The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Demoskopiya instead of demography: to a question of correctness of scientific polemic



The science of demography is known since the 19th century, since that moment when in 1855 the French scientist A. Giyyar published the work "Elements of Statistics of the Person, or Comparative Demography". But here after half-century of its existence, the demographer Anatoly Grigoryevich Vishnevsky untwisted on a wave of the liberal value audit invented new science "demoskopiya". The electronic network weekly "Demoscope of Weekly" acted as a loud-hailer of declaration of a new scientific paradigm. In what does the fundamental difference of "demoskopiya" from demography seem?

The structure of scientific knowledge, as we know, is built at the empirical and theoretical levels. The theory is a peculiar wreath of scientific ascension. However the reminiscence about the Soviet ideologized past generated the real teoriofobiya at domestic liberals. Manifestation of the general trend of a dekontseptualization of sciences also was emergence of a phenomenon of Demoscope. Consideration of processes of reproduction of the population through a prism of a peculiar demographic microscope became an essence of a methodological innovation. Grafo

— the description is substituted for "skopiya" — observation. Without denying in principle an observation technique, it should be noted that it is the most simplified knowledge reception. Capture it for a basis reflects a reduction of all informative process. It is impossible by means of a microscope (even USA having a marker) it is adequate to apprehend not only the global phenomenon, but also mid-scale. When ignoring its limitation there can be a deformed vision of all considered subject estimated only on its any segment. The example of such deformation gives the "Demoscope of Weekly" representing a special case of aging and reproductive fading of the European nations as a universal world trend. It is impossible to comprehend through optics of a microscope something bigger, than material substrate of life. Almost pathological dislike "the Demoscope of Weekly" to any sort to a talk about the ideological and value bases of demographic processes is explained by it. It is impossible at last, using a technique of "demoskopiya" to comprehend all greatness of historical experience of Russia. When attempts of such judgment after all are made, the lampoon like the monograph "Sickle and Ruble" behind authorship of the creator of Demoscope turns out.

In compliance with emergence of new science, the scientific and professional nomination corresponding to it is formed. Instead of demographers to a scientific proscenium there are "demoskopa". Their value systems more than are obvious. Though "the Demoscope of Weekly" separates in words from any ideology, its ideological involvement is visible with the naked eye. For this purpose even microscope lenses are not necessary. It is enough to look at the list of sponsors of the weekly among whom at different times appeared the Soros fund, Fund D. D. and K.T. Makarturov, UN Fund for the population, etc. "Demoskopy" represent special breed of demographers. The neoliberal paradigm of "demoskopiya" prevails in it over

BAGDASARYAN Vardan Ernestovich — and. N, professor, manager of projects of the Center of the problem analysis and gosudarstvennoupravlenchesky design

the most scientific demographic component.

With the corresponding "conceptual" and "value" baggage "the Demoscope of Weekly" approached reviewing of the book of S.S. Sulakshin "The Russian demographic crisis: from diagnostics to overcoming", released in the form of the developed version of the report on the "National Identity of Russia and Demographic Crisis" conference and having presentation character in relation to the corresponding research conducted by the Center of the problem analysis and state and administrative design. By the way, to participation in a conference also A.G. Vishnevsky was invited, but the dear academician of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences refused a front discussion. Perhaps, the level (number) of academicians and (number) of corresponding members of RAS and also (number) of the scientists representing various directions of scientific knowledge, including classical demographers, seemed to it insufficient. The specified review which appeared in No. 269 — the 270th weekly of December 11 — 31, 2006, deserves special attention as an evident illustration of nature of the scientific techniques used in "demoskopiya".

The book subjected to demoskopichesky obstruction represented a number of concepts, essentially new to demography, for expert approbation of conferees: introduction of uniform criterion of a demographic state

— vitality coefficient; four-factorial model of an explanation of the nature of demographic processes; technique of digitization of slaboformalizuyemy factors of non-material property, etc. All this ideological layer was based on the developed system of mathematical calculations. The multiple-factor correlation analysis made a keynote of the presented research results. No Demoscope of Weekly" mentioned a word about all these finds and innovations. Conceptual book contents remained in general out of consideration of the edition applying, apparently, for scientific respectability.

Without wishing to enter a debate on the conceptual field, "the Demoscope of Weekly" chose tactics of disavowal of particulars. More true even only one was taken, pulled out -

a fragment, ny from a book context, which underwent the accented criticism of "demoskop". There is its contents: "Let's remember amazing historical examples. 1943 — the most severe war in the heat, is not present family which would not be affected by losses and a grief, superdeprivations and tension. And suddenly jump of birth rate! What's the reason? Stalingrad gave hope and confidence that we will win that it is possible to be for the future of children quiet in a certain relation. And without housing which in the country is now without clothes, a car, TVs and other objects of today's material welfare the birth rate increased. It that ideynodukhovny and sociopsychological factor" 1 worked. It is characteristic that "the Demoscope of Weekly" the last offer finishing the paragraph was not provided in the quote. Such selective, contradicting the principles of scientific ethics citing is not accidental. It is obvious to vulgarize desire of the reviewer a thesis of the author, to present business so, as if Sulakshin tried to claim about the one-time rise of birth rate caused by Stalingrad whereas it was talked of difficult factorial communication of a victory, through raising of an ideological and spiritual condition of society, with a reproductive response in the subsequent temporary prospect.

"the Demoscope of Weekly", with sharp irony about uncertainty to it cases of immaculate conception at the Russian women, directed all emotional fuse to the proof of that obvious situation that not rise in birth rate, but its sharp falling was during the war observed. And who, actually, argues with it? On pages of the reviewed book about rise in birth rate in days of the Great Patriotic War in comparison with peace pre-war time it was also not approved anywhere. Exposing the absent thesis Demoscope forces an open door. What it, sublimation of the liberal nightmares connected with a reminiscence of a great victory?

If the reviewer opened the book by S.S. Sulakshin not on the 71st page, and from the very beginning, then could apprehend an author's position more precisely. On the schedules provided in the book the recession accurately is fixed

1 S.S. Sulakshin. Russian demographic crisis: from diagnostics to overcoming. M, 2006, p. 71

birth rate in years voyny1. The discussion started "the Demoscope of Weekly" looks in this regard simply as absurdity.

Perhaps, however, "demoskopa" are not strong in graphics. Then they should address for specification other materials spread by the Center of the problem analysis and gosudarstvennoupravlenchesky design. So, in the brochure "To a Question of Formation of the Theory of Demographic Variability as New Explanatory Model of Demographic Processes" prepared by V.E. Bagdasaryan on p. 16 in black and white it is stated that in the USSR in the years of war the demographic accident took place and sharp reduction of reproductibility naseleniya2 was observed.

Demoscope represents a demographic situation in the years of war as a uniform "black spot". Meanwhile in dynamics of reproductibility for this period there were two opposite vectors

— recession (1942 — 1943) and rise (1944 — 1946). The chronology of demographic refraction of war shifted in an annual interval is defined by the trivial nine-month period of incubation of a fruit. It is easy to notice that the designated vectors actually precisely coincide with the period of defeats and victories of the Red Army. The ascending line of the second stage was rise concerning the first defeatist period of war, but not rise in comparison with pre-war high-reproductive level. Stalingrad had critical value and for demographic processes of military years. Sulakshin wrote about it. Demoscope persistently attributes it absurd judgment of existence of the post-Stalingrad reproductive jump in relation to the 1930th years.

Trying to disavow a thesis about favorable demographic consequences of the Stalingrad victory, "the Demoscope of Weekly" indicates the smallest indicators of birth rate for the years of war which fell on 1943. But also this pseudo-opening is challenged by nobody. Experts from "demoskopiya" somehow

1 S.S. Sulakshin. Russian demographic crisis: from diagnostics to overcoming. M, 2006, p. 12-14
2 V.E. Bagdasaryan. To a question of formation of the theory of demographic variability as new

explanatory model of demographic processes. M, 2006, p. 16

lost sight that between conception and childbirth there has to pass the trivial nine-month period. The battle of Stalingrad, as we know, ended in February, 1943. It is easy to consider that its consequences could be shown at best at the end of November - December, 1943. Having in mind the known log in time, reproductive consequences of Stalingrad had to affect mainly in 1944. Such dynamics is also fixed by the gender and age pyramid of a census of 2002 and data on number of pupils of initial classes given "the Demoscope of Weekly" in the USSR in 1949/50 - 1958/59

The elementary mathematical logic prompts that if 1943 was the lowest point in dynamics of birth rate, then it had to become also a starting point for the subsequent rise. To deny it

— means simply to contradict common sense. However "Demoscope of Weekly", obviously, at odds with mathematics. But maybe, he is more informed in the sphere of historical knowledge?

The first waves of mass demobilization in the USSR began only in 1944. In 1943 about them there was no speech also yet. On the contrary

— the mobilization mechanism steadily gained steam. It proves that reproductive rise of 1944 was not a consequence of inflow of male population which continued to be reduced, namely a spiritual response to victories on fronts.

One of verifications of the put-forward thesis is statistics of a brachnost. A direct consequence of marriage, for data "the Demoscope of Weekly", the birth of children is. Statistics of the marriages registered by the Soviet registry offices had the following dynamics: 1940 — 1082 thousand marriages, 1941 — 609 thousand, 1942 — 207 thousand, 1943 — 347 thousand (a change in dynamics of a brachnost), 1944 — 582 thousand, 1945 — 1046 thousand 3.

It was found out that methods of historical and demographic statistics are absolutely unknown to experts from "demoskopiya". Nobody, they claim, did not keep any account of the population in the years of war (and after war Stalin forbade).

3 V.A. Isupov. Demographic accidents and crises in Russia in the first half of the 20th century. Historical and demographic essays. Novosibirsk, 2000, building 180

And if the population was not considered, then dynamics of its number is size incomprehensible. Well, mister Soros should think seriously what he paid money Russian "people cops" for. To possible surprise "the Demoscope of Weekly", it is necessary to report that calculations of population did not stop the Soviet statisticians (CSU USSR and regional statistical offices) during the whole years of war. Fans of "demoskopiya" can gather their results in RGAE archive. The system of the Soviet registry offices continued to function actually smoothly. Specifically Soviet procedure of a registration and extract worked. The increased statistical error did not deny reliability cumulative information. Nothing is known Demoscope and that dynamics of population of the USSR in the years of war paid off historians also on Narkomtorg materials by the number of the issued food stamps and according to selsovetsky account long ago and successfully.

The historiography of demographic history of the USSR of military years accumulated already considerable range scientific, in t. ohm number academic, literatures. Today historians in details investigated not only a problem of fighting losses in the tragedy of 1941 — 1945, but also natural reproduction of the rear population. Dynamics of demographic processes in regional measurement is reconstructed. All this historical literature "Demoscope of Weekly", apparently, neizvestna1. It still as the last word in demography operates with B.Ts. Urlanis's works forty-year-old davnosti2.

On the present the historians have calculations of natural reproduction of the population of the period of war not only in yearly, but also monthly

1 Human losses of the USSR in the Great Patriotic War. SPb., 1995. V.V. Alekseev, V.A. Isupov. The population of Siberia in days of the Great Patriotic War. Novosibirsk, 1986. V.A. Isupov. Urban population of Siberia: from accident to revival (the end of the 30th — the end of the 50th years). Novosibirsk, 1991. G.E. Kornilov. Ural village and war: problems of demographic development. Yekaterinburg, 1993. V.A. Kyshpanakov. Population of Khakassia: 1917 — 1990 Abakan, 1995
2 B.Ts. Urlanis. Birth rate and life expectancy in the USSR. M, 1963

measurement. They allow to fix, in particular, a reproductive response of Stalingrad already in recent months 1943. For the first time for many months of war, rise in birth rate was recorded July-August, 1943 that at a nine-month retrospective projection corresponded to a stop of victorious approach of Germans in the south of Russia and a heat of the Battle of Stalingrad. To demographers also the method of the specified comparison of dynamics of natural reproduction of the population is well-known. And so, for the first time by comparison on months a birth rate indicator

1942 it was surpassed in December, 1943 (9.4% — December, 1942, 9.6% — December
1943 ) 3.

Especially impress verbal exercises of "demoskop". So, out of the official name "CEO" they, obviously, on accord brought the word "general". And already the author of the reviewed book is called as the general and on the basis of it is opposed to the famous demographer B.Ts. Urlanis.

With sarcasm writes "the Demoscope of Weekly" about intention to create the system of public administration by demographic processes. The idea of controllability of demography is essentially unacceptable for the neoliberals defending inviolability of the reproductive right. In this rejection "the Demoscope of Weekly" reaches even opposition of people with state and administrative thinking (a hint on scope of works of the Center of the problem analysis and state and administrative design) to demographers. Perverse idea that problems of management in general are removed for brackets of "demoskopiya" can be created and that for contemplate consciousness of "demosko-p" unlike consciousness of experts managers (which refuses in scientific character of approaches) they are uncharacteristic. But here the creator "the Demoscope of Weekly" A.G. Vishnevsky of subjects of public administration in the former dodemosko-pichesky stay did not avoid at all. It began the professional activity in the Kharkiv branch ins-

3 V.A. Isupov. Demographic accidents and crises in Russia in the first half of the 20th century, p. 176

the Giprograd titut, dealing with problems of town-planning design. It is characteristic of the person of "state and administrative thinking" the name of the master's thesis defended by it in 1967 on economy "City agglomerations and economic regulation of their growth (on the example of the Kharkiv agglomeration)" sounds. Perhaps, on the basis of this fact at "the Demoscope of Weekly" there was a prejudice that other way to demography, than than through economy, does not exist. Such stereotype probably predetermined representation by the weekly of the author of the reviewed book by S.S. Sulakshin as the Doctor of Economics though he defended both doctoral dissertations absolutely on other fields of knowledge. And here the name of a doctor's dissertation research of A.G. Vishnevsky "Social management of demographic processes" sounds absolutely in the spirit of developments of the Center of the problem analysis and state and administrative design. However, time of protection fell on 1982 characterized absolutely by other ideological environment and many apologists of that time managements of demography began to defend its basic uncontrollability shortly. In fact the speech often went only about other administrative goal-setting.

Speaking about objectivity of a trend of depopulation in Russia, supporters of this concept often lose sight that up to recent time the Russian State officially realized the strategy of reduction of birth rate. In December, 1991 with direct assistance of the government the Russian association of planning of family was founded. Actively the federal target program "Planning of Family" which received the status of presidential since 1994 was implemented. In the collective monograph "Demographic Modernization of Russia, 1900 — 2000" published under A.G. Vishnevsky's edition these actions of the Russian authorities are described almost in apologetic tonality: "In the 1990s a basis of service of planning families, hundreds of the centers of planning of family and a reproduction, otno-were practically for the first time started

syashchikhsya to the system of the Ministry of Health. Within the Planning of Family program, government procurement of contraceptives were conducted, many institutions had a possibility of free providing the separate socially unprotected groups of the population, including youth with them. Courses of training of specialists were organized. Considerable work on increase in knowledge of the population in the field of planning of family was conducted. The program provided creation and introduction of special programs of sexual education and education of teenagers. "ways from abortions to contraception" provided substantial financial aid in overcoming the international organizations, government and private foreign funds. Within the international projects, deliveries of the modern equipment, contraceptives for the centers of planning of family and clinics for women were carried out, training was conducted, the corresponding literature was published. However along with obvious and long-awaited revival of activities for development of planning of family also his opponents who did not allow to go out absolutely to the torch which dropped out of hands of ideological department of the Central Committee of the CPSU" 1 became more active. So "demoskopa" do not avoid absolutely methods of management. Another thing is that they are directed not to increase in reproductibility of the Russian population, and in the opposite party.

Exaggerating on the subject of ideological and spiritual bases of demographic processes which is brought up by S.S. Sulakshin, "the Demoscope of Weekly" published the corresponding review of his book under the shocking name "To Increase Birth Rate, We Need New Stalingrad". The tonality of mockery of "demoskop" over a great victory as though reanimates pictures of the liberal sabbath of the beginning of the 1990th years. The author of the book in interpretation of "demoskop" is about to call for a raising of reproductive potential of the nation for opening of military operations. Really, we need new Stalingrad, but not in that literal and primitive understanding which puts in it "the Demoscope of Weekly" and as the beginning of wind revival of Russia,

1 Demographic modernization of Russia, 1900 — 2000. M, 2006, p. 243

hope for rescue of the country and the people, an exit from a condition of demographic accident.

Essentially "the Demoscope of Weekly" and such concepts as "the civilization code", "the Russian civilization", "national identity of Russia" does not accept. Operating with the neoliberal stereotypes, they attribute to the author of the book opposition of Russians to other people of the USSR, "with the improper civilization code". Well, it is necessary to state about misunderstanding in demoskopichesky circles of the category a civilization mixed and substituted by ethnicity. Meanwhile the Russian civilization system integrated in itself not only some ethnic Russians, but also other historically related people of Russia and the USSR. The originality of interpretation by the weekly of a position of the author especially is strange that in the book quite unambiguous and certain interpretation of this question is given: "The Russian people are an important factor of the Russian statehood so far as are the basic (not only thing as in a question of the Russian identity of an ethnic exclusive is not present) the carrier and the guardian of civilization capacities of the Russian state as its centuries-old and multigenerational value savings, national (in the sense of civilization) identities. Under the Russian civilization capacities of the Russian state, and as it becomes obvious, not so much in ethnic how many in exact civilization sense, specifically are understood:

— Russian;

— religions, traditional for Russia;

— culture;

— traditions;

— mentality;

— ways and foundations;

— behavioural and value stereotypes.

In principle for each state the similar communication has to take place. At such approach to a role of the Russian people it means the additional supra-ethnic integrating responsibility and leads not to preferences to ethnic group (citizens of the country irrespective of ethnicity have equal advantage, civil

the rights and their protection), and to need of preservation and a support for development on own civilization value savings of the country. For Russia it is historically defined that it the Russian savings (in the above-stated civilization sense). For France, obviously, it is a frantsuzskost, England — an angliyskost, Japan — Japaneseness, Israel

— evreyskost" 1. Why "the Demoscope of Weekly" ignored the given author's definition? The answer to this question is obvious: hanging of a label of nationalism for disavowal of the concept or the person is old reception of the neoliberal punishment of opponents.

On the other hand — "The Demoscope of Weekly" puts an equal-sign between concepts "national" and "class", without seeing fundamental difference between them. Their association is carried out under the general marker "ideology" to which the neidelogizirovan-ny demoskopichesky science is opposed. Meanwhile the business card of works of the creator of "demoskopiya" A.G. Vishnevsky is the theory of "demographic modernization" ("demographic transition") quite suitable reproduced on the basis of reading of works of the western authors in all the aspects under ideological canons. Its intrinsic content is a postulate that the trend of world natural reproduction of the population is fatally predetermined by fixations on increase in life expectancy (objective aging of the nations) and decrease in level of reproductibility (malodetnost and childlessness of nuclear families). It is claimed that all people have to pass inevitably a way of demographic modernization from "traditional" to "modern" (in terminology of supporters of a concept) to reproduction type. Application of methodology of the factorial analysis by S.S. Sulakshin gives the grounds for revision of a thesis about material predefiniteness of demographic processes, as caused the corresponding demosko-pichesky reaction. Criticism "the Demoscope of Weekly" S.S. Sulakshin builds very strange differentiation existing in the field of demography modern issledo-

1. Russian demographic crisis: from diagnostics to overcoming, p. 8 — 10

vatelsky developments: everything that is written by A.G. Vishnevsky, is, certainly, a science whereas theoretical provisions of his opponents are already ideology.

A characteristic example of a technique of interpretation from outside "the Demoscope of Weekly" of views of opponents represents the following quoted review fragment: "Now, after it (that is Demoscope. — The bus) studied the specified composition (the book by S.S. Sulakshin. — A bus), he clearly understood that "the material factor is more significant for mortality and life expectancy, than for birth rate". Now to it it is clear that procedures procedures (the procedure of reproduction means. — A bus), but if their necessary participants are unavailable, then it is possible to do without procedures and to give birth to children by means of only one spirituality". From the statement which is put forward in the book about more powerful value in demographic process in relation to financial position of the population of a factor of an ideological and spiritual condition of society, owing to a people-kopichesky interpretative metamorphosis the appeal attributed to the author to ignoring of the biological party of human existence turned out. If "the Demoscope of Weekly" at least mentioned a concept of four-factorial explanatory model of the nature of demographic process, core for the reviewed work, fundamental differences in book contents and its interpretation would become obvious. The material factor in the offered model expression is estimated as one of four basic dominants estest-

wine reproduction of the population. The biosocial human nature reveals in the section of the book which is specially devoted to its scientific judgment. So "Nobody appealed to give birth to children by means of only one spirituality" except for most "the Demoscope of Weekly".

The review comes to the end with opposition of the doctor and sorcerer, trivial for the restrained vanity of the scientist. About the nature of iatrotechnics on "the Demoscope of Weekly" it is possible to judge by recognition of one of the chief theorists of the liberal reforms in Russia — American D. Saks: "We put the patient on the operating table, opened to it a thorax, but it had other anatomy". At the same time the true doctors, doctors of medical sciences took part in development of the research presented by S.S. Sulakshin. For notification "the Demoscope of Weekly" about original problems of the complex medicine which is not limited only to observation of physiology of the patient we will give a conclusion of one of them — the head of laboratory of system researches of health of the State research center of preventive medicine of professor I.A. Gundarov: "The physical viability of the population depends not only on life conditions (material factors), but also on the moral atmosphere and an emotional condition of society (spiritual and sincere factors)" 1.

1 I.A. Gundarov. Demographic accident in Russia: reasons, mechanism, ways of overcoming.

M, 2001, p. 31

Other scientific works: