Alexander Tsipko: "Sacred Russian madness has become our political strategy." Alexander Tsipko: “In Ukraine, it is necessary to build a parallel Russian state Tsipko Alexander Sergeevich biography

Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich

(b. in 1941) - spec. in the region social philosophy; Dr. Philosophy sciences, prof. Genus. in Odessa. Graduated from Moscow State University (1968). Since 1972 he has been working intermittently at the Institute of Intern. economy and polit. research RAS, at present. temp. - Ch. researcher In 1978-1981, Assoc. Institute of Philosophy. and sociol. in Warsaw, where in 1980 he defended Dr. diss "Philosophical foundations of a realistic understanding of socialism". In 1986-1990 - consultant of the international. Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, in 1988-1990 - Assistant Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU (A.N. Yakovleva) for theor. questions. In 1992-1995 - director of scientific. programs of the Gorbachev Foundation. Ts. engaged in a comparative analysis of com. and socialist. teachings, philosophy. the roots of utopianism. Investigated the structural causes of crises in socialist countries. systems, especially the causes of the Polish crisis. Since 1999, he has been criticizing radical democrats, whom he considers the heirs of Bolshevik extremism. From the same period, he formed the ideas of the so-called. liberal patriotism, overcoming, in his opinion, the split between the new Westerners and the new radicals.

Op.: history optimism. M., 1974 ;Methodological problems of the study of the socialist way of life // VF. 1976. No. 4;Socialism:the life of society and man. M., 1980 ;Some philosophical aspects of the theory of socialism. M., 1983 ;Philosophy of Uniformity in the Conditions of Perestroika // Sociological Studies. 1986. No. 6;The origins of Stalinism // Science and life. 1988. No. 11, 12. 1989. № 1 , 2 ;The dialectic of perestroika. M., 1989 ;Are our principles good? // New world. 1990. No. 4;Contradictions of Marxism // Through thorns. M., 1990 ;Is a new experiment needed? // Motherland. 1990. No. 2, 3 ;Violence lies or why the ghost got lost. M., 1990 ;Is Stalinism Really Dead?(Is Stalinism Dead?)hazpez. San Francisco, 1990 ;Farewell to communism. Tokyo, 1993 (in Japanese lang.);Slavic anxiety. Sat. articles. M., 1997.

Big biographical encyclopedia. 2009 .

See what "Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich" is in other dictionaries:

- (b. 1941), Russian political scientist, Doctor of Philosophy. Since 1978 at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology in Warsaw. In con. 1980s Consultant of the International Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU. In 1991, Deputy Director of the Institute of International Economic and ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

- (b. 1941) Russian political scientist, Doctor of Philosophy. Since 1978 at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology in Warsaw. In the late 1980s. Consultant of the International Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU. In 1991, Deputy Director of the Institute of International Economic and ... ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko Date of birth: August 15, 1941 (1941 08 15) (71 years old) Place of birth: Odessa, USSR Period: Philosophy of the 20th century Main interests: politics ... Wikipedia

Sergeevich (b. 1941) Russian political scientist, Doctor of Philosophy. Since 1978 at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology in Warsaw. In con. 1980s Consultant of the International Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU. In 1991, Deputy Director of the Institute of International ... ... Political science. Dictionary.

Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko Date of birth: August 15, 1941 (1941 08 15) (68 years old) Place of birth: Odessa Period: Philosophy of the 20th century Main interests: social philosophy ... Wikipedia

Faculty of Philosophy Lomonosov Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov English name ... Wikipedia

Return Foundation ... Wikipedia

Books

• Perestroika as a Russian project. The Soviet system among Russian thinkers in exile about fate, Tsipko Alexander Sergeevich. The author of the book tried to introduce an analysis of the ideological origins of perestroika into the context of current disputes about the existence of a special Russian communal civilization. Unlike today's neo-Slavophiles, he...

Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of Philosophy habilitus of the Republic of Poland

Born on August 15, 1941 in Odessa. He served in the Soviet Army in the GRU troops from 1960 to 1963. Graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University in 1968. From 1965 to 1967 he worked in the propaganda department of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. From 1967 to 1970 - in the propaganda department of the Central Committee of the Komsomol. From 1972 to the present - at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (in the past - IEMSS of the USSR Academy of Sciences), from 1986 to 1990 - consultant of the International Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, from 1990 to 1992 - deputy director of IIEPI RAS, from 1992 to 1995 - director scientific programs of the Gorbachev Foundation. From 1996 to 1998, he was the editor of the Nezavisimaya Gazeta supplement NG Scenario. From 1999 to 2007, he was a political columnist for Literaturnaya Gazeta. From 2008 to 2010, he was a commentator on the VGTRK Vesti-24 program.

From 1978 to 1980 - Associate Professor at the Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences. In 1980 he received a full doctorate in philosophy from the Polish People's Republic.

From 1992 to 1993 he was a visiting professor at the Center for Slavic Studies in Hokkaido, Japan, on a scholarship from the Japanese government.

From 1995 to 1996 - Visiting Professor at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, USA, US Congress scholarship.

The book How the Ghost Got Lost, published in 1990 by the Molodaya Gvardiya publishing house, in turn, drew a line under the legal criticism of Marxism in the USSR.

Author of 11 books and more than 200 scientific and journalistic articles. Books by A.S. Tsipko were published in the USA, Germany, Italy, France, Japan and China. Alexander Tsipko's latest book, Values ​​and Struggle of Conscious Patriotism, was published by URSS in 2009.

Currently, he is the chief researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Normal 0 false false false RU X-NONE X-NONE Microsoft Internet Explorer 4

Tsipko Alexander Sergeevich

Events

International Conference "Global Challenges for the Economies of Russia and China: Search for Answers"

On July 5, 2019, the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, together with the Academy of Social Sciences of the People's Republic of China, held the Sixth International Scientific Russian-Chinese Conference "Global Challenges for the Economies of Russia and China: Search for Answers" as part of a series of regular scientific events "Russia and China: Strategic Partnership".

V St. Petersburg International Economic Congress

On April 3, 2019, Director of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences E.B. Lenchuk took part in the work of the V St. Petersburg International Economic Congress (SPEK-2019) "Foresight "Russia": the future of technology, economy and man" and made a presentation at the Plenary meeting "Digitalization of the economy: drivers and results".

International competition for the medals of N.D. Kondratiev

International N.D. Kondratiev announces the start of accepting applications for participation in the X International Competition for the gold, silver and bronze medals of N.D. Kondratiev for outstanding contribution to the development of social sciences. Additionally, a competition of Russian young scientists (under 35 years of age) for the commemorative medal of N.D. Kondratiev.

The first all-Russian sociological survey of theater spectators

The Union of Theater Workers of the Russian Federation, together with the State Institute of Art Studies, is conducting the First All-Russian Sociological Survey of Theater Spectators. The study is dedicated to the Year of Theater in Russia.

Current interviews and publications

The initiative of Minsk to "freeze" new laws in the EAEU found a rational grain

Expert opinion of the head of the Center for Post-Soviet Studies of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor L.B. Vardomsky (Sputnik News Agency, May 13, 2019)

How to keep talented youth in science

The Poisk newspaper (No. 13 of March 29, 2019) published a response from the Director of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences E.B. Lenchuk to an article by Academician G.P. Georgiev, dedicated to the problem of securing young people in Russian research teams.

On the specifics of Russian discussions

Nezavisimaya Gazeta published an article by Research Supervisor of the IE RAS, Corresponding Member R.S. Grinberg “A historical example of how one can argue about the fate of Russia without offending each other. There is no East without the West” (March 25, 2019)

Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko(August 15, Odessa) - Soviet and Russian social philosopher and political scientist. Chief Researcher at the Institute for International Economic and Political Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Doctor of philosophical science .

Biography

Since January 1992, he took part in the creation of the Gorbachev Foundation, was the director of the foundation's scientific programs. In 1992-1993 he was a visiting professor at the University of Hokkaido (Japan), in 1995-1996 he was a visiting researcher at the Woodrow Wilson Center (USA).

In the 1990s, he began to criticize Russian radical reformers and put forward the ideas of "liberal patriotism". During the mass actions of the Russian liberal opposition in 2011-13. , also criticized the latter, in particular, compared Navalny with Lenin. However, after Euromaidan 2013-14. , the annexation of Crimea to Russia and the conflict in the South-East of Ukraine took a critical position in relation to the Russian authorities, accusing it of restoring "neo-Stalinism" and "neo-Sovietism".

Director of the Center for Political Science Programs of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Science Research "Gorbachev Foundation", Chief Researcher at the Institute for International Economic and Political Studies (IMEPI) of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

He became the founder of the Return Foundation, founded in December 2006, advocating the return of historical traditions, moral values ​​and names that existed in Russia before 1917 and were rejected during the years of Soviet power.

Complete Doctor of Philosophy of the Polish Republic. Speaks Polish and English.

Some works

• history optimism. M., Young Guard, 1974 - 192 p., 50,000 copies.
• The idea of ​​socialism: a milestone in biography. M., Young Guard, 1976, 272 pp., 50,000 copies.
• Socialism: the life of society and man. M., Young Guard, 1980
• Some philosophical aspects of the theory of socialism. M., Nauka, 1983
• The origins of Stalinism // Science and life. 1988. No. 11, 12. 1989. No. 1, 2;
• On zones closed to thought // Severe drama of the people. M., 1989;
• The dialectic of perestroika. M., 1989;
• Are our principles good? // New world . 1990. No. 4;
• Contradictions of Marxism // Through thorns. M., 1990;
• Is a new experiment needed? // Motherland. 1990. No. 2, 3;
• The Violence of Lies or How the Ghost Got Lost. M., Young Guard, 1990; - 272 p., 100,000 copies.
• Is Stalinism Really Dead? (Is Stalinism dead?) Hazpez. San Francisco, 1990;
• Farewell to communism. Tokyo, 1993 (in Japanese);
• Slavic anxiety. Sat. articles. M., 1997.

Write a review on the article "Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich"

Notes

Links

• Nezavisimaya Gazeta 2010-11-03

Interview

• // Nezavisimaya Gazeta, March 10, 2006
• "Echo of Moscow"
• "Russian News Service"
• "Finam FM"
• (unavailable link from 21-05-2013 (2296 days))- program "Philosophical Readings"

Literature

• Alekseev P.V. Philosophers of Russia XIX-XX centuries. Biographies, ideas, works. 3rd ed., revised. and additional -M.: Academic project, 1999. С.364.ISBN 5-8291-0003-7
• Kosolapov R.I. Speech at the "round table" on the topic "Marxism: problems, contradictions, prospects" // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series Socio-Political Research" 1990. No. 5.

An excerpt characterizing Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich

, Russia, Russia

Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko(August 15, Odessa) - Soviet and Russian social philosopher and political scientist. Chief Researcher at the Institute for International Economic and Political Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Doctor of philosophical science .

Biography

Since January 1992, he took part in the creation of the Gorbachev Foundation, was the director of the foundation's scientific programs. In 1992-1993 he was a visiting professor at the University of Hokkaido (Japan), in 1995-1996 he was a visiting researcher at the Woodrow Wilson Center (USA).

In the 1990s, he began to criticize Russian radical reformers and put forward the ideas of "liberal patriotism". During the mass actions of the Russian liberal opposition in 2011-13. , also criticized the latter, in particular, compared Navalny with Lenin. However, after Euromaidan 2013-14. , the annexation of Crimea to Russia and the conflict in the South-East of Ukraine took a critical position in relation to the Russian authorities, accusing it of restoring "neo-Stalinism" and "neo-Sovietism".

Director of the Center for Political Science Programs of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political Science Research "Gorbachev Foundation", Chief Researcher at the Institute for International Economic and Political Studies (IMEPI) of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

He became the founder of the Return Foundation, founded in December 2006, advocating the return of historical traditions, moral values ​​and names that existed in Russia before 1917 and were rejected during the years of Soviet power.

Complete Doctor of Philosophy of the Polish Republic. Speaks Polish and English.

Some works

• history optimism. M., Young Guard, 1974 - 192 p., 50,000 copies.
• The idea of ​​socialism: a milestone in biography. M., Young Guard, 1976, 272 pp., 50,000 copies.
• Socialism: the life of society and man. M., Young Guard, 1980
• Some philosophical aspects of the theory of socialism. M., Nauka, 1983
• The origins of Stalinism // Science and life. 1988. No. 11, 12. 1989. No. 1, 2;
• On zones closed to thought // Severe drama of the people. M., 1989;
• The dialectic of perestroika. M., 1989;
• Are our principles good? // New world . 1990. No. 4;
• Contradictions of Marxism // Through thorns. M., 1990;
• Is a new experiment needed? // Motherland. 1990. No. 2, 3;
• The Violence of Lies or How the Ghost Got Lost. M., Young Guard, 1990; - 272 p., 100,000 copies.
• Is Stalinism Really Dead? (Is Stalinism dead?) Hazpez. San Francisco, 1990;
• Farewell to communism. Tokyo, 1993 (in Japanese);
• Slavic anxiety. Sat. articles. M., 1997.

Write a review on the article "Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich"

Notes

Links

• Nezavisimaya Gazeta 2010-11-03

Interview

• // Nezavisimaya Gazeta, March 10, 2006
• "Echo of Moscow"
• "Russian News Service"
• "Finam FM"
• (unavailable link from 21-05-2013 (2296 days))- program "Philosophical Readings"

Literature

• Alekseev P.V. Philosophers of Russia XIX-XX centuries. Biographies, ideas, works. 3rd ed., revised. and additional -M.: Academic project, 1999. С.364.ISBN 5-8291-0003-7
• Kosolapov R.I. Speech at the "round table" on the topic "Marxism: problems, contradictions, prospects" // Bulletin of the Moscow University. Series Socio-Political Research" 1990. No. 5.

An excerpt characterizing Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich

Madness as a national idea

Yuri Karyakin, who has passed away, was still wrong when he endowed only Russia of 1993 with madness, Russia that made the winner of the December elections to the Duma a simulacrum of Vladimir Zhirinovsky's patriotism. Madness is our main national privilege, until now the only national idea. We cannot live without madness. Isn’t our current nationwide joy that the West, which is more than 20 times more powerful than us in economic power, has become our enemy, is not genuine madness, that many in the West not only fear us, but also hate us, that never, even during the years of the Cold War, were not anti-Russian sentiments so strong in the USA?

The sweetness of self-torture

The stronger the love of the Russian people for Putin, the more our president feels like a tsar with absolutely unquestioned power, the more outright madness the new “Krymnashevskaya” Russia demonstrates. This is also the madness of our government, which decided, as a warning to the West, to show half-starved Russia on the TV screen, which has the lowest minimum wage in Europe, in which mothers do not know how to feed the child, sending him to school in the morning, how we resolutely crush tons of cheese with tractors , meat products, hated overseas fruits, brought to Russia in spite of our counter-sanctions tinged with grave patriotism.

This is the madness of the Duma deputies, who, in front of the eyes of the whole world, arrange festivities about the election of Trump as president. But many of them, for example, Vyacheslav Nikonov, who happily announced at a meeting of the Duma: “Trump has become president!”, understood perfectly well that after the successful operation carried out by the “little green men”, after the hybrid war in Donbass, we became the same for the Americans a pariah country like North Korea or Iran that they have legislated. And therefore, the joy of our country over the election of Trump as president inevitably turns him into a “friend of Putin”, arouses distrust in him. As a result, champagne celebrations for the world to see forever deprive Trump of the opportunity to do something good for Russia.

Whatever period of Russian history you take, you will eventually be convinced that the passion for self-destruction and self-torture takes precedence over the need for creation and improvement of life. The most obvious example of this is the transition of Putin's Russia of the 2000s to the era of "Krymnashev" victories. Yet the most faithful followers of Nietzscheanism are not Germans, but Russians. For us, freedom is first of all the right to the unthinkable, the impossible, the absurd, the most unnatural, the destruction of the conditions not only for development, but for life in general. The “little green men” operation, the murder of any chances for the prosperity of Russian life, for breakthroughs, which President Putin, fascinated by his own unpredictability, speaks of, has become a holiday for the current Russian person. The West is in shock; while remaining true to common sense, it cannot understand what Russia is now striving for. After all, the current self-isolation of Russia undermines not only the conditions for development, but also the conditions for its own military security. Russians today are happy that Russia for the first time in history has become a lone country, that the ring of Russia's enemies is shrinking every day, that the possibility of reunification of Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians has died forever.

There was nothing exceptional about the passion for self-destruction and self-castration that seized Russia during the so-called Russian spring of 2014. There is no people who are not sometimes seized by madness. Let us recall the popular love of the Germans for Hitler or the active support of the communist project on the part of a significant part of Russian Jewry. The wife of our family hairdresser grandfather Saveliy, grandmother Sarah, who lost all her relatives during the Romanian occupation of Odessa, often said: “If I were Levushka Trotsky’s mother, I would have strangled him myself when he was in diapers.” I understood the meaning of this phrase only when, being in Israel in 1991, I had the opportunity to watch films about the history of Zionism and Jewish tragedies, which are shown to the Olim who came to live in this country.

Let's give the world a lesson

The peculiarity of our Russian madness is not only that it is permanent, but also that it is given a sacred meaning. From some point on, madness is perceived as a national value, as evidence of the strength of the Russian spirit. Russian philosophers believed that our people would show the world examples of all-humanity precisely because in our country, in the words of Fyodor Dostoevsky, a mother and father can whip a child to death with rods, and a drunken Russian peasant may well throw his pregnant wife off the stove.

In my opinion, of all the Russian thinkers who sought meaning in Russian life, Peter Chaadaev was closest to the truth. The meaning of Russian history, he said, is to "give the world some important lesson," to show it what people with intelligence and common sense should never, under any circumstances, do. This idea was realized in the days of the USSR. For 70 years we have stubbornly proved to mankind the wrongness of Leon Trotsky, who insisted that "forced labor under communism will be more productive than the labor of a private peasant on his own land."

Russians hate Khrushchev because he began to pay collective farmers money for workdays, because he transferred millions of workers from the cold Stalinist barracks to cozy five-story buildings, where they got their own apartment. And Stalin, on the contrary, our people love because he killed the strong peasantry, starved millions of people to death, finished off the Russian intelligentsia, which Lenin and Trotsky began to kill, and finally deprived the Russian person of the right to think.

If anyone were to write a book about madness in human history, he would have to devote a whole chapter to the analysis of Russian madness in the 20th century. Its peculiarity lies in the fact that it is in the absurdity that Russians find not only a special charm, but also the meaning of their existence. As I said above, there is already extensive material for writing a new chapter on Russian madness. The researcher will see that the Russian madness of the post-communist era is even more dangerous than the previous one, which was associated with the traditional laziness of the mind, with hatred for the truth, with the temptation of a beautiful idea. In recent decades, more and more makes itself felt madness, behind which is the dark instinct of death. This is reminiscent of the traditional Russian eunuchs - a pathological passion for self-mutilation and self-destruction.

Is not our current foreign policy a similar passion, which undermines the conditions necessary for self-development, and indeed existence in the global world? Isn't Sergei Ivanov's statement about our desire to prove that Moska (meaning Russia) militarily capable of resisting the Elephant - the United States, not crazy? In our current struggle for the right against all odds to become the center of modern civilization, equivalent to America, there is no ideology, it is a pure instinct of death. The appeal of the Vice-Speaker of the Duma, Pyotr Tolstoy, to be treated not with modern American medicines, but with oak bark is not a metaphor, it is an image of our passion for self-destruction. I cannot but say that the basis of the current grave patriotism, which Peter Tolstoy preaches, is hatred for his people, and global misanthropy.

Down with common sense!

If we talk about eunuchs not as a simulacrum of the patriotism of our cynical deputies, but as the openness of the Russian soul to suicide, as an ideology of self-mutilation and self-destruction, then it is impossible not to notice that this disease manifested itself long before the victory of patriotism of the “Russian spring” of 2014. Back in May 1990, in the article “Russians are leaving Russia”, published in the Izvestia newspaper, your humble servant drew attention to the original unnaturalness, absurdity of the ideology and policy of “sovereignty of the RSFSR”, which brought Yeltsin to power. Behind the thirst for this sovereignty was also the desire to destroy with their own hands the historical Russia created over the centuries, to leave more than 20 million of their compatriots abroad, to throw out of their borders both the “mother of Russian cities” Kiev, and the “city of Russian glory” Sevastopol, as it was then said, "stop feeding the Caucasus, the Baltics and Central Asia." The sovereignty of the RSFSR became sovereignty not only from the legacy of Russian history, but also from the results of the victory on May 9th. It meant the death of the Russian world. The current Russian Federation has no moral right to be the legal successor of the USSR, because it was she who initiated the murder of historical Russia. But neither our people nor our politicians understand this. Isn’t it crazy: first, to do everything possible and impossible so that Crimea becomes “not ours”, and after almost a quarter of a century, these same people are killing the future of the country in order to regain at a terrible price what they voluntarily threw away in 1991 on dump of geopolitics?

Almost all of the current ardent "Krymnashevites", except for Alexander Prokhanov, were supporters of the collapse of the USSR, moreover, they made a political career precisely thanks to the collapse of the USSR. Many current politicians and military men have fled from Gorbachev to Yeltsin, not at all embarrassed by the fact that their new master openly pursued an anti-Russian policy and destroyed the USSR.

From liberals bribes are smooth. They were consistent in their fight against what they called "Russia's imperial legacy." True, they, too, are directly responsible for the madness of the new Russian autocracy, for the madness of "Krymnashev" Russia: on the blood of the defenders of the parliament, it was impossible to create anything but a new version of the Russian autocracy. Smart Leonid Radzikhovsky for some reason cannot understand that the shooting of unarmed people from tanks in the White House on October 4, 1993, which he, Leonid Radzikhovsky, still approves of, just gave rise to the craziness of the current foreign policy of Russia, which he condemns.

Why did I remember this? In order to show that the break with common sense is typical not only for all Russian eras, each of which gives us examples of its own madness, but also for absolutely all political parties in Russia. Of course, the victory of the Marxist madness of Lenin and Trotsky was generated by the madness of Pavel Milyukov and Alexander Kerensky, who decided at all costs to make Constantinople the new capital of the Russian Empire.

I repeat once again: our tragedy is that neither our politicians nor our people can peacefully coexist with either common sense or truth. Just one example. Special operations, taught in the Soviet era to Russia's current leaders, can never replace a sound policy that implies a long-term strategy. Otherwise, it would not be difficult to understand that Ukraine with the pro-Russian Donbass and Crimea would have much less chance of becoming anti-Russian and pro-European than the current one, wounded by the missiles of the Donbass "miners and tractor drivers." It was not difficult to understand that the "little green men" operation was turning more than 40 million Ukraine into a hostile neighbor, which was becoming an immense NATO training ground. Isn't it obvious that if Ukraine becomes a NATO member, missiles directed against Russia will no longer be in Sevastopol, but very close to Moscow - near Bryansk? Is it really not clear that in the modern world the guarantor of security is not the size of the territory and the number of natural harbors, but a developed high-tech economy that produces modern weapons?

The main conclusion suggests itself from my attempt to recall our ineradicable passion to create madness, to give humanity a lesson, which should never, under any circumstances, be done. Comparing the madness of Gaidar's reforms with the madness of the special operations of the Putin era, I personally discover a certain pattern for myself: the stronger the traditional Russian autocracy, the more the submissive and patient Russian people deify their leader, the less the leader of the country thinks about the negative consequences of his decisions, the less he is able to control himself, the more easily he gives himself up to the power of the irrational.

Many say that without superpower there will never be order and stability in Russia. Don't know. But one must see that in post-Crimean Russia, the autocracy of the ruler cripples the souls of people. Autocracy and a sense of personal responsibility for the fate of your country are incompatible. Never in my long life have I heard as often as in recent years our traditional Russian: "And we, ordinary people, the authorities never ask about anything." Along with the growth of Putin’s omnipotence in recent years, not only among the still living former Soviet people, but also among the middle generation, the fear of having their own opinion, of going against what our television today calls “patriotism”, “loyalty to the Motherland” penetrates into the soul. From the fear of being in the so-called fifth column, the turnout in the last presidential elections has grown unprecedentedly. For many, staying at home in this election meant going against not only Putin, but also Russia.

All clear. The weaker the Russian autocracy, the more harmless the Russian madness in human terms. Gaidar's reforms, which, by his own admission, pursued not so much economic as political goals, brought with them, like all revolutions, primarily the destruction of what is. But still, these reforms did not bring Russia to the red line of a possible military confrontation with the West as much as the successful "Krymnashev" operations did.

Russian dead end

The dehumanization of today's Russian man is manifested not only in the fact that the values ​​of freedom, truth, truth become alien to him, but also in the fact (and this is what scares me personally) that the value of human life becomes alien to him. Few people pay attention, and by the way, I don’t see Putin’s fault in this, that every step towards strengthening the vertical of power in recent years led to forgetting the humanitarian price of the achievements of socialism, to justifying the Stalinist terror, Stalinist repressions, to strengthening the vast majority of the population the belief that in the name of great ideals one can kill and starve millions of people.

No new revolutions are needed. The madness of "Krymnashevskaya" Russia provides abundant food to supplement what was discovered in the Russian soul, both by Maxim Gorky with his "Untimely Thoughts" and Ivan Bunin in his "Cursed Days". It turns out that Russians do not like freedom, not only because they do not want to take responsibility for the mistakes, miscalculations and even crimes of their rulers (I mean the crimes of Stalin), not only because it is much easier to live when power is nothing to you does not ask, but also because they do not like the truth, they do not want to see and hear what could undermine faith in their beloved and unique Putin. Hence the look of a frightened lizard, characteristic of Putin's nuclear electorate. Popular love for the current president and common sense are incompatible.

It is impossible to reconcile common sense and the current "If there is Putin, there will be Russia." After all, behind this phrase is the conviction that Russia in itself is worthless, that you and your children are doomed to perish after the inevitable death of Putin. I have lived for many years, but never in my 70 years of conscious life have I encountered such madness of the people around me. I may be told that I am exaggerating that there is nothing new in the mood of today's Russians, who are ready to die in the coming third world war, if they are called to do so by their beloved President Putin. All this is a manifestation of traditional Russian fatalism, resignation to fate. There was such a Soviet joke: “The party organizer says to the worker: “Vanya, tomorrow you will be hanged.” He asks the question: “Come with your own rope or will the local committee give it to me?” But, in my opinion, there is a significant difference between the fatalism and slavish obedience of Soviet people and the fatalism of those who today are thinking about what kind of cereal to take in a bomb shelter in case a third world war breaks out. The vast majority of Soviet people, not to mention the intelligentsia, sympathized with the victims of Stalin's repressions, gladly met relatives and acquaintances released by Malenkov and Khrushchev from the Gulag. The Soviet people en masse retained faith in a more comfortable, more humane future. Behind the obedience of “Krymnashevskaya” Russia, the willingness to die in order to teach presumptuous Americans a lesson, there is nothing human: no compassion for the victims of Stalinist repressions, no hopes for a better future. It is an undeniable fact that Putin's superpower has removed the future of Russia from the agenda. There remained only vague talk about passing the bottom of the crisis, about some breakthroughs.

What follows from all that has been said? Even with the preservation of Putin’s current, by Russian standards, weak omnipotence (compare Putin’s omnipotence with Stalin’s omnipotence, and you will understand what I am talking about), further spiritual degradation awaits us: I mean fear of the truth, of one’s own opinion, curtailment and without that skinny Russian freedom, the apathy of the soul, which does not feel sorry for anyone. If Russia remains a besieged fortress for a long time, then there will definitely not be any light in our life. The thirst for finding and exposing enemies will finally stifle the already lazy Russian brains. And Russian madness, the holidays of Russian madness will definitely turn into endless everyday life of our lives.

Most likely, due to serious personal reasons, Putin will never give up the autocracy that he loves so much, from his absolutely unlimited power. But, in my opinion, all the projects that Navalny is hatching are disastrous for Russia. Disastrous because we are not a united nation like the Armenians, who think about how the crisis would not lead to the death of fellow citizens. In our country, as in our kindred Ukraine, the Maidans will inevitably lead to bloodshed, to reprisals against the former, to the redistribution of property, to a new edition of Russian anarchy. We must understand that in Russia, revolutions like the Armenian one will inevitably lead to the final disintegration of everything that is left of the USSR in the Russian Federation. An almost insoluble problem arises: if Putin’s omnipotence remains, nothing good awaits Russia, but due to the fact that a single Russian nation has not been formed, there are still no real ways to overcome omnipotence through the development of democracy. After all, it is no coincidence that the democracy of the 1990s turned into a new edition of the Russian autocracy. And, frankly, I don't know how to find a way out of the impasse.