“The crisis of 1929 began in the United States and was broadcast to all of Europe, except for the USSR, which at that moment was in different social conditions, and indeed ended up in a different world of the economy, according to Kondratyev.
And in all other countries - this applies to Spain, Portugal, Romania, Hungary, Germany, Italy and others, approximately the same processes were going on.
The fall in GDP during the crisis of 1929 was 28-30%, and this is what we already have in connection with the coronavirus. Obviously, this is far from the end, although, of course, we have already passed the peak of the fall rate.
In the USSR at that moment there was a socialist system and the Comintern worked, the theorists of Marxism discussed the crisis quite a lot.
And the last Congress of the Comintern, which took place in 1936, was all devoted to the topic of fascism: its formal definitions and features. Since it was perfectly clear to everyone that Romanian fascism, Italian fascism and German National Socialism were exactly completely different things.
So, in 1936 this question was studied in great detail by very smart people. In the course of which the following was determined:
- Fascism arises quite naturally and is an attractor for a bunch of social decisions in the face of a severe crisis of the middle class.
- The emergence of a middle class crisis is due to the fact that the middle class requires a firm hand, hard power and certain guarantees that are not related to the mechanisms of the electoral system.
From this point of view, one of the most interesting definitions of fascism - it applies, in particular, to Italian fascism - is the elimination of all new representatives of democracy while maintaining certain forms of control by the lower classes.
This is a very important point. And without this, in fact, fascism does not exist. Fascism is not only a dictatorship.
Dictatorship is one of the most important elements, but the presence of certain feedbacks is a strict necessity in fascist systems.
In Italy, this was done through the mechanism of the fascist party itself, as well as through the mechanism of corporations. Mussolini Italy was called the corporate state.
This is the model that is likely to be built now in the Russian Federation.
The corporation here is not a form of business management, but something rather more like a classic medieval workshop.
This is a system of ties that unites workers in a certain field, regardless of their situation. This can be the owner of the company, the owner, and the worker on the machine - they are equally included in the corporation.
And, in fact, under Mussolini, the Chamber of Corporations worked in Italy instead of parliament.
Is it good, is it bad, but it provided some moments of mutual control.
Experience is the experience of Italy, and also, in general, the experience of Germany, although German National Socialism is not even fascism, I would say that it demonstrated what the middle class expected in Germany, Romania, Italy, Belgium, France and so on, namely, the solution of certain economic problems. And the conclusions of the economy - although they are rather slow and not very stable - but still for some growth, not a drop.
Actually, this is the answer to the question. In connection with the colossal crisis, the crisis of the middle class is natural, the answer to which society, also absolutely natural, is fascization.
And now, pay attention to the fact that you can completely flip this beautiful Comintern construction and you will get the following.
If you definitely need fascization for some purpose, you will organize a crisis of the middle class, and then you will succeed by itself, you don’t even need to make any significant efforts.
And I affirm that from the very beginning the task was the crisis of the middle class.
... Each country is somewhat different from the others, and Russia is also different from the rest of the world.
And there is a very important situation. How great a great military leader was Stalin, whose power was really comprehensive, Joseph Vissarionovich once said a famous phrase that many people like to quote, and I also love: "I can’t do this, I will have friction with my voters."
Stalin never joked with such things. He said what is in reality.
There are things that Russia accepts. Yes, sometimes with squeaks, painfully, with some riots, but accepts.
But there are things that she does not accept in principle - that is, "this will not happen." And here nothing helps - neither the army, nor the National Guard, nor the authority of the king.
And now look, the whole question now is one: have they managed to truly change the Russian cultural code in the last 30 years?
If it was possible, then it is quite possible to complete the events that are taking place.
But this means that Russia is finally leaving the historical arena, ceasing to be a great power - or at least a significant power. Notice the first has already happened, to some extent.
It is very important to understand that in the current crisis, the United States and China were the basic international conflict, and the Democrats and Republicans in the United States were the basic internal conflict. Neither Russia nor Europe have anything to do with these conflicts; they are on the periphery of history.
I once said that Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, having left the USSR, left history. So: now Russia has taken an important step to get out of the history.
And if the cultural code has changed, then we can get out of history, and the people, perhaps, will not support it, but will not react in any way.
And if in Russia the cultural code has remained the same, then it is this action - a way out of history - that is the severance of relations with voters, that is what Comrade Stalin spoke about.
This is something that structures tied to language, a single mental and cognitive field do not accept and do not withstand.
I can’t tell you if we really already have a change in the cultural code. It is very difficult to measure. But we will find it out in the nearest future”.