The goal of society is the USSR: Justice, Solidarity, Freedom, Development

In the three decades we have been trying to create a capitalist system in Russia along the lines of the US neoliberal model, we have been through a lot. A period of catastrophic recession in the 1990s, based on high energy prices, extensive growth in the 2000s, the crisis of 2008-2010, stagnation over the next decade and … hopes that tomorrow will be better. Over the years, the quality of life of half of the population has not increased, and for another 30% it has grown so insignificantly that it is not felt. As a result, more than 80% of Russian citizens live almost like in the USSR, only without social guarantees (housing, work, education). For this majority, the American way of life and Western goods are something of an advertisement.

Real life takes place in a different space. Therefore, the sanctions and the reduction of imports from Europe and the United States have little effect on most Russians: they do not travel abroad, every expensive purchase is a challenge for them. Prestigious Western brands are used by only 15–20% of the population who have switched to the European and American way of life. These are the people with the highest incomes: owners of large and successful small businesses, middle and upper management in private and state structures, the “elite” intelligentsia… By and large, only they can regret the departure of Western companies. So we are not faced with a choice: Russia or the West, but a choice: capitalism or non-capitalism. And this needs to be dealt with in more detail.

Most of the population of our country are hired workers who are forced to survive. And today, more and more often they are guided not by national or collectivist values, but by market and selfish ones. These are not the values ​​of the West, but of capitalism, which Russian capital reproduces in the same way as Western capital. Nothing will change in our lives if Russian fast food of the same quality takes the place of the Western one. Will change if people’s priorities change. It is necessary not only to change foreign signs to Russian ones, but to move away from capitalism. But if you leave, then where?

In recent months, a new geopolitical situation has emerged in the world and in Russia, which will encourage us to take steps that the country’s leadership has not taken for decades. Sanctions limit our ability to develop a neoliberal open economy. Unfortunately, so far the government is limited to partial measures: resources are taken from one area and poured into another.

And deep social and economic reforms are required. At least a medium-term program of economic development is needed. Not a set of fire measures for import substitution, but a program for updating technologies, infrastructure, labor content and, most importantly, improving the quality of life. There are resources for this in Russia, although we have lost almost a third of our annual GDP due to the freezing of financial assets abroad. It is all the more important to use the remaining money rationally, for which strategic state planning should be developed. This is the first condition for getting out of stagnation, which threatens to turn into a crisis.

The second thing that is needed is a change in property relations. And not so much nationalization (or privatization), but the real subordination of the activities of state enterprises to the interests of society instead of the interests of lobbyists-officials. Plus the mandatory social responsibility of private business, plus the participation of employees in the control and management of enterprises of all forms of ownership.

I would like to emphasize the last point: business must be placed in conditions where it will be profitable for it to work not only for the sake of profit, but also for the sake of solving social, environmental, and humanitarian tasks. Then we will have fewer dollar billionaires, but people will receive more benefits, more affordable and high-quality education, medicine, and housing.

We need profound changes in the distribution of income. How much can one talk about a progressive income tax, a progressive inheritance tax?! And the main task is to raise production so that the taxable base grows.

The implementation of these measures will be a synthesis of the achievements that are in Scandinavia, Austria, China, and Vietnam. Of course, we should not copy these countries. But in any case, society needs to be offered a new strategic project, a new economic, political and cultural perspective. At the same time, an alternative is needed not to the Western economy, but to the market-capitalist system and the values ​​that are associated with it. Since these institutions and values ​​have been most developed in the United States and a number of other NATO countries, it can be said that without an alternative to the model of capitalism that has developed in these countries, Russia will not be able to continue its independent foreign policy.

At the same time, however, the question remains, what will Russia’s choice be in this case? We can move forward by critically using the experience of progressive reforms both in the West and in the East. But another model is also possible: regression, reaction, semi-feudal capitalism isolated from half the world, under which nothing can be done without the permission of the governor or other boss.

And the main question: what will all this give a person? Not to those 15–20% “at the top”, for whom the refusal to have a vacation in Nice is like a disaster, but to those 80% of the country’s inhabitants who receive 20–50 thousand rubles a month and work much more than the official 40 hours a week, for the sake of ensuring a tolerable life, and even survival. It is well known that many people dream of social justice. But it is generally accepted that this priority will entail both tighter social control and the obligation to give up personal prosperity for the sake of the common cause. At first glance, it seems obvious that not everyone will agree to live like this, especially among young people.

But this is both true and false. What is considered, for example, a success that is required to be abandoned? If you are a respected worker, engineer, programmer, if you are paid decent money, films are made about you, this is a success that you can be proud of. But that’s a different success than buying a $500 million yacht. And this is a model in which social justice (everyone has basic guarantees of housing, education, healthcare, and labor and talent are rewarded both materially and socially: prestige, honor, respect for a worker, creator) and economic efficiency go hand in hand, and do not negate each other. And this is the rule for the majority – both for workers and for artists.

For the minority, the owners of capital, the situation is somewhat different. Such a person is worthy of respect only on one condition: it is not enough just to comply with laws and pay taxes, it is necessary to conduct business on the principles of social responsibility. Your production must be high-tech, you must comply with environmental regulations, provide high salaries to others, and at the same time spend most of your considerable income on charity, even if you have to abandon a 300-meter yacht in favor of a 100-meter one.

Everything I write about is not yet socialism, but socially limited capitalism, where there is private property, wage labor, inequality, but they are limited and regulated. Personally, I am a supporter of socialism, where a good organizer of production receives as much as a great scientist, teacher, artist, and each member of society wants not so much more money as more respect. But while I write about the minimum program.

As for the maximum program – the movement towards socialism – it begins with reforms. It is important that it does not end there. And this is not so much an economic issue as a political one. One election victory is not enough to start moving towards socialism. This movement can only be carried out by the masses. In general, as V.I. Ulyanov (Lenin) rightly said in his time, politics begins where millions awaken to social creativity. Political strategists and money cannot become the basis of socialist-oriented development.

So we must address the main question to ourselves: are we ready to turn from a tradesman who dreams only of a more well-fed life into a social creator, not only dreaming, but acting in the name of society, the goal of which will be the USSR – Justice, Solidarity , Freedom, Development?

PS The author is grateful to V.V. Sukhomlinov for his help in working on the article.