Liberalist Igor Chubais: There was no blockade of Leningrad. Igor Borisovich Chubais Chubais Igor Borisovich biography

Igor Borisovich Chubais(born April 26, Berlin) - Russian philosopher and sociologist, Doctor of Philosophy. Author of many scientific and journalistic works. Initiator of the introduction of a new subject “Russian studies” into the Russian education system. Dean of Russia's first Faculty of Russian Studies at the Institute of Social Sciences. Member of the board of the Union of Writers of Russia.

Biography

In the spring-summer of 1991, he joined the Moscow organization of the NPR to the coalition of five parties “Democratic Moscow” and participated in the creation of the Coalition of Democratic Forces in Moscow, directed against the leadership of “Democratic Russia”.

Editor-in-Chief of the magazine (almanac) “New Milestones”.

Active member of the Return Foundation, created in December 2006.

In March 2010, he signed the appeal of the Russian opposition “Putin must leave.”

Since 2010, he has hosted several radio programs on the Russian News Service radio station.

Hosts the “Time Ch” program on Radio Komsomolskaya Pravda.

Currently:

In September 2014, he signed a statement demanding “to stop the aggressive adventure: to withdraw Russian troops from the territory of Ukraine and to stop propaganda, material and military support for the separatists in Eastern Ukraine.”

Family

Married. The daughter graduated from the Faculty of Law of the Institute of Economics and Law.

Bibliography

• “From the Russian idea - to the idea of ​​a new Russia” ()
• “Russia in search of itself” ()
• Textbook "National Studies", together with a group of employees
• “Russia Unraveled. What will happen to the Motherland and to us”, Moscow: AiF Print, Stolitsa-Print, 2005 ISBN 5-94736-074-8, 5-98132-071-0. Awarded the Literature Prize of the Union of Writers of the Russian Federation.

Quotes

Write a review of the article "Chubais, Igor Borisovich"

Notes

Links

Excerpt characterizing Chubais, Igor Borisovich

On August 25, on the eve of the Battle of Borodino, the prefect of the palace of the French Emperor, M r de Beausset, and Colonel Fabvier arrived, the first from Paris, the second from Madrid, to Emperor Napoleon in his camp at Valuev.
Having changed into a court uniform, M r de Beausset ordered the parcel he had brought to the emperor to be carried in front of him and entered the first compartment of Napoleon's tent, where, talking with Napoleon's adjutants who surrounded him, he began to uncork the box.
Fabvier, without entering the tent, stopped, talking with familiar generals, at the entrance to it.
Emperor Napoleon had not yet left his bedroom and was finishing his toilet. He, snorting and grunting, turned first with his thick back, then with his overgrown fat chest under the brush with which the valet rubbed his body. Another valet, holding the bottle with his finger, sprinkled cologne on the emperor’s well-groomed body with an expression that said that he alone could know how much and where to spray the cologne. Napoleon's short hair was wet and tangled over his forehead. But his face, although swollen and yellow, expressed physical pleasure: “Allez ferme, allez toujours...” [Well, even stronger...] - he said, shrugging and grunting, to the valet who was rubbing him. The adjutant, who entered the bedroom in order to report to the emperor about how many prisoners were taken in yesterday's case, having handed over what was needed, stood at the door, waiting for permission to leave. Napoleon, wincing, glanced from under his brows at the adjutant.
“Point de prisonniers,” he repeated the adjutant’s words. – Il se font demolir. Tant pis pour l "armee russe,” he said. “Allez toujours, allez ferme, [There are no prisoners. They force themselves to be exterminated. So much the worse for the Russian army. Well, even stronger...],” he said, hunching his back and exposing his fat shoulders.
“C"est bien! Faites entrer monsieur de Beausset, ainsi que Fabvier, [Okay! Let de Beausset come in, and Fabvier too.] - he said to the adjutant, nodding his head.
- Oui, Sire, [I'm listening, sir.] - and the adjutant disappeared through the door of the tent. Two valets quickly dressed His Majesty, and he, in a blue guards uniform, walked out into the reception room with firm, quick steps.
At this time, Bosse was hurrying with his hands, placing the gift he had brought from the Empress on two chairs, right in front of the Emperor’s entrance. But the emperor got dressed and went out so unexpectedly quickly that he did not have time to fully prepare the surprise.
Napoleon immediately noticed what they were doing and guessed that they were not yet ready. He didn't want to deprive them of the pleasure of surprising him. He pretended not to see Monsieur Bosset and called Fabvier over to him. Napoleon listened, with a stern frown and in silence, to what Fabvier told him about the courage and devotion of his troops, who fought at Salamanca on the other side of Europe and had only one thought - to be worthy of their emperor, and one fear - not to please him. The result of the battle was sad. Napoleon made ironic remarks during Fabvier's story, as if he did not imagine that things could go differently in his absence.
“I must correct this in Moscow,” said Napoleon. “A tantot, [Goodbye.],” he added and called de Bosset, who at that time had already managed to prepare a surprise by placing something on the chairs and covering something with a blanket.
De Bosset bowed low with that French court bow, which only the old servants of the Bourbons knew how to bow, and approached, handing over an envelope.
Napoleon turned to him cheerfully and pulled him by the ear.
– You were in a hurry, I’m very glad. Well, what does Paris say? - he said, suddenly changing his previously stern expression to the most affectionate.
– Sire, tout Paris regrette votre absence, [Sire, all of Paris regrets your absence.] – as it should, answered de Bosset. But although Napoleon knew that Bosset had to say this or the like, although he knew in his clear moments that it was not true, he was pleased to hear it from de Bosset. He again deigned to touch him behind the ear.
“Je suis fache, de vous avoir fait faire tant de chemin,” he said.
- Sire! Je ne m"attendais pas a moins qu"a vous trouver aux portes de Moscou, [I expected no less than to find you, sir, at the gates of Moscow.] - said Bosse.
Napoleon smiled and, absentmindedly raising his head, looked around to the right. The adjutant approached with a floating step with a golden snuff-box and offered it to her. Napoleon took it.
“Yes, it happened well for you,” he said, putting the open snuffbox to his nose, “you love to travel, in three days you will see Moscow.” You probably didn’t expect to see the Asian capital. You will make a pleasant trip.
Bosse bowed with gratitude for this attentiveness to his (until now unknown to him) inclination to travel.

Anatoly Borisovich Chubais is a Soviet and Russian political and economic figure, liberal and reformer, general director of the corporation (Russian Nanotechnology Corporation). Anatoly Chubais was the chairman of the board of RAO UES of Russia. One of the leaders of market and energy reforms in Russia.

Anatoly Chubais

Childhood and adolescence of Anatoly Chubais

Anatoly Borisovich Chubais was born on June 16, 1955 into a military family. Boris Matveevich Chubais, father of the politician, retired colonel, who taught the philosophy of Lenin and Marx at the Leningrad Mining Institute. Raisa Efimovna Segal, Anatoly’s mother, is an economist by training, but has never worked in her specialty. She looked after the children and the house.

Raisa Efimovna paid great attention to her sons. Brother of Anatoly Chubais, Igor, achieved significant heights. He became a Doctor of Philosophy, professor of the Department of Social Philosophy of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences of the RUDN University. Anatoly’s parents sent him to school in Odessa. Already there he began to become interested in exact sciences and come up with various kinds of inventions.

Anatoly Chubais in his youth with his mother

Since the mid-60s of the twentieth century, the politician’s family lived in Lvov, and in 1967, due to their father’s service, they moved to Leningrad. There, as Anatoly himself said, he studied at a school with an emphasis on military-patriotic education. Boris Matveevich and Anatoly’s older brother often discussed politics and philosophy, and young Anatoly Chubais took part in this. Such debates influenced the choice of future profession as a politician.

Student life politics

In 1972, Anatoly entered the Leningrad Engineering and Economic Institute named after. Palmiro Togliatti at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering. In 1977, the future politician graduated from the institute with honors. He began working at the same institute as a teacher, engineer and teaching assistant. While working at the institute, Anatoly wrote his dissertation. He successfully defended it in 83 of the twentieth century.

A. B. Chubais in his youth and now

The beginning of Chubais's political career

In 1980, Anatoly joined the Communist Party. At that time, Leningrad was experiencing the active development of the democratic movement. Leningrad economists founded a circle in which Anatoly Chubais, Grigory Glazkov and Yuri Yarmagaev became leaders. Together they worked on a scientific report entitled “Improving the management of scientific and technological progress in production.” The circle also included the vice-president of the Banking House "St. Petersburg", the future deputy prime minister, Mikhail Manevich, the late governor of St. Petersburg, and Anatoly's older brother Igor Chubais.

Political activities of Anatoly Chubais

In 1990, Anatoly Chubais took the post of deputy chairman of the executive committee of the Leningrad City Council, and then became the first deputy.

In 1991 Anatoly Sobchak, mayor of St. Petersburg, appointed Anatoly Chubais as leading economic adviser. He quickly climbed the career ladder thanks to his intelligence and talent.

A. Chubais and A. Sobchak

In November 1991, he became chairman of the State Committee of the Russian Federation for State Property Management. In 1992, the head of state appointed him deputy prime minister.

Russian President Boris Yeltsin and Anatoly Chubais

In 1992, Chubais began and finished creating a privatization program. By the beginning of 1997, more than 127 thousand enterprises had been privatized.

In 1998, at a special meeting of the co-owners of the shares of RAO UES of Russia, it was decided to take Anatoly Chubais to the Board of Directors, and later he was appointed to the position of Chairman of the Government.

Anatoly Chubais is a prominent figure in politics. From a deputy of the State Duma “Russia’s Choice”, the creator of the “Civil Society Foundation”, which predetermined the activities of the association of analysts of Yeltsin’s election headquarters, to the position of chairman of the government.

Anatoly Chubais

In June 2003, Anatoly Chubais became one of the top three leaders of the Union of Right Forces, but the party failed. When the politician left the post of party chairman, he became a member of the federal political council. In the fall of 2008, the political party accepted Anatoly Chubais into the Supreme Council "Just cause».

For his political achievements and economic success, the private American Institute, which studies issues of East and West, awarded Anatoly Chubais the Outstanding New Excellence Award in 1994. Euromoney magazine (England) gave the politician the title of Best Finance Minister in the World. Anatoly Chubais also received many Gratitudes from the President of the Russian Federation. Anatoly Chubais is a venerable doctor of the University of Engineering and Economics of St. Petersburg. In addition, he is an Actual State Advisor of Russia, first class.

Anatoly Chubais and Vladimir Putin

Personal life of a politician

In the first marriage of Anatoly Chubais and Lyudmila Grigorieva were born son Alexey(1980) and daughter Olga(1983). Both followed in their father’s footsteps and chose a direction related to economics.

In 1989, the marriage of Anatoly and Lyudmila broke up, but the politician always supported his children financially.

In 1990, Chubais met Maria Vishnevskaya and married her. The woman supported her husband in everything, be it career growth or rapid decline. Maria worked in a hospital for hopelessly ill people, but communication with them left an imprint on the woman’s mental health and on the personal life of the spouses. Anatoly Chubais took his wife to various prestigious clinics, wanting to cure her, but all attempts were unsuccessful. After being married for 21 years, Anatoly Chubais and Maria Vishnevskaya separated. Anatoly left all his property to his ex-wife.

Anatoly Chubais and Maria Vishnevskaya

In January 2012, Anatoly Chubais legalized his relationship with the famous TV presenter and director Avdotya Smirnova.

Anatoly Chubais with Avdotya Smirnova

Now Anatoly Borisovich is happy, enjoys active recreation and tries to keep abreast of all the news on the World Wide Web. Anatoly Chubais still loves the British rock band "The Beatles",Bulat Okudzhava and Yuri Vizbor. In cinema, he is most attracted to the films of Andrei Tarkovsky, Kira Muratova and Leonid Gaidai. At this point in time, Anatoly Borisovich Chubais is the general director of the Russian Nanotechnology Corporation.

Anatoly Borisovich Chubais is a human symbol, a demonized hero of political battles, a reformer and liberal, whom some consider an outstanding personality, while others consider him an “all-Russian allergen.”

In 1977 he graduated from the Leningrad Engineering and Economic Institute named after Palmiro Tolyatti. In 1983 he completed his postgraduate studies. In 2002 he graduated from the Moscow Energy Institute.

Father - Boris Matveevich Chubais (February 15, 1918 - October 9, 2000) - participant in the Great Patriotic War, colonel, after retirement, teacher of Marxism-Leninism at the Leningrad Mining Institute. Mother - Raisa Efimovna Sagal (September 15, 1918 - September 7, 2004). After the end of the war, Boris Chubais and his wife lived for some time in defeated Germany. Then the division where Igor’s father served was stationed in Lyadishchi (Borisov). His younger brother, Anatoly Borisovich Chubais, was born there. In the early 1960s, the family moved from Borisov to Odessa

In 1972 he graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Leningrad State University.

He joined the CPSU upon entering graduate school at the Institute of Sociology of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Moscow, after being warned about the impossibility of training non-party people.

In 1978, he completed his postgraduate studies at the Institute of Sociology and defended his PhD thesis on the Polish sociology of television.

From 1980 to 1997 - Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy at GITIS.

In 1987-1990, he was one of the most prominent figures in the Moscow informal associations “Perestroika” and “Perestroika-88”. In 1988-1990 he was a member of the Moscow Popular Front. In 1989, he was expelled from the CPSU for “activities aimed at splitting the party.”

In 1990, Igor Borisovich became the “founding father” of the Democratic Platform in the CPSU, and then (after a short stay in the Republican Party) was a member of the Bureau of the Political Council of the People's Party of Russia.

In the spring-summer of 1991, he joined the Moscow organization of the NPR to the coalition of five parties “Democratic Moscow” and participated in the creation of the Coalition of Democratic Forces in Moscow, directed against the leadership of “Democratic Russia”.

Editor-in-Chief of the magazine (almanac) “New Milestones”.

In 2000 he defended his doctoral dissertation on the problem of the new Russian idea and identity.

In 2006-2007, he was the presenter of radio programs “Moscow Speaks”.

Active member of the Return Foundation, created in December 2006.

In March 2010, he signed the appeal of the Russian opposition “Putin must leave.”

Since 2010, he has hosted several radio programs on the Russian News Service radio station.

Currently:

• Director of the Interuniversity Center for Russian Studies as part of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences of RUDN University
• Dean of the Faculty of Russian Studies, Institute of Social Sciences

Family

Married. The daughter graduated from the Faculty of Law of the Institute of Economics and Law.

Igor Chubais does not approve of his brother’s state-political activities and does not communicate with him.

Bibliography

• “From the Russian idea - to the idea of ​​a new Russia” (1996)
• “Russia in Search of Itself” (1998)
• Textbook "National Studies", 2003, together with a group of employees
• “Russia Unraveled. What will happen to the Motherland and to us”, Moscow: AiF Print, Stolitsa-Print, 2005 ISBN 5-94736-074-8, 5-98132-071-0. Awarded the Literature Prize of the Union of Writers of the Russian Federation.

"Biography"

Born on April 26, 1947 in Berlin. Father - Boris Matveevich Chubais (February 15, 1918 - October 9, 2000) - participant in the Great Patriotic War, colonel, after retirement, teacher of Marxism-Leninism at the Leningrad Mining Institute. Mother - Raisa Efimovna Sagal (September 15, 1918 - September 7, 2004). After the end of the war, Boris Chubais and his wife lived for some time in defeated Germany. Then the division where Igor’s father served was stationed in Lyadishchi (Borisov). His younger brother, Anatoly Borisovich Chubais, was born there. In the early 1960s, the family moved from Borisov to Odessa.

Education

In 1972 he graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Leningrad State University.

He joined the CPSU upon entering graduate school at the Institute of Sociology of the USSR Academy of Sciences in Moscow, after being warned about the impossibility of training non-party people.

In 1978, he completed his postgraduate studies at the Institute of Sociology and defended his thesis “The Impact of Television on the Formation of Public Opinion” (based on materials from the People’s Republic of Poland and the USSR).

Activity

"News"

Ukraine is visible in every mirror and every window

The empire included both Finland and Poland... But the struggle for the rule of law, for democracy, for fair elections somewhere in Papua New Guinea is not very interesting to the Kremlin and the Russians. And Ukraine is visible in every mirror and every window. We are intertwined with too many ties and this is not propaganda, this is reality. That's the whole answer. I myself lived in Ukraine for 7 years - in Lvov and Odessa.

Igor Chubais: There will be no victory for the Kremlin over Ukraine. Russia is fading before our eyes

Igor Chubais, Doctor of Philosophy, historian and founder of the discipline “Russian Studies,” causes, perhaps, no less controversy and criticism than his younger brother, with whom Chubais the philosopher has not communicated for a long time.

His books “Unraveled Russia” and “The Russian Idea”, against the backdrop of today’s pessimism regarding traditional domestic values, look quite optimistic: Chubais proves that there is no historical curse over us, that the thousand-year Russian path was among the most successful on the continent, until it happened the disaster of 1917, which turned the country upside down. And when we realize that we have been wandering on the sidelines for 90 years, when we understand that the USSR and post-USSR are not Russia, when we return and continue our route, the world will accept us again, and we will find ourselves.

Journalist Andrei Norkin kicked brother Chubais out of the studio: Get out

NTV journalist Andrei Norkin expelled Doctor of Philosophy Igor Chubais, brother of Anatoly Chubais, from the studio of his program.

As a Nakanune.RU correspondent reports, on the air of the “Meeting Place” program, the presenter told Chubais that he would not give him any more space to speak on the program.

“I won’t give you another word, Igor Borisovich. For God’s sake, get out,” Norkin said.

Igor Chubais, Doctor of Philosophy, historian and founder of the discipline "Russian Studies", causes, perhaps, no less controversy and criticism than his younger brother, with whom Chubais the philosopher has not communicated for a long time.

His books “Unraveling Russia” and “The Russian Idea”, against the backdrop of today’s pessimism regarding traditional domestic values, look quite optimistic: Chubais proves that there is no historical curse over us, that the thousand-year Russian path was among the most successful on the continent, until it happened the disaster of 1917, which turned the country upside down.

And when we realize that we have been wandering on the sidelines for 90 years, when we understand that the USSR and post-USSR are not Russia, when we return and continue our route, the world will accept us again, and we will find ourselves.

IN THREE YEARS THERE WILL BE NO ECONOMY

– I’ll start with the question that worries me most today: Is Putin something like Julian the Apostate, a loophole in Russia’s historical path or a return to our traditional path, to primordial values?

- Putin? What does he have to do with Russia? The regime in which we now live is a continuation of the USSR in a worsened, impoverished version. There are no higher goals here, there is no myth about communism, but power remains in the hands of self-appointed officials who, as before, remain outside the control of society and serve themselves, not the country. Comparing Putin with Hitler is also incorrect: under Hitler things were bad for Jews and gypsies, but the German population of Germany was riding like cheese in butter. Under Putin, it is Russia and the Russians who are in trouble; the country is fading away before our eyes.

There is such a wonderful economist known abroad - Vladimir Kvint - do you know him? The trouble is that you don’t know: Vladimir is a foreign member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, his forecasts are listened to in Europe and the States, he is the world’s leading expert on economic strategizing.

In 1990, he predicted the collapse of the USSR.

Three years ago, he showed that by 2017, if deep reforms do not begin, the Russian economy will stop and budget revenues will stop. Yes, small and medium-sized businesses have almost disappeared, capital flight is increasing, real incomes of citizens are falling, and fees, fines, and taxes are growing significantly!

In 2016, we will have Duma elections to a mock parliament. After all, in Russia, as in a traditional democracy, there is no system of checks and balances, we have a “vertical of power”, and parliament is not a place for discussion, just as a hospital is not a place for treatment... In two years, when the " deferred crises”, elections with “administrative resources”, or in Russian - with falsifications, will not suit anyone.

“Then why is everyone so excited now?” Such ratings?

– These are not public opinion ratings, this is a measurement of the effectiveness of propaganda! In fact, another indicator is important - the opinions of the so-called opinion makers, people who are listened to. In the last fifteen years, opinion leaders have been forced out of the media... But today all Russian art, except for two characters - Mikhalkov and Bondarchuk, is oppositional. And the passive part of society answers any question with what they hear on TV.

– In my opinion, you still exaggerate the power of propaganda. They believe her as long as she coincides with her own secret mood...

– The secret mood is always the same. All propaganda flatters the feeling of national exclusivity. The Germans were a nation with a huge intellectual tradition; volumes of Kant and Hegel were in almost every home. Meanwhile, after the thirty-third year, their criticism of their own power and of themselves decreased significantly; and five years later she disappeared altogether, with minor exceptions. And all this was done by propaganda - the idea of ​​judenfrei was supported by almost the entire intelligentsia, and not only in Germany.

– But doesn’t Putin rely on that same Russian matrix?..

– This has nothing to do with the Russian matrix, or, more precisely, with the Russian idea: at the beginning of the twentieth century, when the country was confidently becoming a world leader, this idea was just reformed.

Today it is believed that the basis of the empire is continuous territorial growth, while in fact the last manifestations of Russian expansion in Europe were the beginning of the 19th century, then there was the war in the Caucasus.

And at the end of the second third of the century before last, the annexations ended. Alexander III no longer fought at all. The transition has begun from a strategy of collecting land to a philosophy of arrangement and quality growth.

And many today are in raptures over the absurd territorial expansion in Crimea, while no development of the vast and virtually ownerless territory is taking place.

The current government, having announced succession with the USSR, with a totalitarian, illegal state, has made itself illegitimate.

The regime has not received the legal “right to rule” either from God or from Churov’s elections, there is not even historical legitimation - as soon as the “nuts are loosened”, people come out to protest and declare non-acceptance of the existing rules.

There has been no “historical adaptation” in 95 years. As A. Solzhenitsyn wrote, the Soviet Union is related to historical Russia, like a murderer to the murdered!

And now “scoop” continues “post-scoop”.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Russia became an industrial giant, Europe wrote about the “Russian economic miracle,” the Trans-Siberian Railway was built, already at the end of the 19th century, Nicholas II banned the export of crude oil, and 120 years later we live off the sale of raw materials.

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DEFEAT THE GERTIZAN

– By the way, how do you explain the wild frenzy with which Russia attacked first the Maidan, and then Ukraine as a whole?

– The same as the occupation of Hungary in 1956, the introduction of tanks into Czechoslovakia in 1968... By the way, in August 1968 I protested against the occupation of Czechoslovakia in front of the regional committee of the CPSU in Odessa, this is the same building where people died in May. Ukraine restores its identity, becomes free, returns to the European family, it leaves the control of the quasi-Russian, but in fact anti-Russian regime. Soon they will hold a trial of the Communist Party, carry out lustration and say goodbye to the Soviet legacy. The ninety-year darkness will end.

– Let’s return to Ukraine: can the so-called Novorossiya win?

– It cannot, because the vast majority of the Ukrainian people are ready to fight this. In the early sixties, I was fascinated by Cuba, learned Spanish, read with enthusiasm the theoretical works of Che Guevara, he was not only a practitioner, but also a thinker; in his book "Guerilla Warfare" he showed that it is impossible to defeat civil protest if it is supported by the people.

In the Ukrainian situation, the paradox is that the Ukrainian army and national guard are supported by the majority of the population - it is the people who provide them. Look at social networks. Do you need medications? - transporting medicines; food? – they supply food: the generals there are not particularly advanced... And if suddenly the Russian army decided to enter Ukrainian territory, it would be faced with a people’s war, seriously and until victory.

– What is the future of Strelkov, in your opinion?

“He himself believes that he will die soon.”

- And if not?

-Then they will kill us. Which one do you like best?

– Is there no way he can become president?

– Win fair elections? No, there is no truth behind it!

There will be no victory for the Kremlin over Ukraine, and there will be no euphoria about Crimea in the near future either.

You have to pay for everything, and a politician must plan five moves, 10 years in advance.

Our children will have to give up Crimea, they are doomed to defeat.

You know when Germany stopped paying reparations for the outbreak of the First World War - in 2010!

Crimea was taken in violation of all laws – legal and human. “Krymnenash”, otherwise we will have to go back to Soviet times, when the whole world was out of step, and we were out of step. That's all the explanation.

And I would not rush to talk about the final divorce with Ukraine. It seems to me that after the liberation of Russia - after it throws off all the current corrupt rubbish and restores its identity - we will be on the same path as a free Ukraine.

And I would not rule out that in this new free country the capital will be in Kyiv, if they do not abandon us... After all, Kyiv is the mother of Russian cities, why not return to the roots? I say: you have to pay for everything. But Moscow failed.

WE MISSED THE WORLD WAR IN 1991

– How do you feel about Yeltsin today? Many believe that the main tragedy of the country is his victory over Gorbachev, and all the current problems stem from this.

– The roots of the current troubles lie in the failure to overcome the consequences of the 1917 coup; the main geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century is not the collapse of the USSR, but the destruction of the Russian Empire.

Well, if we go back to 1991... If a politician like Putin had come to power then, a world war (not even a Yugoslav one) would have been very likely.

Under Yeltsin, we escaped with the Chechen war, after Yeltsin, with the Ukrainian war.

It was more difficult for Yeltsin, but he avoided a war within the CIS.

And perhaps Yeltsin’s main mistake is that he did not create a class of owners; the nomenklatura remained the master of the country, and this is what we are paying for today.

In the 90s, instead of a class of owners, a layer of oligarchs was created on the one hand and homeless people on the other, the national wealth was concentrated in the hands of several hundred families, today the gap between the incomes of the richest ten percent and the poorest ten percent is a hundredfold. And in Europe, the norm is six to seven times differentiation.

– But do you believe that this class of owners could be created? With a population that is not ready for business, competition, or compliance with laws?

– In Poland, as a result of Balcerowicz’s reforms, it was created. And it was created in Hungary, and Czechoslovakia left our influence quite safely and divided, by the way, without problems.

And Ukraine will do this now, although I understand perfectly well that they will spoil it in every possible way, interfere with it in every possible way. Without deciding on greater aggression, they will not stop at any immoral methods of pressure. I am sure that Yushchenko survived the poisoning only by a miracle.

– Do you believe that reforms can be carried out while simultaneously tightening the screws?

“That’s the only way they should be carried out!”

The peculiarity of Russian reformism is that the reformer here must have very great power, otherwise the power will be lost and the reforms will stop.

Stolypin, for example, did not possess this completeness; they constantly tried to tie his hands and accused him of dictatorship. And he fought only with terrorists, while simultaneously offering effective solutions to real social problems!

And he destroyed the community absolutely correctly - without the abandonment of the community there could be no development in the 20th century. Tolstoy wrote to him that private ownership of land is the greatest evil and that the destruction of the community is immoral. Stolypin answered respectfully and seriously: “Poverty, for me, is the worst of slavery. It’s ridiculous to talk to these people about freedom or liberties. First, bring the level of their well-being to at least the smallest limit where the minimum contentment makes a person free. And this achievable only with the free application of labor to the land, that is, with ownership of the land." So who is right and who is a hopeless idealist? Stolypin did not have enough years or even months to bury the very idea of ​​revolution in Russia.

The Russian tradition was interrupted in the seventeenth, was not revived or restored after the ninety-first, and until we draw a line under the Soviet era, it will not be restored. We remain in a simulation quasi-state that has no legal basis, no goals and no program for the future.

The existing system is also aware that it can only survive in a value vacuum - why today there are no heroes or anti-heroes, there is not a single real history textbook. The history of the twentieth century is not written at all - it is rewritten every decade in accordance with the needs of the moment. True, V. Klyuchevsky and S. Solovyov have been reprinting for 150 years, this is real history, because in pre-Soviet Russia censorship of historical research was prohibited.

RUSSIA IS STRONG IN ITS SCALE

– Don’t you think that the shortest way to get out of the Russian circle is to scrap centralization and pyramidal power? While Russia is so huge and so centralized, it is impossible to govern here differently.

– So you propose to break it up territorially?

“I’m not suggesting anything; it’s dangerous to suggest in this day and age.” There are supporters of federalization, they propose, we won’t name names...

– Federalization or breakup? It is important. One historian living in the States spoke at one of the capital’s universities with a proposal to separate Siberia, the Urals, and make a small European Russia...

I asked him: if I spoke in the States and proposed separating Texas or California, would I have time to get to the exit of the audience or would they tie me up right there?

Why on earth should I treat a headache with a guillotine? Or do you think that, God forbid, after its “sovereignization” anyone will even notice the Tver province on the world map? Russia retains its potential while it is huge. The time will come when we will realize this potential. Breakup has never solved a single problem. And on what basis, along what boundaries to divide? Distributing maximum power to the localities is another matter, it is high time to implement this; but to say that the very scale of the territory predetermines the pyramidal power... On the contrary, on this vast territory it is just natural to get away from inadequate centralization, strategic issues are for the center, regional ones are for the localities, they cannot be solved from Moscow!

– You say that we need to end the resource-based economy, but what industry needs to be developed here first?

- All of it. Russia has in reserve the entire periodic table, the first fresh water resources on the planet, practically inexhaustible oil reserves, gigantic uncultivated lands, and if, say, Andrei Parshev in the book “Why Russia is not America” denies us economic efficiency due to the severity of the climate “We are really further north than the States,” he loses sight of the fact that America spends three times more on air conditioning in the summer than all of Russia spends on heating in the winter. If we start to process our natural reserves... Propylene, a product of the sixth refining process of oil, is 1000 times more expensive than crude oil - in a few years you can get rid of poverty and build another Russia!

- Fine. And who will do all this wonderful work to revive the country?

– They keep quiet about the leaders, but they exist, from Yavlinsky to Kasyanov, an excellent economist and a decent person, by the way. And then, speaking about the people and their corrupt state, for some reason everyone excludes themselves personally from this people: aren’t you ready to revive, work, believe, in the end? After all, the feeling of hopelessness is not for our people: as soon as certainty appears and guidelines are identified, it will become clear to everyone why to live. We need different television, different media!

– Were there any bright moments in the history of the Soviet period?

– Have you ever wondered why Khrushchev was forced to expose the cult of Stalin? Stalinism was recognized as a dead end; this awareness came after two large-scale uprisings in the camps in Norilsk and Vorkuta in the summer and autumn of 1953. In Norilsk, about 20,000 people went on strike; in the Vorkuta zone, approximately 100 thousand prisoners marched on the city, seizing weapons. Most of them were political - Bandera and Vlasovites.

Khrushchev quickly understood everything and began to close the camps. The prisoner revolution changed a lot. And they spoke aloud about Stalin only at the 20th Congress, which was invented as an ordinary political mythology and an attempt to assign non-existent merits to the party.

And after the most terrible night, dawn comes!