May 3, 2022
0 View
0 0

Mikhail Delyagin: The bulk of people are fed not by merchants, but by fields and factories

Mikhail Delyagin: The bulk of people are fed not by merchants, but by fields and factories

Photo: TASS / Vladimir Smirnov

Self-evident things are simply embarrassing to repeat once again – and as a result, they first slowly fall into disuse, and then are completely forgotten. And, examining certain mistakes, the absurdity of which is simply impossible to imagine for a more or less educated person, you see before you the perplexed eyes of their organizers and victims and realize that what was self-evident a quarter of a century ago is unknown today, because banality is embarrassing to pronounce , and it is erased from public consciousness.

And in most cases, it is also selfishly erased – quite consciously and purposefully.

This fully applies to economic policy.

A society that is healthy in the socio-psychological (not to mention the financial!) sense of the word can only rely on the real sector, primarily industry. Those employed in it have a more stable psyche than freelancers who are tremulous and dependent on any whim of the customer and, having become accustomed to joint actions (even at a small enterprise), bring behavioral (and hence political) stability unknown and alien to financial speculators into society.

The real sector (as, by the way, the new master of the world – social platforms) needs scale and stability – in complete contrast to financial speculators. Therefore, a developed industry to this day, in the post-information era (social platforms as the basis for organizing society were replaced by exchanges and the free Internet back in 2020) remains the key to the normality and competitiveness of society, no matter how ridiculous and unacceptable it may seem to projectors of all stripes. .

The aggravation of the global crisis of 2007-2009 (from which the developed countries as a whole, by the way, never recovered) forced the United States to shake itself and take a decisive course towards reindustrialization.

Russia, controlled by the liberal servants of financial speculators, was, of course, forbidden to even think about this (and is forbidden to this day). This prohibition is ensured by the appropriate selection and education of native managerial personnel (who eventually lose the ability to think and cannot even imagine the development of their country on the basis of their own industry, and not external speculation), mass corruption as an instrument of external management, and administrative and political influences (usually point).

However, in order to survive, Russia needs to restore political independence and return the state machine, which is destroying the country and its population in the interests of global financial speculators, to the service of the people.

Perhaps the most obvious manifestation of this cardinal upheaval (which, due to the insignificance of the bulk of the Russian bureaucracy, can take place “in a palace mode”, even without mass resignations – for example, by simply launching the Poseidon anti-corruption information complex at full capacity) will be a change in the policy of extermination the real sector of Russia in the interests of financial speculation in the policy of its development.

In addition to self-evident measures to create cheap public credit, limit the arbitrariness of monopolies and financial speculation (including to secure such credit), as well as the realization of the right of citizens to at least life (in the form of a guarantee of a living wage), the normalization policy will also be based on the ABC of industrial politicians.

It was described in detail by the founder of “physical economy”, a German economist of the 19th century F.List (because of the danger to the liberal ideology of financial speculators, his books were withdrawn from American libraries in the early 70s, and English ones in the early 80s of the twentieth century), then the true founder of the interbranch balance D.I. Mendeleev (the great economic legacy of which in the Russian Federation they try not to remember), and in modern Russia their tireless successor S.V. Kobin.

This alphabet goes far beyond the traditional “reasonable protectionism”, but, of course, includes it: either goods or investments go into the country, and speculative worms can crawl into the “sovereign” can opened by the WTO can opener, abandoned on the sidelines of world development, but real money and technology cannot be included.

Therefore, the withdrawal from the WTO (de facto non-existent since Trumpbut which, by virtue of its destructiveness for Russia, is the shrine of liberalism of domestic assembly), a severe escalation of tariffs (encouraging the production and export of goods with high added value and suppressing the export of raw materials), the abolition of the monstrous “tax maneuver” (destroying Russian processing for the sake of exporting raw materials), flexible import tariff quotas (reducing imports as domestic production develops) are necessary and, moreover, clear signs of the normalization of state power. Without them, the signs of the independence of the bureaucracy will be unstable at best, and most likely fictitious.

The general principle is to compare in the balance of foreign trade not the absolute value of exports and imports, but exports and imports of value added. Peoples who buy complex goods by exporting raw materials are killing themselves because they create a hidden foreign trade deficit and get used to living off not their intellect, but the inevitably transient grace of nature and market conditions.

Those who deny this self-evident truth are working – consciously or unconsciously – to destroy the respective peoples.

The key element of any normal budget should be the excise: a direct tax “on vices.” Today, its main potential part is the super profits of vodka oligarchs and global tobacco corporations, but limiting the arbitrariness of monopolies will make it possible to transfer this money into the pocket of society.

The forgotten condition for the normal development of the economy (that is, the increase in value added) is the minimization of costs for the conditions of production – infrastructure, energy, raw materials, credit and rent. If the entire intellect of the country is working, as it is now (even in the military-industrial complex), to pay off loans and then pay for a communal apartment, it will scatter from this financial hell, wherever your eyes look, and no patriotic spells will help, because they will be brazen and monstrous conflict with everyday reality.

Therefore, the conditions of production must cost industry (and, in general, the part of the economy that develops society) at cost. And, since no businessman will tolerate this, they should be nationalized, directly or indirectly (with the help of strict and comprehensive state control), and the superprofits from the export of raw materials should go into the pocket of society, and not oligofriends running wild with impunity.

A clear example of reasonable nationalization was provided by post-war England: it was the cheapness of the socialized conditions of production that became the basis for the post-war revival in the extremely unfavorable external conditions of the collapse of the empire.

By the way, nationalization by buying assets for money can be cheaper than any confiscation, if you audit the business and ask the privatizers to return what they have stolen – sometimes for decades of owning the property of the people. In this case, due to the scale of the theft (sometimes unknown even to the oligarchs themselves), the balance may turn out to be so unfavorable for them that they will beg for forgiveness of the plundered, that is, for free nationalization.

No independence (the word “sovereignty” worn out in all propaganda brothels is already a shame) cannot exist without a solid industrial foundation, no matter how much profit financial speculators suck out of the people. That is why the protectionism of developed countries is so cruel and merciless in practice, with its total denial in words.

Therefore, until we see in Russia the implementation of the economic alphabet in the form of at least the foundations of an industrial policy forgotten by the wild builders of thieves’ feudalism, nothing good, alas, will happen.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply