Overblog
Editer l'article Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog

Présentation

  • : Le blog de la-Pensée-libre
  • : Philo-socio-anthropo-histoire. Revue en ligne éditée par une partie de l'ancienne rédaction de "La Pensée" exclue en 2004, élargie à d’autres collaborateurs et consacrée au renouvellement de la pensée critique de la globalisation, du politique, de l’économique, du social et du culturel.
  • Contact

Profil

  • la-pensée-libre
  • Philo-socio-anthropo-histoire.
Revue en ligne éditée par une partie de l'ancienne rédaction de La Pensée exclue en 2004, élargie à d’autres collaborateurs et consacrée au renouvellement de la pensée critique de la globalisation, du politiq
  • Philo-socio-anthropo-histoire. Revue en ligne éditée par une partie de l'ancienne rédaction de La Pensée exclue en 2004, élargie à d’autres collaborateurs et consacrée au renouvellement de la pensée critique de la globalisation, du politiq

Recherche

Liens

22 novembre 2020 7 22 /11 /novembre /2020 19:24

La France jouit encore aujourd'hui d'une aura hérité de l'histoire ce qui explique pourquoi les intellectuels et les chercheurs attachés au progrès social attendent toujours de bonnes nouvelles en provenance de Paris. D'où l'intérêt de cet article qui montre que, en Russie, quand on réfléchit sur une nouvelle forme de planification économique pour faire face au désastre économique actuel renforcé par la gestion chaotique de la pandémie, on regarde encore vers la France ...où le pouvoir a semblé reconnaître certes qu'il fallait reprendre le chemin d'une économie un tant soit peu planifiée après avoir ri de cette idée pendant trente ans alors que c'est ce qui avait aidé la France à se devenir une puissance industrielle respectée. Mais encore une fois, il ne s'agissait que d'un effet d'annonce de la part d'un groupe dirigeant sans imagination qui navigue à vue et ne vise qu'à gérer le provisoire.

Qu'à cela ne tienne, en Russie, malgré le démantèlement de l'URSS, on travaille toujours d'arrache pied sur l'élaboration de nouvelles méthodes de planification qui pourront être prêtes le jour où, à Moscou, le vent de l'histoire recommencera à souffler.

La Rédaction


FRENCH BUREAUCRATIC PLANNING

OR

CYBER PLANNING OF ECONOMY?

-

Novembre 2020

 

Professor Elena Veduta, Doctor of Economic Sciences &

Grigor Eritsyan, Master of the faculty of Public Administration of Lomonosov Moscow State University*


Pandemic syndrome: awareness of the need for economic planning.
     The coronavirus crisis of 2020 will be a turning point for the world and globalization, as it has put many States at risk of economic and political collapse. In this regard, the scientific community and the political leaders of many countries are in search of new tools to influence the economy in order to ensure access to the growth trajectory of the public good. The existing system of capitalism, where the driving motive is to maximize profits and money, has proved to be unviable, posing a threat to humanity and unable to solve economic, social and environmental problems.


     The so-called new "green deal", promoted by the IMF, the world Bank, the Democratic party and others, only leads to increased social and technological inequality in developed and developing countries, and in fact, will only deepen the global crisis and environmental problems. Modern Western economic thought that serves capitalism cannot offer new tools for regulation the economy. The appeal of scientists and the public to study the planned experience of the USSR and the reasons that led the USSR to abandon it is becoming more and more relevant, since planning is considered by many as a tool that allows the world economy to get out of the global crisis. France was among the first countries to declare the need for the planning method.


French imitation of economic planning to speed up crisis development.
     In July of this year, the French Prime Minister, in an address to French parliamentarians, recognized the harmfulness of the country's economy's excessive dependence on foreign capital and the economic policies of foreign countries, such as China and the United States. Considering, among other things, the consequences of the pandemic for the French economy, he recognized the necessity to revive material production in the country. He named planning as a tool for reviving the economy. To this end, the General Commissariat for planning, which was dissolved in 2006, was restored, headed by Francois Bayrou.


      However, as a public politician and follower of a market economy, Bayrou does not have the necessary economic knowledge to develop a plan for the development of France's material production to improve the lives of its citizens. From this Institute, you can expect some scenario forecasts of the country's economic development, on the basis of which decisions will be made on the development of certain sectors of the economy, but with such planning, the country's economy will be disproportionate and continue to fall down, without solving the problems of the development of material production. Consequently, such support for to the French Government will be useless.


      Moreover, the ideology of planning in France remained in the seventies when its viability was proved by the structural crisis of 1973-1975. The question arises: "why knock on the old door if you do not open it?". In addition, the scientific and technical capabilities of modern digital technologies for the practical implementation of economic planning in the interests of people are completely ignored. The French Government's approach to economic planning discredits the very idea of planning.


     In principle, all supporters of the so-called market economy and the "new green deal" can only operate with declarations on human rights and freedoms, "let's make the planet cleaner", without having a plan for this and practical implementation of the declared declarations. Unlike Roosevelt's "New deal", which contained “An honest code of competition”, which in fact was a plan for the development of the US economy, the declared manifestos of the market economy and the new green deal suggest further unwinding of economic chaos in the world and thereby strengthening all types of technological, economic and social inequality, as well as environmental degradation due to monetary motivation.


     The absence of a plan for the development of material production, or rather its replacement with the use of the same old monetary instruments, has nothing to do with ensuring the proportional development of the economy in the direction of the growth of the public good. This is confirmed by the government's announced restart of the economy. It is planned to allocate 100 billion euros to support enterprises (tax incentives, credit subsidies), transition to green energy (development of "sustainable" transport and alternative energy sources) and support the social sector. The government plans to raise this amount by issuing bond loans and providing "gratuitous" grants from the EU. The authorities plan to return 60 billion euros that will be borrowed from financial markets to holders by 2025. At the same time, according to economists’ forecasts, the country's public debt will grow to 120-140% relative to GDP, which means that France will become more dependent on its creditors.


     The expectation that France will receive "gratuitous grants" from the EU, which will be reimbursed by increasing countries ' contributions to the pan-European budget, means that France will further increase its dependence on bureaucratic Brussels. The present system of managing the EU economy has proved its inability to cope with the problems of the economic crisis with monetary instruments. France, having declared economic planning, is not really going to get out of the crisis, remaining a hostage to the bureaucratic EU, which intends at the "pandemic stage" to move from financial stabilization, which destroyed Europe's material production, to the inflationary phase of the global crisis. Its result will be the growth of nationalism and euroscepticism in the EU, like the thirties of the last century.

Cybernetic economic planning to improve people's lives
     The only country that had experience in cybernetic planning with feedback from enterprises in a sliding planning mode to effectively governance the national economy was the Soviet Union. It was this method of planning the economy that helped the USSR become a superpower that carried out the industrialization of the economy in a few years, defeated fascism and became one of the leaders of the bipolar world. The specificity of its planning was that the plan was drawn up by the method of successive approximations to the final planned balance, which allows ensuring the proportionality of economic development in the direction of solving the country's strategic tasks. Following this method, the Soviet economist Nikolai Veduta, taking into account the mistakes of the Soviet planning experience, developed a cybernetic model of intersectoral balance, which serves as an economic integrator of the activities of all economic agents to ensure the growth of the public good, which should be the basis of an automated system for state planning. Without the use of this instruments, it is impossible to get out of the global economic crisis and reach a new level of social progress.


     Western economists, who do not understand the essence of the method of successive approximations, have a primitive view of the methodology of Soviet planning, evaluating it as "barrack planning". The old monetary instruments used in the XVI – early XIX-th century will inevitably destroy production in the XXI-th century and have disastrous consequences for humanity, hiding behind the declarations of the "new green deal" etc.


     Albert Einstein, one of the great scientists of the XX century in the article "Why socialism?", published in 1949, declared the inevitability of the planned economy and system of management focused on meeting the needs of society and each individual. The only country that gained experience in such planning was the USSR. However, as each of the first inventor, the Soviet Union maked mistakes. Soviet society could not resist the transformation of the country's top leaders, who should be responsible for the future of their generations, into a party of nomenclature that wanted to become rich, like the Western oligarchs.  Therefore, since the mid-fifties of the last century, party dictatorship have contributed to the reform of the country's economic management system to increase its chaos. The transition to a market economy, that is, to economic chaos, completed the success of the USSR, which used "manual" planning, making it impossible to draw up a balanced plan. To win socialism in the cold war with capitalism, the country needed an automated system of state planning and true democracy with the organization of control from below over the activities of the authorities. This is the only alternative, the necessity of which is declared by Dimitris Kostnantakopoulos, urging to pay close attention to all the experience gained by mankind, including the first experiment of the USSR.

* For more informations about cybernetics and planned economy researches at Moscou University :

< http://strategplan.com/?fbclid=IwAR24neQtYliWX02RBpFJN6CYkQyGPyX0Yaa6fSwqS0lfUZLexdSjawuXE58  >

Partager cet article

Repost0

commentaires