Chubais Igor Borisovich. Editor-in-chief of the almanac "New Milestones"

"Biography"

Born on April 26, 1947 in Berlin. Father - Boris Matveevich Chubais (February 15, 1918 - October 9, 2000) - participant of 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). He was born there younger brother- Anatoly Borisovich Chubais. 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 candidate's thesis"The impact of television on the formation public opinion"(based on materials from 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 constitutional state, for democracy, for fair elections somewhere in Papua New Guinea not very interesting to the Kremlin and 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 philosophical sciences, a 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 millennium Russian way was among the most successful on the continent until the disaster of 1917 happened, turning 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.

"To you I more words I won’t give it to you, Igor Borisovich. For God’s sake, get out,” Norkin said.

Igor Chubais: “In Soviet times, I felt national pressure and would never publicly say that I am a Jew”

Evgeniy KUDRYATS

Conversation with publicist and Russian specialist Igor Chubais

Our guest today is Igor Borisovich Chubais - Russian philosopher and sociologist, Doctor of Philosophy, author of many scientific and journalistic works. Initiator of introduction to Russian system formation of a new subject “Russian studies”. Dean of Russia's first Faculty of Russian Studies at the Institute social sciences. Member of the board of the Union of Writers of Russia. He is a participant in many political talk shows on various Russian television channels, where he always takes a tough anti-Kremlin position, for which he is constantly ostracized and criticized by presenters and political opponents. An ardent opponent of Russia's policy towards Ukraine, in connection with the events in Donbass and the entry of Crimea into the territory Russian Federation, which he considers annexation. On April 26, Igor Chubais turned 70 years old. On the eve of this date, our correspondent talked with the hero of the day.

- Igor Borisovich, you were born in Berlin, so it is quite symbolic and natural that on the eve of the anniversary you are giving an interview to a publication published in the German capital. Please tell us a little about your childhood years.

I lived in Berlin for exactly a year. My father (Boris Matveevich Chubais, 1918-2000 - E.K.) continued to serve in the army after the end of the war. He fought from the first day, and met the last day of the war in Prague. Then he served in Europe: in Hungary, in Germany, where he brought his wife, my mother, from Moscow. I was born in 1947 and took my first steps on German soil. In general, I have been to Germany many times, but already during perestroika: as a guest at the congresses of the Social Democratic Party in West Berlin and Bremen, I worked for several months at the Center for the Study of Eastern Europe at the University of Bremen, on Radio Liberty in Munich...

- Who was your mother?

Unfortunately, I had a very difficult relationship with my mother (Raisa Efimovna Sagal, 1918-2004 - E.K.). She has been gone for a long time, but I still remember these difficulties... Mom and her parents came to Moscow from Mogilev to early childhood, graduated from school and college here, then married my father, who by that time had become a professional military man, and in 1940 they left for Lithuania, occupied by the Red Army. When the war began, my mother managed to escape from Alytus and return to Moscow, and my father, as I already said, fought. After the end of the war, parents traveled around military units, far from major cities. Then dad studied in Moscow at the Academy. Lenin, then we lived in Belarus, then in Odessa and Lvov. I have not yet said that my father completed his post-graduate course - military graduate school - and defended his Ph.D. thesis, after which he worked at the department at a military university. Last place his work is the head of the department of Marxism-Leninism at one of the universities in Leningrad.

- Did your mother have any profession?

- She had a higher education in economics, but she worked in her specialty for a very short time, because the family was constantly moving.

- Could you compare anti-Semitism during the USSR and in post-perestroika times? In this regard, we can recall the recent quite odious and unambiguous statements of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Pyotr Tolstoy and Vitaly Milonov. Do you think anything has fundamentally changed on this issue since then?

You know, in general, life in the USSR, as many people guess, is a situation where you are forced to be an unfree person in an unfree state. The most acute memory in this series is August 21, 1968, the occupation of Czechoslovakia. On August 23, I went out to protest in the square in front of the regional party committee in Odessa. Exactly at politically I was under extremely severe pressure. As for the national issue, much depended on the family. My mother is Jewish, my father’s ancestors are Balts, Russians and Jews, but since he was a political worker, national question it didn’t sound at all, and I stayed out of this topic. The context and refrain was: “We are soviet people", although it was not possible to completely avoid the problem...

- What exactly did this mean?

I remember the distant year 1952. I was only five years old, but what happened remained in my memory forever. We lived in Moscow, my father studied at the academy, and at that time the fight against cosmopolitanism began, which affected many people... My mother’s brother, Uncle Borya, is handsome and strong man, who worked throughout the war at a military plant, and after the war - a foreman at the automobile plant named after. Likhachev, who then bore the name of Stalin. Uncle Borya came to us and... cried, saying that he would now be exiled. He didn't know what would happen next. This picture stuck in my memory for a long time. But everything worked out: he was not exiled, and after some time the fight against cosmopolitanism ended. My father somehow dampened all this, and I got used to the fact that he was absolutely honest and fair. For me, this problem was expressed in a very unique way: in Soviet times, I felt national pressure and would never have publicly said that I was a Jew, I would have avoided such a conversation.

- In Soviet times, it was generally not customary to advertise nationality, especially for those who belonged to national minorities. But for some reason, at the end of the USSR - in the 1990s - there was a certain surge of anti-Semitism, when the Black Shirts, Makashov, Barkashov, RNE and similar Black Hundred organizations appeared. How can you explain this?

I felt it all a little differently. The national problem for me was that I would not discuss this with anyone. When you can't change anything, the problem goes into the subconscious. But during perestroika something else happened: it was not an explosion of some kind of anti-Semitism or nationalism. For 70 years, a totalitarian-censorship steamroller went over people’s heads, which did not allow anything to grow, and suddenly this press was removed, and it turned out that we differ in nationality. A variety of things began to appear that were previously impossible to talk about at all. It turned out that we had sex, which was denied during Soviet times. Something national also appeared: Jewish and anti-Jewish, Semitic and anti-Semitic.

- What is happening today in this matter?

If speak about today, then, in my opinion, there is now no state anti-Semitism, this must be admitted. Today, a Jew in Russia can hold any position, and no one will restrict him because he is a Jew. True, there is limited everyday anti-Semitism. The problem is different: our quasi-state, created in 1917, is constantly in crisis. You can get out of the crisis either by dismantling the entire system or by finding a “scapegoat.” The entire history of the USSR and post-USSR is the history of the struggle against anti-Soviet people, against counter-revolutionaries, against dissidents, against Zionists - whoever prevented our beloved homeland from building paradise on earth. But paradise was never built. And today we are in a situation where the crisis has become extremely aggravated; it is quite possible that in the near future there will be changes in the entire state system. But while the authorities are constantly inventing some enemies - foreign agents, national traitors... The closedness of the system is a terrible danger, it is an indicator of its degradation.

This means that no one accepts our ideas and we are prohibited from accepting “their” ideas. In this context, there is a renewed attempt to revive the old “game” of being an anti-Semite. Pyotr Tolstoy, whom I know a little, since I participated in his television programs more than once, is a man of very strange views. Everyone understands that the vast majority of people shouting: “Glory to Putin!” are simply corrupt and corrupt liars who insure themselves in this way. But they say that Tolstoy is a different person, that he (we are talking about Tolstoy’s phrase about “those who jumped out from behind the Pale of Settlement with a revolver in 1917.” - E.K.) shouted it out, and Volodin (Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation. - E.K.) supported him. It seems that old technology is being purged in a new round of the crisis.

- As far as I know, you are the author of the term “Russian studies”. Can you tell our readers a little about this?

Yes with pleasure. But I must clarify that, unfortunately, the author of this term is not me. In most countries of the world, the education system solves three problems: specialized knowledge, used in a specific profession; knowledge for general development(for example, studying foreign language) and, relatively speaking, ideological or patriotic education. Americans study American Studies, Indian Studies are studied in India, and Australian Studies are studied in Australia. In the European Union, where you live, there is a not very common course called “European Studies”. In this sense, “Russian studies” is a common tradition. And this concept itself was introduced by Dmitry Ivanovich Mendeleev - not only a chemist, but also a Russian specialist. True, in Soviet times his works on Russian studies were not published, any knowledge about the country other than Marxism, disfigured by Leninism, was suppressed. Russian studies is the totality of all social sciences that study Russia: literary criticism, ethnography, statistics of Russia and, of course, the history of Russia and its philosophy. Since I have a philosophical education and I was always involved in social problems, after the collapse Soviet system in 1991, I decided not to go to power, although I knew many there and therefore personally warned Boris Yeltsin about the assassination attempt in January 1991. My brother (Anatoly Chubais) went there; Igor Chubais does not approve of his brother’s state-political activities and does not communicate with him . - E.K.), and I naively thought that he would do everything, so I decided to return to science and took up Russian studies.

If you really study Russia, a lot becomes clearer. It becomes clear that the system in which we have lived for a hundred years is dead-end and meaningless, it must be dismantled as soon as possible. Aware of this situation, the authorities introduced not Russian studies in schools, but “fundamentals Orthodox culture", i.e. studying Russia, but in a reflected light - through Orthodoxy. Orthodoxy and Russia are close things, but not at all synonymous. 15 years ago I received an order from the Kaliningrad region from Lazar Fukson, who was then the head of the regional education department. Lazar understood that Kaliningrad was on the outskirts, so it was necessary to strengthen the sense of homeland there. He read some of my works and ordered the textbook “National Studies” that I wrote. It was taught in 42 schools, but then the governor changed in Kaliningrad and, accordingly, all this “disgrace” stopped.

The topic of your candidate's dissertation - "The impact of television on the formation of public opinion based on materials from the People's Republic of Poland and the USSR" - is not only relevant today, but in general - topic No. 1. I watch Russian political talk shows, and I get the feeling that there is a special technique , in which people in the studio start talking at the same time, which increases tension and, at the same time, TV viewers generally lose some thread of the narrative. You take part in such programs and see everything from the inside...

Yes, there are a number of techniques that are clearly visible to me as a person who has been professionally involved in the sociology of television and who visits domestic television channels. I can name some of them. Few people know that the “extras” in the studio are completely controllable: the director of the hall is hiding behind him, who gives the command: “clap” or “buzz and disapprove,” etc. Thus, a strict censorship line is presented for the “reaction of society”, and the extras, unlike expert opponents, receive money for this. Other TV rules are also taken into account...

- Which for example?

If talk show participants they will start shouting “Glory to Putin!” in one voice, and in five minutes the audience will turn off their TVs: it will be impossible to watch. But you can watch the program if two or three experts are trying to oppose and express alternative point vision. However, when you speak out against it, you are constantly interfered with, you are brought down. You find yourself in a difficult position. Although I was able to live bark “Glory to Ukraine!” or, which I am still proud of, exposing several falsifications.

Once they put KGB general Zdanovich next to me, and he began to talk to me. Then I repeated loudly for a couple of minutes: “This is KGB censorship! This is KGB censorship." He didn't know how to react - continue or stop, and the more he talked, the longer he found himself in a stupid position. Another method that is also used: when you speak in a full voice and quite convincingly, during the broadcast of the program you can lower the volume of your voice and let in some kind of sound interference. I sometimes start a speech with a warning: “They won’t let me speak, they’ll mute me now,” after which the presenter is forced to give me at least a minute, but at the same time he still shoots me down.

- The next topic concerns non-systemic opposition, although not everyone likes this term. Why do you think “Bolotnaya” “choked” in 2011? Almost six years have passed since then, and we can already draw some conclusions...

I think that it is almost impossible to create an independent and powerful civil movement in a subtotalitarian state. True, I have been leading the civil discussion club “Russia” for eight years now. We regularly have to change premises, the police came to us, they took me outside, but we accepted certain rules that allow self-preservation. But create some political unification extremely difficult because this is the sphere of control of the FSB. Without these three letters, the state cannot exist. In addition, a lot of mistrust is driven into our heads almost on a subconscious level, and no matter who I communicate with, I always think: “Maybe he is not entirely sincere?”

You need to maintain a relationship with a person for a very long time in order for trust to arise... Quite recently I came to a sad conclusion: one of those with whom I was friends back during perestroika, who was in the democratic movement for many years, and it seemed to me that we were together, was fulfilling "certain assignment" Of course, I don’t have any documents on this matter, but I’m sure of it and no one will convince me otherwise, because the kind of nonsense that this man is saying about Ukraine today can only be said by someone who is “on duty.”

- Last year you published a collection of articles entitled “Chubais against Putin.” How realistic do you think Putin’s rating is, reaching a colossal 86%? Is there real support for the president in Russian society from a huge part of the population, or is this pure fiction and Kremlin propaganda?

- When it comes to official figures, statements and promises, you can only trust what is verifiable. That's why I don't trust anything that can't be verified. The authorities can say whatever they want, and the worst example that confirms my words is what happened in mid-February and did not cause much resonance.

- What is it about?

Another thing is important: we study not public opinion, but the effectiveness of propaganda, and this is a completely different substance. We are talking here not about in-depth ideas of people with a certain level of training, but about propaganda manipulation. In fact, sociology shows that at least 15% of the Russian population cannot be fooled. Interestingly, the highest percentages for “ United Russia” are given by the most depressed regions, because the local authorities know: if people vote for United Russia, then at least they will send an accordion to the club, and if not, then it is unknown what will happen to this authorities. The figure of 86% “for” doesn’t say much. Let me remind you that a week before Ceausescu’s execution his rating was 96%.

"Jewish Panorama", Berlin

FROM THE DOSSIER

Igor Chubais was born on April 26, 1947 in Berlin. His father, a participant in the Great Patriotic War, a colonel, after his retirement, taught Marxism-Leninism at the Leningrad Mining Institute. 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 Chubais, was born there. In the early 1960s, the Chubais family moved from Borisov to Odessa.

In 1972, Igor Chubais 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 educating non-party people.

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

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

In 1990, Igor Borisovich became one of the “founding fathers” of the “Democratic Platform” in the CPSU, and after its transformation into the Republican Party, he became its co-chairman. Later he was co-chairman of the People's Party of Russia.

Editor-in-chief of the almanac “New Milestones”.

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

In 2006-2007 - presenter of programs on radio “Moscow Speaks”.

Active member of the “Return” foundation created in December 2006.

In March 2010, he signed the opposition’s appeal “Putin must leave.”

In 2010-2012 - presenter of several radio programs on the Russian News Service radio station. Later, he became the host of the “Time Ch” program on the Komsomolskaya Pravda radio.

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 the East of Ukraine.”

Regular participant in programs of the Russian edition of Radio Liberty. Currently, he is a professor at the Institute of World Civilizations. Author of 300 articles and about 20 books on problems of Russian studies. His monograph “How should we understand our country” was translated into German in 2016 and published in Germany.

Interesting article?

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 sense 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 a legitimate “right to power” 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 existing rules.

There has been no “historical adaptation” in 95 years. As A. Solzhenitsyn wrote, Soviet Union correlates with historical Russia, like a murderer with a murdered man!

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

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 Ukrainian army and the National Guard are supported by the majority of the population - it is the people who provide them. Look at social media. Do you need medications? - transporting medicines; food? - they supply food: the generals there are not particularly advanced... And if suddenly Russian army would have decided to enter Ukrainian territory, she would have faced 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 on fair elections? No, there is no truth behind it!

There will be no victory for the Kremlin over Ukraine, and no euphoria about Crimea in soon there won't be any left 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 return 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 from 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 destruction 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 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 full program, interfere in whatever way possible. 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 at the same time offering effective solutions valid social problems!

And he destroyed the community quite rightly - without the abandonment of the community there could be no development in the 20th century. Tolstoy wrote to him that private property there is the greatest evil on earth 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 with no legal basis without a goal or program for the future.

Existing system also realizes 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 real story, because in pre-Soviet Russia censorship of historical research was prohibited.

RUSSIA IS STRONG IN ITS SCALE

– Don’t you think that shortest way to leave the Russian circle - after all, the demolition of centralization, 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 headache 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, in 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 should be developed here first?

- All of it. Russia has in reserve the entire periodic table, the first resources on the planet fresh water, 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 indeed further north than the States - he loses sight of the fact that America is air conditioning of premises in summer spends three times more than the whole of Russia on heating in 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!

- And in history Soviet period were there any bright moments?

– 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 scary night dawn is coming!

Anatoly Borisovich Chubais - Soviet and Russian political and economic figure, liberal and reformer, CEO 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, an economist by training, but never worked in her specialty. She looked after the children and the house.

Raisa Efimovna paid great attention to his sons. Brother of Anatoly Chubais, Igor, achieved significant heights. He became a Doctor of Philosophy, professor of the department social philosophy Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences of RUDN. Anatoly’s parents sent him to school in Odessa. Already there he began to get carried away 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 future profession policy.

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 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' political career

In 1980, Anatoly joined Communist Party. At that time Leningrad was suffering active development 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 climbed up pretty quickly 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 Management state property. 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 the deputy State Duma“Choice of Russia”, creator of the “Fund Civil Society”, 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 Supreme Council Anatoly Chubais was received by the political party "Just cause».

For him political achievements and economic success, a private American Institute that studies East and West issues awarded Anatoly Chubais its Outstanding New Excellence Award in 1994. Euromoney magazine (England) gave the title to the politician - Best minister finance of 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 financially supported his children.

In 1990, Chubais met Maria Vishnevskaya and married her. The woman supported her husband in everything, be it career or a rapid fall. Maria worked in a hospital for hopelessly ill people, but communication with them left an imprint on mental health women and on the personal lives of 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 up to date with 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. On this moment time Anatoly Borisovich Chubais - General Director " Russian corporation nanotechnology".

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

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

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 Republican Party) was a member of the Bureau of the Political Council People's Party 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 democratic forces Moscow, directed against the leadership " Democratic Russia».

Chief Editor 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 The Return Foundation, created in December 2006.

In March 2010, he signed an appeal Russian opposition"Putin must go."

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 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.