Whether K. Marx about Kazakhstan knew?
Analyzing a political situation in the former Soviet Union (further I will tell specifically about Kazakhstan though, with a big share of confidence, taking into account some nuances, it is possible to extend it and to other former Federal republics), it is necessary to pay attention to numerous deviations from the classical theories describing these or those events in the history, and in some directions it is possible even to speak with confidence about contradictions of
In particular, being the convinced Marxist, I try to explain these or those phenomena in political and economic life from class positions all the time. However, despite existence of classes of exploiters and operated, with an astronomical difference in their income, and also a considerable layer of declassed elements in the form of enormous number of people forever lost work and frank bums, in society there are no signs of class fight, and its separate flashes have no mass and system character. Really the ideologists of 19 - 20 centuries preaching inevitability of antagonistic contradictions between work and the capital were mistaken, and the world entered a special stage of development at which “to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds“ though obvious “insatiability“ of wolves and obvious “extinction“ of sheep, “with a smile on lips“ is available. In my opinion, the reasons in the following.
The Post-Soviet personality is in the history unique. Examples when society passed from production, public to a private way, were not yet (except for, maybe, processes of transition from it is primitive - a communal system, but then there were absolutely other scales). Now nobody can predict result of any actions, the person just seeks to survive, any action can lead to negative result therefore also such immovability, it is necessary to keep at least what you have, that is a beggarly dole, the “certain room“ in a sewer well for the bum, slavish, but all - somehow a remunerative work, etc. of
the Power and the people are compelled, from a hopelessness to coexist, trying not to interfere with each other to live, having signed a certain secret public contract. Contradictions, of course, affect, but they have no antagonistic character, their maximum manifestation can be characterized the term “mutual irritation“. Each of the parties wants “to snatch“ to itself as they consider, “blood“ to provide own benefit from public property. But so far it is limited to appeals to observance, so-called, “public behavior“. In Uralsk, for example, neither the power, nor the simple people shun to regale on fish of sturgeon breeds, poaching of both parties has mass character here, but so far these contradictions are limited provocatively to open fishings of elite and “underground“, but much more mass cases of poaching of the simple local population having enormous historical experience of “theft“ of red fish from “an imperial table“.
Besides, for the modern, clever, successful, sociable younger generation wishing to live adequately, but, after many unsuccessful and not productive attempts to construct the European society in Kazakhstan, disappointed in it, there are two more ways out. The most “advanced“ and not deprived at the section of public property, just leave on the West and they can influence the happening processes of the former Soviet Union only indirectly and are not a subject of discussion of this article. Other of this category of people which do not have seed capital create to themselves the individual world which is not subject to the Kazakhstan reality. From the state only the minimum of bans, relative safety, lack of bans of periodic trip abroad, free access to the Internet, etc. is necessary. Such people are self-sufficient and live in parallel, I would tell, rather virtual world, they deliberately protected themselves from realities of society.
All this “is shaky, shakily“ creates visibility of relative tranquility in society, everyone is free to go about the own business and a present political design of Kazakhstan, contrary to all laws of philosophy of development of society, just and is constructed on lack of some fight. And only incidental performances of workers in the form of strikes because of nonpayment of a salary and mass actions of the “shareholders“ “destitute“ by the state, allow to judge that contradictions did not reach the maximum yet, “abscess“ is at a stage of maturing so far and class fight is objective inevitability, it is possible even the near future, it is possible and is not excluded - throughout life still of our generation though the similar scenario is also improbable, but quite has the right for existence. Everything will depend on degree of antagonisms, that is from abilities of ruling elite somehow “to smooth“ these antagonisms.
Well the term “class fight“ in socially - a political condition of the present former Soviet Union does not keep within in any way. After some reflections it is possible to come to a conclusion that founders of the theory of class fight lived essentially in other society and, respectively, did the developments, forecasts and their real embodiment in life, in relation to society capitalist, or imperialistic, in its highest manifestation. That is prerequisites of such fight are put in inevitable contradictions of market economy. Despite multipublic statements from government stands, such society in the former Soviet Union does not exist yet. We have no capitalism and even the term “state capitalism“ which is quite often declared too, has nothing in common with the market of the capital and the market of labor.
You judge, for descriptive reasons and understanding I will give only one example. Now governors of Kazakhstan widely advertize the thesis about the most perfect banking system in all former Soviet Union. The system allegedly successfully overcame crisis and prospers. The mechanism in this case was quite simple, all lost (and in the majority not so much lost as a result of crisis, and simply plundered, under the name of “crisis“) assets of banks were completely restored by the state, it is natural from the public property created due to sale of natural richness of the country. Our banks in “the most perfect banking system“ do not bear any risks and responsibility at all, practically all of them are than other as the transfers transmission gear of a public product in private hands. The state completely offsets it all losses, moreover, all banks constantly correct, “recalculate“ all payments for the credits, taking into account inflation, that is such “floating“ percent is deliberately specified in contracts. And if banks have no risks, then about what their contribution to fight against crisis it is possible to speak. All these declarations are calculated on long ago the fooled inhabitant who now, after the habitual and only State Bank of the USSR, being thrilled with the incommensurable number of the “bred“ banks and very respectable type of their numerous workers, trusts in similar tales, and then, having faced reality, it just does not need to do anything how implicitly to obey to the requirement “to say goodbye“ to mortgage property, joining ranks of bums, some, the most emotional prefer even the acts of suicide which became frequent recently.
If to analyse attentively all modern projects “the economy which is violently developing“, then in their basis, anyway, nothing except daydreaming, no. To carry on “Boeings“ of thoroughbred cows from America, or to create “screwdriver“ production, the superior intelligence is not necessary, economic justification of similar projects, as a rule, the general with reality has nothing. It is difficult to call such activity economy, especially, market therefore also crisis in economy in Kazakhstan was not, is not present and, in the near future, it is not expected because there is no economy in classical understanding of this word. And talk on crisis and a successful exit from it, is strenuously exaggerated only on purpose that the world community perceived Kazakhstan already as ““ that is as the state market and too, as well as all developed states, “is capable“ of crisis. Finally become impoverished people in soul realizing all this resignedly “keep silence“, wait for further development of the scenario. Why?
Yes because there is no market economy with its attributes of free competition, protection against monopolization, the institutionalized rules of the game and efficiency as supreme value of economy. In these conditions it is difficult to speak also about existence of “Marxian“ classes, that is the classes constructed on a functional role in production. Our classes are created on signs of the nature of access to consumption. They in principle cannot be a driving force of development of society. With some insignificant errors in modern Kazakhstan it is possible to define three main classes conditionally.
The first, quite small, approves rules of the game, naturally, reflecting interests of the class. In a class, certainly, contradictions are, but they do not reach antagonistic character as the general interest in long existence of the present device which successfully provides them with necessary resources, the rights, powers and freedoms dominates.
In the second class people who could find various economic niches for themselves in modern Kazakhstan economy are integrated and by that prosper, thanks to present system, but far not to such an extent as the first group. However it provides them necessary financial and other resources, providing access to more comfortable, often inaccessible for representatives of the third class, to living conditions.
Representatives of the most numerous third class, the economic niche for access to prosperity, did not find. At best all of them see “delights“ of modern life on the TV and through showcase glasses of the “bred“ supermarkets. They it is more, than others, are attached to the country, without having either resources, or prospects of a physical or virtual exit out of its limits, but at the same time it is less, than others, receive from it benefit.
Similar classification is a little conditional, the border between the second and third class is amorphous, adapted and found “the niche“ is frequent, thanks to the developed circumstances, join ranks of the third class “untouchable“ and vice versa, some representatives of the third class, at “a successful deal of cards“, join ranks of the second. Only the first class which separate individuals only sometimes, as a result of secret games, become derelicts of system, in general “dog does not eat dog“ is firm.
Of course, the relations between the existing classes conflict and the similar system can exist nowadays only under conditions of full closeness of political structure. The system cannot provide even rather modest living conditions for other two classes therefore it “is forcedly fenced“ from the others, at the same time, externally showing a certain ostentatious concern, seriously which is perceived by nobody, even they are.
According to most of bourgeois ideologists, in process of development of democratic society, understanding processes that we are forced to share one space with people whom we do not know and we do not want to know with which we do not agree and with whom we do not wish to communicate, but which as well as we, try to distribute the rules, the principles, the protective mechanisms to those spaces which we to recent time considered exclusively own, will find the development (Sam Green, the American political scientist, the journalist, the deputy director of the Moscow center Carnegie). That is, contradictions between classes will not absolutely surely develop in the antagonistic and taking place events will accept evolutionary character.
The similar prerequisite is based that in the countries of the developed West workers quite loyally belong to the class of exploiters, holding back at the same time that in these countries, for the purpose of relative stabilization of processes in society, ruling classes are compelled significantly, often artificially, to support the acceptable standard of living of the population, due to operation of the people of the countries from them depending. For example, the debt of the USA three times exceeds an annual national product, that is two thirds of the income, part of which capitalists also share with workers, they receive from other countries. That is, the American worker earns much not so much because well and intensively works, and in bigger degree - from work of working other countries, let this work is also still unproductive, but it with interest becomes covered by its mass character.
So it developed that to Kazakhstan and other republics of the former Soviet Union, the fate “to feed up“ “foreign“ workers is prepared. At the same time, according to the scenario developed by Z. Brzezinski and “to an izha with it“ the population of the former Soviet Union has to be reduced to economically reasonable limits determined by need for the West of use of natural resources of our former general territory. Figures from 30 to 80 million people at the same time are given in different sources. How many it “is necessary“ to remain on Earth of Kazakhstan citizens while I did not meet anywhere, but I assume that for present 15 million population of the country of figure can be impressive, if not depressing any further “prosperity of the nation“ it would be possible already from now on and not to mention.
For the West similar development of the situation would be most acceptable as at the same time the basis of activity of the representatives of the Kazakhstan first class, “the dictating rule of the game“ based subsequently only on “indications of the West“ (today they remains very many and often speak about a certain independence and sovereignty of the republic), the apolitical second class would be reduced to reasonable limits and “the class conflict as not found the niche at this conjuncture is cleaned from a scene“. However, plans of United States Secretaries of State 50 - x years of last century were also directed to it.
Many political scientists, on the basis of the analysis of today`s political situation of Third World countries and being guided by postulates on inevitability of class antagonistic contradictions, predict not evolutionary succession of events, series of mass revolutions of the last years only confirm their conclusions. However it is theoretically possible, but improbable scenarios, most likely processes are already irreversible and their discussion carries rather theoretically - informative, but not practical character.