Russia today

User avatar
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat May 11, 2019 10:59 am

Activists of MOUTH FRONT detained on the action of the "Immortal Regiment"

Communist propaganda on Victory Day banned

Three activists of the Moscow branch of the ROT FRONT party were detained for distributing propaganda materials at the ш Immortal Regiment ’march, according to Aleksandr Batov, leader of the capital’s organization, in the party’s telegram channel .

"Immortal regiment" in Moscow, 2019

All detained members of the organization were detained at the Department of Internal Affairs for the Airport area of ​​Moscow. Police officers accused them of “distributing newspapers and leaflets,” but this formulation of the question does not appear in any way in Russian legislation.

Distribution of materials is not an offense or a crime. The circulation of the registered editions of newspapers distributed by our comrades was withdrawn by the police without explanation.

By 5 pm on May 9, activists were released from the police station without charge, but with the establishment of a protocol, despite the fact that no offenses were committed by the comrades. With activists took "explanatory".

The detained comrades noted that the police officers only smirked in response to the question of what right is being detained. Apparently, the order for the police is much more significant than the observance of certain ephemeral laws of the Russian Federation.

Freedom to Alexander Batov! 2017

Recall that in 2017, under similar conditions, the leader of the Moscow organization of the ROTFront party was arrested. He was charged with Art. 20.2. Code of Administrative Offenses (CAO) . Our comrade paid a fine in double size and served 7 days in a pre-trial detention center on an artificial pretext, and in fact - for spreading propaganda of a system that is openly hostile to the elites of the Russian Federation who went to the Immortal Regiment. ... ny-na-bes/

Google Translator

This, yet the capitalist demagogues repeatedly refer to 'Communist Russia', Communist Putin', even the Soviet Union in the present tense. How is this? It is because the propaganda of the Cold War is embedded in the brains of probably most Americans exposed to it, and this includes the generation that mostly got it second hand. Just laying there, waiting to be resuscitated by the shameless whores of capital, much like racism, which I believe would fade out of the popular consciousness if not revived by every politician & hustler for their advantage. To the wall with these people!
Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations

User avatar
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jun 14, 2019 12:52 pm

Russian CWP, 100-years to the Communist International and tasks of the Communist movement today
6/14/19 2:29 PM
Russia, Communist Workers' Party of Russia - Revolutionary Party of Communists Joint Statement En Ru Europe Communist and workers' parties
On June 1-2 in Moscow there was held international conference “100-years to the Communist International and tasks of the Communist movement today” As a result of discussions and exchange of views on the issues of international cooperation between communist parties a final statement was composed by the participants that is submitted to your attention.

Press-center of RCWP.


Of the participants of international conference

«100-years to the Communist International and tasks of the Communist movement today»
Moscow, 1 - 2 June 2019.

Communist parties, which took part in the scientific and practical conference in Moscow 1-2 June 2019, dedicated to the centenary of the Communist International, has kept their allegiance to Marxism and Leninism, a great revolutionary teaching; has kept their attitude towards Marxism-Leninism as a science; has kept its revolutionary and proletarian character.

Our parties confirm, that internationalism is not only immanent to Marxism as to any real science, - internationalism is the main precondition and means of the Communist goal to be achieved. It is unambiguously and directly stated in the Communist Manifesto: "Proletarians of all countries, unite!"

Parties and movements, participating in the conference, at large estimate the role of the III Communist International, created under the leadership of Lenin, as positive and appreciate its contribution to the cause of development and strengthening of the world Communist and workers movement. Particularly in the cause of formation of new Communist parties, in the struggle with XX century Fascism, in the defeat of the Hitler Germany and its antiComintern pact allies. We consider, that it is necessary to further study the historical experience of the III International and to use it in our in our practical struggles. Our positive estimate does not mean at all, that there were no mistakes in the experience of the Communist International and that it should not be treated critically. Unconditionally the analysis and study of these mistakes are necessary and has to be done, but mostly in order to carry out our struggles for socialism relying on the knowledge, achievements and mistakes experience of our predecessors.

We note some similarity of the present situation with the state of the revolutionary movement in the beginning of the XXth century. First of all with the ages of the Second International crash - a very strong wave of opportunism, that had lashed the Communist and left movement. More over, today opportunism and revisionism is a well guided and well organized weapon of bourgeoisie. The top achievement of this policy of apostasy is the example of the European Left Party. It is an ideological and organizational center of revisionists, that lives on the EU money and functions according to its laws, working for strengthening the EU imperialism. Coming from this conclusion, we consider Lenin's experience of the formation of the Communist International with its organization of resolute and uncompromised struggles against opportunism and working out theoretical principles for consistently revolutionary parties as very precious. These principles were formulated as conditions of membership in the Communist International. Today theoretical and practical struggle with opportunism is absolutely necessary for our movement.

The participants of the conference come from the consideration, that today there are no conditions to immediately set up the new Communist International, there are no parties of Bolshevist strength and scale; there is no country of victorious socialist revolution, that could take upon itself the material and organizational functioning of a common center; and the new contemporary revolutionary strategy is carried out not enough. All that emphasis, that there certainly is a necessity of common work in the field of theory as well as common practical work and coordination of positions and actions for the cause of organizational, political and ideological strengthening of communist parties.

Participants of the conference note, that some activities in the direction of the Communist pole strengthening was consistently carried out BY our parties for more than twenty years. These are Solidnet System meetings initiated by the CPG; release of the International Communist Review magazine; the formation of the European Communist Initiative Movement; joint conferences in Leningrad amd Moscow and many others. So we consider, that, first of all, these forms of counter-action have to be developed and filled with practical content in several most important directions:

-the theme of struggle with opportunism as an integral and obligatory part of anti-imperialist struggle should be carried out by our parties in theoretical aspect and, how it is possible, be accorded in its practical implementation in all vide international forums;

- The goal of yet the first International - the International Workingmen's Association, was the development of the world Workers' movement, the introduction of scientific knowledge and the movement towards the Socialist revolution. So our common priority is the development of each party in its national level as well as development of mass workers' resistance in each country, internationalization of workers' and trade-union struggles on the basis of class struggle against capitalism and any exploitation, any oppression. This field should be not only a joint theme, but also a tool to strengthen the very parties and extension of their influence among the masses of working people in one’s own country;

- There exists an urgent necessity of joint analysis and, how it is possible, common characteristics of such complicated and influential things, as so-called "construction of socialism with Chinese specificity "as well as the so-called Bolivarian models of the "XXIst century socialism", that, as we consider, contradict to the main principles of the socialist revolution theory and construction of socialism;

- Constant mutual connection between our parties and assistance to one another in the cause of strengthening of each party’s positions in its own national level as an indispensable condition of general Communist pole strengthening.

Parties, that signed this declaration, take obligations and call other proletarian parties to remember, to study and to be guided by the everlasting principles of Marxism-Leninism, incarnated in the activity of Bolsheviks and the Communist International, created by them!

Long live to the Marxism-Leninism!

Down with the dictatorship of bourgeoisie! Long live to the power of the working people!

Long live to the militant struggle against all sorts of opportunism!

The necessity and normality of socialist revolution and construction of socialism remain urgent.

Proletarians of all countries, unite!

Moscow. 1-2 June 2019.

Azerbaijan, Communist Party of Azerbaijan
Belarus, BRO CPSU
Belgium, Marxist platform
Bulgaria, Communist Party of Bulgaria
People’s Republic of Donetsk, Workers’ Front of Donbass
Estonia, Communist Party of Estonia
Finland, Communist Workers' Party of Finland
France, Communist Revolutionary Party of France (PCRF)
Greece, Communist Party of Greece
Hungary, Hungarian Workers' Party
Communist Party of Italy
Kazakhstan, Socialist Movement of Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan, Communist Party of Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan, Communist Party of Kyrgyzstan
Latvia, Socialist Party of Latvia
Latvia, Union of Communists of Latvia
Lithuania, Socialist Party of Lithuania
People’s Republic of Lugansk, RCWP
Moldova, Communist Party of Moldova
Mexico, Communist Party of Mexico
Russia, Communist Party of Soviet Union (CPSU)
Russia, Communist Workers' Party of Russia (RCWP)
Syria, Syrian Communist Party
Spain, Communist Party of the Workers of Spain
Sweden, Communist Party of Sweden
Turkey, Communist Party of Turkey
Transnistrian Moldavian Republic, Communist Party of Transnistria
Ukraine, Union of Communists of Ukraine ... ent-today/
Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations

User avatar
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jun 27, 2019 11:44 am

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
The text of the speech in the program of Konstantin Semin "In a living way"

From the Editor : Oleg Olegovich Komolov - economist, journalist, associate professor of the University of Economics. Plekhanova, a member of the ROT Front party, the author of several articles and monographs on the issues of modern economics. His performance in the program “Lively” aroused genuine interest among viewers. Some of the author’s conclusions are debatable, but in any case, the author’s overall erudition and his excellent knowledge of the material leave no doubt.

Conversation Content:

Is correct capitalism built in our country or not?
Is it possible to compare poverty in America and in any third world country?
Why are trade union movements everywhere so weak?
On the profit rate and the era of parasitism
On libertarianism and low investment in science, education and industry
About Putin's “socialism” and tax policy
About energy exports and rising gasoline prices in Russia
About Russian importers and cheap ruble
The situation in agriculture in Russia
Is Russian capitalism imperialistic?
How do people come to the classic Marxist view of economics?
Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
K. Semin : Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, still a very young man, wrote a great work on the development of Russian capitalism. She had a stunning effect on contemporaries. But today we love to criticize capitalism very much, knowing very little about it, practically without understanding the subject. This is a common feature for all, a common flaw. In order to do something about it, we always consider it a great success, if we manage to invite economists to visit. In our studio, Oleg Komolov, Ph.D.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
Oleg, what is built in our country? Can this be called capitalism? Should this be considered something else? It seems to very many people that our capitalism is somehow wrong and we need to start everything all over again.

O. Komolov : The Russian economic system naturally refers to the capitalist one. It fulfills all the main features of capitalism:

it is the presence of a capital market, a labor market, the domination of commodity production;
the dominance of private property;
exploitation of wage-workers by capitalists.


Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
Capitalism is underdeveloped and peripheral. Therefore, many people don’t like it, in the first place they don’t like people inhabiting the territory of Russia. Because, being peripheral capitalism, Russia acts as a food base for the development of developed countries, since it is included in the system of non-equivalent exchange. And in fact, Russian resources, the added value created by the labor of Russian workers, through the tools of non-equivalent exchange go to developed countries, which ensure an accelerated pace of development at the expense of this vast global periphery. Russia is not any exception, any feature in the framework of global capitalism. As you know, 1 billion people on Earth live in relatively favorable conditions - Western Europe and North America, while 6 billion live within the framework of this wrong capitalism, wrong from the position of our liberal colleagues. It is clear that the 6/7 economy can not be wrong. It means, obviously, some objective laws can be traced here. But the patterns, I repeat, are as follows: for a small part of the modern economy to flourish, a rather meager, if not completely impoverished, existence of the rest of the economic system is necessary. That is, in the 21st century, and even earlier, starting from the middle of the 20th, inequality and exploitation moved from the level of national capitalism to the level of the global economy.

K. Semin : If before they robbed their workers, now they are robbing foreign workers, away from themselves, and throwing their own little.

O. Komolov: Let's just say: this does not mean that they do not rob their own, because we live in a very interesting era - the era of neoliberalism, which is a specific stage in the development of the capitalist mode of production. This neoliberalism in the Western world has replaced the era of regulated capitalism. And this transition was marked by increased exploitation not only within the periphery countries, but also within the developed countries themselves. In fact, the dominant classes of developed countries are in the gains over the past few decades. This can be observed through the growth of inequality in all developed countries of the world, even the most prosperous. Just the other day, I was discussing with a colleague from the Netherlands: and there, inequality is growing in a seemingly much quieter and more favorable country. Inequality is growing in the United States, it is growing precisely from the 1970s to the 1980s, when the neoliberal reforms of Reagan occurred, when production was moved to the countries with the lowest pay. And an interesting question arises: why do ordinary Americans suffer from this too? If an investor has the opportunity to use free labor in the Asian world, then naturally he will lower wages in his economy, because American workers do not have the opportunity to fight for wage increases, they do not have sufficient arguments, because production can be at any time closed and moved to backward countries with low wages. And thus we see a sharp degradation of the trade union and labor movement in America and in Europe, starting in the 70s with the transition to neoliberalism.

K. Semin : But they will say that it is impossible to compare the poverty of the American poor and the poverty of a Nigerian, Cambodian or Brazilian worker.


Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
O. Komolov: If in the middle of the 20th century this was indeed the case, today this distinction is no longer so great, because the stratification today is mostly within countries. If we look at the representatives of the ruling classes of various modern capitalist states, we will see how the Chinese oligarchs crowd American oligarchs at the first lines of Forbes, which had not happened a few decades ago. At the same time, the standard of living of American workers has not grown since the 70s: as you know, real wages in the American economy are growing extremely slowly, and for some social groups they are not growing at all. And most importantly, they are increasingly lagging behind in the rate of growth of labor productivity. We see the same thing in the Chinese economy: the standard of living has slightly increased among Chinese workers, the level of poverty has decreased, but still, most of the national income created in the Chinese economy goes to the large Chinese owners, the Foxcon plants and similar enterprises that use free labor. And it follows from this: the Chinese oligarch, relatively speaking, approached the American oligarch, and the Chinese worker approached the American worker. But the interclass stratification within both countries has grown.

K. Semin : Why are the contradictions between these same classes in different countries, including the countries of the “golden billion,” so insignificant and insignificant compared to the beginning of the 20th century? You said that there is a weak trade union movement there. Why so, if the contradictions are growing?

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


O. Komolov: Contradictions are growing, and tools in the struggle of workers for their rights no longer becomes. At least there are many problems that impede the formation of trade unions and the growth of the labor movement. In particular, in the same United States, the active growth of the trade union movement in the early 20th century was also due to the rather loyal attitude of the national bourgeoisie towards it. The era of regulated capitalism was beneficial, oddly enough, to American capitalism as well, because it was threatened by the socialist alternative — the Soviet Union — there was a sharp increase in the popularity of socialist ideas after World War II, members of the Communist Party, or all left-wing social activists. And for this reason, American capitalism, and its laws apply to the entire “golden billion”, was ready to make some concessions to its society. And thus we see how the post-war era of the development of the Western economy is characterized by such a word as the “golden” age of the history of capitalism, when the standard of living grew rapidly. We see a sharp increase in technical progress, a decrease in inequality, the quality of life has constantly increased.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


But, interestingly, the rapid growth of capitalism, its qualitative development in the interests of society simultaneously undermines the interests of the ruling class. And we see a characteristic pattern, illustrated by the dynamics of the profitability of the American economy, the dynamics of the rate of profit. I have a number of publications on this topic ( see O. Komolov’s article “The profit rate in the context of the instability of the world economy” - ed. ) % That is, the development of the economy was accompanied by a drop in profitability. And this is because, I remind you, the basic pattern of Marxism - the fall in the average rate of profit - is empirically confirmed. ( The trend of the rate of profit to decrease -thesis formulated by Karl Marx in Volume 3 of Capital . It consists in the fact that , because of the very properties of the capitalist economy, there is a tendency to a decrease in the rate of profit on a general economic scale - ed. ) Since the source of profit is surplus value, and surplus value is nothing but the unpaid labor of an employee, the better they live alone - the worse, respectively, to others. National income is divided into wages and profits in the most general form. So, when profitability fell to its lowest level in the 1970s and it coincided with a crisis of stagflation, with an oil shock for the Western economy, what way did western capitalism find from this economic trap into which it fell?

K. Semin : Export of capital?

O. Komolov : There is a really interesting moment here. The export of capital took place, but it brought with it somewhat different consequences than at the beginning of the 20th century. We will return to the export of capital and the role of Russia in this process.

So, what tool did western capitalism find to get out of the crisis? This tool was not the growth of efficiency, not the replacement of manual labor by machine, not the growth of investment in science and education. On the contrary, the rapid reduction of all these "unnecessary" social weights, the transfer of production to countries with low wages, an increase in the share of wage earners, a fall in capital-equipment ratio by 60% in the global economy and thus a sharp increase in profitability: 70 - the beginning of the 80s, the profitability of American capital began to grow rapidly again and by the mid-2000s reached the post-war level. Due to the brutal exploitation: firstly, poor countries with cheap labor, and secondly, of their own population, since it was from that period that real wages in the American economy did not grow. And in general, all this allows us to call neoliberalism, and I will do this after the American economist David Koz, the era of parasitism, because the last decades of the development of world capitalism are pure parasitism. It has very little progressive, little innovative. Many studies show that investment in science is declining.

K. Semin : But what about Ilon Musk?

O. Komolov : This is also a very interesting moment. By the way, Ilon Musk has accumulated his capital in the 2000s due to financial speculation.

K. Semin : And he is on the verge of bankruptcy, if I have no doubt?

O. Komolov: Yes. But if you look at the official statistics on the United States, by the way, the best statistics in the world are the statistics for the USA, so it shows that the growth rate until the 1970s in the IT sector, that is, in the creation of hardware and software, has increased in year. And since the 70s he began to stagnate somewhere until the mid-90s, then a sharp rise again, which ended in a dotcom crisis - that is, speculative takeoff. And, most interestingly, followed by a fall. And in the 2000s, when the world economy grew at an incredibly rapid pace, the growth rate of investment in the IT sector, the most developed, the most seemingly progressive - the cutting edge of modern science, even declined somewhat. That is, this growth was not provided technological progress. He was ensured by the inclusion of an increasing mass of cheap workers in capitalist production. And today you can look at the Chinese economy and see that there are elements of some manufactory production, when tens of thousands of Chinese sit under the roof even without walls and on primitive machine tools they make icons, key chains, lanterns - etc. rest. This ensured the economic growth of the 2000s, plus a number of factors that we can talk about.

So ultimately, if your economy develops not at the expense of innovative progress, increase in labor productivity, but due to the growth of brutal exploitation of less developed societies, then in the end it forms system problems not only at the periphery, but also in the center. After all, why do politicians like Trump come to power in the West, why does the UK leave the EU, why is the popularity of euro skeptics going up and the crisis of European integration? Why, tell me, globalization, about which in the 2000s you could read in every English textbook - there was a whole chapter about “Globalisation” about how everyone will now visit each other on an airplane on a ticket, like a tram , why did it all collapse? Why has the share of international investment in world trade relative to GDP dropped from 57 to 39% since 2008? At 20 percent almost fell and is constantly falling. That is, this is not a one-time fall into a crisis, but world trade is declining from year to year, international investment is squeezing, because this system can no longer develop as before. It has accumulated so many contradictions, expressed in 2008 in the form of a financial crisis, that the Western countries themselves are already not welcome. Western capital is not happy: it cannot secure its previous growth because it has formed too many contradictions in its own national system. Therefore, Trump raises questions about the return of production from China, imposes sanctions against China. It would seem, why do not you buy cheap Chinese goods,

The growth of unemployment, the growth of social inequality, the growth of political contradictions and, accordingly, a slowdown in economic growth suggests that the beneficiaries of this system first of all say that it simply cannot work anymore, and they start looking for some way out of this. And what a solution: to tighten the economic confrontation, to strengthen sanctions, to fence off barriers.

There are many examples. It is very interesting to say about the sanctions in relation to Russia. It seems that it seems that the Anglo-Saxons again opposed Mother Russia. But nothing of the kind: Russia is just a link in the chain. The main protectionist in the world is the United States, which introduced even under Obama, not under Trump, several hundred restrictions on foreign trade, but just over the past 10 years, according to a number of studies, the number of measures taken in the States governing international trade, international capital and labor , was about 6 thousand. Three quarters of them were protectionist, and only one quarter was directed towards liberalization. The international economic confrontation escalates: the United States is the main protectionist, then India, then Russia. Integration does not develop in the post-Soviet space for the same reasons, since there are no sources

Ultimately, the world economy is in a state of crisis, its acute phase has just passed, the pre-crisis growth rates have not been reached, which means that the formal signs of a crisis remain: Japan has 98% of GDP, Europe has a zero growth rate 2% per year show. But on a global scale, the crisis continues. The protracted crisis exacerbates the contradictions between transnational capital, which is the initiator of these economic wars. National capital and transnational are trying to concentrate on themselves the remaining pie of international GDP, international production, the struggle is intensifying, of course.

K. Semin: The blanket narrows, it becomes cold and every country pulls on itself. All that you describe as two drops of water reminds of what already happened in the beginning of the 20th century before World War 1, and then in the 1930s before World War 2. And then there were currency wars, and protectionism, and barriers - all this happened. But now these Euro-skeptics in Europe or Trump's supporters in the US — why we see the rise of right-wing sentiments — are very much spreading the idea that wrong capitalism has been built. In America, the "wrong" - there is too much government regulation, and the right was in the 19th century, when everyone was competing with each other, when everything was "really", and now everything is not really. And in our native hearths this libertarian, neoliberal approach is also becoming very widespread: we have “wrong” capitalism built, it contains remnants of the socialist system, Soviet remnants, and all our capitalists are yesterday's party bosses, we had a merging of capital and nomenclature, capital and bureaucratic system, so there is no competition, no real business, what else to expect. And the only way out of this situation is to demolish everything and build normal capitalism.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


O. Komolov: Even if our capitalism was supposedly “wrong” in the 1990s, it doesn’t matter the further it develops, the more correct it becomes: Russia is more and more strictly integrated into its designated place in the international division of labor. This is evident in several aspects. Market reforms received a completely new type of economy: in the 90s, the Russian economy inherited a significant part of the production capacity and potential of the Soviet Union, the structure of the Soviet economy with a developed manufacturing industry, with high expenditures on science, and huge social expenditures. And all this did not at all correspond to the role that Russia had defined by the international system of division of labor: a source of raw materials and even cheap labor to some extent, although with China we cannot in the last place — there are simply no such people.

If we look at the dynamics of economic policy since the 90s, then all of it is aimed at integrating Russia into this system, discarding all the extra weights that do not allow the full development of classical peripheral capitalism - after all, Russia is semi-periphery .

K. Semin : That is, science to hell.

O. Komolov : And not even just like that to hell. What is the problem of Russian science, education, and health care? Many believe that bad officials, stupid, do not understand what they are doing. Not. Everything is well understood. Both science, education, and the health care system in the form in which they were inherited from the USSR are a perfect vestige on the body of the Russian economy today, an excessive burden. Why invest in science, if the basis of the economy is the fuel and energy complex, mining and processing with a low degree of redistribution?

Looking at the export of the Russian Federation, namely, exports determine the country's position in the international division of labor, then, despite all the assurances of technological growth, which we have been promised for 20 years, of import substitution, Russia, both before and 79% now exports hydrocarbons another 10% of primary metallurgy, a little bit of the chemical industry, 5% of equipment - something that did not come from the Soviet engineering, mainly military equipment.

What imports Russia, which means it creates a market for producers? Machinery and equipment 45%. Metallurgy - oddly enough, we have it both in export and in import, although in export there are primitive fittings, metal corners, pigs and slabs, and we import pipes of large and small diameter, high-tech alloys, which we cannot produce . Again, we are actively exporting the primary processing of the chemical industry, but we are exporting fertilizers from Poland, for example, which are used in Russian agriculture. That is, Russia is a source of raw materials for developed countries, and on the other hand, a sales market for their goods.

K. Semin : Just like before the revolution.

O. Komolov : Yes, we are very close to the state of the end of the 19th century according to the well-known model of the historical spiral. The question is whether there is a new Lenin.

K. Semin : Wait. Skeptics, critics on the right will start shouting that no, it all happens because of the remnants of the old bureaucratic system, everything belongs to the state, the entire fuel and energy complex is state-owned, just the Soviet system reproduced itself in Gazprom, in Rosneft, in solid state corporations - everything circle crushed by the state. From here we have no market, no competition, this is the reason for the lack of high processing, engineering and everything else.

O. Komolov : I don’t like Russia - you can look at the post-Soviet countries, Eastern Europe. In Eastern Europe, Lithuania, Estonia there is no such state domination as the liberals assure, but at the same time we see massive de-industrialization there, turning them into sources of labor resources for the countries of Central and Western Europe, and into sales markets - everything is the same.

K. Semin : No Gazprom, no Rosneft, but no Ilona Mask.

O. Komolov : There is no factory that produced minibuses of the RAF, there is no sugar industry, agriculture is ditched - and all this as a condition for joining the EU. The Baltic states were accepted in the EU not as a supplier of agricultural products or manufactured goods, there is someone to do this: Germany does not need competitors, it needs sales markets and cheap labor. Who does the Germans clean the sewer? Well, of course, Balts, Poles, Hungarians, Romanians. For them, there is work there. As we have for the Central Asian republics, Russia is an exploiter, from which Russia is a semi-periphery.

K. Semin : It turns out a single food chain: a Tajik migrant worker comes here, a Russian, a Ukrainian or a Lithuanian moves to make money there.

O. Komolov : Now the question about the role of the state in the Russian economy. The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) has launched a lot of speculation on this topic. Meme about 70% of the state in the economy is in fact an abstract statement.

K. Semin : By the way, different interpreters appeared after that, who now say: “ what kind of socialism you need, socialism is already built, 70% of the state owns it, and this is Putin’s socialism, just carefully without any revolutions ".

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


O. Komolov : What is this 70%? This is a very abstract value and is counterintuitive. In the 1990s, as we remember, there was a massive privatization and dozens, hundreds of thousands of enterprises passed into private hands every year. Then thousands, then hundreds, but privatization did not stop for a minute. Last year, 150 enterprises were privatized in various industries. It cannot, on the basis of this already 70% of the property, be in the hands of the state, this is an absolute nonsense. Just go to the Rosstat website and see what proportion of the assets of our state: 18%.

K. Semin : How to count: by quantity, by share in the economy, by capitalization?

O. Komolov: If you look at the market value of assets and carry them by ownership, this is one thing. How did FAS count? They say that 70% of GDP is created by state-owned companies. But this kind of research was conducted by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which arouses more confidence than the biased hotbed of FAS liberalism, which is a conductor of ideas for further privatization. In fact, the IMF counted 33% of GDP created by the public sector. There includes the entire state apparatus, schools, clinics, public, plus the phenomenon of companies with state. participation is that our liberals are called state companies. And there is a tricky thing: in fact, state-owned companies are only GU: Mosgortrans, state-owned enterprises of defense plants - and there are very few of these, in fact, 1.5% of the current GDP. So, significant part of the state. Companies include companies in which the state has some share of the stock. And it can be insignificant, for example, like the Otkritie Bank - the Central Bank has 10% there. But this bank is called the state those who counted 70%. This is a purely propaganda figure that is used to push privatization further.

Plus, an indicator that is very often addressed in analytical studies is the role of the state in the economy, which is calculated as the share of the state budget to GDP. Known liberal mantra that crushed the unfortunate businessmen taxes. How to calculate it? Some even violate all the laws of mathematics and common sense and simply add up all the existing interest rates that exist in the tax system of Russia: deductions to the Pension Fund, the MHIF, the Social Insurance Fund, and the personal income tax, income tax, etc. - 70% on this basis they say that "the state takes 70% of our income from us." Then what about Norway, where this amount is 170%? That is, there should also apparently remain the state? This is a useless methodology.

Correctly look at the share of the budget in GDP. This is a very small amount in Russia. What is a budget? This is the amount of tax fees. And it makes up 33% of GDP for Russia. In developed countries, 34.5%. In Finland, 44%! Is Finland a more socialist country? Do business from the position of the liberal approach even more oppress?

And that is not all. If we exclude from the Russian budget the raw material rent, that is, the mineral extraction tax, which occupies a significant part of our government revenues, because in other countries there is no such kind of income, it will turn out to be 23%. And this is very little for business taxes. Russia has great potential for increasing the tax burden. True, for whom?

K. Semin : People who come up with these laws will not hang the tax burden on themselves. They are more likely to spend a pension reform.

O. Komolov : We have very high taxes on labor and very low taxes on capital. Russia is an entrepreneurial paradise, when compared with Western countries. Of course, there are exotic countries in Africa, where taxes are not paid at all, but business doesn’t go there, because the local population does not have purchasing power. Our investors began to fuss with us: a well-prepared workforce thanks to the remnants of Soviet education, the level of production culture is still high, we do not need to be removed from a palm tree and show what a machine is, although there are already problems.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


But if we look at the structure of the tax system, we will find that the state is directing its tax policy towards the achievement of one single goal with all its might. Tax and monetary policy is ultimately aimed at providing favorable conditions for one sector of the economy. First of all, the fuel and energy complex. There is such a phenomenon in the budget process as tax breaks. Last year, they were allocated to businesses as much as 3 trillion rubles. This is the fifth part of the federal budget and the tenth part of the consolidated budget. And who primarily deserves tax breaks? My students answer that high-tech enterprises, small business, some social enterprises. Common sense is what prompts. But no. 1.5 trillion was allocated last year to the fuel and energy complex. This is exactly so much how much was not enough to not raise the retirement age. How much is the fuel and energy complex a donor of the Russian economy, and not vice versa? And while they continue to raise the price of gasoline. This is a consequence of the economic policy that aims to satisfy our ruling class of raw oligarchs.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
How is the commodity sector related to the public sector? There are 2 main taxes that oil companies charge. MET - mineral extraction tax and export duty. Together, they accounted for 8 trillion rubles last year, and this is somewhere around 43% of the federal budget. On the one hand, it seems like a lot - half of the budget consists of oil tax.

But. First, the state has long been conducting such a maneuver, when it increases the mineral extraction tax and reduces the export duty. This is done to stimulate oil refining and click on the nose of our comrades in the Customs Union. As a result, Belarus will receive oil and gasoline at the same price as Germany, because there is no customs duty for the supply of oil through Belarus within the Eurasian Economic Area and now it will be removed for Germany, and Belarus will lose this advantage. And the fears of the Belarusians are justified. They are clamped into a corner: there is no longer any sense for Belarus to be in the EAEU, where the main attractive element was the duty-free supply of oil, which the Belarusians processed and drove gasoline to Europe, or even back to us.

On the one hand, this maneuver for exporters creates appropriate motives for product distribution between the national and foreign markets. What share of gasoline, oil and gas was exported in the 90s from Russia? 1 third. And 2 thirds went to domestic consumption. Today, exactly the opposite: 1 third goes for domestic consumption, 2 thirds for export. It is very profitable to export gasoline and oil abroad, because you get the currency for it, and you simply cannot sell gasoline so much inside the country. What does this lead to? That in the domestic market there is a shortage of fuel. Why are growing rapidly in gasoline prices? Because the export alternative for corporations is in many ways more attractive, it is more profitable to sell gasoline abroad than within the market. Even the fact of selling something inside the country is a result of political agreements, otherwise they would not sell anything inside the country at all. Why sell for rubles here when you can sell for dollars there?

Selling for dollars, they get double the revenue. Because the exchange rate of the Russian ruble is artificially devalued against the dollar. What we see in exchangers - 1:65 approximately - this is the exchange rate strongly corrected by the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance. Any peripheral economy with a dependence on the export of raw materials is interested in the devaluation of its currency. Why is it like exporter profitable? If you have a cheap national currency, then putting the goods on the foreign market for $ 100 you will receive 6,500 rubles of revenue. And in Russia, you are the king. And with a course of 30 rubles for a dollar, you get only 3,000 rubles.

How to determine what should be the ruble in fact without government intervention? After all, the ruble exchange rate is the same as it is in life and therefore there is no concept of the “correct” ruble exchange rate. There is a rough guide called purchasing power parity. Conditionally take the same product in the US and Russia - a basket of products according to the Economist magazine. In the USA it costs 2 dollars, and in Russia it costs 60 rubles. It turns out that the purchasing power of 1 dollar is equal to the purchasing power of 30 rubles. This is an adequate exchange rate. According to the IMF, this is 1 to 27. And in exchange offices we see 1 to 63. More than 2 times the ruble exchange rate is undervalued against the dollar. This makes export deliveries extremely profitable and doubles the ruble earnings of exporters. But cheap ruble, helping one, beats on others.

K. Semin : On the other hand, in 1997, everything was inundated with imports, and the situation changed after undervaluing - devaluation - ruble.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism
O. Komolov : In 1998 there were a lot of unemployed and unused capacity, which ensured growth after the devaluation. And today, when this recovery growth stopped in 12-13, even before the sanctions, before the fall in oil prices, the growth rate of the Russian economy was constantly slowing down, what is happening? It only seems that importers are those who buy Chinese computers and spare parts, machinery and equipment, fertilizers, agricultural machinery, without which national production is impossible, and then we just sell it. They buy it twice as expensive. This leads to higher prices in the country. The effective renewal of fixed capital becomes impossible, and the degree of depreciation of fixed assets in Russia is 50%! 30 years ago at the demise of the USSR, this figure was less than 30%, but since then the machines have not been updated with us.

K. Semin : We can’t enter anything anyway, the sanctions are in effect.

O. Komolov : Nobody prohibited trade, sanctions are financial in nature. And to sell Russia the machines that we need no one and does not prohibit.

K. Semin : The course has been withdrawn by a raw oligarchy and technical equipment with it is impossible.

O. Komolov : What is a cheap ruble? It does not make the country richer or poorer, but it redistributes resources from the importer to the exporter. In order for Rosneft, Gazprom, Lukoil, etc., to receive double the revenue, we must pay a kind of tribute. Therefore, maybe the raw material part of the Russian economy is not so much a donor for our economic system, but on the contrary, it feeds at the expense of the rest of the economy.

About 8 trillion rubles the budget received from the oil and gas sector. Where did they get the money for these taxes? The total income of the fuel and energy complex amounted to about 200 billion dollars. If these dollars were converted into rubles at the rate of parity purchasing power, the income from resource exports by Russian oil companies would be 10 trillion rubles less than they actually became after the sale of foreign currency earnings. As a result, 10 trillion were received from above, and 8 of them they paid to the budget. Thanks to the devalued ruble, commodity corporations pay taxes with the money they themselves receive from the state! And the state takes them from the pockets of importers, first of all from our pockets. The parasitic nature of Russian business, Russian capitalism is evident.

K. Semin : Self-Eating.

O. Komolov : I'm afraid they do not eat themselves, but they eat us. The leader in terms of the depreciation of fixed assets in Russia is the fuel and energy complex. 57%. Despite the huge investments, extremely favorable exchange rate, huge tax breaks. Nevertheless, they do not strive to update the main fund, since it is convenient to parasitize on the Soviet legacy: all geology was carried out mainly during the Soviet era, pipelines have already been laid, and towers can be bought for currency in Canada or the USA. Why do we need to organize an advanced production system? Capital is not only not updated, but even rapidly becoming obsolete.

K. Semin : And there are no glimpses? Neither in the nuclear industry, nor in agriculture, which seems to be showing rapid export growth?

O. Komolov : Since 2014, there are certain benefits for agricultural producers. True, this is all so hard to get, and even then not to farmers who go bankrupt by the hundreds every year, but to the monopolist “Miratorg”. Small business, although it is gradually leaving the Russian economy, continues to play an important social role for capitalism, giving jobs for migrants, mothers of many children, retirees, and for “supporting pants” in short.

K. Semin : But on the scale of Miratorg, this does not make the weather.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism


O. Komolov : So about agriculture. The import substitution policy gives poor results, although 5 years have passed. In some categories there has been an increase since 2014. This is wheat, chicken, pork production to some extent. But according to the index of agricultural production, they only approached the level of 1991 in the RSFSR. And that. The forecast for 2019 says the index will be less than 100%. We have in total 30 lost years in agriculture. Even new technologies are being used, new fertilizers and equipment, but we are still marking time at the level of the 80s.

K. Semin : 40 million hectares of abandoned land.

O. Komolov : 66% of the land suitable for agriculture in Russia are idle and not used, although of course the yield per hectare is growing. In industry, things are much worse: only 85% is the industrial production index of 1991. Given that mining is 130% from 1991. And the production of machinery and equipment is generally 45%. This is a sharp drop in the 1990s and a lack of growth in the 2000s. Such is the place of Russia in the system of the international division of labor. Not for the sake of destroying the USSR, not for this purpose they asserted peripheral capitalism in Russia in order to create competitors for themselves.

K. Semin : Inside this system, we see the following on the example of Miratorg, about which we have just learned that it is the largest landowner - the largest owner of the land, contrary to the assertions that capitalism will hold on to a small producer. We see that bank capital is rapidly entering retail (retail trade). Everything is becoming bigger everywhere. Whatever capitalism was, Colombian, Russian, Nigerian, but within it all the time new and new monopolies are born. How can this capitalism be characterized? Before the revolution in Russia was imperialism. And we see that even here everything is rotting and falling apart, but our companies are capturing all new markets, sending private military contingents to protect their business interests. Can we call modern capitalism in Russia imperialistic?

O. Komolov : I will say a seditious thought that many viewers will not like. It seems to me that Lenin's theory of imperialism does not fully correspond to the realities of modern Russia. I do not say that Lenin was wrong. Just by combining his theory with world-system analysis, one can get a picture of modern capitalist Russia. On the one hand, Russia, as a peripheral economy, is the food base for more developed countries, on the other hand, it has imperialistic ambitions and is a local imperialist for exploiting the post-Soviet space. True, the extent and scope of its influence is narrowed all the time. A whole series of geopolitical defeats influenced this.

Let's look at the outflow of capital from the Russian economy. Lenin spoke of the export of capital, as a property of the imperialist economy. This development and industrialization of new markets, turning them into a source of cheap goods, as well as a market for their products. From Russia, a huge outflow of capital is observed: tens and hundreds of millions of dollars. But does this mean that Russian capitalism is the capitalism of the metropolis? Absolutely not. Because you need to look at the structure of this outflow and the role that it plays in the economic system. Over the past 20 years, more than $ 1 trillion has unilaterally left the Russian economy - a net outflow. There is a private capital outflow, when Gazprom, Rosneft, etc., withdraw capital from offshore companies. On the other hand, the state withdraws assets abroad in order to devalue the national currency. The Ministry of Finance withdraws dollars in the foreign exchange market, puts in completely excess reserves in excess of all the norms of sufficiency existing in science These reserves are then invested abroad in the form of purchases of securities and bonds of western states. Thus, the supply of dollars in the foreign exchange market decreases and the dollar is artificially overvalued - the ruble is devalued. And 27 rubles turn into 63.

And what does the private sector do with the capital that it withdraws from the Russian economy? Just look at the structure of this outflow. 30% of this outflow is related to production investments abroad: Rosatom, Gazprom create power plants abroad, gas station networks, gas pipelines and so on. All the rest is the outflow of capital in offshore. Offshore are different. Like the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Virgin Islands - there is a low level of taxation, a high degree of corporate secrecy, that is, you can launder money, hide them from taxes. There are more respectable offshore companies: Austria, Great Britain, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Japan - through them Russian capital goes somewhere in an unknown direction. Net outflow - the difference between inflows and outflows - was 1.2 trillion dollars. 2 thirds of this outflow is associated with the purchase of football clubs, islands, shares of Western companies, that is, in fact, this is an example of food supply for the Western world. We lend to developed countries so that the war in Syria would later be fought with this money, plants would be built somewhere in Africa by the Germans. Just as China is a major holder of American debt. This was the cause of the global crisis. After all, financial speculation was made on money taken from our own, Chinese and other working peripheral economies. On the eve of the crisis, capital back donors were backward countries, and the recipient countries are just developed countries. The export of capital is no longer a pure export. Completely new conditions were added to the phenomena discovered by Lenin. New conclusions actualize Leninist theory. And if someone has doubts that Marxism is outdated, has remained at the level of the 19th century, then nothing of the kind.

K. Semin : We have touched upon very immense topics today.

O. Komolov : On the channel of the party ROT FRONT in YouTube you can find videos on the topics raised by us, if someone has any questions.

Oleg Komolov - about the nature of Russian capitalism

[img] ... 3.png;/img]

K. Semin : Then tell me in the end how you yourself came to this worldview? I used to think that in the Plekhanov Academy there are practically no people who adhere to such views close to Marxist political economy, but it turns out they still exist.

O. KomolovA: Generally speaking, there are really not so many of them, although they exist, in particular, in our department of political economy, for example, Ruslan Dzarasov organized a seminar. But most don't care. There are no views of people. Most teachers retell textbooks from year to year, they can do it for decades, and it is absolutely indifferent to classics, Marxism, constitutionalism that the material belongs to who is right and who is to blame: the course was scolded, students passed the exams and that was all. Teachers do little research work, nobody needs it, it pays little. This is a formal weight on the leg of the teacher, so that the university can say that it is working. Scientific work becomes perfect formalism, just as students begin to relate to it. Scientific novelty zero, retold obsolete dogmas, not related to reality. And everyone thinks that education is needed well, simply because it must be needed in the 21st century. And it does not fulfill its role, which is not surprising. If the most common professions are drivers, vendors and security guards, then ultimately education is not necessary for such an economy. And when the Rosstat declares that the average salary of a scientist is 95,000 rubles, while at the Russian Academy of Sciences someone receives 24,000 rubles, these are not mistakes of someone else’s and not poor-quality reforms, but a reflection of objective reality. Peripheral economy does not need any science or education, and as a result, they will degrade. But still in this swamp there are progressive islands. that it should be needed in the 21st century. And it does not fulfill its role, which is not surprising. If the most common professions are drivers, vendors and security guards, then ultimately education is not necessary for such an economy. ... ossijskog/

Google Translator owes me for editing services
Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations

User avatar
Posts: 2455
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle island

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Jul 06, 2019 1:43 pm

Since all these shows in 2019 are showing Soviets as evil and there are even "leftists" on here saying that the dissolution of the USSR was a good thing, it's important to remind everyone what capitalism brought to the former Soviet Union:

Drop in GDP by 40%. It wouldn't be until 2006 that GDP returned to the levels they were in 1990.

Drop in life expectancy in men by 8 years. It would take until 2012 to return to USSR levels. Life expectancy in women dropped to 1960 levels.

Drop in standard of living.

Drop in caloric intake.

Increase in death rates and decline in birth rates.
Homicides doubled in only 3 years.
Rise in alcoholism.

Women in engineering dropped from 60% to below 40%.
Don't take it from me. More people in Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Russia, Tajikistan, Moldova, and Belarus say that the dissolution of the USSR was more harmful than good. Nostalgia for the Soviet Union is even higher among older generations who actually lived through it.

But it wasn't just people living in the former Soviet Union that suffered. As a result from an economic blockade by the US, the USSR was one of Cuba's few trading partners. After the dissolution of the USSR, Cuba lost 80% of its trade and 34% of its GDP.

Yugoslavia also saw a similar drop in GDP with the introduction of capitalism.

With the USSR no longer challenging global capitalism, countries in the west were able to introduce more neoliberal policies at home and abroad leading to a spike in global inequality in the early 1990s.

All courtesy of bernardo canto @petcrierbonanza
Even an entire society, a nation, or all simultaneously existing societies taken together, are not owners of the earth. They are simply its possessors, its beneficiaries, and have to bequeath it in an improved state to succeeding generations

Post Reply