A wonderful article by Tatyana Voevodina “The main problem of our industrialization. An attempt to look at things directly." It opens with the words of A. Smith: “A country without a developed manufacturing industry cannot win a war against a country that has such an industry.”
In the eyes of the author, the prospect of reindustrialization is connected with the most important question: who will work in the new industry? It proceeds from the fact that now much fewer workers are needed in factories and factories than 100 or 50 years ago, but there are no completely deserted industries and are not expected.
T. Voevodina, using historical material, shows that in all industrializations - in England, in Russia, in Italy, in China, in India - the source of labor was the peasantry.
“Life in the countryside was so difficult that work in industry turned out to be an improvement in the worker’s situation, social growth.” However, this source has now disappeared.
If we talk about the city resource, then “for today’s young man, it (working at a factory - D.F.) is almost unbearable. After all, today’s popular philosophy of life cultivates ease, ease, irresponsibility, life without effort, for fun and for fun.”
The author refers to the experience of the last Soviet decades, when “the ideal of work was formed: to sit in an office and not be responsible for anything.” She believes that “a turning point in attitudes towards factory work occurred in the 60s. In the 50s, working at a factory was still a normal and desirable path in life... In the profession of an engineer (meaning the 1970s and later - D.F.) there was a taste of something outdated, banal, too Soviet or something... When In this case, in the officially approved picture of the world, the position of the industrial worker was considered above all others, and there was something sacred in production.”
And further: “To tell the truth, it even seems to me that Soviet industry was destroyed with masochistic delight, or, in any case, with general tolerance, because it was not loved, appreciated, or valued on a massive scale - it burned with a blue flame, but we will sit elegantly in the office and reformat the circle diagram into a column diagram for a PowerPoint presentation... There is now a small but noticeable trend: people who like to work with their hands are becoming artisans. But they won’t go to the factory,” T. Voevodina is sure.
Nevertheless, the author has an answer for where to get industry workers from - options 1 and 2. She is skeptical about the first, associated with the importation of migrants, which the West has followed and the Russian Federation is still following.
The second remains, namely, the forced “pushing” of local youth into industry - a more promising path, but immeasurably longer and more difficult, as the author believes. “It is almost impossible to implement it in a democracy: ... democracy excludes any measures designed for a long period of time.”
T. Voevodina explores the Stalinist experience - from the introduction of tuition fees in grades 8-10 and in universities and the spread of craft, factory and railway schools to providing well-performing students with scholarships comparable to salaries. “This situation remained until 1956, when that educational bacchanalia began, which slowly led to that social depravity when almost all graduates of an eleven-year school spend five young years, practicing idleness and consolidating the habits of idleness.”
Based on historical experience, the author makes tough recommendations: “Today it is extremely difficult to push young people into industry, because many will have to be offended and upset: many senseless humanitarian almshouses (essentially kindergartens for adults) will have to be closed, and myriads of teachers of all sorts of political sciences and theories of entrepreneurship will have to be squeezed out. (there is such a thing—honestly!).” In her words, it is awkward to remember lawyers and economists. Other measures include promotion of blue-collar professions, distribution from the moment of admission to study, significant scholarships, beautiful uniforms, etc.
Finally, the author devotes significant space to the Soviet practice of organizing all life around the plant. “In essence, it goes back to medieval industrial corporations, where people lived in professional craft settlements. In the city of Gus-Khrustalny there are still red brick houses that were built by the owners of the Maltsev enterprise for their workers. And in Tula, even the streets were named after the part of the gun that its inhabitants made - Dulnaya, Stvolnaya, Kurkovaya. We must in every possible way cultivate affection for our small homeland, for the workers’ settlement, for our work. Of course, for this, the working settlement should consist of houses in the garden, and not of high-rise buildings. It is much more difficult, if not impossible, to form an attachment to a concrete cage on the 22nd floor.”
She refers to the book “Proletariat” by V. Sombart: “The proletariat does not have a fatherland because the concept of the fatherland is built on top of childhood impressions of one’s home, yard, kindergarten, to which a person unconsciously attaches his soul from childhood. And the span
In the eyes of the author, the prospect of reindustrialization is connected with the most important question: who will work in the new industry? It proceeds from the fact that now much fewer workers are needed in factories and factories than 100 or 50 years ago, but there are no completely deserted industries and are not expected.
T. Voevodina, using historical material, shows that in all industrializations - in England, in Russia, in Italy, in China, in India - the source of labor was the peasantry.
“Life in the countryside was so difficult that work in industry turned out to be an improvement in the worker’s situation, social growth.” However, this source has now disappeared.
If we talk about the city resource, then “for today’s young man, it (working at a factory - D.F.) is almost unbearable. After all, today’s popular philosophy of life cultivates ease, ease, irresponsibility, life without effort, for fun and for fun.”
The author refers to the experience of the last Soviet decades, when “the ideal of work was formed: to sit in an office and not be responsible for anything.” She believes that “a turning point in attitudes towards factory work occurred in the 60s. In the 50s, working at a factory was still a normal and desirable path in life... In the profession of an engineer (meaning the 1970s and later - D.F.) there was a taste of something outdated, banal, too Soviet or something... When In this case, in the officially approved picture of the world, the position of the industrial worker was considered above all others, and there was something sacred in production.”
And further: “To tell the truth, it even seems to me that Soviet industry was destroyed with masochistic delight, or, in any case, with general tolerance, because it was not loved, appreciated, or valued on a massive scale - it burned with a blue flame, but we will sit elegantly in the office and reformat the circle diagram into a column diagram for a PowerPoint presentation... There is now a small but noticeable trend: people who like to work with their hands are becoming artisans. But they won’t go to the factory,” T. Voevodina is sure.
Nevertheless, the author has an answer for where to get industry workers from - options 1 and 2. She is skeptical about the first, associated with the importation of migrants, which the West has followed and the Russian Federation is still following.
The second remains, namely, the forced “pushing” of local youth into industry - a more promising path, but immeasurably longer and more difficult, as the author believes. “It is almost impossible to implement it in a democracy: ... democracy excludes any measures designed for a long period of time.”
T. Voevodina explores the Stalinist experience - from the introduction of tuition fees in grades 8-10 and in universities and the spread of craft, factory and railway schools to providing well-performing students with scholarships comparable to salaries. “This situation remained until 1956, when that educational bacchanalia began, which slowly led to that social depravity when almost all graduates of an eleven-year school spend five young years, practicing idleness and consolidating the habits of idleness.”
Based on historical experience, the author makes tough recommendations: “Today it is extremely difficult to push young people into industry, because many will have to be offended and upset: many senseless humanitarian almshouses (essentially kindergartens for adults) will have to be closed, and myriads of teachers of all sorts of political sciences and theories of entrepreneurship will have to be squeezed out. (there is such a thing—honestly!).” In her words, it is awkward to remember lawyers and economists. Other measures include promotion of blue-collar professions, distribution from the moment of admission to study, significant scholarships, beautiful uniforms, etc.
Finally, the author devotes significant space to the Soviet practice of organizing all life around the plant. “In essence, it goes back to medieval industrial corporations, where people lived in professional craft settlements. In the city of Gus-Khrustalny there are still red brick houses that were built by the owners of the Maltsev enterprise for their workers. And in Tula, even the streets were named after the part of the gun that its inhabitants made - Dulnaya, Stvolnaya, Kurkovaya. We must in every possible way cultivate affection for our small homeland, for the workers’ settlement, for our work. Of course, for this, the working settlement should consist of houses in the garden, and not of high-rise buildings. It is much more difficult, if not impossible, to form an attachment to a concrete cage on the 22nd floor.”
She refers to the book “Proletariat” by V. Sombart: “The proletariat does not have a fatherland because the concept of the fatherland is built on top of childhood impressions of one’s home, yard, kindergarten, to which a person unconsciously attaches his soul from childhood. And the span
Photo by: Vladimir Zhabrikov / URA.RU
