In the swirling maelstrom that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, a concept as old as time found fertile ground in the nascent Russian free market: Krysha. Literally translated as "roof," this term encapsulates a system of protection and patronage that became synonymous with the rise of the oligarchs—a story grippingly told by Ben Mezrich in "Once Upon a Time in Russia." But as we dissect this concept, we find that the tendrils of 'Krysha' extend far beyond the Russian landscape, manifesting in various guises across different cultures and economies.
The tales of the fall of the Soviet Union are replete with instances of 'Krysha.' As state-owned assets were hastily privatized, a few savvy, ruthless, and sometimes purely fortuitous individuals managed to grab vast swathes of wealth. But with great wealth came the need for protection—not only from the competitive peers but from a turbulent and often lawless society. This is where 'Krysha' stepped in, initially perhaps as a metaphorical 'roof'—a safeguard against the torrential uncertainties of the times. It rapidly evolved into a system of organized collusion between business moguls and the political, as well as the security apparatus. 'Krysha' was not a mere mafia-style protection racket; it was a sophisticated hierarchy of power, influence, and assurance.
As Mezrich’s narrative unfolds, we observe how 'Krysha' operates within an ecosystem of power brokers, with the oligarchs at the helm shaping the new Russian economy. This system of mutual back-scratching ensured that businesses could thrive under the aegis of political heavyweights, and in return, the oligarchs financed and supported the political elite. The 'Krysha,' thus, was not just a shield but also a ladder for social and economic climbing.
However, this phenomenon isn't a Russian exclusive. The 'Krysha' is strikingly reminiscent of the ‘guanxi’ in China, which refers to the networks of influence, reciprocal obligations, and personal relationships that facilitate business and other dealings. Similarly, in the West, though perhaps less overtly, the 'old boy network' or 'crony capitalism' performs the same dance, albeit to a different tune. In these environments, it's not what you know, but whom you know and who stands behind you that counts.
In the Italian context, this symbiosis can be seen in the historical grip the Mafia has had over Sicilian life, not just in criminal enterprises but in the very fabric of the societal structure. The Mafia’s ‘protection’ and connections were essential for business survival and growth in many cases, exhibiting the same characteristics of the 'Krysha.'
What these diverse manifestations of 'Krysha' share is the recognition that in economies where the rule of law is weak or the state is unable to enforce contracts and property rights, these alternative systems of assurance take root. They are born out of necessity, in environments where formal institutions are either in flux or fail to provide the security and predictability that commerce requires.
In scrutinizing 'Krysha,' we must grapple with complex ethical and economic implications. While it can be argued that such systems may provide stability and a way to navigate through the morass of a transitional economy, they also entrench power structures, stifle competition, and perpetuate a form of elitism that can hinder broader economic and social development.
As we reflect on the saga of 'Krysha' and its global parallels, we're reminded of the adage that power abhors a vacuum. In the wake of the Soviet Union's collapse, the rapidity with which 'Krysha' rose exemplifies the human propensity to fill power vacuums with whatever structures, legitimate or otherwise, are at hand. It speaks to a universal aspect of human organization and governance—regardless of culture or economy, there will always be a 'roof,' in whatever form it may take, under which transactions take place, and power coalesces.