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 - worked in the propaganda department of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. From 1967 to 1970 - in the propaganda department of the Komsomol Central Committee. From 1972 to the present - at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (formerly - IEMSS AS USSR), from 1986 to 1990 - consultant of the International Department of the CPSU Central Committee, from 1990 to 1992 - deputy director of IMEPS RAS, from 1992 to 1995 - director scientific programs of the Gorbachev Foundation. From 1996 to 1998 – editor of the Nezavisimaya Gazeta supplement “NG-Script”. From 1999 to 2007 - political commentator for Literaturnaya Gazeta. From 2008 to 2010 – commentator on the VGTRK program “Vesti-24”.

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 Doctor of Philosophy degree from the Polish People's Republic.

From 1992 to 1993 - visiting professor at the Hokkaido Center for Slavic Studies, Japan, Japanese government fellowship.

From 1995 to 1996 - visiting professor at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, USA, fellowship of the US Congress.

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's works were published in the USA, Germany, Italy, France, Japan and China. Alexander Tsipko’s last book, “Values and the Struggle of Conscious Patriotism,” was published by URSS in 2009.

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

Normal 0 false false false RU X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Tsipko Alexander Sergeevich

Events

International conference “Global challenges for the economies of Russia and China: searching 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: Searching 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 (SPEC-2019) “Foresight “Russia”: the future of technology, economics and people” and made a report at the Plenary session “Digitalization of the economy: drivers and results.”

International competition for medals N.D. Kondratieva

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

The first all-Russian sociological survey of theater audiences

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 audiences. The study is dedicated to the Year of Theater in Russia.

Current interviews and publications

Minsk’s initiative 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 newspaper “Poisk” (No. 13 dated March 29, 2019) published the response of the director of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences E.B. Lenchuk to an article by academician G.P. Georgiev on the problem of retaining youth in Russian scientific teams.

On the specifics of Russian discussions

Nezavisimaya Gazeta published an article by the scientific director of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, corresponding member R.S. Grinberg, “A historical example of how one can argue about the fate of Russia without insulting each other. There is no East without the West” (March 25, 2019)

Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko was 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 - worked in the propaganda department of the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper. From 1967 to 1970 - in the propaganda department of the Komsomol Central Committee. From 1972 to the present - at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (formerly - IEMSS AS USSR), from 1986 to 1990 - consultant of the International Department of the CPSU Central Committee, from 1990 to 1992 - deputy director of IMEPS RAS, from 1992 to 1995 - director scientific programs of the Gorbachev Foundation. From 1996 to 1998 - editor of the Nezavisimaya Gazeta supplement "NG-Script". From 1999 to 2007 - political observer for Literaturnaya Gazeta.

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 Doctor of Philosophy degree from the Polish People's Republic.

From 1992 to 1993 - visiting professor at the Center for Slavic Studies in Hokkaido, Japan, Japanese government fellowship.

From 1995 to 1996 - visiting professor at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, USA, fellowship of the US Congress.

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.

Alexander Sergeevich TsIPKO: interview

WHAT IS GOOD FOR A RUSSIAN?
How myths about national character hinder the country's modernization

What kind of Russians are we? Is the modern image of a Russian person far from centuries-old mythologized ideas? How can we get out of the captivity of ideological cliches about ourselves? Who benefits from these stamps? Doctor of Philosophy Alexander Tsipko answers these questions to RG.

What is, from your point of view, “national character”? In science, this term does not exist; in any case, it is not a subject of analytics.
- There is no “national character” for all times. As well as a special “Russian civilization”, a special “Russian man”, who - according to the template - does not like property, does not like prosperity, is irrational, gives in to great impulses, and the only thing he is capable of is soaring in the clouds. All these are myths that absolutely do not correspond to Russian history.

Russia is diverse. There was a patriarchal Non-Black Earth Region that did not accept Stolypin’s reforms. The south of Russia and Crimea are a completely different type of people, wealthy and capable. And Siberians are the strongest Russian people. Therefore, emphasizing certain characteristics of the peasants of the Non-Black Earth Region as “Russian character” is, to put it mildly, far-fetched.

- But there is a saying: “What is good for a Russian is death for a German”? So, do we still have common features?
- Yes, there are psychotraits, a mood of the soul, or something, that is inherent in a Russian person, but does not coincide with the mood of the soul of a German, Italian, Frenchman, Greek.

- And what are these features of ethnopsychology?
- Well, for example, the movement of the psyche from one extreme to another. Why did revolutionary sentiments take root among us? Because this is how our history develops: calm, calm - then an explosion! Desire for drastic changes. Indeed, there is a temporary loss of the sense of reality, a desire for a miracle right away. Remember, from Lenin: “They demanded a miracle from us, and we gave a miracle. A miracle of the revolution.” There is something else: let’s say, amazing gullibility, a desire to start a new life. By the way, extremely dangerous gullibility. And also amazing suggestibility. I spent a lot of time abroad: in Poland, Japan, in the States. The people there are much more critical and realistic. They cannot be seduced, for example, by pseudo-patriotism in the spirit of Zhirinovsky.

- What makes us exactly like this?
- I think what is important is what is connected with Orthodoxy, Byzantine and Greek culture. With history.

No middle ground

What, in your opinion, are our trump cards?
- So the fact of the matter is that it is impossible to separate one from the other. Take for example the ability of compassion, even contrary to common sense. I watch my contemporaries. Few people will pass by a beggar. Although everyone knows that they are almost professionals. Responsiveness and kindness - Russian psychology. But most importantly, the golden mean is not about us: to sin, then sin, repent, repent.

Why do you think the “Russian myth” has taken root? He was supported by many highly respected Russian thinkers.
- In Soviet times, it was popular among the intelligentsia because it did not coincide with Marxism. It was a unique form of dissidence. We understood that all talk about the nation, about the fate and psychology of the people fundamentally contradicted the official ideology.

In the early 90s, these ideas were successful because, in conditions of total collapse, people lost faith in themselves and began to curse their history and Russian fate. And the Russian myth saved us from total national nihilism. But 20 years have passed, we have preserved the state, we are going out into the world. It was good to listen to the beautiful texts of the intelligent Slavophile Khomyakov about how Orthodox Christians live as monks. But the rational time has come. By the way, the church fathers also talk about this.

- How does the market combine with Orthodox teaching?
- Read the speech of Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad at the Russian State University for the Humanities. If we have already entered this modern world, he said, we will not be able to escape modernization. And we won’t be able to come up with special modernization and special mechanisms other than the market and individual entrepreneurship. The Bishop poses the questions: “Is there something in our character that will help us remain people worthy of modern civilization? Does Orthodoxy contradict the idea of a master?” And he answers, I quote almost verbatim: “If God created this material and material world, then a Russian person who has a family and a home must take care of the household, of property. Another thing is that one should not attach one’s soul to wealth.

- Individual entrepreneurship, rationalism... How to fit Russian communalism into this series?
- Another Slavophile myth. The community was created after the peasants were freed from serfdom - from above, administratively, to make it more convenient to collect taxes.

Bankrupts or saints?

What can you say about the Soviet “Russian character”?
- We often transfer specific, moral and psychological features of human life and behavior within the unique Soviet system to the Russian character. Not understanding that from the point of view of historical science, the Soviet system is an absolute accident. If there had not been a world war, millions of soldiers who did not know what to do, if there had not been an alliance with both France and England, there would have been no Soviet Russia. Another thing is that, having emerged from the Soviet totalitarian system, we now have a crippled nation. Even the Tatars did not destroy the elite of the conquered peoples as much as we destroyed ourselves.

- The myth about the Russian character, unadapted to life, who benefits now?
- It’s the same for both liberals and Pochvenniks. The Marxists were very interested in the idea of a Russian man who was ready to suffer and live in barracks. But it is a lie that he followed the Bolsheviks because communism suited his nature. What percentage participated in the Civil War? 10-12 percent. And the rest waited. If Trotsky had not appeared and organized detachments near Kazan, it is not known how the revolution would have ended! And the barrage detachments consisted of Latvians, Hungarians and Chinese! What I mean is that it was an international Bolshevik revolution.

Liberals present us as a patriarchal country unfit for modernization. And if so, the Russians need to be remade, Western influence is necessary. Like, let's change their archetype, make them able to live freely, love property.

There is a third direction. Many of my friends go into romantic Slavophilism, into a cultural ghetto. The feeling there is this: there is a hostile world, and we - saints - will not defile ourselves with external contacts. There they talk about great Russia and raise toasts to it. But this is a ghetto of extinction. This arrangement is beneficial for liberals, because they like the idea of being controlled by Russia, and for Slavophiles, because they don’t want to do anything.

In your opinion, it turns out: let’s get rid of myths and live well. However, something is left unsaid about who we are.
- We need to discard the opinions of radical liberals and aggressive Slavophiles. After all, this is not only a cultural problem, it is a worldview problem. For both of them, it turns out that Russia could not solve the problems of industrialization without the Soviet system.

- Like modern Russia - problems of modernization?
- And this is already the problem of the burden of Marxism, which hangs over our consciousness under the guise of a Russian myth. And leaves us within the framework of Marxist-Leninist ideology. If you admit that without a revolution the Russians could not solve the problems of civilization, how does this, my dears, differ from the views of today's liberals, that modern Russia without the West cannot answer the challenges of modern civilization?

- The traditional question of the Russian intelligentsia: what to do?
- To revise Russian culture and imagine the Russian point of view. I don’t know about you, but Struve’s liberal patriotism is closest to me. Struve pondered how to combine Russian sovereignty with freedom.

What doctrines are popular now? Let's take Kholmogorov's group. They unconsciously or slyly take the myth of the Russian man and begin to evaluate Russian history in accordance with this myth. What happens then? For example, there was the bad Khrushchev, who seduced the Russian people with prosperity and “transferred him from a barracks to a five-story building.” I note that these guys themselves love to live in five-star hotels. This smacks of cynicism.

Text: Elena Novoselova, Elena Yakovleva (author's blog)
Source: Published in RG (Week) N4394 dated June 22, 2007.

Alexander Sergeevich TsIPKO: articles

Alexander Sergeevich TsIPKO (born 1941)- philosopher and political scientist, chief researcher at the Institute of International Economic and Political Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Philosophy, Doctor of Philosophy habilitus of the Republic of Poland: | | | | .

IMMORTAL LENINIAN AS THE GRAVE OF THE RUSSIAN SOUL
Immortal Leninianism as the grave of the Russian soul

Can a nation survive long that is unable to call evil evil and an executioner an executioner?

When the recording of the talk show “Right to Voice”, dedicated to the fate of the monument to Dzerzhinsky, ended, and when both the pro-communist and anti-communist sides agreed with the host’s opinion that for today everything should be left as it is, that those who will come in 20- 30 years after us and will decide what to do with both the Lenin Mausoleum and the Iron Felix monument, for the first time since perestroika, a quarter of a century, a terrible thought came to me. But won’t post-communist Russia perish before its population agrees on what was a crime and what was a feat in its Soviet history, what should be worshiped as a national shrine or what should ultimately be condemned? Can a nation survive long that is unable to call evil evil and an executioner an executioner? Does a country literally stuffed with Lenin monuments that still look at us in squares and parks have a chance to survive? After all, even the pro-communist side of our talk show, headed by the deputy from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Nikolai Kharitonov, agreed with me that Dzerzhinsky was unlucky, that he simply happened to become the personification of that unique superhuman cruelty of the Cheka, that unique butchery that distinguished primarily Lenin and thanks to which the Bolsheviks managed to conquer power in Russia and build the USSR.

There is something morbid and paranoid in Lenin’s messages, classified as “Strictly Secret,” calling on both Dzerzhinsky and the deputy chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, Unshlikht, to “intensify the speed and force of repression” and, in particular, to use the campaign to confiscate church valuables to continue the “ferocious and merciless reprisals” against representatives of the ruling classes: “The more representatives of the reactionary bourgeoisie and the reactionary clergy we manage to shoot on this occasion, the better.” As can be seen from this instruction, Lenin continued to call for mass repressions even after the Civil War. After all, in fact, all the atrocities that the Nazis later distinguished themselves with - the mass shooting of hostages, the creation of concentration camps for suspicious persons, and genocide (the Bolsheviks, unlike the Nazis, had class genocide) - were borrowed by them from Lenin’s party. The only difference between the Bolsheviks and the Nazis is that the former, as Army Commander Tukhachevsky did, used “poisonous asphyxiating gas” against their own Russian population, against the Tambov peasants, while the Nazis used it against strangers, against Jews and gypsies.

And as soon as you realize what a monster Lenin, still beloved by the Russian people, really was, then you will feel what simply shocked me during the discussion: that a country where monuments to the “great leader of the proletariat” stand at every step resembles a cemetery , where under every standing statue of Lenin lies a piece of Russian conscience and Russian soul. When I talk about the soul, I mean, first of all, a person’s ability to feel disgust for violence, the ability to empathize with the torment of those endless millions who were killed by Stalin’s Holodomor or tortured in the Gulag. And, most importantly, when I talk about the soul, I mean the ability to understand my genius Fyodor Dostoevsky, who insisted that even the happiness of all mankind is not able to atone for the torment and tears of one tortured child. In fact, the nation, which still overwhelmingly glorifies the executioners Lenin and Stalin, is sick at heart and carries within itself something subhuman.

And instead of the soul - anger, hatred, an insatiable thirst for the blood of my opponents from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Here, as always, a woman distinguished herself, again a deputy from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Elena Drapeko, who simply shouted: “It was necessary to kill!”, that this “was required by the class approach,” that the tsar killed and we, the Bolsheviks, killed.

When I listened to deputy Elena Drapeko’s ode in defense of murder and blood, I regretted that once upon a time, at the end of 1991, I had not supported Yuri Afanasyev’s proposal to ban communist ideology in Russia. We still do not realize what great damage the Marxism-Leninism with its preaching of class enmity, which is revered in our country, has caused to the Russian nation to this day. However, from a moral point of view, the analysis of the nature of Bolshevism, presented to the audience by an expert - a professor at MGIMO - was no different from the preaching of the blood of Elena Drapeko. Like, there is no point in talking about the victims of Bolshevism, the professor insisted, after the millions of victims of the First World War. The philosophy of murder thus lives in Russia in a wide variety of forms.

In fact, in the main thing, in hatred of pre-revolutionary Russia, of the pre-revolutionary Russian elite, there is no difference between the deputies from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the heirs of the sixties, who still contrast the “democracy” of the Leninist guard with the dictator Stalin.

And as I listened to all this, I suddenly realized that we really have very little, practically no chance for salvation, for our recovery from class anti-human morality. A miracle is impossible! No national unity is possible, the revival of national consciousness is impossible when there is no national elite capable, moreover, has the right to condemn the crimes of the Bolsheviks and call for good. I am by no means a supporter of another Russian pogrom, this time pogroms of monuments to Lenin, in the likeness of how Lenin himself and his Leninist guard smashed monuments to tsarist Russia after the revolution.

The problem is different. The fact is that we still do not understand the unnaturalness of our national worship of people, the leaders of Bolshevism, who personified all the bestial, anti-human instincts. It frightens me that we still not only do not understand the danger of maintaining the Bolshevik psychology of reprisals in our souls, but we also do not know how to begin liberation from it. We don’t want to see the obvious, as Fyodor Dostoevsky warned, that no happy country can be built on the blood of innocent, tortured people. It seems to me that we, our entire elite, are sick not only morally, but also mentally. We are unable to learn the obvious lessons from our entire Soviet history. After all, precisely because the foundation of the USSR was Bolshevik super-cruelty, it instantly, in a few hours, collapsed when Dzerzhinsky’s brainchild, the KGB apparatus, retired.

As it turns out, liberation from communist prohibitions in itself gives little if there is in fact a national elite that personifies the moral values of the Russian people, capable of defending them and introducing them into people’s consciousness. In the countries of Eastern Europe, for example, in Poland, at the time of the death of socialism, many representatives of the interwar intelligentsia were alive, friends of Cardinal Wojtyla, who became Pope, those who carried the so-called Polishness within them. One of these friends of Cardinal Wojtyła, sociologist Jan Szczepanski, was my doctoral supervisor - I communicated with him for many years and even then, in the late 70s, I realized that the Poles have a better chance of saving the nation, because they still have connection of times. And we, unfortunately, did not and could not have anything in common between those outstanding thinkers of the Russian nation who, even before 1917, warned that Bolshevism and Marxism would lead to unheard-of victims, and those “red professors” who taught the humanities in USSR after the revolution. It is one thing to be a humanist who went through a religious upbringing in childhood, and another thing to be a humanist who went through the Pioneer and Komsomol schools. Even among the current authoritative Russian intellectuals, there are practically no ones who would dare to say that the death of the intellectual elite of pre-revolutionary Russia was not worth the future successes of the Soviet cultural revolution, that without the Bolsheviks, having the mental and cultural potential of the pre-revolutionary intelligentsia, it would have been possible to achieve something completely different from the Soviet the quality of literacy and, in general, the quality of national thinking.

Still, the overwhelming majority of us still think worse than pre-revolutionary Russia thought. The problem of the fool is much more relevant for us than it was in Russia during the time of Gogol. Many intellectuals - and so-called patriots, and so-called nationalists, and so-called liberals - are still convinced that the Russians are a special, according to their logic, inferior nation, because without the murder of their national elite, without a bloody Civil War, they, unlike from other nations of Europe could not solve the problems of industrialization. Many intellectuals are still convinced that without the 6 million peasants killed by the Holodomor in 1932-1933, we would not have been able to build the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station. I am deeply convinced that the blatant absurdity of our current political thinking is also a consequence of the Soviet remaking of the Russian person. No one here dares to say that in fact the degradation and collapse of the 90s is, first of all, a natural result of the “great successes of socialist construction”, that even our reformers of the 90s with their crazy immoral reforms are also fundamentally the result of our class education of the younger generation.

How will you create a morally mature, spiritually healthy society if in fact there is not a single influential full-fledged political force in Russia that would carry in its worldview the Christian “Thou shalt not kill” and at the same time the consciousness of the intrinsic value of every human life? By the way, both the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the leaders of the liberal opposition are united by Yegor Gaidar’s conviction that the Bolsheviks stood “at the level of the tasks of their era.”

The tragedy is that even the Russian Orthodox Church does not have the will to become the center of consolidation of the entire anti-communist elite, all those who do not accept the Bolshevik reprisal against Russia. It is not only a mockery of common sense, but also a mockery of the memory of the victims of Bolshevism that today conferences devoted to criticism of the immoralism of Bolshevism are held, as a rule, by Zhirinovsky’s LDPR.

And one has only to wonder why we, those who so passionately wanted a “different”, non-communist Russia, did not understand that in fact “other” was not given to us, that after three or four generations of communization of Russia, no successful decommunization was possible. If it weren’t for Gorbachev, then, probably, the USSR would have lasted another 20 years. But in fact, there is no guarantee that current Russia will last 20-30 years, which has neither the will nor the moral strength to ultimately call a crime a crime, in order to cleanse its soul, its thinking from the original Marxist-Leninist anti-human code.

In fact, the communist legacy is not only power plants and mines, thanks to which we survive, but also a mass of insoluble contradictions. Without solidarity based on national consciousness, it is impossible to overcome the hardships of the transition from communism to a normal market economy. But in reality there is no basis for the reproduction of a strong national consciousness. Yes, it didn’t exist before the revolution. If it had been, then the Bolsheviks with their class consciousness would never have won. As I tried to show, in our country there are practically no people who, through the example of their entire lives, would deserve the right to personify and defend the original spiritual values of the Russian nation. Our crazy post-communist individualism also opposes the task of growing solidarity. Liberation from communism was and is still perceived by people as liberation from forced Soviet collectivism.

Hence the belief that everything is permitted. Just as liberation from the total Soviet deficit led to an unprecedented explosion of consumerism, so liberation from Soviet ideological prohibitions led to an explosion of individualism. But the reconstruction of national consciousness is impossible not only without personal immersion in national cultural values, but also without the ability to restrain one’s individualism for the benefit of society without the ability to correlate one’s life and actions with national interests. The new generation of Russia is distinguished not only by unconsciousness, but also by its unwillingness to bear any responsibility for its historical past and for the national future. But the growth of national consciousness is also hampered by the unbridled egoism of the current political elite, or rather, the egoism of those who, by chance, ended up at the top, who personify examples of the exact opposite kind, that is, the ultimate thirst for personal enrichment and desire, all the most valuable things in their lives - and children, and the money should be transferred outside of Russia.

Here's the story. Without the return of national consciousness, we will not save the country. But in fact, if you look soberly, in the conditions of the current divided Russia, when at the words “spiritual bonds” a grimace appears on the face of many intellectuals, there are very few objective conditions for solving this problem. I repeat the obvious: all our main national shrines and even the great Russian culture are connected by their origin with Orthodoxy and stem from Christian values. But we still have neither the strength nor the desire to condemn those who deliberately and purposefully destroyed the spiritual foundations of the Russian nation. I think from here, from our powerlessness, not only moral, but also mental, the proposal to leave everything as it is, to revive the churches destroyed by the Bolsheviks next to the monuments to Lenin, to glorify both Tukhachevsky and Denikin at the same time, to contemplate the Kremlin Masonic stars against the backdrop of the royal double-headed eagle on the building of the Historical Museum, hanging portraits of Stalin in churches next to the crucifixion of Christ, going to confession with a priest who is convinced that Russia could not have been saved without Stalin’s repressions.

Why not? We spent 70 years building our own special communist world, and now we are building our own special post-communist world, where both red and white values live together. True, I feel with all my gut - and I definitely see trouble, as experience has shown - the providence of either God or reason, it doesn’t matter, will not forgive us this endless schizophrenia.

Replica

Honestly, I just couldn’t believe my eyes. I re-read it again. Yes, political scientist Alexander Tsipko agreed right up to the fascist thesis about the Russian people:

“Perhaps, as elementary common sense suggests, we need to stop crippling the multinational Russian state that has developed over centuries and tell ourselves the truth. To say that our greatest enemy is the unbridled egoism of the Russian person.”

Did you understand what Alexander Tsipko said?.. In many nations of the world there are good and bad people, but only Russian people have a natural quality characteristic of the people - selfishness. This is some kind of under-people, some bastards of humanity, this is an endangered biological race, and the sooner it goes extinct, the better it will be for humanity!..

This abomination came from the pages of Literaturnaya Gazeta in a discussion devoted to the Russian question. A venerable political scientist, by the way, a Doctor of Philosophy, decided to reveal to the Russian people the truth about himself and wrote the truth “Stop fooling around!” (in the sense of the fool Ivan):

“I agree with the editors of Literaturnaya Gazeta - there is a danger of “talking about” the “Russian question.” If we do not now seriously analyze the causes of the physical and spiritual degradation of the titular nation of Russia, then the country will not exist. A Russia where ethnic Russians die out will no longer be Russia.
In order to change something in our lives, especially in a radical way, we need to know what everyone who is most dissatisfied with their life suffers from in the first place. The Russian people are undoubtedly martyr. But the Russian question is not to compete in depictions of his suffering, but to find out who is most to blame for his torment - himself or hostile circumstances, a hostile environment?

And below:

“...I am forced to say that where there is no desire to talk to one’s people seriously and honestly, reminding them of their own responsibility for their choices, of their miscalculations and mistakes, there is in fact no true love for their people. The fact of the matter is that treating one’s people as a victim is not very far from treating one’s people as “cattle,” as a silent creature that does not know what it is doing, on which nothing in this world depends.”

And then Tsipko again with pleasure puts the Russian people in the pillory, pursuing the thesis that he himself is to blame for his troubles, you are a fool Ivan, an egoist, and your power is the same - narrow-minded and bastard:

“As the Russians say, “there’s no point in blaming the mirror if your face is crooked.” But even now it is not difficult to see that our current government really thinks little about its people, and only because it consists of the same egoists as the rest of us. By the way, precisely because of the rampant growth of Russian individualism, a significant part of the younger generation does not want to be the master of their country. Feeling like the owner of the country means becoming responsible for its fate, and this is precisely what the new Russians do not need at all. It’s time for both the authorities and the intelligentsia to honestly say out loud that until Russians, and above all Russian men, give up their drunkenness, until Russian mothers stop killing their Russian children, until we roll up our sleeves and become something We are truly doomed to do anything to improve our lives. The salvation of the Russian people lies in themselves. It’s time to stop playing the fool and playing the victim.”

The thesis about the people and the power that they themselves deserved, Tsipko revealed in more detail in the text of the article, and again pursuing the fascist thesis about the bastard people and the same power:

“It is one thing when a people suffers from the violence of cruel conquerors, and another thing when it becomes a victim of its own, chosen power. Strictly speaking, the image of a victim is incompatible with a people who had the right to choose. The Russian people cannot even be called a victim of the Bolsheviks, for they themselves brought them to power, under their leadership they themselves destroyed educated Russia, they themselves burned and destroyed their own churches.

We must not forget that the current government, like the government of Yeltsin’s team, was unanimously elected, first of all, by the Russian people. The Russian people preferred the sparing of words, but “cool” Yeltsin to the “talkative mumble” Gorbachev. The Russian people themselves preferred Yeltsin’s program of radical economic reforms, i.e. capitalism, the gradual reforms of Gorbachev, who constantly reminded us of the “socialist choice” of our grandfathers.

I do not believe that the current Russian government is doing everything possible to improve the lives of people in depressed areas of the Russian Federation populated by Russians. But I am deeply convinced that if the Russian people do not stop fooling around and start doing for themselves what can be done without any power, no changes at the top will help us.

Please note. All the peoples of multinational Russia suffered from unemployment caused by Gaidar's reforms. But the mortality rate from drunkenness in the Russian regions of the Russian Federation is several times higher than the mortality rate in national republics, for example, in Chuvashia and Bashkiria. Who forces Russian mothers to kill so many of their children in their own wombs? The number of abortions among the Russian population is also several times higher than the number of abortions in the national republics. What prevents a Russian person from seriously taking care of his physical health and the health of his children? Compare, for example, the way of life, prosperity, and well-groomed Tatar villages with Russian villages around Nizhny Novgorod. The difference is amazing. In every Tatar farmstead there are several cows, dozens of sheep, and in Russian villages there is most often desolation and extinction.”

Here we can breathe a sigh of relief when we finally understand that the Moscow professor, Doctor of Philosophy, judges the Russian people by himself. Before us is a primitive thinker, incapable not only of deeply understanding the issue raised, but even more or objectively presenting it, without belittling his own people, his country, his history and philosophy. Before us is an ideologist who has made the sale of his beliefs a means of subsistence, a political weather vane showing the direction of the ideological wind within the state. That is, before us is Judas, who sold Christ for thirty pieces of silver, and for a pot of lentil stew - the birthright of a Russian intellectual. Moreover, Alexander Tsipko even developed a special pose for such outpourings of betrayal. When Tsipko takes off his glasses, folds his hands in prayer and raises his eyes to the sky: expect new hysteria! They will softly and intelligently, with Moscow charm, present you with the most banal things and truths for thirty pieces of silver. This is the pose:

But let’s return to the lies presented by Tsipko in the guise of truth. The fact is that Tsipko, like many liberal thinkers, does not rise to the East-West contradiction, that contradiction between the village and the city in world history, which has significantly hit Russia. Here is an excerpt from the main page of my website No. 4 (September 15, 2003 - December 2005):

“The Russian community - this is still not understood by modern society, is a POLITICAL form of community, i.e. principle of DEFENSE. In short, this is a community without Christ, that is, faith in the return of Christ, a community on the defensive, where the most worthy person to serve the community is elected to the place of leader. The social unity of the Russian peasants with their faith in the individual is a form of IDEOLOGICAL defense against the affirming POWER of the EAST (COMMUNITY) and the denying LAW OF THE WEST (INDIVIDUARY). The Russian community is faith in man (Christ) and humanity (community), i.e. a kind of SYNTHESIS OF COMMUNITY AND INDIVIDUALITY. That is why Russians surprise the whole world by the fact that they are incapable of self-organizing unity according to an ethnic image, as Eastern peoples easily do, and on the other hand, Russians are reluctant to engage in individual activity on an entrepreneurial model, as is typical of Western peoples. There is a subconscious resistance of the Russian mentality to the fact that in the first case the principle of the individual is violated, in the second - the principle of the community, or rather, the principle of the unity of the community and the individual.” (See http://www.kcherepanov.narod.ru/kcherepanov/glstr4.htm)/

Tsipko does not even realize the depth of this problem, solving the Russian question on his own - an egoistic Moscow intellectual. Equally primitively, Tsipko unties the knot of the October Revolution and the unspoken competition between Stolypin and Lenin:

“Why did all those who profess the philosophy that “Russians can gain freedom for national development only by sacrificing the empire” forget both the lessons of October and the lessons of 1991? They forgot that Russian thinkers, who truly loved their people and addressed them as a thinking, spiritual being, were not afraid to talk about Russia and the Russian people. The main problem of the Great Russians, as the ideologists of Stolypin’s party and the All-Russian National Assembly said even before the 1917 revolution, is “paralysis of nationality.”

I will again quote my excerpt from the main page of the site:

“In the history of Russia, at the last line of the existence of autocracy, there was an unobvious ideological duel between Stolypin (the agrarian path of development of Russia - the solution to the peasant question, i.e. what we call TERRITORY as the power of the East, a rural way of existence) and Lenin (the production path of development of Russia - the decision of the social path of development with the subsequent industrialization of the country, i.e. what we call PRODUCTION as the law of Western society, the urban way of existence). The question is about STRENGTHENING the autocracy or its DESTRUCTION.

They both tried to untie the main knot of Russia - the RUSSIAN COMMUNITY (or the Russian form of community - collective). Moreover, Stolypin unwittingly chose the Western method - individualism as the creation of the individual peasant, Lenin - the Eastern method - collectivism as the creation of the party-state. Stolypin wanted to isolate the individual (peasant) from the community - the development of the eastern type of existence of Russia, Lenin - wanted to eliminate the individual in the name of the community (party) - the development of the western way of existence of Russia. Stolypin's path led to the fact that Russia rapidly and rapidly developed as a rural country, becoming one of the richest in the world, but Lenin's path showed that in the context of the rapid development of urban production, especially military-industrial (Western countries and especially Germany), Stolypin- agrarian Russia was doomed in the future to defeat and to the disintegration of the territory (i.e. the principle of territory turned out to be powerless before the principle of production, and the principle of power - force before the principle of society - law). At the beginning of the twentieth century, Russia was no longer free from the generic and therefore worldwide tendencies of DENIAL, i.e. the rapid development of the West throughout the world - a process that later came to be called globalization."

As you can see, the issue is too complex for Mr. Tsipko to solve. The same method of solution - a hint of thick circumstances without analysis - is visible in the theme of Marxism:

“All this talk about the supposedly merciless government, which drinks the life force of the Russian people and wants to exterminate them from the world, of course, recalls the Bolshevik pathos of criticism of autocracy and capitalist exploitation. And this is no coincidence. As a rule, today in Russia supporters of defining Russianness through genes are people of left-wing, Marxist convictions. All of them, as a rule, are atheists, hidden or open opponents of Orthodoxy, of Christianity in general, which reminds of a person’s personal responsibility for his destiny. Irresponsible calls for rebellion, all these stories about how in Russia a Russian person cannot say that he is Russian, an accusatory bias in criticizing the authorities - all this is from the arsenal of Bolshevism. The contrast between “pure ethnic Russians” and Russians is very similar to the Bolshevik contrast between the working class and the exploiting class. Both here and there are class morality, a justification for hatred and cruelty.”

One can identify a feature of Tsipko’s method: he always takes an ambivalent position, leaving himself room to change theses and beliefs, because he trades in his beliefs and ideology without a twinge of conscience or any moral hesitation. But in only one thing the Moscow professor is firm, purposeful and merciless: in his hatred of the Russian people. Alexander Tsipko would have created an inferiority complex for the Russian people and Russia if the people and Russia did not know the value of words. But what he said from the pages of the Literary Gazette is, of course, no other definition as intellectual fascism does not deserve! “A liberal is an enemy of the people!” - said our spiritual seer, writer and thinker Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky!..

And the final touch to the portrait of Alexander Tsipko, who did not fail to touch on the theme of the Russian idea:

“The main “Russian idea” for today’s young Russians, as they themselves say, is to settle down in the “comfortable West” as quickly as possible.

Few people know that in 2005 Alexander Tsipko was a member of the jury of the “Ideas for Russia” competition held by the “Unity in the Name of Russia” foundation and the “United Russia” party, which killed my work “The Russian Idea as a Philosophical and Logical Formula” "(See http://www.kcherepanov.narod.ru/formula.htm). And the fact that today’s Russians have no choice but to go abroad is his considerable personal merit.

So, let’s summarize: Alexander Tsipko presented his personal problems - the Moscow liberal and ideologist as a class of armchair thinkers who never knew Russia and never understood its people - as the problems of the Russian people. He lied, he lied, and he will lie again and again, because he does not and cannot do otherwise. Isn’t it time to stop letting people like Tsipko into decent society, like, for example, the editorial office of Literaturnaya Gazeta. Aren't you tired of the smell of lentil soup and the jingle of Judas' silver coins?..

Address of the article Alexander Tsipko “Let’s not play the fool!” http://www.lgz.ru/article/17872/ Photo addresses http://er.ru/text.shtml?13/7952,110923, http://www.ng.ru/regions/2007-11- 16/5_tomsk.html

And a political scientist. Chief researcher at the Institute of International Economic and Political Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Doctor of Philosophy.
In 1985 he defended his doctoral dissertation on the topic “Philosophical prerequisites for the formation and development of the teachings of Karl Marx on the first phase of the communist formation.” In 1986-1990 - consultant to the department of socialist countries of the CPSU Central Committee. In 1988-1990 - assistant to the secretary of the CPSU Central Committee A. N. Yakovleva.
.Currently positions himself as a “moderate patriot of pre-Crimean Russia.”
This is from Wiki.

And this will be from me.
When I don’t want to argue, in order to get rid of something, I say, they say, I don’t like the name “to my face.” With this type it will be sincerely said: I DON’T LIKE IT ON THE FACE.
What Lombroso would say about him, of course, is unknown, but his muzzle is disgusting - a pancake with two slits instead of eyes.
I am biased, yes, and if I like a person in general, but he is not handsome, I will still describe him as Jean Marais. But here I am quite objective!
We noticed that since 1986, a comrade worked in the Central Committee of KPSS? The dog wedding - perestroika was arranging its people.
By the way, he wrote that WE then went to work and kept...figs in our pockets. We! It was in Independent.
A freshly minted Doctor of Sciences, whose doctoral thesis is about the teachings of Marx :-) And to this day he is not ashamed to call himself a Doctor of Sciences!
He was one of the most written (from the word write, of course) publicists: A word in defense...My struggle...I can’t do otherwise...How it was...Spiritual health of Russia...and so on. He scribbled like a machine gun, in a word.
I just didn’t call the Soviet Union an evil empire, but maybe I did, I could have missed it.
But all his “works” were imbued with hatred of the Soviet system.
Summary: NIT! This is mine. That he’s a traitor and a scumbag, of course.

I never would have written about him. Yes, he sticks out on the TV, and I “can’t even eat”, I envy him :-)
He's a lousy polemicist. The manner of speaking is instructive, moralizing, even, in short, disgusting.
Once Tretyakov, I remember, splashed water on Tsipko right at the so-called debate - fucked me up!
At first, this pepper glorified Tsarist Russia, but kept quiet about religion. Then he himself admitted, saying that he underestimated, I confess, we need to revive religion.
Revives! But he admits that they somehow don’t like him... they don’t listen... He even started a website where he posted his “works”. However, I turned off comments.
And then the other day I read in MK...
The Russian nation is a myth. That's what the doctor of science called the article!
Let me make a reservation right away: I don’t like reading supposed philosophers on the topics of the nation, the people. There are so many debaters, so many definitions. A lot of people in the Union were taught to be “lyricists” :)
I will give Stalin's definition.
1946
“A nation is a historically established stable community of people that arose on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life and mental makeup, manifested in a community of culture.” Only the unity of all four features constitutes the concept of a nation; “the absence of at least one of these features is enough for a nation ceased to be a nation... A nation represents a combination of all characteristics taken together.” Stalin I. Marxism and the national question - Soch., vol. 2, M., 1946, pp. 296-297.
Strictly speaking, today there is not a single element of the above.
Language? Not at all. Formally only. The Russian language is disappearing. The wordsmiths are shouting about this. Who can hear them?!
Territory? Hmm, where are the families of our bosses? And on foreign territory.
Economic life? Well, no words are needed here. What is life like with a salary and pension of 15 thousand rubles?
Mental makeup...Yes, we are all sick. All!
What Stalin would say on this topic today is unknown. I'm afraid that the joke about two decrees - to paint the Kremlin wall green and shoot according to the list - would not turn out to be a joke.
So strictly speaking, Tsypkin is right - there is no nation today. But! Here is a quote from his next opus.

“People, as a rule, begin to look for a special idea for themselves when their national feeling is absent or fading, when there is no longer anything that would bind people with their souls, and not with St. George’s ribbons for show.
And it is no coincidence that in recent days the theme of our numerous television shows has been the Russian national idea.
“Crimea is ours,” like any patriotic enthusiasm, fades away, and we return to the 90s and, under the leadership of full-time television ideologists, begin to look for how to unite those who are for “ward No. 6” with those who support the “fifth column” " "

So Judas noticed that Shapirkin is talking about this only. Another quote.

"All Russian thinkers who were looking for the Russian idea, for some reason did not pay attention to the obvious - that the Russian nation as something integral, organic never existed..."
Those thinkers are fools, thank God, Tsypkin clarified this!
I won't upload meaningless quotes. In short: the common people were ignorant, poorly educated, the Bolsheviks took advantage of this (Denikin himself said so!), and therefore easily surrendered to Soviet power in 1991!
He modestly keeps silent about his Jewish role in the events of 1991. Moreover, this nit dared to reproach the people in 1993 for their supposed callousness! They say they didn’t sympathize with those executed!!! Is this a nation, mournfully asks?!
Nations, in his words, were formed among three peoples. Among the Jews, of course, among the Armenians (?), among the Poles. All.
I am not Andrei Makarov, who in St. Petersburg criticized the government for “8 years,” as he himself said. True, he himself admitted that he would not name names - he was afraid.
I don't want "8 years". Smart people will understand.

And somehow it coincided that almost simultaneously with this article, a serious scandal broke out in Israel around a married couple widely known in very narrow circles - Bossart and Irtenyev. Poets... Left for history. From gebnya, from scoop.
About two years ago, Bossartsha did not like the way she was examined at the airport. I wrote a poem. Bad. But...they endured it.
And here it is again! And Bossartsha fell silent again. She called the border guard girls sluts.
While still living in Moscow, she became famous for considering Hodor “genetically correct” as opposed to “Russian nature.”
Well, the Russians swallow everything, they didn’t sue the fool.
Not so in Israel! Her verse caused a storm. To the point of being completely ignored! It turned out that she and her husband and the Jews were fake.
But know ours! Quote from Vzglyad.

“...But Bossart does not share the critical attitude towards her work.
She subtly calls her opponents “insects,” “half-baked freaks” and “assholes,” and is not afraid of the “vile vomit” of their “stinking comments,” alternating swearing and the assertion that she and Irteniev are “increasing the quantity and quality of the intelligentsia in the Russian community.”
But the intelligentsia in Israel is resisting: “For this verse, a bunch of idiots want to deprive me of my citizenship again,” the poetess is indignant. “Don’t forget, you brainless chickens, who you are and who I am.” ..."

I don’t know how it will end there. As for me, it’s just that there weren’t enough of them here, there are plenty of our own “Shenderovichs” here.
(In parentheses, incidentally. There are those who feel bad everywhere. Maybe it’s not in those around them, huh? But in themselves? So the well-known Olga B. (Bakushinskaya) left for history and curses her with might and main.)

So what am I talking about? In Israel they put the boorish person in his place instantly! And here Tsypkin and a gigantic pack of “accusers” simply live in Ostankino. Jumping from channel to channel!
And they reprove, reprove... Maybe we can learn from the Israelis?

And the nation, Tsypkin, was and is. Sick at the moment. A tumor with metastases struck her. And one of the metastases is you, Tsypkin.
The chemistry is strong these days. We need a doctor! To pick up the chemistry!!!

Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Alexander Sergeevich Tsipko

Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Birth name:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Nicknames:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Date of birth:
Date of death:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Place of death:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Country:	USSR 22x20px USSR, Russia 22x20px Russia
Academic degree:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Academic title:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Alma mater:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Language(s) of works:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
School/tradition:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Direction:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Period:
Main interests:
Significant ideas:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Influenced:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Influenced by:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Awards:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Awards:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Signature:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
[[Lua error in Module:Wikidata/Interproject on line 17: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value). \|Works]] in Wikisource
Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).

Lua error in Module:CategoryForProfession on line 52: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).

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

Biography

Since January 1992, he took part in the creation of the Gorbachev Foundation and was the director of the foundation's scientific programs. In 1992-1993 - visiting professor at Hokkaido University (Japan), in 1995-1996 - 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 expressed criticism of the latter, in particular, he compared Navalny with Lenin. However, after the Euromaidan of 2013-14. , the annexation of Crimea to Russia and the conflict in the South-East of Ukraine, he took a critical position towards the Russian government, 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 of International Economic and Political Research (IMEPS) RAS.

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

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

Some works

Optimism of history. M., Young Guard, 1974 - 192 pp., 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;
About zones closed to thought // Harsh drama of the people. M., 1989;
Dialectics 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? // Homeland. 1990. No. 2, 3;
The violence of lies or How a ghost got lost. M., Young Guard, 1990; - 272 pp., 100,000 copies.
Is Stalinism Really Dead? (Is Stalinism dead?) Hazpez. San Francisco, 1990;
Farewell to communism. Tokyo, 1993 (in Japanese);
Slavic worries. Sat. articles. M., 1997.

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

Notes

Literature

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

Excerpt characterizing Tsipko, Alexander Sergeevich

“I think not...” Anna was saddened. “She was much stronger than all of us on Earth, and her “test” was much more terrible than mine, which is why she probably deserved more. Well, she was much more talented, of course...
– But why was such a terrible test necessary? – I asked carefully. – Why was your Fate so Evil? You were not bad, you helped others who did not have such a Gift. Why did they do this to you?!
– In order for our soul to become stronger, I think... So that we can withstand a lot and not break. Although there were also many who broke... They cursed their Gift. And before they died, they renounced him...
- How is this possible?! Is it possible to renounce yourself?! – Stella immediately jumped indignantly.
– As much as possible, dear... Oh, as much as possible! - the amazing old man said quietly, who had previously only observed us, but did not interfere in the conversation.
“Grandfather confirmed it to you,” the girl smiled. – Not all of us are ready for such a test... And not all of us can endure such pain. But it’s not so much about the pain as it is about the strength of our human spirit... After all, after the pain there was still fear from what we had experienced, which, even after death, tenaciously sat in our memory and, like a worm, gnawed at the remaining crumbs of our courage. It was this fear, for the most part, that broke people who went through all this horror. As soon as later, already in this (posthumous) world, they were only slightly intimidated, they immediately gave up, becoming obedient “dolls” in the hands of others. And these hands, naturally, were far from “white”... So later “black” magicians, “black” sorcerers and various others like them appeared on Earth, when their essences returned there again. Magicians “on strings,” as we called them... So, it was probably not for nothing that we passed such a test. Grandfather also went through all this... But he is very strong. Much stronger than me. He managed to “get away” without waiting for the end. Just like my mother did. Only I couldn't...
- How to leave?! Die before he was burned?!. Is this even possible? – I asked in shock.
The girl nodded.
– But not everyone can do this, of course. It takes a lot of courage to dare to end your life... I didn’t have enough... But grandpa doesn’t have to do that! – Anna smiled proudly.
I saw how much she loved her kind, wise grandfather... And for a short moment my soul felt very empty and sad. It was as if a deep, incurable melancholy had returned to her again...
“I also had a very unusual grandfather...” I suddenly whispered very quietly.
But the bitterness immediately squeezed my throat in a familiar way, and I could no longer continue.
– Did you love him very much? – the girl asked sympathetically.
I just nodded in response, internally indignant at myself for such an “unforgivable” weakness...
- Who was your grandfather, girl? – the old man asked affectionately. - I don't see him.
– I don’t know who he was... And I never knew. But I think that you don’t see him because after death he came to live in me... And, probably, that’s precisely why I can do what I do... Although I can, of course, still very little. ..
- No, girl, he just helped you “open up.” And you and your essence do everything. You have a great gift, honey.
– What is this Gift worth if I know almost nothing about it?! – I exclaimed bitterly. – If you couldn’t even save your friends today?!
I plopped down on the fluffy seat in frustration, not even noticing its “sparkling” beauty, completely angry with myself for my helplessness, and suddenly I felt my eyes sparkle treacherously... But I couldn’t cry in the presence of these amazing, courageous people. for which I didn’t want to!.. Therefore, in order to somehow concentrate, I began to mentally “grind” grains of unexpectedly received information, in order, again, to hide them carefully in my memory, without losing a single important word, without missing out some smart idea...
– How did your friends die? – asked the witch girl.
Stella showed the picture.
“They might not have died...” the old man sadly shook his head. - There was no need for that.
- How is it that it didn’t happen?! – disheveled Stella immediately jumped up indignantly. – They saved other good people! They had no choice!
– Forgive me, little one, but THERE IS ALWAYS A CHOICE. It is only important to be able to choose correctly... Look - and the elder showed what Stella showed him a minute ago.
“Your warrior friend tried to fight evil here just as he fought it on Earth. But this is a different life, and the laws in it are completely different. Just like other weapons... Only you two did it right. And your friends were wrong. They could live for a long time... Of course, every person has the right of free choice, and everyone has the right to decide how to use their life. But this is when he knows how he could act, knows all the possible ways. But your friends didn't know. Therefore, they made a mistake and paid the highest price. But they had beautiful and pure souls, so be proud of them. Only now no one will ever be able to return them...
Stella and I were completely upset, and apparently in order to somehow “cheer us up,” Anna said:
– Do you want me to try to call my mother so you can talk to her? I think you would be interested.
I was immediately fired up by a new opportunity to find out what I wanted!.. Apparently Anna managed to completely see through me, since this really was the only way that could make me forget everything else for a while. My curiosity, as the witch girl rightly said, was my strength, but also my greatest weakness at the same time...

Tsipko Alexander Sergeevich biography. Alexander Tsipko: “We need to build a parallel Russian state in Ukraine. How to keep talented youth in science