To the Conclusions of Some Western Experts on Recipes of Exit from Great Recession of Our Days


In the end of 2009 the Nobel prize winner for economy Edmund Phelps (the director of the Center of studying of capitalism at the Colombian university) offered his recipe of struggle against Megacrisis. He recommended the governments (that is the states) to promote creation of banks which would specialize on financing of innovative private enterprises. Phelps is convinced that thus is possible to repeat boisterous technological development of XIX century. "That is checked up method of achievement of prosperity". That is, it is offered to intersect socialism with liberalism.

In his turn, the professor of economy of Colombian university Jeffrey Sachs considers: to compensate recession in consumer expenses is possible only by increase in investments into ecologically safe technologies. The governments, Sachs saya, should stimulate this process.

In other words, Westerners with lateness come up with ideas which we with Sergey Kugushev stated in the book "Third Project" in 2000-2005. Only it's been made much deeper and successively. This the first thing. Secondly, the same things were stated by Sergey Pereslegin, George Malinetsky, Sergey Sibirjakov and other Russian thinkers long time ago. This - perfectly in the tideway of those offers that the author of the lines made to the president Medvedev in September, 2009

Thus we suggest to go further. To act more qualitatively.

The question should be about creation of a new civilisation. Innovative. Non-polluting. With strong state venture financing: for liberal monetarist economy as Erit Rajnert proves - enemy of innovative development (WE ARE MORE Creators of "Spirit of the Age" Fresko and Medouz also speak the same - though in their original way, with antichristian notes.

We suggest to build new civilisation of Sixth technological structure (Neuroworld-neurosociety) accepting for this purpose state plans and allocating necessary priorities, combining socialist and private-enterprise methods. (G.Malinetsky, J.Krupnov, M.Kalashnikov). Putting forward new megaprojects: for example, of futurepolis urbanization, development of essentially new types of transport (A.Junitsky, S.Sibiryakov). Beginning programs of development not only of new power and machine-tool construction, new aerospace and medicine-social development but also the program of creation of superpeople.

The state role in such transition is enormous. We already wrote about it:,,,,, It is necessary to refuse resolutely from liberal delirium that the state should put up money only in old and checked up technologies, to lay risks of new on private business. Mankind history denies this bosh.

It is necessary to create new social and economic model of development as capitalism does not suit any more. It was discussed almost in clear at the conference "Returning of Political Economy: to Analysis of Possible Parametres of the World after Crisis" (

Slipping out of the Russians from a deadly loop - only in resolute break, in creation of new social order with new civilisation.

However, whether such break will take place in barbarically-corrupted, raw Russian Federation with rotten "elite" hostile to creativity? We offered authorities transaction: if you want - here you first projects for the break into the new world. Now we wait from it for the proofs of capacity, mind and desire to carry out saving development.

If the power cannot provide it, there will be only one way - the way of revolution. National-social and innovative simultaneously. We ourselves should enter the arena of political strike, for otherwise - there is simply nobody. We - last boundary. We shouldn't look at the West: our brains are better, things now stated by Phelps and Sachs we proposed much earlier.

While in the Russian Federation instead of innovative development and distinct industrial policy - only wish-wash, senseless waste of huge money, miracles of "Rosnano" and actually - refusal of what they themselves call "modernisation". It speaks a lot.

So be ready, comrades!

From editorial board: Well, the convergence theory was thought up not by Kugushev with Pereslegin and even not by academician Sakharov but it doesn't matter.

As to the creation of mechanism of innovative economy within the limits of existing system so that the state banks finance private innovative projects, there is a big and well-founded scepticism. Example of "Rosnano" is more than eloquent - money allocated to the concern by the state are mainly spent and there's no final product, except personal enrichment of separate persons.

Is Chubays again guilty? While if to appoint on distribution of gratuitous state money "under projects" to private companies someone else - the result will be the same. We saw, how pretty often natives of special service are being appointed the head of state corporations - and in the shortest time we can see their clean hands of knights sparkling with watch which cost is comparable to the budget of small settlement and even small town. These people - absolutely Russian (to the question about "Russian socialism") but there and then they begin be in need of habitation abroad, money to be kept in the same place, to teach children also abroad, if there's possibility even to have their families living "behind cordon" coming back to the country as "rotation worker".

I do not believe that the budget of "Rosnano" has been carved up personally by Chubays - he has no necessity, he already has everything. This money went on greasing of gears of the "system". "System" has an iron law - if budgetary funds can be plundered - they will be necessarily plundered, transfer of state money to private concerns "under projects" serves to it.

I agree with Maxim Kalashnikov - bases of deconstruction of the "system" can be put already within the limits of the "system" but that is right the thing we should think about - we should think about mechanisms of other motivation to work which excludes private character of assignment of state money allocated "under projects", that is "under air". Let's say, futurepolis should become some kind of monitoring system over expenditure of private means as the community standing in a basis of futurepolis should have mechanisms of the control over expenses of its members.

Perhaps, investment should include interests of futurepolis also - then the control, interested control will come "from other end", from outside community. In any case investment program should not be based on financing of "a black box" - say, we allocated you money and you under acceptance certificate gave us certain miracle of technique and that's all, the question is closed. Such scheme will work within the framework of national economy as the pump, approximately as rent sites at the enterprise in Gorbachev's times, when one shop of the factory was "rent" and through it not only all wages fund of the enterprise but also all non-cash means were drained. Otherwise futurepolises will turn into such "rent sites" but in country scales.