 |
 Gavriil
Kharitonovich Popov was born on October 31, 1936, in Moscow. A
graduate of the Faculty of Economics of MSU, holder of Stalin’s and
Lenin’s scholarships. Secretary of the All-Union Young Leninist
League’s Committee of the Moscow State University. In 1970, G.Kh.
Popov became the youngest USSR’s doctor of science in economy, as he
defended his theses «Methodological problems in the theory of public
production management». In 1971, he became a Professor.
In 1963—1988, he worked at the Faculty of Econo-mics of MSU — as an
assistant, associate professor, laboratory chief, holder of chair
and dean. In 1988—1992, G. Kh. Popov was editor-in-chief of the
Voprosy Ekonomiki magazine. He was elected a member of the USSR
People’s Deputies Soviet, worked as a Co-Chairman of the
Interregional Deputy Group (1989—1991), together with Yu.N.
Afanasiev, B. N. Yeltsin,
A. D. Sakharov and V. A. Palm. Chairman of the Moscow Soviet of
People’s Deputies (1990—1991), the Mayor of Moscow (1991—1992).
G. Kh. Popov has contributed much to the establishment of
non-governmental associations of economists both in Russia and
abroad. G. Kh. Popov became one of initiators of the second birth of
the Free Economic Society of Russia. His name is tightly bound with
the establishment of the International Union of Economists that has
become a reputable international organization over the 20 years of
its work, and now unites the representatives of 48 countries across
the world. The International Union of Economists was appropriated
the status of the General Counsel of the UN’s Economic and Social
Council.
Starting from 1991, G. Kh. Popov was President of the
International Union of Economists (was unanimously elected to
occupy this post in 1996, 2001, 2006, and 2011.). Since 1992 he has
been President and founder of the International University in
Moscow. Beginning August 1991, and till the year-end, G. Kh. Popov
performed duties of the President of the All-Union Economic Society.
On January 9, 1992, the delegates of the First (founding)
Congress of VEO of Russia elected Gavriil Kharitonovich Popov to
the position of its President. Later on, he was re-elected in
1995, 2000, 2005 and 2010. Beginning 2009, he has been the President
of the International Academy of Management. President of the Russian
subdivision of the Universal League for Freedom and Democracy.
G. Kh. Popov is a Full Cavalier of the medals of VEO of Russia (he
was given the Big Gold and the Big Silver medals). In 2001, G.
Kh. Popov was awarded with the Diploma of the «Golden Foundation of
the International Union of Economists». G. Kh. Popov was given the
Lomonosov Award in 1986, the monetary part of it he transferred to
the foundation for the restoration of the monastery on the
Solovetskiye Islands, well-known in the time of Lenin and Stalin as
a prison camp for political prisoners. G. Kh. Popov is Academician
of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Honored Academician of
the International Academy of Management.
G. Kh. Popov was entitled «Honorary graduate of Lomonosov Moscow
State University».
For years, G. Kh. Popov has been a member of the management board at
the USSR-Greece Association, and later on, he headed this
association. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, the association
was reorganized into the Federation of Greek Communities PONTOS.
G. Kh. Popov is the Honored Citizen of Tokyo and Seoul, and also, of
the Maryland, USA, the Honored Master of the South Utah University (USA)
and the Dowling College (New York).
In 2009 G. Kh. Popov received the first award of the Eurasian Club
of Scientists for the historical study on the development of the
Russian and world economy, and for the achievements providing new
ways and vistas for economic development (this year, the award was
given to the winner of Noble Prize in economy, R. A. Mandell).
Books by Popov have been published in the USSR, China, Hungary,
Poland, Bulgaria, Czechia, Mongolia, Slovakia, Croatia, Vietnam,
Cuba, France, the USA, UK, Italy, Japan and other countries. The
selected works of G.Kh. Popov in eight volumes were published in
1996, and the selected works published in foreign languages in four
volumes saw the light in 1997. 8 composite volumes by G. Kh. Popov
were published in 2004; their topics were the following: «On Art and
Life», «On the Russian History», «On the Contemporary History», «On
the World, in Which Russia Must Survive», «On Revolution of
1989—1991», «On Moscow Version of Democratic Reforms (1990—1992)», «On
Democracy of Functionaries and Oligarchy», «On Democracy of
Functionaries (2000—2004)».
8 (of the projected 10) books of the subject collection «The
Wolfhound Century Rushes to My Throat» were published in 2008—2011.
G. Kh. Popov has always been in the limelight of the Russia’s social
life. His numerous articles were published in many print
publications: «Crisis and Global Problems. For the April meeting of
G-20» (March, 2009), «The Major Anti-Crisis Strategy of Russia» (May,
2009), «We’re Waiting for Changes, Again» (April, 2010), «It Doesn’t
Matter What Color the Cat Is for As Long As It Catches Mice» (July,
2010), «When Millions of Russian Slaves Became Free» (March, 2011),
«Ways to Escape off the Gunpowder Keg» (April, 2011), «Prophet
Renounced» (May, 2011), «We’ll Do without the Sacred Cow» (June,
2011), «GKChP: Twenty Years After» (August, 2011), etc.
To celebrate his 75th anniversary, the Economicheskaya Gazeta
Publishing House published a collection of publicist works and
essays devoted to the life and creative work of Gavriil
Kharitonovich called «Amidst the Storms of the Epoch», within the
framework of the book series «Presidents of VEO». The collection
also entails articles from the book «Economist on Issues Other Than
Economy», and his memories about his teachers, friends, associates,
as well as their personal impressions from Popov’s works,
collaboration with him, and scientific debates, meetings, dialogues
and discussions Popov took part in. The book retains the style, the
spirit, the tone the economist uses to speak about «issues other
than economy»; it is an attempt to understand Popov as a personality,
as a citizen, as a patriot of his country, as a person who devotes
himself and his experience to the benefit of Russia’s today and
tomorrow.
The TONCHU Publishing House has published a book of the selected
works by G.Kh. Popov, «The Wolfhound Century Rushes to My Throat.
Rethinking About the Fate of Russia in the 21st century», by his
anniversary.
We would like to turn to the works of one of the most rational
personalities of our country — G. Kh. Popov for searching answers to
pressing questions.
What does one of the prominent economists and
reformers in Russia think about now?
«There are three features characteristic of today’s Russia.
The first is the millstone of ever aggravating and unsolvable
problems around the country’s neck. Year after year we see forest
fires. Year after year we see floods. Year after year we see lack of
places in the kindergartens. Year after year we see traffic jams.
Year after year we see feed grain exported and meat imported. Year
after year the main morning news we look for is oil and gas prices.
Year after year we see corrupt prosecutors, judges, police…
The second one is a stream of flowers of speech we hear from the two
heads of the Russian eagle.
They speak on the hottest topics. Often, they accompany the speech
with wise analysis. And promises, plans, offers abundant enough to
sink a battleship in. Sometimes, they even add threats and promise
to punish the guilty. Words, words, words…
The third is management imitation. Deputies and ministers come and
go. Governors are reappointed. They hold meetings almost every day:
with the President, or with the Prime Minister. Almost every week
country’s leaders pay calls throughout Russia or abroad. However,
their heavy activities look like the idle run of an engine working
at full-scale output, while the car stays at its place. And what’s
the result? Time belts have been changed because they can’t complain.
There are enough Olympic and Student Games reserved in advance to
satisfy our children and grandchildren …
All of these signs are quite familiar to the people of my generation:
we saw them in the last twenty years of the USSR that were called a
stagnation period, later on. The conclusions we made then are
getting increasingly clear: living this way is possible no more. The
problem is not the government; it is the impropriety of the state
and economic mechanism itself».
Government system in Russia today
In the years of the USSR, «we had socialism, but not the Marx’s
socialism, generally, we had the Lenin’s and Stalin’s socialism, the
idea of which was the command-and-control socialism, the main role
in which was played not by the level of the productive power
development, like in the Marx’s socialism, but by the command of the
governmental power, it was the socialism based on state bureaucracy.
Today, the system we live in is the one I call the functionaries’
system that formed as such not so long ago, and some time ago, I
called it the power of functionaries and oligarchy. About ten years
ago, our functionaries got strong enough to get rid of the liberal
fellow-travelers, and then, decided that it did not need oligarchy
either.
The system that has settled down in Russia that I call the economy
of finance, or to put it right — it is the oligarchic-financial and
functionaries’ economy, because it is not the pure classical
imperialism under the command of financial monopolies. This is the
system where financial oligarchs are bound tightly with
functionaries, and we have gotten a completely new social phenomenon:
functionaries adherent to top-bankers. This oligarchic-financial and
functionaries’ economy that has settled down in Russia and worldwide,
is already outdated, and can give us nothing even with the most
sensible measures applied. In order to sum up this topic, I’d like
to recall the fable by Ivan Andreevich Krylov about musicians that
all of us remember since childhood. No matter how we change the
musicians, no matter what rows they sit in, I’d even add that the
music they play does not matter, as well, they are self-defeating. I
think claims about the new government, the new team we need is
simply another wording: we need a new policy, a new team, and new
people».
The reform of 1990s is almost 20 years old,
already. Looking back at the years past, what would you change in
the reforms made? Was the strategy for the country’s development
chosen right?
We should pay particular attention to the following: «In terms of
economy, we should focus on the drastic fight against all forms of
monopolism, both financial-oligarchic and state-bureaucratic.
Private monopolism must be eliminated, as the most dangerous one.
And the state one should be narrowed down to the inevitable minimum.
To put it conventionally, if production of bread can be organized
through thousands of small private bakeries, and thus provide
everyone with bread for breakfast, all the large-scale bread-baking
industry should be eliminated, no matter how profitable it is.
But in case a private nuclear power station is dangerous, it should
be controlled by the state».
«In terms of politics, professional parties and politicians should
be avoided. Instead of them, the leading role should be played by
civil society organizations, such as trade unions, creative
organizations, associations of doctors, teachers, engineers, as well
as sports societies, consumer associations, associations of women,
youth, pensioners, etc.
According to Solzhenitsin, not the upper strata but the primary link
(country council, community, subdistrict, microdistrict) should
become the main unit of a state structure. The deputies and the
administrators of these institutions should firstly work in their
areas and only then — in the structure of local authorities, as a
rule, free of charge. Courts, law-enforcement agencies and mass
media should be completely independent at both financial (due to
special taxes) and organizational (self-regulatory) levels.
Populist democracy should be completely excluded from the process of
establishing government structures. A person should have one vote
only when selecting the Upper Chamber that secures human rights.
When selecting the legislative house, people should have a number of
votes that corresponds to their educational and intellectual
qualification, as well as the amount of his profit tax. The
government legislation should be drastically restricted to general
necessary limits only. Key rules should be set by those they are
related to: trade unions, communities, teachers’ societies, students’
associations, etc.».
What is the main lesson of the 2008 recession?
«I have already written about the need to change our governing team
in connection with the insufficient efficacy of government
anti-recession measures. The key goal — establishment and
implementation of a postindustrial course — defines the character of
this change: we need a postindustrial government rather than a
government of effective anti-recession measures. But, no matter how
far we have advanced in the improvement of the postindustrial
society, the key lesson of the 2008 recession consists in the need
for radical measures at the global level.
In connection with the slippage of the anti-recession measures, we
have to (at least, theoretically) start considering fundamentally
new models of the world’s economic structure and society. In my
opinion, these models should necessarily be long-term and applied on
an international scale. That is why I call them global.
We had to bear the severities of everyday life, the power and the
privileges of talentless bureaucrats, ideological terrorism and many
other things for the sake of the happy communistic future (according
to Khrushchev, it had to come in the lifetime of the current
generation of Soviet people). That is why I entirely understand my
contemporaries’ deep antipathy towards any attempts to avoid the
current problems by means of conversations devoted to the future —
whether these are «national projects» or a «three-year budget».
But if we really want to overcome the current recession and,
foremost, prevent the relapse (though the authorities and their paid
ideologists tell us about the inevitability of recessions in the
market economy), we have to discuss a scenario of the future that is
alternative to the current financial economy.
If we want to avoid the relapse of the 2008 recession, we have to
establish a new civilization where globalism will permanently
overcome national-state and national-territorial forms. From the
viewpoint of the nations, the most important aspect of this new
globalism will be preservation and development of their national
cultures. Competition between national cultures, a combination of
their self-dependence and mutual enrichment will become a driver for
the development of humanity».
What is the profile of modern Russian businessmen?
«First of all, they should be aware of general economic trends and
modern scientific-technological progress. A lot of things can change
over five years. If specialists do not see a vector of changes in
their sphere and do not know its development prospects, they will
hardly be able to successfully realize themselves. Secondly, modern
businessmen should realize the value of complex efficacy. The
contemporary world is characterized by the very high dynamics of
multi-factor changes, it causes abrupt effects; therefore,
businessmen should clearly understand when these or those
investments will pay for themselves and when the chosen strategy
will prove itself. The wider the specialist’s scope of intellect and
the larger the number of factors they are able to take into account
are, the more effective their activity is. And, finally, the third
equally important aspect is the social responsibility of business.
Business in a society where citizens are able to protect their
rights cannot be other but socially-oriented.
Private initiative plays a huge role in social development. Only
very narrow-minded people might think that only strictly centralized
governmental power is able to provide social welfare. In the
present-day world, governmental efforts will have effect only if
they are combined with the private initiative and can be a source of
such an initiative».
What way could be the most favorable one for
Russia?
«In my opinion, the Chinese way is the best development path for
Russia. When Perestroika began, I thought that development would be
based on the system of Aleksandr II, i.e., tsarism itself would
introduce reforms fundamentally incompatible with it. I thought that
the top echelon of the CPSU would act in the same way — it would get
over socialism while remaining within the system. But, despite my
wish to implement the Chinese way of development, it cannot be used
in our country. I can list the points included in the Chinese way of
development.
First of all, the top echelon of the Chinese Communist Party
consisted of people who had not grown in government rooms, had not
made their way in life by taking part in backstage fights or
different frauds. These were people who had been struggling in
trenches for 30 years; they were fighters. It was a completely
different stratum of people, different bureaucracy.
Secondly, in spite of anything said about the Red Guards, the
Chinese Cultural Revolution leaded to the huge clean-up of the
Chinese bureaucracy and renovated 2/3 of it. Therefore, all
conservative elements were thrown out of the Communist Party, and a
lot of young people joined it. Their key goal was the problem of
efficacy; therefore, their slogan («It doesn’t matter what color the
cat is as long as it catches mice») was fine and relevant. Chinese
communists were ready to go far for the sake of a cat that catches
mice.
And, finally, the third equally important factor is the historical
traditions of the Chinese ideology, the Chinese approach. Taking
into account the fact that Chinese people are not dogmatic and their
religion (Confucia-nism) is pragmatic, their entire ideology is
result-oriented. It was also contributory. In addition, it was one
nation; it was not multi-national, with different religions and
beliefs. And the last aspect: Deng Xiaoping is a doubtless desert
and sunshine of the Chinese nation. This was a man who saw beyond,
understood a lot and was ready to go all the way. We did not have
such conditions; so, we were not able to go this way even if we
wanted to. This became clear during the first three days of the work
of the Congress of Peoples' Deputies».
«If Russia accepted Sakharov’s three strategic formulas —
establishment of a convergent postindustrial society, Euro-Asian
Union and operational opposition to the government with the
conditional support of the governmental power regarding reforms —
the history of Russia could have been different».
The future of Russia in the XXI century
«Russia as of the beginning of the èèI century is not the USSR of
the times of the Great Depression of 1929. We have rather many
advanced enterprises and even industries. Therefore the full
rejection of the old economy in the spirit of the 1930s is
impossible. But we need to realize that the main part of our economy
is behind up-to-date requirements, whereas labor productivity is at
least two times inferior».
The crisis of 2008 became a «purifying thunderstorm». «It was
long-awaited and broke out contrary to our will. But we need to use
the crisis, since it has taken place. We need to get rid of all «millstones
around our neck» and of people who have flourished around these «millstones».
The crisis will do the cleaning for us on its own or under our «connivance».
Therefore it is unacceptable to «save» enterprises in blocks — even
when it comes to former leaders, distinguished and strategic ones.
We need to support the businesses that are contemporary according to
the world standards or those able to quickly reach these standards
by means of some investment and merging with the best companies of
the West and East. There is a need to help increase the percentage
of the use of raw materials, develop agriculture and production of
clean products, without fertilizers and herbicides, organize someone
to process our woods with their natural increment equaling millions
of tons.
We need to force the industries of the future: solar batteries, wind,
geothermal and tidal sources of energy, cheap and environmentally
friendly communications — air ships and radio telephones. Roughly
speaking, the nanotechnology block.
But all these directions — that can be called an innovative
breakthrough — are a competition against something that other people
are already doing.
Obviously, this will all allow Russia to stay a country keeping
up with the time in the 21st century, but it will not be able to
ensure the role of a great power for it. After all, this is an away
game for us and we have to play it by the rules given. Indeed, the
great future is only possible for the country, if the strategy of
the innovative breakthrough is supplemented with the strategy of the
intellectualization of Russia, with a course for turning it into one
of the key world centers of theoretical, fundamental science. It
has a basis (not yet destroyed) to make Russia in the 21st century
one of the leading centers of the theoretical science and
intellectual culture.
Experience shows that even the most developed countries — such as
Japan — have not managed to become centers of theoretical science.
But Russia — due to a number of factors — still can. What factors
are they? This is the long-term development of the whole
interconnected range of sciences, the whole block of theoretical
research, the education that is focused on the intellectual
development of young people. Intellectual culture of Russia and many
more.
It is for intellectualization that we need to use the key
anti-recession means. Let our teachers earn more than their
counterparts in any other country and provide such a level of
training and at such schools that kids and parents from the CIS
countries and other countries would dream of. Let there be 100
higher educational institutes left, but they must be the best in the
world and the aim of any ambitious young person. Let there be 100
scientific centers left, but these must be such a place where
scientists would dream of working. After all, Catherine the Great
did create such conditions that urged even the great Euler to come
to Russia.
It is this kind of Russia that has a chance to stay in the 21st
century as not only a successful and prosperous country, but also as
a great empire». |
