ДВАДЦАТЬ ЛЕТ РЕФОРМ — ПРОМЕЖУТОЧНЫЕ ИТОГИ? (РОССИЙСКОЕ ОБЩЕСТВО КАК ПРОЦЕСС)
Сегодня в самых разных социальных группах нарастает разочарование и ощущение бесперспективности, ощущение того, что последние 20 лет со всеми их потрясениями и жертвами привели страну в тупик. Последствия недавнего экономического кризиса никак не причина, а только некоторый частный «усилитель вкуса» этого господствующего ощущения. Это ощущение, которое русский культуролог и публицист Евгений Трубецкой в начале прошлого века описывал словами: «Попытка подвести итоги первому десятилетию XX в. переносит нас в атмосферу известной народной сказки. Сиденье над разбитым корытом всегда предрасполагает к философским размышлениям. Естественно, возникает вопрос, почему оно разбито, почему вообще рухнули одна за другой все наши радужные мечты? Еще так недавно терема и дворцы были близки к осуществлению. Почему же теперь даже светлая и просторная изба кажется нам недосягаемым счастьем?» [Трубецкой 1911, с. 190]. То, что обсуждается в СМИ в качестве «проектов будущего», на деле обращено в прошлое. Это либо возвращение к той или иной форме советской модели («кремниевая долина» в Сколково воспроизводство советского опыта от «шарашек» до наукоградов), либо мечтания о 90-х как о «времени возможностей».The article deals with the key features of the socio-economic system that has developed in Russia for the past two decades. The reforms, which were initially declared as market-oriented and democratic, have led to a result that sharply differed from public expectations, as well as was contrasted to the goals proclaimed by the initiators and supporters of social changes. Thus, Russia failed to create an environment for efficient competition and a mechanism for market concentration and accumulation of capital by efficient firms, as well as generate the necessary incentives for efficient productive use of resources and build a system of transparent rules of the economic games respected by all the key economic actors. Instead, in Russia there has been established a political and economic system that was different from the classical concepts of market democracy and the principles of its functioning. It should be noted that we deal with a special type of economy with its own inner logic, rather than only a transitional period from the planned to the market economy. The relations and institutions incompatible with the modern concepts of an efficient market economy represent a full-fledged element of a functioning economic system rather than the relic of the past. The system defined as Peripheral Capitalism has its internal logic and is capable of not only self-reproduction, but also of self-development. However, the Peripheral Capitalism of the Russian type does not allow and will not allow for a radical improvement of the situation in such vital areas as employment, modern standards of living, demographic situation and ensuring security. The reasons conditioning the failure of the economic reform of 1990s are: the lack of clear vision of the nature of the Soviet economy; the errors made in determining the content and sequence of measures of economic and social policies; disconnection between the declared goals of the reform and the real interests and incentives of those in power; negligence, and sometimes purposeful disregard of not only the specifics of the object of reform (the economy), but also its subject (the historical, cultural and psychological component). The authors note that the obstacles for the reforms targeted at Russia's modernisation lie in a historically deep alienation between the people (the society) and the government (the state), and elimination and disengagement of the society from government. Such a gap makes it extremely difficult or even impossible in the present situation to reveal the intellectual and creative potential of the nation. Instead, a specific reaction to the actions of the state a so called 'escape'is observed. The 'escaping' people neither resist the state, nor render support to it. The fundamental failure of the reforms of 1990s from the socio-cultural point of view is that Russia has not managed to overcome this gap. As a result, despite of positive modernisation potential in the society accumulated throughout decades, the reforms in the form in which they were made destroyed the pivots for modernisation and boosted archaic complexes. Today's policy of the Russian government still appeals to the most destructive elements of social consciousness, its most backward and conservative forms and behavior patterns, determines the motion vector towards degradation and mental sluggishness. At the same time, the authors make a conclusion that a social base for an alternative programme of reforms still exists in Russia. If the society can perceive different activating signals equality before the law, independence of the judiciary system, inviolability of property, accountability of the authorities, etc. the people can become a conscientious supporter and actor of the reform
