|
|
Russia's role in Western wealth
One of the most important achievements of the Western civilization is the development of a functioning social system, which makes it possible for people of all social classes to enjoy benefits of high salaries, medical treatment, pensions etc.
At the beginning of the 20th century, most economists predicted that economic development in the West would lead to degradation of the greatest parts of the population. According to this theory (developed by Karl Marx), the production of goods would become more and more capital-intensive in time. That is, more and more machines would be used in the production of goods. Those machines would replace human workers and allow the entrepreneurs to use low-skilled workers, who can be replaced easily by another workers. This would lead to lower salaries of the workers. Eventually, most of the population would empoverish, until it reached a critical mass. Once too many people were very poor, a socialist revolution would break out and destroy the capitalist order.
That's the theory. What Marx did not take into account in his theory, was the Russian factor. Against any theoretical predictions, in 1917 Russia became first socialist country in the world.
Step by step, the Russians built a socialist state, which had many attractive features like
•egalitarian social structure (little differences between rich and poor)
•powerful economy
•functioning social system
•high education level of the population.
Apart from this, Russia was a functioning socialist state. Despite of all disadvantages of Russian socialism, the Russian way was a real alternative to the capitalism.
The elites (governments) in the West understood that Russian example (and socialism in general) was very attractive to the intellectuals. They understood that if they lower the salaries too far, empoverished masses in their countries may overthrow the government and establish a socialist system. These fears were rational - as long as Russia was socialist, many intellectuals in the West went to demonstrations with posters of Che Guevara, Marx, Lenin and other socialist leaders (for instance, student uprisings in France in 1968). Moreover, the Soviet Union supported socialist movements in the West financially.
Western elites wanted to prevent socialist revolutions in their countries. For this purpose, they decided to introduce regulations (laws), which would raise standards of living in the West to make Russia's social achivements look pale. High salaries, medical treatment etc should prevent the masses from getting poor and from establishing a socialist system.
We can conclude that Russia prevented the development of Western economies according to Marxian scenario. Presence of Russia forced Western elites to establish social systems.
Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, there is no alternative to capitalism any more. More than 10 years after the socialist threat disappeared, we notice the first signs that Western elites now have no obstacles in destroying the social achievements of the past. Today we witness such tendencies even in countries with a long social-democratic tradition, like Germany and Austria.
If nothing happens, the world is likely to develop according to Marxian scenario.
Threats of the modern world
In order for that scenario not to become reality, Russia must again save the world.
At the moment, the fate of the world lies in the hands of a single, not particularly responsible, superpower. The policy, which it pursued in the last years seems to be based on following principles:
1.Liberal (Western) democracy is an ideal form of state organization for all peoples
2.Market economy is the ideal form of economic organization for all peoples
3.Western values (individualism) are the only acceptable ones, again for all peoples.
First statement is put through by the US officials and the officials of their satellite countries (almost the entire world).
Second statement is put into practice by means of international financial institutions, most important of which (International Monetary Fund and World Bank) are under American control.
Third statement is the domain of American propaganda (news and entertainment industry).
Many people throughout the world believe that all of the above three statements are wrong.
Value systems differ significantly among different peoples. Values of a particular people determine the optimal form of both state and economic organization. Different types of organization are not better or worse, they are just different. The fact that liberal democracy and market economy works in Western cultural context does not mean that it will work in, say, Muslim cultural context.
It is absurd to think that a European will be able to live according to the same values as a Muslim. It is also absurd to think that a Muslim will be able to live according to the same values as the European. Both European and Muslim have own systems of values, which are time-proven and work within their cultural contexts. They are different, but none of them is better or worse.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Dmitri Pissarenko
This user has not written anything in his panorama profile yet.
|
Comments
do you know, Johannes Langer | Sep 22nd, 2004
what you write here?
what? Dmitri Pissarenko | Sep 23rd, 2004
could you be more precise?
thanks
Ricky | Oct 8th, 2004
Good way of giving your opinion by using examples.
russia and socialism ian rae | Nov 9th, 2014
Russia is a capitalist country only it is run mainly by the state although more individual capitalists pop up every day .That's why marx asked for all workers of the world to unite because you cannot have a socialist state only a socialist world.
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
