of systemic anti-capitalism in the person of the USSR, everything is returning to normal. Capitalism takes on the familiar shape of an “iron heel”, a devourer of other people’s time. The Germans talked about Lebensraum - space for life, now it’s time to talk about Lebenszeit - time for life, time-as-life, devouring which dying capitalism tries to prolong its life.
Andrey FEFELOV. It is very interesting. Perhaps, we often do not take into account the temporary category, although, as it turns out, it is very eloquent.
Modern Chinese futurology at such a high level indicates that society is looking to the future. In this case, we are talking about a dystopia in which a society of social and, probably, digital control over the population reigns.
Andrey FURSOV. And this is another trend - strengthening social control with the help of numbers (the flip side is the increase in digital dementia of the population). Some people talk about chipization, others talk about the abolition of money and the introduction of cards - this is, indeed, strengthening social control. Our Russian optimism lies in the fact that it will not be possible to build social control in Russia. Someone will definitely steal or break something.
Andrey FEFELOV. Even during the presidency of Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, there was an attempt to introduce a universal electronic UEC card. The Orthodox called this project the forerunner of the Antichrist, trying to resist him. A few years later it turned out that our officials managed to completely “cut up” the Antichrist.
Andrey FURSOV. In this regard, the Russian official is our support and hope. As Nekrasov said, although he meant something else, “he will endure everything.”
As for China, it is a fairly organized society and strict social control is the norm there. In the West, the possibilities of social control, which over the past half century has successfully turned into social training, are multiplying thanks to technical capabilities. There is an obedient, comfortable population, who will do whatever they tell them. But in Russia the situation is still different both socially and technically. In addition, we have a wonderful thing - such a value as social justice. It, firstly, originally exists in Russian culture, and secondly, it is powerfully fueled by socialism.
Andrey FEFELOV. That is, injustice is not the norm?
Andrey FURSOV. Injustice is not our norm. If an Indian perceives social injustice normally, the reason for this is the caste system; if, say, a Brazilian perceives it normally, because he lives in a peripheral capitalist country, then for a Russian this is not the norm. In addition, in Russia there were traditionally specific relations between the dominant groups and the oppressed. In 1649, the Council Code enslaved the population, and not only the peasants who served the nobles, but also the nobles who served the state, and the townspeople. Under Peter III, this agreement was terminated. The nobles received the right not to serve, although the majority continued to serve anyway, because the nobles were a financially poor class. Therefore, Sukhov-Kobylin has a proud epitaph: “I never served.”
Andrey FEFELOV. And I thought that this was already under Catherine, who usurped power.
Andrey FURSOV. No, this decree was issued by Peter III literally a few months before his death - in 1762. The impostor on the throne, Catherine, paid with others - with the decree on the liberties of the nobility in 1785. But this is one line. After it became clear that the nobles might not serve, the peasants decided that they would be released the next day. They were indeed released the next day, but after 99 years. The decree of Peter III was dated February 18, 1762, and on February 19, 1861, the peasants were released. However, since the 1760s, peasants perceived their relationship with the bars as unfair: if the nobles could not serve the state, then why should the peasants serve the nobles. Class hostility was superimposed on sociocultural one - nobles and peasants personified two different sociocultural structures. But the European nobility, especially the English, managed to impose their values on the lower classes as national ones. Hence the fundamentally different relations between the upper and lower classes in Western Europe and in Russia: Pushkin wrote about it this way: “The Russian peasant does not respect his master, but the Englishman respects his master.”
In 1861, a reform was carried out that freed the peasants, but at the same time deprived them of a third of the land - again injustice. Therefore, what is called everyday Russian rudeness is the other side of the described reality. Someone, I don’t remember who, of our wealthy travelers said that in Russia, unfortunately, even in an expensive restaurant, if the waitress is in a bad mood, she will definitely let you feel it, but in France or Germany this is impossible. Yes, this is one side of the matter, because the people there are absolutely well-trained. But our system did not roll a person, did not narrow him, as Dostoevsky’s hero would say.
Ultimately, the presence of social justice as a value means that the population will never accept the results of 1991, and this creates a permanent problem in the relations between the population and the privatizers. The attitude towards the rich and noble in India or China is completely different. And Chinese socialism was based on a completely different tradition than Soviet socialism.
Andrey FEFELOV. And, accordingly, social stratification and economic inequality also fall on different traditions in different countries.
Andrey FURSOV. Moreover, the uneven development of different regions within the same country, including some regions in global processes and excluding others, further increases inequality, ultimately depriving the losers of ever changing their fate.
In India, for example, there are super-developed sectors in electronics. But these are growth points that have minimal relevance to India. They are connected to the same points in China, the United States, and Europe. Moreover, Indian capital has invested much more in British industry than the European Union: given the long-standing ties between Great Britain and India, the British are more comfortable in contacting Indians than with their European neighbors. Great Britain and India are very different countries, but they have one thing in common: perhaps in no other country in the world do the upper classes treat the lower classes as cruelly and arrogantly as in Europe - in Great Britain, and in Asia - in India. And so these two traditions overlapped each other. Many police stations in India, for example, still have portraits of station commanders from colonial times. Although India became independent in 1947, the tradition of the British Raj continues, especially since it was the British who united the principalities and polities of the subcontinent into a single whole. Before the British, India did not exist in its current form, there were the Great Mughals, there were Marathas, there were Sikhs, there were states of the south, and they fought among themselves. And the British came, crushed everyone with an imperious hoop and united them. It is symbolic that one of the claims of the leaders of the Indian national liberation movement to the British was that they stopped observing their own rules, that the white sahibs did not behave in the way they declared correct.
Psychologically, there were a number of very interesting moments in the development of colonial India. For example, social psychologists pay attention to how Indian attitudes toward white women changed during World War II. Before this, the white woman was looked up to as a special being. And during the war, American comics and pin-up pictures began to spread in India, where women were slightly scantily clad. This convinced the Indians: a white woman is the same as an Indian woman, with all the ensuing consequences. In general, the war greatly changed the attitude towards whites in general and the British in particular - they were defeated by the Japanese, i.e. Asians. And then the national liberation movement, on the one hand, and the understanding that came to the West that in the new conditions it was possible to effectively economically exploit the countries of Asia and Africa without political costs, led to the dismantling of the colonial system, the main beneficiary of which was the United States and American multinational corporations. The euphoria of gaining freedom in the former colonies of the Afro-Asian world very quickly gave way to apathy and the realization that the gap between the West and the former colonies is growing, but now the mother countries do not bear any moral and political responsibility for those they have tamed. At the same time, while the West was dealing with the Soviet Union, China rose and made an economic breakthrough. The latter, however, should not be overestimated: China, for all its purely quantitative economic power, is a workshop. The design office is located in a different location. And in this regard, the Chinese are well aware of their situation - both military and economic.
In addition, Russia, Russians for the West are, in a certain sense, less socially and culturally acceptable characters than the Chinese or Arabs. For example, the Nazis once declared the Japanese to be honorary Aryans. In the same way, it will be easier for Americans to declare Chinese people honorary Americans than Russians. The Russians pose a constant threat of non-standard thought and behavior, and therefore of victory.
About 20 years ago, a German woman came to one of our academic institutes with a dissertation on a specific topic - she studied the structures of Russian everyday life and analyzed those situations when Russians use certain objects for other purposes. Well, for example, you come to the accounting department. What are they holding the flowers in? You cut a plastic bottle, put some dirt in there, and there you have it, a flower. Or, say, a lock on a barn to prevent water from pouring in, a plastic bottle is cut off, nailed, and it closes it. The German woman called this phenomenon barbarism, because civilization, in her opinion, is when a thing is clearly used for its intended purpose, the function is strictly tied to the substance. For us, “call me a pot, just don’t put it in the stove.” On our TV, as part of the program “While Everyone is Home,” there was even such a section as “Crazy Hands.” This is a play on words: crazy and very skillful. The rubric demonstrated exceptional ingenuity, adapting for various functions those objects that were originally intended for something completely different. It was Russian ingenuity that helped us win many wars, including the Great Patriotic War. The unconventionality of thought and behavior is due to harsh natural conditions, the change of seasons, a short agricultural season, and special historical conditions that constantly forced us to look for ways to survive - and defeat the circumstances and a superior enemy: rich and well-fed Europeans did not face such problems on such a scale. Hence the conformism elevated to the norm.
Andrey FEFELOV. This is German civilization.
Andrey FURSOV. No, Western European in general. Our civilizational non-standardity, the ability to survive in different conditions, creates problems for them. Andrei Platonov said this very well: “A Russian person can live in one direction, and in the other direction, and in both cases he will remain intact.”
Andrey FEFELOV. When we talked about social control, I remembered how a balloon rose over Kabul every morning. This is occupied Kabul, 2010, and this balloon was doing optical tracking. And in the evening, NATO members used winches to pull him back to the ground. Huge American patrol cars were moving around Kabul; there were huge blacks sitting there who bore the white man's burden in Afghanistan. And these paintings symbolized a lot... Now you have made a very large trip to India - what paintings, what images do you have after the trip?
Andrey FURSOV. Well, firstly, of course, these are colossal contrasts. They are visible to a much greater extent in southern India than in northern India. For example, Delhi is a city of contrasts, but Mumbai - the former Bombay - is an even more contrasting city, where, when you leave a luxury hotel, you find yourself not on a luxurious street, like in Delhi in the center, but in a slum zone. Moreover, in Mumbai as such there is no city center, these are several cities, but, nevertheless, in the city itself, and not at all on its outskirts, there is the Dharavi district - an area of two square kilometers, that is, two million square meters, where two million people live: one person per square meter. This is a closet 1.5-1.6 meters high, and it’s not even Kuma Pumpkin’s house from “The Adventures of Cipollino”, because Kuma Pumpkin’s house was still made of bricks, and this is thin plywood, thick cardboard, pieces from a refrigerator, etc. .
Andrey FEFELOV. It's like in Kobo Abe's novel The Box Man.
Andrey FURSOV. Almost. Second floor, third floor. But the most interesting thing is that this is one of the attractions of Mumbai; rich tourists are taken there and shown how people live. In fact, this is a non-human existence. At the same time, there are 10-15% of rich and super rich Indians who live in a completely different world. These worlds practically do not touch, which is also caste-based. Of course, this cannot be compared with the stratification in the United States, because there is more social fat there, but the process is happening everywhere. Naturally, the situation is worst where there is little social fat. Marx once used the phrase: “A pagan wasting away from the plagues of Christianity.” It is from the ulcers of capitalism that those who wither and suffer most are not in the core, which plundered the periphery, but on the periphery, because it is no longer needed. It was once needed, but now it is not needed, now it is thrown away.
Andrey FEFELOV. Squeezed lemon, skin.
Andrey FURSOV. Yes, that's absolutely right. And the current periphery of the capitalist system is reminiscent of what happened to northeast Brazil at the beginning of the 19th century. In the 18th century, this area was actively exploited, then everything was squeezed out of it and it was thrown out. Much of the Afro-Asian and Latin American world is unnecessary in a post-capitalist digital world. And the problem arises: what to do with this population? This problem within the framework of the capital system, in my opinion, is insoluble. Huge masses of the population, which the wave of technical and economic progress is pushing into the abyss. Half a century ago, the American sociologist B. Moore noted that revolutions are born not from the victorious cry of the rising class, but from the dying roar of the class over which the waves of progress are about to close. Today there are a lot of people in the world for whom the progress of the current masters of the world game leaves practically no chance. I am sure that they will give battle to the hosts, and on “their field” - I mean Afro-Asian migrants in Western Europe and Latin American migrants in the USA. They will not be able to create a new world - rather a dark age, but they will destroy the old one. And the post-old world will be a world of uncertainty, a world of functions walking on their own, regardless of substances - a world familiar to us, Russians. And playing in that world will require sophistication.
Andrey FEFELOV. And mobilization.
Andrey FURSOV. Certainly. The most important thing, a necessary condition for victory, is that the elite must associate itself with the society of which it is a part. The elite who associate themselves with the “Barvikha Luxury Village” and who for this “Barvikha Luxury Village” will certainly give up everything, everything and lose. It will be cleaned out.
Andrey FEFELOV. These elite groups have no other base other than Russia. They think that someone somewhere will accept them for their money, but this will not happen.
Andrey FURSOV. These are all the dreams of Ostap Bender - the same one who was accepted and completely cleansed at the Romanian border. So, in this regard, whoever will win will win - and this is a paradoxical situation! - with the people.
Andrey FEFELOV. And the second point, it seems to me, is very important, the only way to survive is to win.
Andrey FURSOV. Indeed, victory is a condition for survival. As Confucius said: “Whoever jumped the farthest will jump again.” We will paraphrase this: the one who wins will live. This is a strict condition, this is an imperative of the great crisis of the 21st century into which we are entering. Braudel called the time between feudalism and capitalism a social hell. And now we live in an era that is increasingly beginning to resemble a social hell. And the same Braudel in his fundamental work “Material civilization, economics and capitalism. XV–XVIII centuries.” posed the question: is it possible to escape from social hell? Can. But not alone. No one can escape alone. We can only break out collectively. Only those ruling elites who will have a powerful magical weapon - unity with their people - will enter the post-capitalist (post-catastrophic?) world. A ticket to the future in the context of an impending crisis, a war of all against all, will be given only to those elites who identify themselves with their countries, who are rooted in their culture and who share the same values, interests and goals with their people. The organizational weapon of the elite of the Russian Federation in the conditions of the crisis of the 21st century can be only one thing - unity with the people. This is a necessary condition for victory, sufficient – the will to win, which is forged in accordance with the principle “don’t believe, don’t be afraid, don’t ask.”
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||
We publish answers to questions from EYE OF THE PLANET readers in video format.
About Europe
1. Dear Andrey Ilyich! Watching your speech on TV Day, a question arose: do you think that after the collapse of the Third Reich, the Nazi hierarchs transformed it in the form of the European Union and the NATO bloc for a new campaign to the East?
2. What causes the current crisis of multiculturalism in Europe? Are there prerequisites for a similar situation in Russia, and if so, how can this be prevented? Recent events show that the Anglo-Saxons strongly support radical Islam and help them overthrow the government. Does this mean that Israel is essentially being disposed of and pushing it, like Turkey, towards military action?
About the collapse of the USSR
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
Is the collapse of the USSR caused only by external influence and betrayal, or by existing internal imbalances in the system?
Vatican in geopolitics
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
Tell me, what role does the Vatican play in modeling geopolitical processes? Does the Vatican have the opportunity to significantly influence the political life of individual countries, and if so, which ones? What is the volume of the Vatican's financial resources? Tell us about the relationship between the Vatican and the “Venetian black aristocracy”?
Centers of power
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
You spoke about emerging macro-regions that resist globalization. Which of them can be predicted, except for the EU, USA, China and EAC. Will Latin America be united, what options do Mexico, Australia, Japan, India, Southeast Asia and Africa have? Will Europe be united or will the problems on the periphery only begin? What about countries like Spain or Greece?
Ideology of Russia
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
1. Do you think a state can exist without state ideology? And what ideology does Russia have now?
2. Dear Andrey Ilyich! What idea do you think can unite the peoples of Russia: the supremacy of a strong government, social justice and equality of people (or is this impossible in modern Russia), faith and support for religious cults, or something else?
3. Can Russia avoid the fate of becoming a tool in third hands in a clash between East and West?
About modernization
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
1. Just a year ago, we heard about “modernization” every day from the first persons; what happened today?
2.Good afternoon, Andrei Ilyich! I always watch videos with your participation and read your articles with deep interest; in one of the stories regarding the current moment, you said that you are only making a “diagnosis” for the system and the world. Actually, the question is that I really want to hear from such a competent researcher some suggestions - recommendations for improving the situation in the lives of people and countries in the world! Are you working towards practical recommendations from the country's political leadership? Do our leaders understand the depth and complexity of the modern world order? How do you see the coming years of Russia's life if the current government policy is maintained?
Network-root structures
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
1. Is the systemic global crisis a sign of the collapse of global “network structures”? There is a feeling that these structures are in deep crisis and are now gnawing at each other like spiders in a jar. And if this is so, what should the Russian leadership do in this case, in your opinion?
2. In your opinion, is the Internet simply a quantitative characteristic of communications, or does it represent a new phenomenon that changes the behavior and properties of society as a whole.
World elite
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
1. You often talk about elites. I have a question: What qualities should candidates for the world elite have: enough wealth? What characterizes this club?
2. In one program, you said that the world’s ruling elite has its own education system, to which mere mortals do not have access. Do you think the world elite has its own religion, and if so, which religious movement or philosophical movement known to us is it closest to, in your opinion?
3.Good afternoon, Andrei Ilyich! I always watch videos with your participation and read your articles with deep interest; in one of the stories regarding the current moment, you said that you are only making a “diagnosis” for the system and the world. Actually, the question is that I really want to hear from such a competent researcher some suggestions - recommendations for improving the situation in the lives of people and countries in the world! Are you working towards practical recommendations from the country's political leadership? Do our leaders understand the depth and complexity of the modern world order? How do you see the coming years of Russia's life if the current government policy is maintained?
Information security
1. Do you consider the idea of eradicating the exploitation of “man by man” as utopian, or as an idea capable, at a certain stage, of uniting Russian society and pointing it in the right direction? Do you agree that religion is a tool for managing society? Can we expect transformation from religion, for example, a transition from dogma to dialectical knowledge of the universe? Do you agree with the statement: - Everything that happens happens for the better? Did I understand correctly from your statements that Russia has no subjectivity? If I understood you correctly, then don’t you think that Fyodor Tyutchev’s words can be addressed to you? "You can't understand Russia with your mind."
2. Why, in your opinion, do people not create mechanisms of psychological and behavioral defense (conscious or not) from the harmful influence of alien environments, and often even take the worst (the cult of consumption, liberal promiscuity)? Is this due to the underformation/instability/unconsciousness of cultural codes?
And lastly: how deep can the decline of civilization, which you talk about in some of your speeches, reach? What does an ordinary person need (and can) prepare for?
About miscellaneous
Andrey Fursov answers questions from readers of Eye of the Planet:
1. Dear Andrei Ilyich, I am concerned about the attack on the Far East (Sakhalin) by Asians - China or Japan, how realistic is this now and under what conditions is it possible?
2. Tell me, is there any reason to believe that, by betraying the interests of the state of Israel today, part of the world elite is trying to play the same card as in the case of the Holocaust?
3. Thank you for your analytics. I look forward to your analysis regarding the latest initiatives of Zbigniew Brzezinski.
4. The editor-in-chief of Gazprom magazine Sergei Pravosudov wrote in his blog that there is a chance for a book by you. In recent years, the country seems to be waking up; quite a large number of people may be interested. Do you still have such plans?
Full version of the interview:
Thanks to Andrey Ilyich for detailed and interesting answers. In the future, we hope to regularly communicate with him on the most current topics.
Dear readers, we have the opportunity to ask our questions to a historian, publicist and sociologist Fursov Andrey Ilyich, we invite you to join.
A.I. Fursov is director of the Center for Russian Studies at the Institute of Fundamental and Applied Research at Moscow University for the Humanities, head of the Department of Asia and Africa at INION RAS, editor-in-chief of the journal “Oriental Studies and African Studies (Foreign Literature)”, head of the Center for Methodology and Information at the Institute of Dynamic Conservatism.
Elected full member (academician) of the International Academy of Sciences, Austria.
Andrey Ilyich Fursov: biography
Birthday May 16, 1951
Russian historian, sociologist, publicist, organizer of science
Biography
Born in Shchelkovo, near Moscow, in the family of a military man. In 1973 he graduated from the history department of the Institute of Asian and African Countries at Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov. In 1986 he defended his PhD thesis on the topic “A critical analysis of non-Marxist historiography of the 1970s and 80s on the problems of the peasantry in Asia.”
Member of the Russian Intellectual Club, the expert council of the Political Journal.
In 2009, he was elected a full member (academician) of the International Academy of Sciences, Austria.
In 2010, he was elected a member of the Russian Writers' Union.
Scientific work
The position in science was formed under the influence of Vladimir Vasilyevich Krylov (1934-1989), a gifted researcher and original thinker, who died early at the IMEMO RAS. Subsequently, it reflected the influence of some ideas of Alexander Zinoviev and the American “world-system specialist” Immanuel Wallerstein.
Scientific interests are focused on the methodology of socio-historical research, the theory and history of complex social systems, the characteristics of the historical subject, the phenomenon of power (and the global struggle for power, information, resources), Russian history, the history of the capitalist system and comparative historical comparisons of the West, Russia and the East.
He took part in 150 Russian and international scientific congresses, conferences and seminars.
Teaching
Lectures at universities in Hungary, Germany, India, Canada, USA (New York in Binghamton, Columbia, Yale and Dickinson College).
Publications
- Problems of the social history of the Asian peasantry. - Moscow: INION AS USSR, 1986-1988. - 2 vols. - P. 161, 267.
- Revolution as an immanent form of development of the European historical subject (reflections on the formational and civilizational origins of the French Revolution) // 200 years of the French Revolution / French Yearbook. 1987. - Moscow: Nauka, 1989. - P. 278-330.
- Kratocracy (The social nature of Soviet-type societies. The rise and fall of perestroika) // Society. - Moscow, 1991-1994.
- The great mystery of the West: the role of formational and civilizational factors in the creation of a European historical subject // Europe: new destinies of the old continent. - Moscow: INION RAS, 1992. - T. I. - P. 13-70.
- Peasantry in social systems: experience in developing the theory of the peasantry as a social type - a personification of the interaction of universal and systemic sociality // Peasantry and industrial civilization. - Moscow: Science, 1993. - P. 56-112.
- Communism, Capitalism and the Bells of History // Review. - Binghamton (N.Y.), 1994. - Vol. XIX, No. 2. - P. 103-130.
- Kapitalismus, Kommunismus und die Glocken der Geschichte // Comparativ. Leipziger Beitr?ge zur Universalgeschichte und vergleichenden Gesellschaftsforschung. - Leipzig, 1994. - 4. Jahrgang, Heft 5. - S. 57-69.
- East, West, capitalism: problems of philosophy, history and social theory // Capitalism in the East in the second half of the 20th century. — Moscow: Vost. lit. RAS, 1995. - P. 16-133, 530-540, 597-599.
- Russian System (co-authored) // Frontiers. - Moscow, 1995-1996.
- Social Times, Social Spaces, and Their Dilemmas: Ideology “in One Country” // Review. - Binghamton (N.Y.), 1997. - Vol. XX, No. 3/4. — P. 345—420.
- Manifesto of the Communist Party, or 150 years later // LARP. - Moscow, 1998. - T. I, No. 1. - P. 267-300.
- The middleness of Central Asia: a long-term view of the place of Central Asia in the macro-regional system of the Old World // RIZH. - Moscow, 1998. - T. I, No. 4. - P. 165-185.
- The Asia-Pacific region (concept, myth, reality) and the world system // Afro-Asian world: regional historical systems and capitalism. - Moscow: INION RAS, 1999 - P. 89-144.
- Al-Hind. Indian Ocean Islamic world-economy: structures of everyday life, social institutions, main stages of development // Afro-Asian world: regional historical systems and capitalism. - Moscow: INION RAS, 1999. - P. 35-72.
- Another “enchanted wanderer” (About Vladimir Vasilyevich Krylov against the backdrop of late-communist society and in the interior of the socio-professional organization of Soviet science) // RIZH. - Moscow, 1999. - T. II, No. 4. - P. 349-490.
- Gulf (Iraqi-American conflict 1990-1991) // Arab-Muslim world on the threshold of the 21st century. - Moscow: INION RAS, 1999. - P. 155-195.
- The Break of Communism // LARP. - Moscow, 1999. - T. II, No. 2. - P. 274-402.
- At the end of Modernity: terrorism or world war? // LARG. - Moscow, 1999. - T. II, No. 3. - P. 193-231.
- Saeculum vicesimum: In memoriam (In memory of the 20th century) // LARP. - Moscow, 2000. - T. III, No. 1-4. — P. 17-154.
- About the great contrary: life-experiment and creativity of A. A. Zinoviev in the context of social theory and Russian history // Zinoviev Phenomenon. - M.: Modern notebooks, 2002. - P. 40-64.
- Operation Orientalism. - Moscow: Humanitarian, 2004. - 55 p.
- Operation Progress // Cosmopolis. - Moscow, 2003/2004. — No. 4 (6). — P. 23-43.
- Eurasia Viewed from an Historical Height // World Affairs. The Journal of International Issues. - New Delhi, 2004. - Vol. VIII, No. 1. - P. 150-168.
- World geopolitical chess: champions and challengers // Dehiyo L. Fragile balance: four centuries of struggle for dominance in Europe. - Moscow: Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2005. - P. 244-313.
- The European system of states, the Anglo-Saxons and Russia // Dehiyo L. Fragile balance: four centuries of struggle for dominance in Europe. - Moscow: Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2005. - P. 27-48.
- Central Eurasia: Historical Centrality, Geostrategic Condition and Power Model Legacy // Towards Social Stability and Democratic Governance in Central Eurasia / Ed. by I. Morozova. - Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2005. - P. 23-39.
- Ideology and ideology // Kustarev A. S. Nervous people. Essays on the intelligentsia. - Moscow: Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2006 - P. 7-47.
- Intelligentsia and intellectuals // Kustarev A. S. Nervous people. Essays on the intelligentsia. - Moscow: Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2006 - P. 48-86.
- Conspiracy theories, capitalism and the history of Russian power // Bryukhanov V. A. Tragedy of Russia. Regicide March 1, 1881 - Moscow: Partnership of Scientific Publications KMK, 2007. - P. 7-69.
Interview Andrey Fursov: THE WORLD OF THE FUTURE
1. Where is this world going (i.e., what does the picture of the future look like)?
The world is rapidly moving towards the end of capitalism. Not much remains of the latter: there is practically no market anymore, there are global monopolies; the state is dying out; civil society is shrinking; politics is turning into a combination of the administrative system and show business, money has lost a number of functions and has largely ceased to be money; Europeans have lost one of their foundations - the work ethic, capital almost managed to absorb, devour labor, but because of this it itself ceases to be capital.
1.1. Who is building a new world?
Two processes are taking place simultaneously: the destruction of the old world and the formation of a new one. The old capitalist world is being broken by the capitalist elite - they no longer need it, at least in the long term. Since the mid-1970s, capitalism has been dismantled. He seems to be “going” to his “pre-democratic past”, to the era of the “Iron Heel” and the East Indian companies, these predecessors of the current transnational corporations, only cooler than these latter. Curtailing progress is the way the world elite creates their new world. For most of humanity, this “new world” will turn into new “dark ages” - not to be confused with the Middle Ages, which started in the 9th century. the collapse of Charlemagne's empire. “Dark Ages” is the time between the middle of the 6th century. (the system of Roman aqueducts finally stopped working; 476 as the end of the Roman Empire is a false invention of the Roman high priests, who thus emphasized their role) and the middle of the 9th century.
The Dark Ages are, indeed, an era of darkness and blood, in contrast to the Middle Ages, slandered by figures of the Renaissance and especially the Enlightenment (by swindlers like Voltaire), the Light Ages, until the beginning of the 14th century. eras; XIV-XVII centuries - a new Dark Age, which, however, had a façade that was as inviting as it was false - the Renaissance.
1.2. Is there an alternative to the Western model of the future (new dark ages)?
At the moment, such an alternative is poorly visible. Now the main thing is not to let the dark-age project be realized, but we will see. The alternative is resistance to the global agenda, i.e., the course towards a barbaric reduction in the planet's population, destruction of the state (sovereignty), family, science, education, healthcare, the latter, as M. Moore noted, turns into healthcare burial.
1.3 Is it possible to return to the path of development that the planet followed 50-60 years ago?
Hardly. Returns and restorations in history are impossible. It is impossible to repeat the unique era of 1945-1975. - a breakthrough of humanity, led by the USSR, into the future, a breakthrough artificially interrupted by the stupid Soviet nomenklatura and the calculating elite of the capitalist world. The Soviet elite paid for this situational alliance with the destruction of the USSR.
1.4 Is it possible to restore people's confidence in the future, hope and optimism?
Optimism is a state of mind of strong and integral people who know how to not only change circumstances, but create them. Optimism is difficult, but at the same time joyful work, often in defiance of fate. Optimism cannot be given, donated, or returned. He is born in struggle. Of course, there is a biochemical (genetic) basis for optimism, however, optimism is a social function of healthy societies. It is enough to compare the Soviet society of the mid-1930s - mid-1960s (“We have no barriers on land and sea,” “The Andromeda Nebula” by I. Efremov and much more) with the Soviet society of the 1970s-1980s - tired, cynical, sarcastic and joyless. And this despite the fact that life in the 1970s became more comfortable, easier and more satisfying; fear went away, but happiness did not come. The 1960s were a brief moment of hope that did not come true either here or in the world.
1.5 Is it possible to put progress at the service of all people (or at least the majority)?
The USSR tried. And it worked for us for thirty years. So it’s possible. You just need to be vigilant and remember Stalin’s warning that as socialism develops, the class struggle intensifies, i.e., there is a threat of degeneration. And so it happened, and certain segments of the CPSU Central Committee and the KGB were among the first to degenerate. The party inquisition has not worked properly.
1.6 Dream - a rough sketch of the future. What do people dream about today?
Different people dream about different things. It depends on what they are focused on - reality, nav or rule. That is, either to the world of dark and vulgar passions (wealth and pleasure at any cost to oneself personally and to the detriment of others), or to labor in solidarity on the basis of social justice and the preservation of one’s ethnocultural identity.
2 The problem of the “golden billion” is the most dangerous problem of our time, do you agree with this?
The problem of the “golden billion” in the form in which it was formulated is not the most dangerous, since this billion is being eroded. In Europe it is being eroded by Arabs, Turks, Kurds, Africans, and there will be more and more of them. It seems that the European part of the “golden billion” has been written off and flushed into the “toilet of history,” or they are trying to selectively, with the help of immigrants from the South, develop a new type of Europeans who will fight for the future not in numbers, but in skill. True, so far young educated Europeans are emigrating to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, but not to the USA, where it will soon be hot too. After all, social problems there are mixed with racial ones: blacks, who are now commonly called African-Americans, Hispanics (Latinos). The racial and ethnocultural composition of the West is changing. Actually, the West in the usual sense no longer exists. There is a post-Western, post-Christian society that is rapidly sliding into the “hole of History.” Those whom B. Disraeli called “the masters of history,” and the writer O. Markeev “the masters of the world game,” have some kind of plan, but, firstly, it seems that the situation is getting out of control. Secondly, a struggle is unfolding within the world ruling elite (it is not united) for the future. It is these contradictions that we need to play on, as Stalin did in the 1930s.
2.1 What place is allocated to Russia and Russians (in the general sense of the word, i.e., residents of Russia) according to this plan?
Andrey Fursov: - In the original plan, I think there is no place for Russians and many other non-Western peoples. But, I repeat, the plan seems to be breaking down. However, the globalists treat several lines very harshly: the destruction of the state, family, education, healthcare and science. This is part of their global agenda. Therefore, despite any rhetoric and situational high-profile actions in foreign policy, I will believe in the good intentions of only such a government in our country that will stop the pogrom of science, education and healthcare, i.e. will break the global agenda in these areas. What kind of struggle is this for the sovereignty of the state today, if everything is going in such a way that tomorrow there is no one and nothing (lack of healthy men and brains) to defend it?
2.2 What plan can we propose instead?
Who are "we? People, oligarchs, government? To propose a plan, you need to have a strategy. To have a strategy, you need to have an ideology. We have a state - formally - non-ideological and non-ideological, and the lot of those who in today's world do not have an ideology, and therefore, their own project for the future, is a picnic on the sidelines of history in the expectation that, perhaps, the owners will call for a new celebration of life. They won’t even call on the “bad guys” who served them: “Rome doesn’t pay traitors.” Russia can have only one goal - to survive and win in the 21st century, preserving its identity, population and territory. This is a minimum program. This can only be done by creating a social system based on social justice, then Power and Motherland become one and the same. People can kill for money, but no one will die for money. For the Motherland - they will, the Great Patriotic War showed this. That’s why we won - we had a fair social system behind us, whose collectivist-anti-capitalist character corresponded to the Russian archetypes of consciousness and subconscious and cultural-historical code; as Alexander Blok said, Bolshevism “is a property of the Russian soul, and not a faction in the State Duma.”
The 21st century will be a time of fierce struggle for the future, when entire states, ethnic groups, cultures will be mercilessly, without sentimentality, erased by the Eraser of History. The scumbags in power (their name is legion, one example - look at the face of X. Clinton) will stop at nothing. In this struggle, united social systems, welded together by a single value code, characterized by minimal social polarization and containing a high percentage of knowledge carriers, a kind of nation-corporation, will survive and win. Oligarchic systems will not survive in this struggle, their fate is to become economic fertilizer, manure for the strong; in fact, they don’t deserve anything else. In the second half of the 20th century. The oligarchized power structures in the USSR blocked progress twice and paid dearly for it. In the mid-1960s, the USSR was ready to make a scientific and technological leap into the future, transforming from systemic anti-capitalism into real post-capitalism, but this was in the interests of both the Soviet nomenklatura and the top of the world capitalist class. The breakthrough was strictly blocked, and the rise in oil and detente prices brought a sense of calm and deep satisfaction to the Soviet leadership. We often remember the Brezhnev era with emotion - stability, confidence in the future. And in the short term this was true, but in the medium term (not to mention the long term, the Brezhnev era was a waste of the future, a time of missed historical opportunities. “Baggy old men... who were afraid of their own wives” (E. Neizvestny) wasted the future of the system - it was dying in them and through them. And this despite the fact that in the multi-layered USSR there was a super-powerful scientific and technical complex, which was supposed to rush into the future no later than the beginning of the 1990s. However, if the impulse of the 1960s was cut off by detent and oil, then the second - perestroika and destruction of the USSR, which were based on the banal desire of part of the Soviet nomenklatura to “enroll in the bourgeoisie." One can only hope that the evacuation of the regime that took place at the very end of the 1980s was not only financial, but also scientific and technical. However, “a shot from future” - this is wonderful, but we also need to avoid making mistakes ourselves.
3. In order for Russia (and us together with it) to survive in the current situation, it is necessary to fight off an external attack. It is a well-known truth that when a dog is beaten with a stick, in order to be saved, it must bite not the stick or even the hand, but the throat of the one holding the stick. In order to find this throat, you need to have a very good understanding of the structure of the modern world, know the forces operating in it and their habitats.
3.1 Does the science you present answer these questions?
Yes, it does. The enemy of Russia is global moneylenders and the politicians, journalists, and show personalities who serve them, not only outside our country, but also within it. In the latter case, we are talking about regressors that destroy the value, intellectual and technological foundations of our society. But they are just faceless functions of the global matrix, Chapek’s salamanders, about which the writer said: “They come like a thousand masks without faces.”
Fursov Andrey Ilyich is a Russian historian, social scientist, publicist, and sociologist. Author of more than 200 scientific works, including nine monographs. The author of a unique course of lectures on Russian history, I recommend that you read it by clicking on this link.
In 2009 he was elected academician of the International Academy of Sciences.
Andrei Fursov's scientific interests are focused on the methodology of socio-historical research, the theory and history of complex social systems, the characteristics of the historical subject, the phenomenon of power (and the global struggle for power, information, resources), Russian history, the history of the capitalist system and comparative historical comparisons of the West, Russia and the East.
You can watch a unique course of video lectures given by Andrey Fursov by clicking on
Exactly 97 years ago, an armed uprising began in Petrograd, overthrowing the Provisional Government and going down in history as the Great October Socialist Revolution.
It received this name almost two decades later, and immediately after it, a Civil War broke out in the country, accompanied by an invasion of interventionists. For most of the detractors and critics of the USSR, the actions of the Bolsheviks ended there; they forget that despite all these circumstances, the USSR carried out a fantastic project for those times to electrify the country, which led to the development of industry, energy, the development of colossal territories, the construction of infrastructure, and much more. from this it works so far. In parallel, there was a development of education, medicine, science and technology.
The GOELRO plan was one of the key government projects of the young Soviet country. Lenin’s famous expression is that “communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the entire country.” The famous science fiction writer Herbert Wells was simply shocked by the electrification plan and told Lenin that it was impracticable, but when he returned to Russia 14 years later - in 1934, his amazement knew no bounds, because plans that he could “imagine only with the help of super-fantasy ", were overfulfilled. In many ways, it was the electrification of the country that became the basis for subsequent industrialization - the Kuznetsk coal basin began to be used and the industrial zone was developed, huge hydroelectric power stations were built, a network of regional power plants appeared, and electricity production increased by almost an order of magnitude in 15 years.
In a matter of years, a colossal construction project took place in the country - hundreds of factories, railways, subways, and colossal infrastructure facilities laid the groundwork for the emergence of a superpower, which used this potential for another half a century and continues to use it to this day. Here you can also recall the system of universal free school and accessible higher education, the development of science and technology, the space program, nuclear energy, medicine...
Considering all this, one can understand why November 7, in the memory of generations of people who firmly remembered from an early age “the day of the seventh of November - the red day of the calendar,” still remains “that very November holiday”, which marked a global event and the most significant achievements of the Soviet system.
He spoke in an interview about why November 7 was and remains a relevant holiday for Russian people, about Soviet patriotism and why the USSR still cannot be restored Nakanune.RU historian, writer, full member of the International Academy of Sciences Andrey Fursov.
Question: Today is the day of the Great October Socialist Revolution. Why, in your opinion, is this day more understandable to people than the Day of National Unity?
Andrey Fursov: Despite the fact that the so-called National Unity Day has been celebrated for almost 10 years, it still remains an “artificial” holiday for many reasons. Firstly, most people in Russia understand perfectly well that this happened on November 7, according to the new style, 1917. The October Revolution, which became the beginning of a new era not only in the life of Russia, but also in world history. This is a global event. Almost no one knows what happened on November 4, 1612, since it was a very long time ago. In recent years, however, we have been enlightened that this is a victory over the Poles, but we have not been enlightened about the details of this victory. The fact is that there was no unity of the Russian people on November 4, since the militia of Minin and Pozharsky were in very tense relations with the Cossacks of Trubetskoy, with whom they agreed and expelled the Poles from the Kremlin. And then the struggle between these two groups began, and there was no unity. It is enough to read the chronicles and works of historians. In short, November 4th is definitely not suitable for Unity Day. In addition, many people understand perfectly well that November 4 was invented, as they say, on the knee, in order to supplant November 7 as a kind of Soviet symbol, as a symbol of the revolution that overthrew the power of the “bourgeois, landowners and priests.” Naturally, for those who overthrew this anti-capitalist, anti-autocratic regime in 1991, the memory of November 7 is very, very unpleasant. But you can’t argue with history - November 7 remains in people’s memories and will remain for a very long time.
Question: President Putin mentioned the day before that the Bolsheviks did not give peace, land to peasants, factory workers, and in general, “albeit gracefully, they deceived” the people who supported them.
Andrey Fursov: I think the president was inaccurate in his wording. First, the Bolsheviks kept two of their three promises. They promised peace, bread and land. The peace they promised was a way out of the imperialist war. They kept their word - Russia withdrew from the imperialist war. They promised land to the peasants - and they gave the land to the peasants. Even during collectivization, a significant part of the land - half - remained on collective farms - collective property, and not state property. That is, the peasants also received land. There really was a problem with bread, because in May 1918 the Bolsheviks declared a dictatorship and this became one of the reasons for the Civil War, but not the only reason. Not only the Bolsheviks, but also the Left Socialist Revolutionaries, monarchists, and former Februaryists were to blame for the outbreak of the Civil War. A civil war is a very complex phenomenon, and one should not blame the Bolsheviks for everything. So the president was inaccurate in his wording, and this once again suggests that it is necessary to select historical consultants more carefully so that they do not set up the main boss.
Question: And when talking about the minuses, the pluses are often forgotten? Can the creation of a system of free universal education, breakthroughs in medicine, science and technology be considered achievements of the revolution?
Andrey Fursov: Everything is very complicated with the October Revolution. We need to talk more broadly - about the Russian Revolution, which took place in two stages. The first stage is the international socialist revolution, the main characters of which were Lenin, Trotsky and this whole company, who wanted a world revolution, who wanted a land republic, but they didn’t give a damn about Russia. But nothing came of it - the big “Russia” system turned out to be too tough for the capitalist system and left-wing globalists. And in 1925-27, Stalin’s team, which objectively expressed the interests of the large “Russia” system, curtailed the project of world revolution and began the project of building socialism in a single country. And this phase of the Russian revolution lasted until 1938-39. Its final chord is the mini-civil wars of 37-38. And in 1939, with the 18th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, this process ends, and the era of the Russian Revolution ends, a regime is established, and a Red Empire is created. Moreover, such an empire is being created, a quasi-empire, which was able to break the back of the Wehrmacht. Of course, we still live by the achievements of the Red Empire, the Soviet Union. The fact that the Americans did not bomb us like the Serbs or Libyans is because we have nuclear weapons, and the foundation was laid under Stalin.
We live on this foundation, without it no one would talk to us. But the achievements of the Soviet Union are not limited to space, defense, or a special type of civilization. I always remember that in the 1960s the Soviet Union set an absolute record, I think that it will never be surpassed, at least in the next 100-200 years, we are talking about mortality - 6.9 ppm. This is an absolute record. This means that thanks to medical preventive measures and a whole range of other social measures, Soviet citizens demonstrated a very low mortality rate that was undreamt of in the capitalist world. In a broad sense, all of these are truly achievements of the October Revolution, because it was planned as a prologue and the beginning of the world revolution and, in fact, until 1936, the holiday of November 7 was not called the day of the October Revolution, it was called the holiday of the First Day of the World Revolution. But in 1936 it all ended. And in 1936 the term “Soviet patriotism” appeared. That is, in a broad sense, it was the October Revolution that opened up broad prospects for the development that Russia received. Tsarist Russia would never have achieved any of this
Question: So, say, the implementation of the electrification plan and the development of industrial potential would not be so active?
Andrey Fursov: Many plans were drawn up at the beginning of the twentieth century back in Tsarist Russia, but they could not be realized under the political regime, under the class structure of society that existed. After all, the revolution unleashed colossal energy from the people, which previously could not be realized by the regime that existed. And this energy rushed over the edge; this energy also had negative aspects. What happened in Russia in the 1920s and 30s is not some kind of evil intent, it is a negative aspect of the energy that was released. But, by the way, it was this energy that crushed Hitler’s hordes, it was this energy that sent man into space and did much, much more.
Question: Most of those who have visited the republics of Novorossiya, especially the Lugansk Republic, note that left-wing, communist views are extremely popular there; many militias say that they are restoring the USSR there. In a broad sense, does November 7 remain a relevant holiday, a relevant date for the majority of Russians?
Andrey Fursov: That's true. Another thing is that the USSR cannot be restored. The USSR was adequate to a certain historical stage. This stage is over. We live in such a watershed-transitional time that is ending, and this concerns not only us, but the whole world. The destruction of the Soviet Union was one of the aspects, perhaps the most important, of the social transition that took place at the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries. And this transition is a prologue to the battle for the future of the world, as it will be. The fact that it will not be capitalist is completely understandable. The capitalist system has outlived its usefulness, it is old. What will the post-capitalist world be like, will it be oligarchic, inegalitarian, tough, a new edition of the iron noose, or will it be something that will absorb the best leftist ideas of the 19th-20th centuries without their extremism (although in history, as a rule, it is difficult to predict developments without extremes), time will tell. This will be the essence of the 21st century – what the world of the future will be like. Will it be the world of Dara Veter from Efremov’s “Andromeda Nebula” or will it be the world of Darth Vader from “Star Wars”.
Question: Does Russia now have the potential to create, if not a Bolshevik state, but which, nevertheless, would create the conditions and organization for such a social and intellectual breakthrough as happened almost 100 years ago? In general, is it possible to develop simply according to the principle “We want, like Europe, to give more democracy and freedoms”?
Andrey Fursov: I want to hope that there is potential, but everything will depend on specific historical circumstances. The pressure that the West is now exerting on Russia shows that it is precisely this that is causing very powerful energetic opposition from certain segments of the population, and this gives rise to certain hopes. At least, the current generation of those who are between 20 and 30 years old is much more patriotic than those who were 20-30 in the 90s.
Question: Why did this happen, since these young people were brought up, in many ways, under the influence of precisely that “unpatriotic” generation?
Andrey Fursov: You can educate as you like, but people see social injustice, they see social polarization, they see crime and they know from the stories of their elders that this did not happen in Soviet times, that in Soviet courts there were much more acquittals, and much more cases were spent on further investigation. There were no rich people, there was a certain injustice, but it was not in such a blatant form, the “gay leaders” did not make faces and there was not much else. Life itself educates those people who do not accept this post-Soviet system.
Question: And returning to the national unity with which we started, can the unity for which the authorities are calling for, but so far not being very successful, be formed on this social basis?
Andrey Fursov: National unity is formed, as a rule, during periods of very, very acute crises, when it comes to survival. For example, in 1941-45 it was about the survival of Russians and other indigenous peoples, which the Germans wanted to erase with the eraser of history. Energy is born from overcoming a crisis.
Question: The current situation does not fall under this definition?
Andrey Fursov: We are currently living in a pre-crisis situation. Whether a crisis will break out, whether it will develop more and more, depends not only on Russia. We are an element of a world system that is increasingly plunging into crisis. In addition, we see the agony of the United States, this quasi-empire, and in a situation of such agony, this huge dinosaur will beat its tail left and right, and all sorts of options are already possible here.