Dmitri Orlov has written extensively about the collapse of the social order in the former Soviet Union based on his numerous personal observations during the late 80's and 90's. An emigre to the US when he was 12, he returned to his former homeland on a number of occasions to witness a society which dissolved before his eyes. We are in an economic crisis in which all the indicators suggest it will get worse... far worse. And it would behoove us to pay heed to what happened in the former Soviet Union in the midst of its economic collapse.

One thing stands out. Men fared far worse. In fact, they spiraled downward psychically and physically at an alarming rate. The life expectancy for Russian males plummeted, dropping some 16 years during the 90's. Alcoholism skyrocketed. Women, however, weathered the crisis far better.

Perhaps, that's because Russian women's identity was tied more into family life and less into the next big project that animates so many men. Part of this was a matter of necessity. Very few Russians owned their own homes. Instead, they were crammed into tiny apartments, which often included grandparents and aunts and uncles.

Much of life revolved around standing in lines, waiting to purchase necessities. But to supplement their diets Russian families grew food in small plots, just outside the city, and the women were usually in charge of this food gardening.

When the former Soviet Union collapsed, the tasks women performed remained. The men, however, had little to do except complain. And when complaining accomplished nothing, they committed the slow suicide of the bottle.

Is the Russian experience of the 80's a portent of what we will face?

We dismiss this question out of hand at our own peril.

And if, the future brings an economic collapse like Russia's during the 90's, will we be able to learn form their suffering?

from what part of their experience is there to learn from? Russia is still "suffering." There are a very limited number profitable industries and most of them revolve around oil which has been in the toilet the last several months. There is nothing to take from their experience because they never actually recovered from it in any meaningful way.

I disagree. Watching a ship go down can tell you lots about how it happens. You can't say "I learned nothing from watching that sinking because they didn't somehow get rescued." Instead, you catalogue their sufferings and start thinking about prevention.

I would suggest voluntary simplicity. It's a movement based on reducing all non-essential ownership and consumption. I moved into an RV and live on family property rent free. I have only small utility bills. I realize this is no solution for most, but downsizing everything is a start.

Next, men need to embrace the fluidity of gender roles and start learning to cook and think about efficient methods of cleaning and other chores. Eat potatoes, beans, rice, corn and peanut butter. Stop buying and eating all processed foods and begin to use staple items like the one listed above. The food is much better for you and less expensive. Avoid all chemical drinks like soda or other beverages that come in cans or plastic and go back to filtered water, tea and coffee - organic if you can find it. Make your own beer. Scan the internet for clearance sales on clothing. I have a big wardrobe of designer labels that I got 70% off. Stop buying DVD's and just burn shows off the DVR. Just a few ideas.

So what are you arguing that we should learn from this? That we should try to make this downturn less hard on men by laying off women instead, or that we should focus on shifting cultural values so that men have more areas to respect themselves, to make themselves useful, and to draw comfort and solace so that losing a job is no longer the ego-busting experience that it has been in the past?

I'd argue that there are some very different ways to approach the lessons learned. One would describe several different classes of jobs and contexts for employment. I'd actually argue that this may be one of the more interesting ways to go with the lesson. Jobs that are rooted in the community rather than in national or global corporations are fundamentally more stable, for example. They don't move as quickly, they don't come and go, they are more robust to corruption, they tend to feed more fundamental needs. They are also less 'get rich quick' and less tied into the global consumer/financial economy.

The pyramids are smaller and so the rewards at the top of a local job pyramid is smaller than that at the top of a global job pyramid. Inequalities are less.

Another way to look at the problems of Russia are in the way innovation was stifled by corruption. It is more profitable to find a new way to be corrupt, to find a patron with capital and power and connections, than to find a new product or business. We've seen something similar on Wall Street; it was less important to find a great new business to invest in than it was to find a way to squeeze money out of existing investment structures. A new way to pass the risk to someone else; particularly via the government and it's regulatory powers. Playing, for example, the game of picking stocks and bonds that are just about to change from 'investment grade' to 'not investment grade' because of regulations, forcing major sells or allowing major buys from institutions... not because of any real change in the business, but simply because of the rules.

Anyway, I don't think Russia can teach us what to do, but it offers various insights into how things work and what not to do.

Yes, you can say you know what not to do if you are a former communist nation in northern asia with vast oil reserves and not much else.

If you are the US however, this info doesn't do much good. Not to mention the fact that there many possible choices of what to do now. Crossing off 1 incorrect answer on a multiple choice test that has 100 possibilities doesn't do you much good.

Don't tell me, Sun Tzu is only applicable to ancient China...

BenK:

Don't tell me, Sun Tzu is only applicable to ancient China...

not even remotely a fair comparison.

That is a book on the generalities of war, written intentionally to be instructive and general. The russian experience is a specific experience. It can only be taken as a lesson if the situations are similar, which they are not.

Our economy cannot save its way out of a recession. That said, I think your heart is in the right place and frugality can be a good thing.

jascob:

Our economy cannot save its way out of a recession. That said, I think your heart is in the right place and frugality can be a good thing.

What the U.S. should do is buy up everything in the world, ESPECIALLY raw materials and valuable components that it can, and when not even the most desperate 4th worlder will give us anything else on credit we have another revolution, rename the country, and declare all of the past regime's debts null and void. Then we can start the process over again, or get working, both are good options.

Think about it, the rest of the world will be working - that's good.

We'll have the time of our lives as consumers -also good.

We won't have to pay the bill for it, as our army and nukes are still here under the new regime - double bonus!