The end of capitalism: 80% of Russians want the state to dictate food prices

The fact that the Russian government has undertaken to regulate the prices of sugar and vegetable oil has been interpreted by many liberal observers as the beginning of "consumer autocracy". However, the data of sociologists, quoted by journalist Pavel Pryanikov in his blog , show that, on the contrary, the overwhelming majority of Russians expect the government to take up price regulation even more actively. Sociologist Regina Resheteyeva from the HSE Laboratory for Economic and Sociological Research (Sociological Journal, No. 3, 2020) writes about this in her work. Moreover, the sociologist cites the opinion not even of Russians in general, but of their most privileged stratum - Muscovites.

To begin with, the author of the work provides sociological data:

“Russia is in crisis all the time” - this opinion is shared by 42% of Muscovites and about the same number of residents of the regions. The crisis is becoming commonplace and an element of everyday life, and not an extraordinary event. Consumer deprivation "justifies" in the consumer's perception of illegal ways to maintain their well-being. In addition, economic difficulties often do not lead to the mobilization of Russians' own resources, but they provoke a "shift of responsibility" to the state.

The political sphere arises in the form of an appeal to the power structures. Thus, about 80% of the Russians surveyed would like the state to set prices for food".

And focus groups with Muscovites conducted by researchers only confirm this data. They can be summarized as follows:

“The larger request for custody from the regulator is the practice of“ rein in the sellers ”. The protective role of the state is manifested in the punishment of the “guilty”. Different experience of experiencing the political gives rise to different forms of justifying the boundaries of state responsibility. Informants experiencing financial difficulties and having gone through economic socialization in the Soviet era associate punishment of the guilty with state control. Feeling most vulnerable to the market system, such informants were unhappy with the efforts of the state, but they desperately needed it. In the narratives of people who have socialized in a market economy, predictability and transparency in the market are rather expected from the state. This goal is achieved not by “punishment” but by “checks”.

In search of the true culprit, the following line of reasoning is traced: if the state did not follow the market and allowed the consumer to deceive, then both the state and the seller are guilty. If the regulator does not cope with its duties and people feel vulnerable, then citizens “punish” the authorities for the hardships they experience.

***

The comments on this publication were expected to match the conclusions of the experts:

- You know, but this is the END. Nothing can be fixed here. In such a public mood, neither me nor anyone has any good options! "Burn it with fire!"

- I have no words. This is a "feat" of the paternalistic state. Until you knock it out of your head, nothing will happen. I remembered the film "Station for two" with the unforgettable episode "do it yourself, yourself". Until we do it OURSELVES, until we clearly say to the state “hands off us”, we will vegetate and lead a wretched life.