Crisis: terribly, even horror, or not really?
Come to the neighbor recently, his house is absent, and the wife cries in three streams. I ask: what`s the matter? And it to me weepingly: - Mischa left. - Where? - To the village. Speaks: crisis approaches, still will collapse unexpectedly - unexpectedly, it is necessary to prepare. - So you what roar? Correctly speaks. - And if crisis collapses, and I houses one what to do - that? - All right, do not roar, crisis - not a roof even if will collapse, will press down not at once.
And here I reflected, and is valid: what to do when crisis falls down the head? Also I began to look for councils everywhere how to behave during the crisis period. Also came across in No. 23 “LG“ for 2009 article of the Doctor of Philosophy Boris Slavin “For whose account“.
Well, I think, the fact that it is necessary seems. I look for councils, gallop under article, without stopping on flimsy... lo and behold, and already by the end reached. I think and where councils? Well, you judge. Here what way of an exit of Russia from crisis is offered by our above-mentioned Doctor of Philosophy. I cite:
“Only the narrow group of university economists (from modern pupils of Marx) shows the original reasons of current world crisis. From the point of view of these economists, objectively there can be only three scenarios of an exit from this crisis.
Reactionary , connected with continuation of development of oligarchical capitalism, implementation of imperial protectionism and, perhaps, new power repartition of the world.
Moderate , in the spirit of the plan “Roosevelt - XXI“, connected with restriction of large business and increase of an economic role of the state, with the organization of public works and creation of new workplaces, with consecutive socialization of education, health care, finance, with expansion of control of activity of the capital and the state from civil society.
At last, the third, strategic the scenario provides a radical exit for a framework of capitalist system and arrival to the political power of people of wage labor. Unfortunately, this scenario has no real political and ideological registration, and the left intellectuals offer nothing significant yet“.
I once again counted councils of the Doctor of Philosophy and doubted his doktorstvo. Where it he in Marxism noticed oligarchical capitalism? It is remembered, Lenin spoke about monopoly capitalism, but that about oligarchical - in Marxism.? No, it cannot be. However agree before moving further, it is necessary to deal with councils of the Doctor of Philosophy Boris Slavin.
Reactionary the scenario is impossible at least already because oligarchical capitalism does not exist in the nature. Monopoly capitalism about which Lenin wrote and which was fully realized in fascist Germany can take place. Now monopoly capitalism is realized in the USA, the wars arranged by Americans testify to it. And as Lenin`s article and experience of Germany, from the monopolist to the fascist - one step assumes.
Moderated the scenario is impossible because all this it already was in the USSR, and even taking into account control from civil society in the form of party and national control, by the way, much more effective, than all types of control which are nowadays existing in the world. To twice introduce the same process in society moreover after any time, usually it is not possible.
Strategic the scenario is impossible because the author can tell nothing acceptable about it. Well, and if it is serious, there will be no ideologists who realized simple truth that forecasting of ethnic processes in a separation from Gumilev`s theory is impossible, creation of the ideology capable to entrain people until then yet, it is impossible.
And in conclusion there is a wish to tell that Mishka is the neighbor, though not the doctor of philosophical or economic sciences, having remembered 90 - e years, understood that it is time to hammer rural pogrebok with not spoiling products. And it is correct. We already everything passed it. Whether to us to be afraid of any crises.
But, of course, it is necessary to remember: “Hope for God and itself not ploshay“. What also I advise you.