Тhe Вattlefield: Еconomic Нistory. Commentary on the Paper by D. A. Fomin and Beyond

Abstract

The paper considers major ideas and conclusions observed in historical and economic publications of non-conservative character. It shows, on the base of some recent publications, that the authors of such works use all methodological possibilities and any data to confirm the thesis on the necessity and inevitability of Stalin’s modernization and, thereby, to justify the mechanisms and tools of the industrialization of the country. Moreover, they consider the partial reconstruction of such tools useful for overcoming the current economic problems. The example of D. A. Fomin’s paper shows methodological defects of such historical and economic research. The main errors are the idea of the self-value of the rate of production growth and ignoring its quality, the social consequences of forced industrialization. We consider the statement about the crisis nature of Russia’s economic development in the post-Soviet period to be unproven, and we consider its comparison with economic disasters in our country in the twentieth century to be incorrect.