Basic information
Interviewee ID: 990013
Name: Dügersüren
Parent's name: Luvsanrenchin
Ovog: Barga
Sex: m
Year of Birth: 1951
Ethnicity: Halh

Additional Information
Education: tusgai dund
Notes on education:
Work: Santehnikch jijuur - Academy of Sciences
Belief: Buddhist
Born in: Ih-Uul sum, Zavhan aimag
Lives in: Sühbaatar sum (or part of UB), Ulaanbaatar aimag
Mother's profession: herder
Father's profession: herder

Themes for this interview, suggested by the interview team, are:
(Please click on a theme to see more interviews on that topic)
privatization; work; democracy; authority; environment;

Alternative keywords suggested by readers for this interview are: (Please click on a keyword to see more interviews, if any, on that topic)

Click here to submit your own keywords for this interview

To read a full interview with Dügersüren please click on the Interview ID below.

Summary of Interview 080504B with Dügersüren

In this interview Dügersüren talks about the privatisation. According to him, in 1991 two different privatisation plans were being discussed. The first plan was to rent the factories/collective farms to their staff and later to privatize; the second plan was to evaluate all state enterprises and produce shares so that people could become shareholders. Parliament chose the second plan and carried out the privatisation in two steps, known as the 'small privatisation' and the 'big privatisation'. The idea of the privatisation was to make every citizen a holder of shares worth 10,000 tögrögs. The privatisation, however, did not go according to plan for several reasons. Firstly, working people did not understand shares, for they were not sufficiently informed. Secondly, the parliamentarians did not come up with good laws about companies and shareholders, because they themselves were not knowledgeable in this matter. Thirdly, the Revolutionary Party, according to DugerDügersüren, produced bureaucrats who were taught to use rather than respect people. Therefore, educated people in charge of various organisations took advantage of the ignorance of working class people and used the privatisation for their own ends. Dügersüren explains these points by using the example of Sürenjav, the former director of the company where Dügersüren had shares. It was not only the former bureaucrats and canny people who perverted the privatisation, but the stock exchange itself was working against the interest of ordinary people. Dügersüren knows about all this, because he attended a forty-five day course in economics at the beginning of the privatisation.

Dügersüren also says that he participated in the democratic revolution. Thanks to the revolution, he argues, people became free. According to him, freedom has to be exercised in the correct way. Freedom comes with responsibility. And it is responsibility that people in Mongolia have forgotten.