Military Review

To be or not to be Gosplan in Russia?

27

Do you support the introduction of the Gosplan (strategic planning) in Russia in the defense industry and the economy?

I support, if the control system over its execution is developed - 1093 (96.3%)
96.3%
I do not support it, since government intervention will not lead to anything good - 31 (2.73%)
2.73%
Other, in the comments - 11 (0.97%)
0.97%
To be or not to be Gosplan in Russia?Perhaps today Russia can be called one of the leading countries in the world in terms of using the experience of strategic planning at the state level. As you know, our country was the first in the world to use the State Plan for the development of various sectors of the economy. According to experts, the first Gosplan is the famous GOELRO - a country's development strategy based on its large-scale electrification. The GOELRO project itself began to implement at the beginning of the 20s of the last century, and whatever the critics of this truly powerful program say, the strategic project of providing the country with affordable electricity pulled many other industries along with it and was able to lead the Soviet Union into real industrial giants.

If we evaluate the implementation of the strategic development plan for the energy sector of Soviet Russia, and then the USSR, in numbers, they are impressive. Electricity production from 1920 to 1935 year increased by 56 (!) Times. Coal mining volumes are 12,5 times, steel production is 66 (!) Times. Certainly, there will be people who declare that all these figures are the result of banal Soviet propaganda, which was directed not to multiply industrial and economic achievements in various economic sectors and reduce the level of industrial development in pre-revolutionary Russia. However, one can try to write off Soviet achievements solely on the work of the propaganda machine, but the fact is that with all the existing stereotypes of closeness of the Soviet Union in 20-30, the industrial sphere was not at all closed from external contacts by an insurmountable wall. There is a huge amount of publications by far not only Soviet authors about the present industrial breakthrough of Soviet Russia based on the use of the State Planning strategy for decades to come. Numerous foreign experts of that time noted that the growth of Soviet industry in 20-30-s was simply amazing. Many of these Western experts tried to adopt a long-term planning strategy for use at the level of their own economies, however, at least two problems existed.

The first problem was that by that time Western society could not be called a society of enthusiasts, because work at all-Union construction sites is an innovation that clearly could not be used in countries with a capitalist economy. The second problem was, and it is not a secret to anyone, that unpaid labor was used at numerous construction sites of factories, canals, power stations, and roads. Calling things by their proper names, the Soviet government did not oppose the fact that hundreds of thousands, or even millions of prisoners, invested their labor for the good of the country in which they lived. The phrase “redemption of a fault by hard work” during the implementation of the strategic development plan became the norm. For obvious reasons, when using virtually free labor, projects were implemented in the shortest possible time. And if you take into account that for any miscalculation, and even more so for the manifestation of sabotage, you could get a bullet in the back of your head, the work went with enviable productivity.

Naturally, such a state of affairs was unacceptable in the West, but this did not mean at all that the idea of ​​State planning was somehow bad. One thing is the plan itself, another thing is the methods of its implementation. By the way, at least two states in the world, which did not differ in their special sympathies for the Soviet methodology of economic development, nevertheless began to use certain practices of the USSR in relation to their own economies. We are talking about the development strategies of such states as Japan and France developed in the post-war years.

Today it is considered that the positive development of the economy is possible only if the state structures do not interfere in the financial sphere and do not create any plans for its development. Allegedly, economic mechanisms themselves are able to bring any economic sphere of the country to a new level without any interference from the government of the country. However, the same Japanese post-war example suggests that such a judgment is the most obvious misconception.

The fact is that immediately after the end of the Second World War, the Japanese economy was literally on the verge of survival, as in principle, the Japanese state itself. However, starting from the end of 40, the government of the Land of the Rising Sun decides not only to follow the path of protectionism in the most affected areas of production, but also to develop a strategic plan for their development, which will be designed for decades. At the same time, the Japanese government chose the path of financial support for the competitive environment, abolishing the monopolies that remained from the prewar period. In the development strategy, a clause was made according to which the government would act as a guarantor for the protection of Japanese products in the external market. In this case, a gentlemen's agreement was concluded, so to speak, aimed at developing a strategic development plan by the state and adopting this plan for action by Japanese business. The main role of financing (in the amount of about 65-70%) was given precisely to private investors, who received state preferences from the Japanese government in their future work. In other words, the state authorities in Tokyo developed a full-scale development project and “launched it” directly into the business, which was supposed to go strictly according to the plan. The amazing symbiosis of classical planned economy and purely capitalist principles, which led to a real industrial boom in the Land of the Rising Sun, making it a few decades later the second economy of the world. By the way, there were no oppressed factory-builders and Kanalo-Armyans under the sights of warders in Japan. This once again proves that it is possible to implement a qualitatively developed Gosplan by completely civilized methods.

Today, China is living along the path of strategic planning on the part of the state and by its optimal (state) intervention in the economy. Here, too, the symbiosis of the socialist and capitalist approaches to the development of the economic system was applied, which was reflected in the annual growth of the Chinese financial system in double digits. Today, growth has slowed, but it has slowed down not only in China, but around the world, so it’s simply wrong to associate a slowdown in growth with a partially planned model of the PRC economy.

Not so long ago, information came out of the Russian parliament that our legislators are also thinking about how to reanimate the fairly forgotten Gosplan system. Naturally, its revival cannot yet manifest itself in full, yes, by and large, this is not necessary. The priority areas where strategic planning, calculated for different terms, can be implemented, are called "defense" and the economy. True, the very concept of "economy" looks so multifaceted that the State Planning Commission may well embrace most of the country's economic activity.

While it is known that the plan for the development of a country's defense strategy can be transferred from the Ministry of Defense directly to the Supreme Commander, that is, to President Vladimir Putin. In turn, Putin may entrust the preparation of such a strategy to the General Staff. If you believe the comments made by Anatoly Serdyukov, this plan can include such items as a plan to create material state reserves, a strategy for deploying the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, and a mobilization plan for the economy.

According to experts, the points on the interaction of local authorities, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Emergency Situations to counter serious threats of natural disasters may be in the new strategy. In the same multilateral format, work can now be carried out to counter the spread of extremism and level the terrorist threat throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation.
Such a strategic plan for the development of the country's defense can be calculated either up to the 2016 year (short-term), or up to the 2025 year - a long-term one.

It is obvious that the lack of a strategy for the development of the country's defense capability may have a very negative effect on the modernization of the army. If we recall the very recent historywhen strategic planning in the Armed Forces of Russia was, in fact, eliminated, we had to face threats to which the security forces were completely unprepared. These are Chechen campaigns, manifestations of terrorist activity in the regions of Central Russia, and events of the 2008 model of the year. The preparation of a strategic plan for the development of the defense sphere will make it possible in the future to more effectively respond to a variety of challenges that we may not even suspect today.

If we consider the option of a possible attack by the United States and (or) Israel on Iran, then here already now it is necessary to carefully develop a strategy of Russia's behavior. After all, ill-considered actions can lead to mistakes that will harm the interests of the Russian Federation in the region. And we need to think about the possibility of the flow of refugees from the north of Iran through Azerbaijan, the possible aggravation of the struggle for Caspian resources, the emergence of new centers of instability in the Caucasus, and much more.

Strategic planning in the economy today looks much more complicated. After all, the world can not get out of the next crisis funnel, which leads to stagnation and regression in many countries around the world. Although, on the other hand, when else should we try to find new ways of development, if not in a crisis period? The main thing is that the intervention of the state should go along a rational path, and not slide to the banal regulation of the economy by the old Soviet methods. Moreover, here we will have to take care that the State Planning Commission does not become another document that allows corrupt officials of all stripes to stretch their hands not only to the state or regional budgets, but also to the finances of private companies.

In general, Gosplan itself is quite a sensible thing, but only if civilized methods are used to implement it, and it will not become a scarecrow for private investors and business development.
Author:
27 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. andrei332809
    andrei332809 18 October 2012 08: 29
    +4
    if you reduce officials to a minimum, then the idea with the State Planning Commission is excellent. but I'm afraid there will be another feeding trough. and control, total control over bureaucrats is necessary - the country's wealth is still finite, but they are insatiable
    1. Hon
      Hon 18 October 2012 16: 08
      +1
      No need to cut back !!! In our country, this leads to an increase in the number of officials. It is necessary to declare in Russia a year of support for officials, then, according to our tradition, this will lead to a reduction in their number.
      1. andrei332809
        andrei332809 18 October 2012 16: 14
        -1
        Quote: Hon
        It is necessary to declare a year of support for officials in Russia

        common sense. and the most successful to present a spoonful of arsenic for achievements in the fight against the people
    2. Vasiliev Nikolay
      Vasiliev Nikolay 15 November 2012 03: 39
      0
      You will know, dear andrei332809, that today there are much more officials in Russia than under the USSR. lol
  2. Aleksandr
    Aleksandr 18 October 2012 08: 32
    +4
    even the little things even plan or at least think
    1. crazyrom
      crazyrom 18 October 2012 17: 04
      0
      Onotole 100% for gosplan, who are we to be against?
      1. TAN_a_TOS
        TAN_a_TOS 18 October 2012 22: 36
        0
        Onotole said that only by 2020 will it be possible to introduce a state plan
    2. aviator46
      aviator46 18 October 2012 20: 42
      0
      The communists presented the state economy as a large company - here you have the planned economy!
      So she is depicted in the book of Lenin "State and Revolution" ...

      Only one thing was not taken into account, with an increase in production, the number of products manufactured in the country increased sharply, because of this the number of technological chains increased according to the power law, and the planning methodology did not change.
      A mysterious pricing system overlaps this ...
      On this, the "planned economy" of the USSR "stumbled" ... "and its muzzle on the asphalt."
  3. bubla5
    bubla5 18 October 2012 08: 50
    +3
    Yes, it’s all useless, the country at this stage is designed for uncontrolled and total looting by officials and oligarchs, this is where the ideal planning
    1. 11Goor11
      11Goor11 19 October 2012 22: 27
      0
      bubla5
      country at this stage is intended for uncontrolled and total looting by officials

      Determinism?
      Inevitable predestination?
  4. borisst64
    borisst64 18 October 2012 08: 52
    +5
    "for any miscalculation, and even more so, for the manifestation of sabotage, one could get a bullet in the back of the head"

    Yes, you, my friend, Solzhenitsyn have read!
    1. str73
      str73 18 October 2012 12: 34
      +5
      You are absolutely right, Boris! And a little more from that opera, where we had 80 million convicts, a free labor force. But in reality, the share of prisoners as labor did not exceed 5-7 percent of the country's working population. So what then did the rest of the people of the USSR do if the Gulagists built everything ??? Did he eat pears?
      1. aviator46
        aviator46 18 October 2012 20: 55
        -6
        That you studied the history of the USSR ...

        In the 1940s, about a dozen specialized Headquarters were formed: Dalstroy, Gidrostroy, Highways, Railway Construction, Mining and Metallurgical Industry, etc.
        Each Main Directorate had its own local camps.
        Camp complexes (territorial administrations) were scattered throughout the country and not only in the wilderness, but even in the capitals of the republics. By the end of the 1930s, there were more than 100 of them.
        In each from several thousand to a million or more prisoners.
        Often in remote areas of the country, the number of prisoners in the camp complex was significantly higher than the local free population. And the budget of another camp complex in many ways exceeded the budget of the region, region, or several regions in whose territory it was located
        (the camp complex included from 3 - VladimirLAG - to 45 - SibLAG - camps).

        The whole country was covered with a dense network of prisons and NKVD pre-trial detention centers. As a rule, they were deployed in all regional centers and capitals of the Union and Autonomous Republics. In Moscow, Leningrad and Minsk, there were over a dozen prisons and special detention facilities. In the country as a whole, these punitive institutions numbered no less than 800–900
        1. Letnab
          Letnab 18 November 2012 04: 33
          0
          quote:
          To the Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Comrade Khrushchev N. S.

          In connection with the signals received by a number of persons from the CPSU Central Committee about the illegal conviction for counter-revolutionary crimes in previous years by the OGPU Board, the NKVD Troika, the Special Conference, the Military College, the courts and military tribunals, and in accordance with your instructions on the need to review cases against persons convicted for counterrevolutionary crimes currently held in camps and prisons, we report:

          According to the data available in the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, for the period from 1921 to the present, counter-revolutionary crimes were convicted by the OGPU Board, NKVD Troika, Special Conference, Military College, courts and military tribunals of the 3 777 380 people, including:

          to VMN - 642 980 people,

          to detention in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years and below - 2 people,

          765 people in exile and deportation.

          Of the total number of those arrested, tentatively, the following were convicted: 2 people - by the OGPU Board, the NKVD triples and the Special Meeting, and 900 people - by the courts, military tribunals, the Special Collegium and the Military Collegium

          and this is from 21 to 53 years .... GDK here tens of millions?
  5. Construktor
    Construktor 18 October 2012 08: 58
    +7
    "... it is no secret that unpaid labor was used on numerous construction sites of factories, canals, power plants, roads. Calling things by their proper names, the Soviet government did not at all oppose hundreds of thousands, if not millions of prisoners, invest their work for the good of the country in which they lived. "
    It would not be bad to bring statistics to the account of millions. And after all, "Generally known", as a rule, is a propaganda cliche.
    So what really is well known (in any case to thinking people) is the unviability of wild, market-bazaar capitalism. The history of the United States, from the very beginning of this country, is a constant and often shameless state intervention in the affairs of the economy. on that and are still alive.
  6. Ivan Krasov
    Ivan Krasov 18 October 2012 09: 08
    0
    What is this new document - the Defense Strategy Development Plan? There is no such document in the law "On Defense". It is known that a bill has been introduced on amending this law and in it the document will be called the Defense Plan of the Russian Federation, the submission for approval of which by December 1 was announced by both the Ministry of Defense and the NGSH.
  7. Delink
    Delink 18 October 2012 09: 34
    0
    Everything is new, it is well forgotten old.
    All that has been destroyed is now trying to restore the entire mechanism of strategic planning worked out over the years under the USSR.
    The main thing is that everything ........ Words can not describe everything now.
    A lot of threads are torn. And almost the entire industry is ruined.
  8. tan0472
    tan0472 18 October 2012 09: 49
    +5
    Does the state know how many planes, tanks, missiles will be needed in 10 years? I think yes. Are personnel trained, in the long run, for work in strategic industries? I doubt it. This is what planning is needed for.
    In the near future, a situation may arise when the state will have everything - ideas, money and even new production (at least purchased over the hill), but there will not be enough adjusters and skilled workers who can work on advanced equipment.
  9. Vanek
    Vanek 18 October 2012 09: 59
    +1
    Back to the "five-year plans"? request
    1. 11Goor11
      11Goor11 19 October 2012 22: 39
      0
      Does the word itself have a negative connotation? smile
      In fact, there is planning now, but it is tied to the personality of the leader, perhaps THERE decided to give their vision a more solid foundation than "I think so."
      Which is very correct, the system is always more stable than one person.
  10. Boris55
    Boris55 18 October 2012 10: 04
    +4
    A plan is a way to achieve a goal. The plan (goal) is THERE and HERE. Methods for achieving the goal can be both under the USSR, administrative command (digging from here until lunchtime), and market "Capitalist" (three crusts of bread there, whoever gets there will live). If we do not know the ultimate goal, this does not mean that it does not exist. There is always a goal. The "plane" cannot fly to anywhere. We are simply not always told about this, but why is another question.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 18 October 2012 10: 33
      0
      In connection with the above my understanding of the plan, as a way to achieve the ultimate goal, the question is not whether to support or not. The question is whose plan to support, OUR or THEIR.
  11. baltika-18
    baltika-18 18 October 2012 10: 06
    +4
    Strategic state planning is necessary. But to do this, you first need to determine the goals and objectives. Building a state is like building a house. The builder determines what he wants to build, and then plans and calculates. We have a big country and without a plan, without clear, thoughtful actions, normal functioning It’s not possible to have a state machine. But the main thing I’ll repeat is to define goals, and then plan. And based on what goals are defined, choose the composition of performers who are close and understandable. It’s one thing when we assume that Chubais is planning and another thing when we assume Old men.
  12. tambu
    tambu 18 October 2012 10: 44
    +2
    Gosplan is a great achievement of the USSR, only specialists all over the hill who were able to reanimate it, and there is no way to return it .... an excellent idea to partially implement, you need to try ....
  13. strannik595
    strannik595 18 October 2012 11: 03
    0
    I think officials will go on a whirl for joy for two weeks drinks if they introduce the Gosplan, the system under which the Gosplan was dead, and under our democracy, such institutions are another feeding ground for those who are already satiated
  14. Wanderer1980
    Wanderer1980 18 October 2012 11: 26
    +1
    It is impossible to reanimate the system of the USSR State Planning Commission in the presence of private ownership of tools and means of production. State planning in the USSR was the result of a systematic analysis of the economic condition and development, when efficiency was determined not by the norm of profitability, but to a greater extent by social utility. Anything like this is impossible in a capitalist economy.
    Just planning certainly does not hurt. Short and medium term, and especially long term. But in solving this problem systemically there are a number of complex problems associated with the fact that several significant parameters are not determined by us, i.e. not the Russian Federation.
  15. IRBIS
    IRBIS 18 October 2012 12: 17
    +5
    The chaotic development of the national economy of Russia has led to such distortions in the economy that now, if you take your mind, it will take twenty years to eliminate the consequences. Take a look around: shops, boutiques, restaurants, clubs, saunas, solariums, etc ... Where are the factories, factories? Where is the production area? The socks are Chinese, the panties are Turkish. Trying to read the annotation on the goods makes your head spin. Where is your native Russian? Around only lawyers, managers, waiters, cashiers, salespeople, etc. And economists. The question is: are they really needed in the absence of the actual economy? So we live in a "happy" capitalist, market society.
  16. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 18 October 2012 13: 01
    +3
    A very interesting article from the point of view of public administration.
    GOSPLAN is simply necessary because it will show the needs of the state and simplify the system of public procurement.
    At the same time, the state as the largest consumer will enable private traders to plan their activities for the duration of the planned period. Moreover, planning needs can and should not be for 1 or 3 years, but for 5-7 years or the payback period of production.
  17. Straus_zloy
    Straus_zloy 18 October 2012 13: 07
    +1
    GOELRO "Symbols of the era"

  18. markevo
    markevo 18 October 2012 14: 59
    0
    I support if a control system for its implementation is developed .....
  19. markevo
    markevo 18 October 2012 14: 59
    +1
    I support if a system of control over its implementation is developed ..
  20. vladimir64ss
    vladimir64ss 18 October 2012 15: 40
    +1
    A logical step in building the State. The main thing is not to repeat the mistakes of the past.
    Quote: Boris55
    The question is whose plan to support, OUR or THEIR.

    The answer is obvious. And therefore, this is the first stone in construction.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 18 October 2012 18: 34
      -1
      Not so simple. We are forbidden to have our own concept, our own state ideology, and without them you cannot define a goal ... And since there is no goal, then there is no plan for achieving it.

      Constitution Article 13 n.2 - No ideology can be established as a state or mandatory.

      Putin on the new Ideology of Russia - http://klin.ucoz.net/forum/8-20-329-16-1348213800
  21. wax
    wax 18 October 2012 18: 01
    +5
    Oh, for me this "bullet in the back of the head" as a stimulus for technological progress. Not funny?
    Read from the designer of artillery systems Grabin http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/grabin/pre.html how he at the artillery enterprise increased the production of guns 20 times in one year without any repression. And he met Stalin more than once.
    For reference: "Of the 140 thousand field guns that our soldiers fought with during the Great Patriotic War, more than 90 thousand were made at the plant, which was headed by V. G. Grabin as the Chief Designer (in the book this plant is called Privolzhsky), and 30 thousand were manufactured according to Grabin's designs at other factories in the country. "
  22. Uncle
    Uncle 18 October 2012 20: 37
    -4
    The main role of financing (in the amount of about 65-70%) was given to private investors who received government preferences from the Japanese government in their future work. The author does not mention that the United States invested money.
    Today, China lives along the path of strategic planning by the state and its optimal (state) intervention in the economy. The same problem, the US and Europe are investing money.
    And given that for any miscalculation, and even more so, for the manifestation of sabotage, it was possible to get a bullet in the back of the head, the work went with enviable productivity. They invested money in the economy, and in the USSR - a bullet in the back of the head. So we have the result, those who were backward camps before the Second World War now make goods for the whole world, and we are a raw material power.
  23. Egoza
    Egoza 19 October 2012 00: 06
    +3
    And who supplies weapons to the Russian army? Private enterprises or are they state-owned factories? Why am I asking - there are just private traders in Ukraine who "operate" in the military market. And try to introduce them to the State Planning Commission!
  24. Magadan
    Magadan 19 October 2012 07: 08
    +2
    Uncle, no matter how it was, but the military-industrial complex of the USSR turned out to be orders of magnitude more effective than the western. The proof is that weapons are superior in performance characteristics to Western ones, more reliable and simpler, much cheaper to manufacture, and all this despite the fact that the USSR had orders of magnitude less money than that of NATO countries.

    Generally Gosplan needed. And not only Gosplan, but annual government reports on economic planning and actual results. I would really like to see how they plan to reduce the share of oil in the country's GDP and the growth of the share of industry. Especially: aircraft, machine building, machine tool, electronic industry. Horseradish already with consumer goods, I put up with the fact that it will be done in China.
  25. 8 company
    8 company 19 October 2012 11: 44
    -1
    "By the way, there were no oppressed factory builders and army soldiers under the sights of overseers in Japan. This proves once again that it is possible to implement a well-developed Gosplan using completely civilized methods."

    Oh, the author is a well-deserved plus. And then the Stalinists often argue that Japan supposedly steal the Stalinist economy. Goebbels goes crazy with envy from the passages of Dzhugashvili fans lol
  26. atesterev
    atesterev 19 October 2012 11: 47
    +1
    "Perhaps today Russia can be called one of the leading states in the world in terms of using the experience of strategic planning at the state level."

    The statement is very controversial. The USSR should be called such, but in Russia the state plan was destroyed and instead of it there was an "invisible hand of the market"
  27. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 20 October 2012 01: 59
    0
    Today there is no point in talking about which Gosplan.
    Since the plans of the leadership of the country, the business part of society and the people are different and they do not intersect at any point, since they are based on personal wishes and ultimately have personal achievements.
  28. Revenge
    Revenge 31 October 2012 00: 25
    0
    At this stage, the State Plan is impossible by definition, while there are only crises all around and there is no sense in planning for a long term.