Deripaska, the founder of Rusal, published a commentary in the RBK on December 30, pouring out the big bourgeoisie\u2019s plans to get Russia out of difficulties. According to Deripaska, to overcome the obstacles before Russia\u2019s development, these are the must-do\u2019s: Staying in the market economy in the age of change, \u201crejecting the delusions of the sinister state capitalism,\u201d and \u201cremoving the visible or quiet bans\u201d on \u201cbusinesspeople\u201d taking part in the government.<\/p>\n
\u201cDeripaska\u2019s manifesto\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n While it\u2019s essential to break down each of the points in this neoliberal manifesto on its own, the truth is that nothing here is genuinely novel. Deripaska had already announced his program on April 8: Abandoning \u201cstate capitalism,\u201d adopting a \u201cmarket economy,\u201d and calling an end to the Ukrainian campaign. Then, realizing that the Kremlin might get enraged over the Ukraine situation, and this time it would not be limited to being publicly shamed over a ballpoint pen and a collective bargaining agreement, he removed the message. On April 17, a revised version of the program, which deliberately made no mention of Ukraine, was issued: It is needed to \u201cfind new markets,\u201d \u201cdeal with exports,\u201d and establish a new \u201cbeginning point\u201d; in this way, \u201cwe can create a strong economy in 10 years\u201d. At the time,\u00a0Nezavisimaya Gazeta<\/em>, another regardable journal of the liberal bourgeoisie, covered this program under the heading \u201cDeripaska\u2019s manifesto\u201d (and with absolute enthusiasm. Please see the following sentence: \u201cDeripaska\u2019s manifesto is a collection of extremely serious theses, proposals, and recommendations\u201d).<\/p>\n Let\u2019s have a look at the details of the April manifesto:<\/p>\n The end objective is to eliminate state capitalism. The reason is that \u201chistory has revealed that only under the circumstances of a free-market economy and with the importance of private property, it is feasible to achieve a high and steady rate of economic growth that ensures a balanced development and rise in incomes for the entire community.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s incredible, isn\u2019t it? It\u2019s great to be able to quote these words as if they were verses from the Bible in a nation that owes achieving the world\u2019s highest pace of industrialization to socialism.<\/p>\n If so, large it! If competition is sacred, all obstacles before foreign capital should be eliminated, free zones must be created to entice foreign capital, all state-owned businesses must be privatized, and assets held by pension funds must be transferred immediately. There must be no restrictions on moving money out of Russia. It\u2019s necessary to reduce state expenditures at all levels. Not only at the national level, federal, regional, and local levels, including the Central Bank and state monopolies, as well as law enforcement and civil servants. The state instrument should be slashed in half; law enforcement that is \u201cunrelated to the military\u201d should be decreased by three or four times (it takes courage to call for lower military spending while the Ukraine crisis persists, and Navalny is the only one who has shown that). From Gaydar to Nemtsov, Ryzhkov to Navalny, this has been the common dream of all liberal prophets in Russia. At the same time, Deripaska called for an amnesty for all \u201cbusinesspeople\u201d convicted under Articles 159 and 160 of the Penal Code, as well as a release from the \u201caggressive pressure of law enforcement officials who dismissed them.\u201d Fraud, credit card fraud, check fraud, electronic payment fraud, insurance fraud, data theft, extortion, and embezzlement are all covered in these articles and clauses. Deripaska\u2019s class solidarity is a trait that should be admired and even followed as an example. Not enough, he demanded that the government and the Central Bank utilize all sources at their disposal to get out of the current crisis. He warned that escaping this crisis would be possible in commensurate with \u201cthe strength of the entrepreneurs.\u201d Calls for the welfare state were sprinkled in the manifesto as well. For example, he wanted local governments to build homes and federal district banks to put more money into regional projects. Perhaps most importantly, he advocated for the state to finance small and medium-sized private businesses. However, these enterprises he deemed available for funding would be limited to spare part manufacturers; he favored allowing the middle bourgeoisie to rise only in intermediate goods production. Deripaska\u2019s hopes were limitless as well as his hopes. He demanded to end \u201cthe senseless compensation of state capitalism for more than 14 years\u201d. \u201cEither the employment of ordinary, normal citizens who always pay their taxes regularly will be retained, or the state bourgeoisie will continue to be pampered,\u201d Deripaska concluded his manifesto.<\/p>\n Deripaska\u2019s goals are thus:<\/p>\n 1) Wiping out all state-owned monopolies and complete privatization.<\/p>\n 2) The middle bourgeoisie engaging solely in producing intermediary goods.<\/p>\n 3) The \u201cdownsizing\u201d of the government.<\/p>\n 4) Eliminate any regulatory and legal obstacles to foreign capital, such as inquiries into the motivations of their investments in Russia and the threat of an investigation into offshore accounts.<\/p>\n 5). A blanket pardon for the bourgeoisie, who has been convicted of bribery, embezzlement, corruption, fraud, etc.<\/p>\n It seems like he\u2019s gearing up for an all-out confrontation with the Kremlin. However, that\u2019s not the case. The big bourgeoisie is shrewd. Before publishing her manifesto, Deripaska had also argued with Lyubov Sokol, and her former silent partner had come out against this indomitable preacher of the liberal bourgeoisie, calling her an \u201cidle parasite,\u201d \u201cdebauched,\u201d \u201cracketeer,\u201d and \u201cjackal.\u201d Deripaska went as far as accusing her, the most rightist woman imaginable, of being a \u201cradical leftist.\u201d This was the case. Sokol urged Deripaska and the other representatives of the big bourgeoisie to rise up against the Kremlin. This call terrified him so much that Deripaska wanted to guarantee that he would never do such a thing with phrases ostensibly targeting Sokol: \u201cDon\u2019t be afraid, I\u2019m not keen on becoming a chef.\u201d<\/p>\n The sole difference between Deripaska\u2019s April and December manifestos is that in the latter, he enthusiastically argued that there is discrimination against entrepreneurs and demanded equality: \u201cAs long as free and private entrepreneurs enjoy equal rights with all other social groups (artists, patriotic journalists, athletes,\u00a0siloviki<\/em>, representatives of law enforcement, veterans), [these free entrepreneurs] along with the dismissed intelligentsia remain as \u2018the impotent.\u2019 But it is up only to entrepreneurs to bring about significant change quickly.\u201d<\/p>\n Not freedom but prison<\/strong><\/p>\n The term \u201cslaboviki,\u201d which I translated as \u201cthe impotent,\u201d is a significant notion. Referring to the Medvedev fraction, the slaboviki is placed against the siloviki. The latter comes from the word \u201cstrong,\u201d whereas the former is derived from the word \u201cweak.\u201d Siloviki means \u201cemployees of the force instruments to whom the state has delegated its monopoly of legal violence.\u201d Therefore, it sounds Marxist since it refers to the state\u2019s repressive mechanisms. In political contexts, however, the meaning narrows down: Siloviki refers not to all of the employees of these instruments but rather to their leaders, their representatives in power. Regarding slaboviki, before digging down to its meaning, I should quote a single sentence from a column that\u2019s just as valuable as the definition itself. This is from an article regarding the situation before the Georgian war published on January 18, 2019, in Novaya Gazeta, the most \u201crespectable\u201d and militant mouthpiece of the big bourgeoisie and the advocates of liberal reforms (now fully declassified), former middle bourgeoisie:<\/p>\n \u201cMedvedev\u2019s slabovikis were wandering the Kremlin corridors; talks about modernization had begun.\u201d<\/p>\n The slaboviki, then, included the following groups: The faction of the power bloc that Medvedev represented, the fraction against siloviki, the weak wing of power in the face of the siloviki; the proponents of \u201cmodernization,\u201d or those who support Russia\u2019s immediate integration with the imperialist world.<\/p>\n Obviously, liberal and slaboviki are linked ideas.<\/p>\n Saltykov-Schedrin wrote a story called \u201cLiberal\u201d which I translated into Turkish (in \u201cBilge Kayabal\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d; Helikopter, Istanbul: 2013). The liberal in Russia, and by extension all liberals, is portrayed as a man who abandoned his ideals altogether and \u201cadapted them to life.\u201d And how stunningly he depicts! The liberal\u2019s ideal was not freedom anymore but a prison. He has buried his old ideas in the dirt, but he still hopes that the sun will rise tomorrow, and the muck will dry off of him.<\/p>\n Suddenly, he felt as if a drizzle had just hit his face. Whence did it come? What gives? The liberal looked up: \u201cIs it raining?\u201d However, he saw that the sky was completely clear, with the sun crazily hovering over the peaks. The wind was blowing, though, but yet there was no sign of water dripping from a window; there was no such thing.<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a miracle!\u201d said the liberal to his friend. \u201cNot a drop falls, no puddles, yet something tickles my face.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cBut look, there\u2019s a guy lurking in the corner,\u201d replied his friend, \u201cThat\u2019s his job. Due to your liberal affairs, he desired to spit in your face, but he didn\u2019t venture into doing it. Here, in the context of \u2018adapting to the life,\u2019 he spitted out of the corner, and the wind blows his spit right to you.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n That liberal is slaboviki.<\/p>\n Theory and practice<\/strong><\/p>\n I gave that a lot of thought. The adopted policy is the limitation of the political power of the big bourgeoisie and its economic power to the extent that it bolsters the political power and the replacement of the middle bourgeoisie, which has been declassed since February 24, with a new middle class that will be the stable mass base of the Kremlin. This policy can only be implemented with unstated NEP measures, leading to leftist backing.<\/p>\n The most crucial distinction between the big and middle bourgeoisie must not be overlooked. The big bourgeoisie can invest significant fixed capital and get adequate financing from the financial oligarchy of which it is generally a part. Thus, to maximize profits, it does not need to resort to primitive solutions like extending the workday or slashing social programs. (\u201cUnnecessity\u201d is a factual situation, but impulses, not needs, drive free-market capitalism.) When compared to the big bourgeoisie integrated with the financial oligarchy, the middle bourgeoisie is unable to make big investments in fixed capital or locate suitable credit opportunities like the bourgeoisie incorporated with the financial oligarchy. That fact leaves them with no choice but to resort to primitive methods like extending the working day and reducing social rights to increase profits.<\/p>\n The big bourgeoisie may, thus, inflame or quickly defuse the conflict with the working class it employs, but the struggle between the proletariat and the middle bourgeoisie only grows. This is the norm everywhere. This is precisely why the big bourgeoisie uses what is called \u201cpeople\u2019s capitalism\u201d (of the kind that Potanin preached a few months ago) as one of the ideological means to gain the working people over the middle bourgeoisie. This \u201cuselessness\u201d situation facilitates the neutral position of the working class in the conflict between the big bourgeoisie with the middle bourgeoisie.<\/p>\n The bourgeoisie is generally impotent since they seldom claim for the government and almost always demand the state to protect its relative autonomy. In general, their political representatives usually rule on behalf of the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie, both big and middle, want a \u201cneutral\u201d state. On the other hand, the monopoly bourgeoisie only favors a neutral state since its members are in a mortal conflict with one another and, therefore, have lesser shared interests against their enemies. But when it is united vis-\u00e0-vis a more significant threat and starts a struggle as a bloc against its common enemy by sidelining its internal conflict, it recalls that it is \u201ccr\u00e8me de la cr\u00e8me.\u201d Now it is less numbered to rule directly, but politically influential, economically robust, and enormously homogenous. The working masses are often seen as the only possible common opponent for the big bourgeoisie, but this view reduces the scope of the class conflict. The struggle, even the struggle for life and death, need not necessarily be monolithically between the bourgeoisie and the working class. Moreover, the dominant aspect of class struggle under capitalism is rather often the struggle of the bourgeoisie within itself.<\/p>\n Thus, Deripaska\u2019s hubris to demand the de facto transfer of the state to the \u201cbusinesspeople\u201d stems not only from his relations with the ruling circles but also, and primarily, from these two reasons: 1) A new kind of NEP conflicts with the interests of the big bourgeoisie and that makes them unite against the common enemy (the rising middle bourgeoisie) and its political representatives. 2) Since resorting to the \u201cbasic\u201d (not referring to \u201cprimitive,\u201d \u201crudimentary,\u201d or \u201cextinct,\u201d but to the most animalistic impulses that never go away) methods of capitalism is \u201cunnecessary,\u201d the working class can remain neutral in this conflict.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Deripaska, the founder of Rusal, published a commentary in the RBK on December 30, pouring out the big bourgeoisie\u2019s plans to get Russia out of difficulties. According to Deripaska, to overcome the obstacles before Russia\u2019s development, these are the must-do\u2019s: Staying in the market economy in the age of change, \u201crejecting the delusions of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":2102,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"gallery","meta":{"ep_exclude_from_search":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[955,1057,1059,971,901,945,1058,683],"class_list":["post-2101","post","type-post","status-publish","format-gallery","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opinion","tag-capitalism","tag-deripaska","tag-kremlin","tag-moscow","tag-neoliberalism","tag-nep","tag-rbk","tag-russia","post_format-post-format-gallery"],"yoast_head":"\n