Why trade with Russia is better than war

Making their choice of life in one direction or another, each person or people, voluntarily or involuntarily, is looking for a better way for themselves. Subsequently, it becomes clear to man, but not to an animal, that this better way is morally meaningful only under the condition of living for others, that is, through moral service. Otherwise, an immoral, selfish decision for oneself or exclusively for one’s own people will one way or another be paralyzed by the selfishness of other people and nations. Thus it may turn out, and will surely turn out to be: “To indicate the necessary stations on the road to the better, when the worse has been definitely chosen, is not merely a useless but an annoying and even insulting thing to do, for it brings the bad choice back to one’s mind…” as V. S. Soloviev writes about such a choice.

So how to choose the right path to the better and how, when and which way have the people of America and Russia made this choice?

Everyone knows that the history of Russia stretches back for thousands of years, and the history of the United States – for centuries, but few know that the history of protectionism and industry in America is centuries old, and in Russia – decades old.

But why, suddenly or not, has Russia fallen by the wayside in the development of a national factory industry? Why these two unique countries of the world, which meet all the conditions for the development of all kinds of national industry, are and remain adversarial rivals rather than allies in industry? Why, when, and by whom, in spite of the U.S. Federalist economic constitution, in America for the road to the better there was chosen the knowingly worse path of military rivalry? Why, in 1894, was D.  I. Mendeleev perceived in London as the representative of a competing rather than an industrializing power, and why, finally, in 1913, was C.  A. Beard able to convince much of American society that America was better off warring rather than trading?

But was the American government’s choice in the 20th century, made based on Beard’s recommendation, the right one? Could it be that originally in 1787 the Founding Fathers shaped a more correct way, a better way, which then for some reason, to please someone’s self-interest, was turned into a worse one? Could that be why the U.S. budget deficit is constantly growing and the standard of living is falling? Could it be that America has forgotten how to distinguish between exchangeable values and productive powers? Could it be that the U.S. government has forgotten what mental productivity and private and national industry is, relying instead on global industry? Isn’t it time to remember what the greatness of the American nation really is? Isn’t the actual development of America’s national industry that same way to the better, the way that is based not on wars but on the principle of a cosmopolitan productive force? Could this be the role of a world leader, if indeed it is a leader?

Every U.S. or Russian president is able and eager to speculate about God and human soul. And not for all of them it is clear what distinguishes man from animal nature; how the higher division of labor differs from the division of labor operations; how inter-industry balances differ from inter-state balances; and why this is significant for countries with all the natural conditions for the development of all kinds of industry.

In other words, America may find itself in a situation, as it already has, where it “earns” only one trillion dollars of low value-added on war, while it could earn tens and even hundreds of trillions of dollars of high value-added on consumer goods by synchronizing its industrial policy with Russia. And then it will turn out that whoever hinders you on the road to the worse, will help you on the road to the better with the right choice of joint industrial development.

Using Germany as an example, it is easy to prove that its added value can reach 2 trillion euros with a raw material cost of only 20 billion euros. In the case of Russia, this version of value added can be more than 10 trillion euros with unlimited raw material resources. In this case, the dream of democracy in Russia will be but a simple definition: the rule of law and all civil liberties are the children of Russian industry and wealth. Where there is industry, there will be democracy!

Thus, by developing the principle of cosmopolitan productive powers and promoting the industrial development of Russia, in this way the U.S. will be able in a short time to not only level the deficit of its federal budget, but also to establish peace throughout the world. This is the surest road to a better world. And this is why trade with Russia is better than war!

Russia, being a middle state, can combine its natural conditions for the development of all kinds of industries with China. Russia can contribute to the development of England’s products of industrial ecology to the extent of America’s military-industrial complex costs. But everything will depend on the good will of China, the United States, England and the moral state of Russian society.

Last Update: 3rd Nov 2023