(3 of 5)
Then we have been constantly criticizing the competitiveness and the market process of your own system to the point of excluding the very word market from any discussion of our country. A market can be a capitalist or a socialist one, but it is still a market. So here we have wasted a lot of time, not to mention all that has been sacrificed and the people and the resources we have lost. Also, the system of leveled-down wages has led to a loss of interest in their work on the part of both workers and managers. Let's say that somebody has set a record, has fulfilled not one daily quota but five. His wages ought to be raised by a factor of five, but instead, there is an immediate tendency to pay him not five times as much money but three times -- "There, so much for your wanting to get rich."
Q. Is there something in the Russian character that hinders progress in this country?
A. I think the problem derives from conditions that do not allow the Russian character to express itself. The Russian character is no weaker than the American character. We also have people with a flair for business, but, of course, in the matter of entrepreneurship, some of your executives have made quicker progress, thanks to entrepreneurship itself. We only started talking about socialist entrepreneurship in the past few years, thinking it a possible way out for ourselves. "Come on," we said, "move and think faster, and you'll get more profit for your enterprise."
Q. One of your main adversaries in the Politburo is Yegor Ligachev, chairman of the agricultural commission. What does he represent to you?
A. I must correct you. He is not my adversary; he is my opponent.
Q. What is the difference?
A. With an adversary one fights a duel or settles scores in some form or other, by military force, for example. But Ligachev is my opponent. We simply have different opinions, different points of view on certain questions of tactics. Well, of course, I think he is more conservative, if not to say outright conservative, to put it simply. That is why I think this complicates the process of perestroika. There are, however, some forces behind him. They cannot be defined; they are not organized; you can't identify them as Ivanov or Petrov, but they exist. Not to the extent of representing an opposition to Gorbachev, but a slowing-down factor.
Q. How did Ligachev slow down perestroika?
A. In hidden ways. I would put forward one proposal, and he would advance the opposite point of view. In regard to social justice, he considers there are no problems in this area, but I think there are problems that keep the moral fabric of society in a state of tension. Remove this tension, and the sprouts of perestroika will start growing.
Q. What do you think about a multiparty system?
A. It's a difficult question. We have not yet removed the locks from all the doors, locks that are sealed with sealing wax. It's my view that this issue ought to be open for discussion. That would be the first step. We are not ready today; I mean we are not ready today to take a decision on this tomorrow.
Q. You have spoken out against privileges for party functionaries. But didn't you take advantage of them yourself?