The article draws parallels between the state of the present-day global economy and the Soviet economy in the 1980s. It is assumed that in both cases the diagnosis can be similar and is defined as the socio-economic stagnation. Its main features are: excessive and increasingly growing accumulation of commitments in economic, social, institutional and political spheres as well as lagging and eventually reducing in the course of time possibilities of their implementation. Accordingly, transition to a new model of the global economy may be associated with the same stages, which are known from domestic economic history — crisis, transition period, slow recovery. It is assumed that consumption boom unfolding in Asian countries, which is based on consumer crediting of the population, is becoming a key driver of transition from stagnation to crisis. The author analyses possible consequences for the global economy of a consumer society creation in Asian countries, especially in China. The basic painful consequences of competition between two models of consumer society are defined. The author formulates new global challenges with regard to such consequences and experience of the transition period in our country. It is proposed to take into account these challenges in developing long-term strategies for the development of certain countries or groups of countries, including Russia.
In conditions when the USA are implementing the global geo-economic project (Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), designed to radically reformat zones of strategic influence in the global economy, there is a need for a new management model, the counter Russian project (Big Eurasian Partnership) relying on fuel-energy and transport-logistics infrastructure based on cooperation of states — the EAEU participants. Big Eurasian partnership should be aimed at globalizational-strategic transformation of post-Soviet economic integration and cooperation to expand the spheres of profit extraction and increase of added value, obtained by the EAEU companies at accessible markets in Europe and Asia.
The article analyzes global political processes. The authors proceed from the fact that the world is being de-globalized. It is stated that two competing centers of power are being formed — the America-centric West and the China-centric East. The issue of Russia’s role in the process of the world reformatting and the place of Russia in the future world is raised, an attempt to find an answer is made.
In the context of economic leap, accomplished by China, particular attention should be paid to building new Russia strategy. The art of maneuvering between the Chinese dragon, aspiring to the first role in the world, and retreating, leading rear guard battles “American Eagle” will become the most important for Russia, drastically weakened by the “reforms”.
After founding of the PRC in 1949 the economic policy of the country was formed by five generations of the Chinese leader. The program of “new democracy” and gradual socialist transformations, put forward initially, was interrupted by “accelerated construction of socialism”, by “the great leap forward and people’s communes”, and then — by decade of the “cultural revolution”. The new economic start initiated after putting forward the task of building “socialism with Chinese specifics”, requiring to follow the principle of “practice — criterion of truth”. “The center of gravity” in the party and state work shifted to economic construction, and in the subsequent more than 35 years of reforms social and economic course of the Chinese leadership was remaining consistent, being supplemented only by “creative discoveries” of the new generation of leaders.
Deng Xiaoping’s reforms gave farmers the opportunity to create 180 million small farms working at a lease contract, which then became the basis for forming a strong voluntary cooperative sector. These small production entities ensured two, three times growth of agricultural production. The next stage of reforms was formation of the sector of small and medium-sized industrial enterprises located mainly in rural areas and created on a collective (cooperative) basis. Namely they, rather than large-scale enterprises, have converted China into the world’s factory. And they ensured that arrival in China of large Western corporations and creation of special economic zones did not cause the collapse of the Chinese industry (as it was in Russia) and stimulated further growth of the Chinese economy. This experience of China is fully applicable to Russia.