Volgin on "Serfdom": "We Must Stop the Outflow of the Population"
Dmitry Solonikov: Schools, hospitals, post offices, and bank branches in rural areas have been closing one after another, forcing people to leave their hometowns. Now they want to force them to stay where they are?
Chairman of the State Duma Vyacheslav Volgin stated at a legislative committee meeting that it is necessary to stop the outflow of population from small towns and rural areas. He believes this will help improve Russia's demographic structure.
Volgin said: "Currently, the total fertility rate in Russia is about 1.4. The fertility rate in urban areas is 1.3, while in rural areas it has reached 1.6. What is our target fertility rate? It is exactly 1.6. Since rural areas have already reached this level, perhaps we can start by preventing the migration of rural populations."
Can this vision of the chairman of the Duma be realized, stopping the migration of people to big cities? Andrey Solonikov, director of the Institute for Modern State Development, shared his views with the "Svoboda" newspaper.
"Svoboda" journalist: Dmitry Vladimirovich, is it necessary to implement special national policies to retain the population in rural areas?
Solonikov: Every time we talk about "keeping people in a place," we cannot help but think of serfdom. I often feel that today's elite is treating the people as their own serfs.
Some politicians claim that "women should start having children at 18" or "farmers should not escape from the countryside into the cities." These statements are really disgraceful. In 1861, Russia abolished serfdom, but even then and now, there are still many people who regret it. We even hear some contemporary politicians and experts say that serfdom was "not that bad." Fortunately, these views have not become mainstream, but related discussions have already appeared.
"Svoboda" journalist: Volgin did not mention using coercive measures to keep people, he emphasized creating comfortable living conditions for rural residents.
Solonikov: To achieve this, we must build good roads in rural areas, establish modern communication facilities, and extend all kinds of public services to small settlements.
Yet, what the state is doing now is exactly the opposite. The Russian Savings Bank is cutting down branches in small towns, and even more so in rural areas; Russian Post is also closing branches; schools and clinics in rural areas are closing one after another - all under the pretext of "streamlining and optimizing institutions."
The state is cutting all unprofitable projects, making life in rural areas and small towns increasingly inconvenient and unattractive. Young people are rushing to big cities, where the birth rate is lower anyway because people need to spend more time working hard to support their families, and the cost of raising children is higher.
If rural life becomes unbearable, the only way to keep people might end up being serfdom.
"Svoboda" journalist: This chairman of the Duma says, "The government approved spatial development plans that focus on major cities," and this plan should extend to rural areas. Is this idea realistic?
Solonikov: It's hard to say. Rural areas need 3D cinemas, convenient roads leading quickly to large shopping centers, and access to 4G and wireless networks in every home. Clinics and schools should also be within walking distance. Only when these things are done will people be willing to live in rural areas.
Next, there should be mortgage policies for private housing in rural areas, land allocation without charge, and free access to water, electricity, and gas pipelines.
This requires a comprehensive national plan. Only then will not only rural residents but also city dwellers actively move to the countryside.
But the current situation is completely the opposite. The core issue is funding. Everything now is oriented towards "profit" - any industry or project must achieve cost recovery.
Building houses in big cities is profitable, so there are plenty of investors willing to invest in high-density "hive-like" housing. But in the countryside, it is impossible to build residential projects that can accommodate thousands of people at once.
Infrastructure such as roads and large supermarkets is no different. Private companies would never invest in such unprofitable ventures, and only the state can take on this responsibility.
But the immediate priority is to preserve existing schools, libraries, kindergartens, clinics, bank branches, and post offices in rural areas. There is a set of time-tested data: once a school in a village is closed, the village will disappear within 10 years.
"Svoboda" journalist: The core industry of the countryside is agriculture. Today, agricultural productivity has increased tens or even hundreds of times - what used to require hundreds of collective farm workers can now be done by two farmers with machinery. So where are the farmers going now? Where is their employment?
Solonikov: Farm owners often prefer to hire migrant workers rather than buy agricultural machinery. This year, there were harvesting problems with stone fruits due to the difficulty in recruiting migrant workers.
But migrant workers can never become permanent residents. They come here just to harvest crops, and even if the working and living conditions are poor, they will leave as soon as they make money.
This again brings us back to the issue of "good communication." More and more people are choosing remote work - they can work for a company in another city without leaving home.
If rural areas have good communication networks and create a comfortable living environment for the middle class, people can work remotely from the countryside, whether in banking, IT, or as sales agents... There is no need to live in big cities to work.
"Svoboda" journalist: What is the current living situation in villages that have lost their schools, clinics, and bank branches?
Solonikov: Life is very difficult. When sick, you have to wait for a commuter bus and then travel an hour and a half to reach the regional center for treatment - and the bus service is already sparse. The situation for children is even worse. That's why villages are disappearing one by one.
So the most important point is: if the state cannot solve the real difficulties of the people, then no one should look down on them and tell them where they "should live," or demand that women "must have three or more children." People are not pigs, and they shouldn't be treated as breeding tools.
It is true that the population issue needs to be resolved, but this requires the state to create favorable conditions, not let politicians make foolish and insulting remarks.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7585007861676196398/
Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.