---

Published: February 10th, 2016

Ruslan Grinberg, renowned economist and public figure, scientific director of the Institute of Economics, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences will have his 70^th birthday this February. The columnist of "RF Today" met with the hero of the dayr to talk not only about the economy and the way out of the crisis, but also about literature, football and life values...

– Ruslan Semenovich, only recently on the Gaidar Forum sounded, we can say, panic statements by the economic bloc of the Government of the Russian Federation. Prime Minister did not rule out that the economic slump may drag on for a decade, the finance minister has warned of the threat of a repetition of the 1998 crisis ... Such pessimism is depressing. This is the price for globalization, as we were said a year ago?

– We are paying for the fact that in the early 90's the new Russian society succumbed to the illusion of omnipotence doctrine of "free market", from which naturally followed the concept of 'natural competitive advantages. "According to it, each country specializes in a particular production, thereby actively participating in the international division of labor. Some are engaged in agriculture, some - the release of the aircraft ... In this benevolent world, all countries prosper by sharing with each other the best of everyone.

– Utopia, in short ...

– Now the concept of "new normality" entered in circulation, the "new thinking" of Gorbachev was very popular before, the concept of a single "European home" from Vladivostok to Lisbon, the Charter of Paris of 1990, which resembles a treatise on Perpetual Peace Kant - all seemed very nice ... Yes, our rough attitude toward the West works out to. To love and hate.

– And so, when the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet people saw the life without shortages and queues, that in the Soviet Union became the most difficult problem, for the first time. The shock of what they saw was so powerful that it has started a collective madness. People mastered the idea that if we do the same as "they", we will be the same. I am not talking about the desire for freedom, the abolition of censorship, the introduction of publicity ... This is also good, but for the most part they were not a value in itself, but mostly it was the freedom of consumer choice. Well, plus, of course, the lifting of the ban on the enterprise, which has developed rapidly in the form of cooperatives.

– And a three-percent tax ...

– You've made a good point. It is difficult to understand how this newly minted entrepreneurs who had the opportunity to pay income tax at a rate of only three per cent, instead of continuing to work in such favorable conditions, have gone into politics with the slogan "persecute communists in the neck." In the public mind on the line won the blind, unconditional adherence to Western recipes, which essentially boiled down to a mantra: less government regulation, less trade unions, more free market ... And it worked.

– But how? Businesses have not been given a respite to adapt to new conditions and increase the competitiveness of products. Repealing directive planning, the monopoly of foreign trade and centralized pricing, reformers in a short time filled the shelves with previously inaccessible western and domestic goods that were in short supply recently. Of course, it was a huge success of the reforms, but the other side of the coin - the beginning of more primitive structure of the economy and, more importantly, derailed industry.

– But we were not so bad at planes construction, but well-known figure of the reform said that Russian aircraft industry is not necessary.

– Additionally, it was motivated by the fact that airplanes consume too much of kerosene and that the salons were too cramped. Instead of reducing the energy intensity of production, the industry eliminated. Rapid privatization and liberalization of everything, in the absence of appropriate institutions, an independent judiciary, the skills of civil society contributed to the formation of a narrow layer of rich and vast masses of people who have fallen into need, and even in poverty. Freedom turned into anarchy, and this had discredited the values ​​of democracy and the market.

– Robust voices, including those from overseas, even then were heard. Nobel Laureate in Economics Wassily Leontief two months before his death, said that the question of Russia were depriving him of his health. In 1992 he condemned the policy of "shock therapy" and wrote: "Now Russia will take at least 70 years to build an efficient economy."

– The story that I know very well because I was involved in the creation of a group of scientists from Russia and the United States on economic reforms. Back in 1996, the criticism of our reforms was made by Russian academics L.Abalkin, O.Bogomolov, V. Makarov, S.Shatalin, Yu Yaremenko and D.Lvov, from the American side - the Nobel Prize in economics L. Klein, B. Leontiev, Dzh.Tobin and a number of prominent economists such as George Galbraith and M. Intriligeytor. Recent appreciated events as an adventurous. Those and others were to meet in Moscow, but the meeting had been prevented.

– In all the world there is a fashion,. The reputed concept of the free market was fashionable then. It was personified by Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Helmut Kohl. This trio has determined motion vector "back to Smith," which stemmed from their belief in the power of the forces of self-regulation. And all because of the beginning of the 70s the ruling class in the West thought that their capitalism had too much socialism in it.

– And what now? The Russian leadership has recognized the exhaustion of the previous economic model.

– Of course, it will have to adjust. You know, society has to feel the future, young people - have social elevators and plan for the future. The ideology is included in this clarity. I do not know whether it is good or bad that we have none.

– You have just returned from Germany. What is the ideology of the Germans?

– Good question. For them it is not a problem. We often accuse Western civilization in consumerism, in fact, oddly enough, it produces and spirituality. This is illustrated by today's humane behavior of the Germans towards migrants. I will express a risky idea: the whole mercantile spirit of young people in Germany is much lower compared to our youth.

– Maybe the fact that it is open and closed society. Of the seven billion inhabitants of the earth four have cell phones. One billion have cell phones, but do not have bread, and medical care. So it breaks in Europe. We have a different attitude towards migrants, less warm. We are not worse than the Germans, but we have a different situation and a different story. If a person is not enough economically provided, he begins to search for enemies. The relationship between public opinion and the material being there, here Marx was not wrong. It determines the atmosphere of the society, when the ruble is falling, incomes are falling, the level of unpredictability of the future increases.

– Then what do you, as a liberal, criticize in economic policy, which is also rather liberal?

– Liberal in my understanding is the man who wants prosperity for all and believes that the elite has a great responsibility for the implementation of public interest that can not be reduced to the simple sum of individual interests. Radical, ridiculous, infantile liberalism in the economy won. Thus it happened that the state intervenes where it is not necessary, and neglects his duties inherent only in the most important areas of human coexistence.

– On one hand, the state oppression of the business is very large, on the other - the custody of education, science, health and culture almost canceled. It remains under the pretext of the crisis to further reduce government spending and make the citizens who no longer have enough money for food, housing and medicine, pay all social services. By the way, if the crisis will deepen, we should not rule out the food rationing. It will be correct to subsidize 10-15 basic products and sell them at reduced prices. Of course, it only allows to survive the most needy, but does not eliminate the need to move to a new economic policy.

– On crossing over the crisis?

– This is a big problem. If under the old paradigm the government will try to collect taxes better, to borrow a little more money, to increase the budget deficit, the situation will stabilize at the level of stagnation. But development will not be! We have already missed so many smiles of fate.

– The best way to guess the future - create it. Success without goal setting, reasonable combination of market and state regulation, a more even distribution of income will not be reached. Over the years, we come to understand that the world is not goodness, there are double and triple standards that selfless love for West is absurd. But it makes no sense to take offense, as it is said "on the offended the water is carried." We must learn to flatter attitude to the world and especially the West. After all we ​​have basically the same values, but the story is different. We should not indulge in adoration, as it was in the 90s, but the present-day phobia and hostility are also harmful. To equip the new cooperation we still have with our eyes open.

– How do you explain the fact that the citizens who showed us the sanctions of the West often approve of Vladimir Putin in the social networks?

– Very simple. America, the most powerful country that makes a lot of silly mistakes and not liked somewhere. But Europe has not accepted to blame the Americans. The Germans have a saying "Gloating - the purest joy." Therefore, any open protest against the United States is approved. And the fact that the Russian president shows “damned Pindos gruel” - it's beautiful, well done, so be it!

– You are the co-chairman of the Moscow Economic Forum. MEF is now authoritative discussion platform, where an attempt is made to develop an alternative model of development. On what principles it should be based?

– We need indicative, and policy planning, industrial policy, priorities, de-industrialization, not only import-but export- substitution to reduce dependence on capricious dynamics of oil prices. Otherwise, the distribution of primary income should be arranged. It is time to cancel the flat rate tax, and to introduce a tax on luxury.

– All of this stems from the ideas of economic sociodynamics, one of the authors of which I am. In essence, we are talking about the economic foundations of the theory of convergence. Sociodynamics comes from the fact that there is a public interest that can not be reduced to the personal. It is the duty of the ruling elite - to implement them, for which the state is expected to actively support the four foundations of life - education, science, health and culture.

– On MEF there are different points of view. For example, unlike most I am definitely not inclined to evaluate our foreign policy complementarily. It is, in my opinion, we made some mistakes. First we made a strong bias towards the West, neglecting Asia. Now I fear skew vice versa. Both are counterproductive.

– There are talkings about our participation in the Chinese project "Silk Road". And from an economic and geopolitical point of view it is very promising joint project of high-speed railway Moscow - Beijing. Only we need to be mindful of their interests and not to take the "Silk Road" as an alternative to the restoration of cooperation with Europe. It is equally important to deepen the integration of the former Soviet Union. It is very difficult, especially after our somersaults in the field of monetary policy. That is, the "pure" policy requires a more balanced economic policy.

– More recently, there was a change in your life, you left the post of director of the Institute of Economics. Breaking yet?

– I do not because I support the competitiveness not only in the economy and politics, but everywhere else. The two terms, I think that's enough. Many would have thought that if I stayed it would be handy, but any stagnation hinders life. In this sense, I hope that the parliamentary elections this year will bring changes in the political landscape of ours and lead new people. Multicolored world, it is changing, we are on the verge of great discoveries. It is possible that in ten years, mankind will be able to replace diseased organs with artificial. But the risks are increasing.

– Ruslan Semenovich you have dreame to become an economist right from childhood?

– Of course not. I wanted to be a famous football player. But it did not ... However, among economists I am definitely an outstanding football player.

– Your economic outlook over the past 25 years is somehow changed?

– In my opinion, everyone should change, though many are proud that they do not change. I was a young man with a sense that the world is not black and white, and often there is some correctness in opposite judgments. It is important to find a compromise. Especially when using different theories. So I think now.

– It is clear that I, like many, had illusions and false expectations. I'm ashamed of how I reacted to Gorbachev invented "hundreds" for Parliament - a hundred of the best firemen, a hundred of the best scientists, and so on. Together with other liberal people I said that this was nonsense. And when I saw, who then went to the parliament, I doubtes in that assessments. The quota of professionals - that's great. In the Soviet period there was a good selection system frames, allowing essentially to promote the best. Now it is very often decided by money and the clans. As they say, the best - to children.

– I erred on the so-called plan-making enterprises. At first for me, marketeer, it seemed as an absurd. But it turned out that they need. It meritornye (decent) good.

– In life you need to find a compromise between freedom and justice. The first without the second - it is chaos, and then a dictatorship. And justice without freedom - egalitarianism and oppression. For me it is important to seek a balance, harmony, and why I like Aristotle and Confucius. However, on fractures of the history of their little ideas are claimed.

– How do you spend your spare time?

– I like to read the Russian classics - Turgenev, Tolstoy, Gorky. Especially novel "Life of Klim Samgin", which depicts the entire panorama of Russian life at the beginning of the last century. I like Nabokov. I like Movies, but watch little. In the theater, I prefer drama. I teach foreign economies in the Moscow Art Theater School, so often go to the theater. The music I like almost as much as football, which I just hung up.

– Our team does not disappoint?

– Well, in general, yes. In football, we have become a victim of the same doctrine. I noticed that in sports, our country has always been strong in those periods of history when the order was maintained, but it was freedom. As with Khrushchev when took first or second place. Status of Russian football reflects our illusions in economic philosophy. In 1964, Konstantin Ivanovich Beskova was fired from his post as head coach of the Soviet Union for what the team at the European Championships took only second place. Now only dream of such success is possible.

– Let's go back to the economy. Do we have to hope for a rebound in oil prices? Soon will we see the light at the end of the tunnel?

– I think that the economic part of the Government received a good lesson. But it seems to have no idea how to change the current model. It is inertia and powerfully stuck. The change is fraught with risk of lung or slipping into chaos, or mobilization of the economy with all the consequences for economic and other freedoms. This medicine is worse than the disease. For me, the best kind of life as it is now, than her full overregulation.

– My optimism is based on the belief in the self-sufficiency of the Russian economy. Hopeless situation does not happen. Of course, the bad, when increasing unpredictability of life, and it seems that this feeling is not only for us. Otherwise, US Secretary of State John Kerry would not compare the world atmosphere in Davos today's with the mood of the passengers of "Titanic."

– More exactly, on the "Titanic" there were different classes. Most people today live in the hold, but in the past they did not knew what was being done on the upper deck, and now they know. This is a very strong potential. Problems really grow globally and require the same global common response. Conclusion: it is necessary to seek consensus, balance. Geopolitics is back in the hideous guise, but the tug of war is futile. Main problem - the loss of confidence in each other. And between countries and within countries. The return of confidence, including the elites of society, reduction of social inequality is the most urgent task. First of all it concerns our country.

Source: Российская Федерация сегодня