Krylov: Russians are an inferior people May 17th, 2014
What can unite Bandera’s followers with those who call themselves “Russian nationalists”? Read this post krylov
and the answer will be obvious.
There are Vlasovites in Russia who directly support fascist rebellion in Ukraine, calling for it to be repeated in Russia and cursing anti-fascist resistance Donbass:
But there is more complex shapes, which is clearly demonstrated to us by the voice of the national democracy by the name of Krylov, who in his blog was indignant at the lack of nationalism and cites the example of the leader of the group “Vopli Vidoplyasova” Oleg Skripka. Yes, yes, that same Skripka and that same interview of his.
Krylov in the following way praises the openly Bandera text of the Violin: “A wonderful interview of its kind with Oleg Skrypka, the leader of “Vopley Vidoplyasov” and the creator of modern Ukrainian-language culture. The person understands everything correctly - of course, “for the Ukrainians.” Because he is a nationalist and right-wing. True. The kind they kill and imprison in Russia. Moreover, without stupid “atrocities”, everything the right words“for culture” and “for world peace” he says. But underneath it all there is a steel core. "Ukraine is above all." Without any sentimentality. “Crush Russia, ban the Russian language.” This way and only this way. There are such people in Ukraine. Actually, everyone there is like that. Or not everyone, but everyone understands that such people are the salt of the earth. And here we have Makarevich. He says what he says. And Shevchuk. And other figures. And there is no “Russian Violin” with the same level of national consciousness - no, there has never been and there never will be. Just imagine a person from the stage who dares to say something about “one hundred percent Russification of Russia.” CRUSHED. ADDITIONAL WEIGHT. For mental passionaries: yes, I endlessly admire the Ukrainians (as well as the Chechens, the Balts and other full-fledged peoples) and envy them very much, but I am Russian, and my admiration for them does not mean any sympathy. They are better than us, yes. The only thing that follows from this is that we must get at least a little closer to them in terms of the level of national self-awareness (which is the only thing that matters) so as not to be crushed in a historical perspective, and the closest one at that.”
In the same place, the National Democratic thinker, citing Skrypka’s interview, especially highlights and approves calls for total Ukrainization and "suitcase-station-Khanty-Mansiysk" for those who do not want to be Ukrainianized according to Bandera’s recipes.
Let us immediately stipulate that Krylov does not directly support Bandera’s followers, no, he declares himself a “Russian nationalist” and... proposes to learn from Bandera’s followers, to build according to their patterns new Russia. It's like responding to an attack Nazi Germany propose to learn from the Germans how to deal with “the Untermensch” and bring your own Hitler to power.
It is impossible not to pay attention to Krylov’s characteristic reservation that in Ukraine everyone is Bandera: “Everyone there is like that. Or not everyone, but everyone understands that it is precisely such people who are the salt of the earth.”, i.e. We are offered in plain text the final divorce of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, carried out strictly within the framework of the logic set by Bandera’s followers.
But the leader of the “National Democratic Party” does not even stop there, Krylov directly says that Russians are an inferior people, we quote again: yes, I endlessly admire the Ukrainians (as well as the Chechens, Balts and other full-fledged peoples) and I envy them very much... They are better than us, yes. It only follows that we must get at least a little closer to them.
In addition, Krylov cannot help but understand that an attempt to implement Bandera’s scenario in Russia will instantly destroy the country. Or was Krylov going to work in Tatarstan, Chechnya and Yakutia according to Skripka’s recipes? Or maybe this is exactly what he, as one of the organizers of the campaign, wants?
Or doesn’t understand that all this will blow up not only national republics, but also traditionally Russian regions, where, not without the participation of national democrats, quasi-tribal Russophobia has been cultivated for many years, implying the separation of tribes from the Russian people Siberians(even the “Siberian language” has already been developed, does this remind you of anything?), Cossacks, Pomors and so on. fantasy? Or maybe he was involved in the campaign in Novosibirsk, where the corresponding meeting was organized by the chairman of ROD-Siberia ( federal structure headed by Krylov) Rostislav Antonov, is this exactly what he wants?
The result is the following:
1) A certain person comes on stage and excitedly shouts: “I am Russian, Russian, Russian nationalist! I am terribly worried about our unfortunate people, persecuted by the Caucasians! We live in an occupied country!”
2) Then this “most Russian nationalist” begins to comment fascist rebellion in Ukraine: “Yes, the country there is being crushed by Russophobes and I don’t support them. But! But look how great they are, if you look at the state of affairs from their side! You see, from Bandera’s point of view, they are right when they destroy Russians and “moscalized Ukrainians”, they can be understood!”
3) Finally, the “Russified nationalist” offers a way out for the Russian people: “We need to learn from Bandera’s followers! Yes, we may be an inferior people, but there is, there is a chance to get closer to the higher Bandera race, to become at least a little like them! I believe in it! The glory of the nation is death to the enemies!”
Thus, Bandera propaganda is fully (completely!) reproduced, according to which:
1) Bandera’s supporters act in the interests of the Ukrainian people. Moreover, Ukrainian = Bandera, and nothing else.
2) “Moscowed Ukrainians” are an evil that Bandera’s followers are absolutely right to destroy.
3) Russians are an inferior people.
Krylov cannot help but understand that all this rhetoric is kneading the ground for the Maidan in Moscow, of which he will definitely be a part, just as he was part of Bolotnaya:
And even the need to stand shoulder to shoulder with fascists who do not hide their essence (Vlasovites, Banderaites and other Russophobes of all stripes, who formed a Russophobic consensus at Euromaidan, which they will definitely try to transfer to Moscow) does not bother Krylov, because branches of his party in the regions are already headed by outright fascists.
If you ask: why does “the Russian Krylov himself”, who went into politics, need all this? Then Krylov will answer you honestly:
An official US protectorate is the dream of “the most Russian nationalist.” He made his choice and decided to the end, and which one
KRYLOV Konstantin Anatolievich
Editor-in-Chief of the APN (Political News Agency) website, President of the Russian Social Movement (ROD-Russia), Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Russian National Democratic Party (RNDP)In 2004 published in " Literary newspaper» article “Midnight, June 22”, in which he drew parallels between the terrorist activities of modern Chechen separatists and the collaboration of some Chechens with Hitler’s army during the Great Patriotic War. An attempt was made against Krylov to initiate a case under Article 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“inciting national hatred”). Krylov’s supporters organized a “people’s fund to help Krylov” via the Internet; several accounts were opened and funds were collected. In May 2005, K. Krylov, Natalya Kholmogorova, Sergey Nesterovich, Viktor Militarev and Tatiana Shlikhter organized a public campaign in defense of Muscovite Alexandra Ivannikova, who stabbed to death an Armenian taxi driver who was trying to rape her (according to another version, to seduce her non-violently). A. Ivannikova was accused of premeditated murder, but then acquitted. During the campaign in defense of Ivannikova, the Russian Social Movement (ROD) was proclaimed, the stated goal of which is to help Russians in difficult situations; K. Krylov became president of the ROD; the accounts of the “people's fund for assistance to Krylov” were transferred to the disposal of the ROD. As president of the ROD, he took part in the preparation and conduct of the “Russian March” on November 4, 2005. He was one of the speakers at the rally that ended the march.
At the restoration congress of the Congress of Russian Communities (CRO) in December 2006, Dmitry Rogozin was elected a member of the Central Committee of the Rodina.KRO movement. In January 2007, he was appointed editor-in-chief of the Russian March newspaper established by Rodina.KRO (the name of the newspaper caused protests from on the part of the organizing committee "Russian March-2007"). "Russian March" was financed by D. Rogozin and was published in the form of special issues of the Moscow regional newspaper "Region-Special Opinion" (pilot issue - in February 2007; before May 2007, at least five issues; in the summer of 2007, publication of the newspaper was suspended due to the cessation of funding.) At the beginning of 2007, disagreements arose in the ROD - including regarding participation or non-participation in the Organizing Committee of the "Russian March" together with the Movement against Illegal Immigration (DPNI) and other more radical groups (who excluded, in particular, V. Militarev from the Organizing Committee of the “Russian March” as an ethnic Jew and “Belkovsky’s agent”). K. Krylov (representative of the ROD in the Organizing Committee with voting rights) and N .Kholmogorov (representative with advisory voting rights). On March 8, 2007, he resigned as president of the ROD; instead he headed the organization Vyacheslav Makarov(formerly leader of the youth branch of the ROD). However, a few days later, at the request of a number of ROD participants (in particular, N. Kholmogorova), K. Krylov disavowed his resignation and announced the convening of a conference of an alternative ROD. On March 24, 2007 held the founding conference of the Russian social movement(ROD-Russia, or ROD(k)), at which he was elected president and chairman Governing Council(RK) movement (executive director of the ROD - N. Kholmogorova). Since March-April 2007, there have been two parallel organizations: ROD(k), or ROD-Russia (Krylov, Kholmogorova, S. Nestorovich joined at the end of 2007) and ROD(m) (Makarov, Militarev, etc.).
On September 18, 2007, he was appointed editor-in-chief of the Political News Agency (APN; (network project of the Institute national strategy(INS) Stanislav Belkovsky - Mikhail Remizov), replacing Boris Mezhuev).
He was one of the organizers of the conference “New Political Nationalism” on June 8, 2008 and on behalf of ROD-Russia signed the Potkin brothers, “Great Russia” with the DPNI Andrey Savelyev and the "PEOPLE" movement, the coalition agreement "Pact of June 8th".
In July 2009, ROD-Russia Krylova established the “Fund for the Support and Development of Civil Society ROD (Russian Social Movement)”; K. Krylov was appointed president of the ROD Foundation, director - Vladlen Kralin (Vladimir Tor). Since the fall of 2009, the ROD Foundation has been participating in the activities of the organization “Russian Verdict” by Alexei Baranovsky, created for the purpose of legal and journalistic defense of arrested and convicted Russian nationalists (in particular, skinheads accused of street murders of foreigners). In November 2009, K. Krylov led (together with N. Kholmogorova) a campaign in defense of the rights Nikita Tikhonov And Evgenia Khasis, arrested on charges of murder in January 2009 of a lawyer Stanislav Markelov and journalists Anastasia Baburova.
Consultant of the National Registration Company.
By political convictions - Russian nationalist ( "Russianist"), by religion - Zoroastrian ( "blessed"). I once called myself "liberal Russian fascist". He hates Saltykov-Shchedrin as an anti-Russian writer and imitates him in some of his texts.
Writes prose, incl. fantastic, under a pseudonym M.Yu. Kharitonov and ironic poems under a pseudonym Yudik Sherman.
Stories by M. Kharitonov were recommended to the publishing house AST Sergei Lukyanenko who discovered them on the Internet. Lukyanenko found out who was really hiding behind the pseudonym after the first collection was signed for publication. K. Krylov himself officially admitted that he was M. Kharitonov in December 2006.
Author and co-author of books: K.A. Krylov. No time. Articles and reviews. St. Petersburg, Vladimir Dal, 2006. M.Yu.Alekseev, K.A.Krylov. Features of national behavior. M., Art-Business Center, 2001. V.I. Krylova, K.A. Krylov. Behavior.
IN THE ORDER OF FRIENDLY CRITICISM.EDGE (or how spies are caught).
IN in this case By “spies” I do not mean Western spies themselves, but rather “agents of influence”, “ideological Westerners” who, in principle, do not like Russian reality and the Russian world in general in any form, “which is what foreign stickers praise.” Some of them hide it, but periodically it breaks out of them - and you can catch them on small parts and accidental punctures.
I caught mine doing this close friend- Konstantin Krylov - certainly the Russian philosopher Number One of the living, and also, part-time, the leader of Russian nationalists (and the head of the National Democratic Party), more precisely one of the segments of the Russian nationalist movement- national democratic.
I catch him doing this in a friendly way, as a form of comradely criticism and in the hope of his correction and increased love for the Russian world. I'll explain how I caught it.
Below (at the end of this post of mine there is a link to his post on Facebook) is a repost of Konstantin’s text about his attitude to Soviet cinema. The logic of his words seems to largely fit into the usual doctrine of the national democratic movement, which denies and despises everything Soviet. It seems to sound harmonious.
According to Kostya, all Soviet cinema is terrible, and good Soviet movies from "Sherlock Holmes" to "17 Moments of Spring" - only about foreigners. That's the whole point of his post. “Everything in the Soviet Union was terrible, and if anything was good, it was either foreign films accidentally brought into the USSR, or films about foreigners.”
Attitude towards national cinemas is a matter of taste that does not require debate. Let’s say, for example, for some reason I don’t like Italian cinema at all, although it is diverse, full of geniuses - and that’s why everyone loves it. But not me. A matter of taste. I love Soviet cinema, American, English and French.
The same applies to genres. Some people like comedies, some like tragedies, and some like melodramas.
For example, I just love Soviet cinema, not about anything about foreigners either - from films about the war like “The Cranes Are Flying” or “Father of a Soldier” - to simply everyday ones like “Moscow Doesn’t Believe in Tears” or even very simple ones like “The Most Charming and attractive." I’ll keep quiet about the fact that I simply can’t imagine how it’s possible not to love Soviet cartoons, just as Konstantin doesn’t like them, if you remember about “ Snow Queen", "Musicians of Bremen" (and there are not two of them, but a hundred great ones), etc., and even prefer them exactly those Hollywood cartoons that Konstantin saw as a child with his mother (well, everything is written in his post) - i.e. not masterpieces like “The Lion King”, etc., but just running mice and cats (also good cartoons, but obviously an order of magnitude lower level, rather than "The Snow Queen").
In short, it's a matter of taste. However, Konstantin indicated WHAT he likes, and this includes part of the array of Soviet cinema. He even named two examples - “Sherlock Holmes” and “about Stirlitz.” This genre can be called “costume cinema” or films based on literary classics.
So, there is no arguing about tastes. But now let’s move on to what we caught Konstantin Anatolyevich doing and convicted him of.
Excuse me, but in the listed cinematic niche there are Soviet films not only based on European literary classics, but also on Russian literature. One can get tired of listing these masterpieces, real masterpieces - certainly not inferior to "Sherlock Holmes", but purely on a Russian theme: "Oblomov", "Cruel Romance", "War and Peace", "Unfinished Piece for Mechanical Piano", "Dead Souls" " etc. and so on. - a million films based on Pushkin, Chekhov, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, etc.
Now Konstantin, of course, will say that “this is also not Soviet cinema, it is about pre-revolutionary times.” Of course I agree. I don’t completely agree, but I agree in the context of the thought expressed by Konstantin - that “it’s not about Soviet people". And just about the Russians. Of course. But why the hell did Konstantin remember this only when I reminded him about it?! After all, in the post he wrote that “only about foreigners.” Why only about foreigners? After all, this is about ordinary Russian people, even pre-revolutionary ones.
“That’s what I meant,” he’ll say? Sorry no. It is said “only about foreigners” - it means only about foreigners. ABOUT FOREIGNERS. And if Konstantin “forgot to mention,” even if not Soviet, but pre-revolutionary Russians, then in psychology this is called “mistaken.” This is despite the fact that the national democratic doctrine, while formally scolding everything Soviet, extols everything Russian pre-revolutionary, - in program documents. So, in the paradigm of national-democratic criticism of Soviet cinema, one cannot “accidentally forget” about this by focusing “only on foreigners.” More precisely, it is possible - but only if - if you don’t think about it at all - and only for the sake of appearance, criticize “the Soviet, which took away everything beautiful pre-revolutionary from the Russians,” although in your head you keep in mind not the pre-revolutionary and primordially Russian, but simply foreign :)
And so, my friends, so that you, in particular, are never caught in this way, even by cunning psychologists, I advise you to better love everything Russian in general, including everything Soviet. Both in words and in deeds. Otherwise they’ll catch you like this and they’ll laugh and catch you :)
May the holy connection between the times of the entire centuries-old Russian history and its achievements, great achievements, including the great Soviet Russian period, not be interrupted!
And here is the text by Konstantin Krylov.
Konstantin Anatolyevich Krylov(b. October 18, 1967, Moscow) - Russian philosopher, publicist, journalist, public and political figure, supporter of building a national democratic state in Russia.
Biography
Born in Moscow. Graduated from the Faculty of Cybernetics of MEPhI and the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, the Department of Systematic Philosophy.
From 2003 to 2009 - Chief Editor newspaper "Special Forces of Russia".
From 2005 to 2007 - President of the Russian Social Movement, after 2007 - President of ROD-Russia.
Since the fall of 2006 - member of the Central Committee of the Congress of Russian Communities.
Since 2007 - editor-in-chief of the Russian March newspaper.
Since September 2007 - editor-in-chief of the Political News Agency.
Since 2010 - editor-in-chief of the journal “Questions of Nationalism”.
In 2011, a criminal case was initiated against K. Krylov under Article 282 in connection with his public speaking at a rally held on October 22, 2011 on Bolotnaya Square in Moscow.
In August 2012, the famous scientist and writer K. Yu. Eskov took the initiative open letter, which condemns the persecution of Konstantin Krylov.
According to the results of a survey conducted by the site Openspace, in which more than 40 thousand votes were cast, Krylov took 5th place among the most influential intellectuals in Russia.
In October 2012, he was elected to the Coordination Council of the Russian Opposition from the nationalists.
By religious convictions he is a Zoroastrian (devout).
Personal life
Married. Second marriage since 1998. Two daughters from his first marriage, two from his second.
Creativity under the pseudonym “Mikhail Kharitonov”
He ran the magazine haritonov on behalf of “Mikhail Kharitonov.” At the end of 2006, Konstantin Krylov in his LiveJournal, in the comments to one of the messages, officially admitted that Mikhail Yuryevich Kharitonov- his pseudonym. A number of science fiction and journalistic works were published under this pseudonym.
Kharitonov's stories were recommended to the AST publishing house by the writer Sergei Lukyanenko, who discovered them on the Internet. During this period of time, the authorship of the pseudonym was unknown, and the publishing house informed Lukyanenko about who was actually behind it later, when the first collection had already been signed for publication.
Kharitonov’s publicly announced plan is a joint novel in the genre with Yuri Nesterenko alternative history"Hubert Alles" (see the beta version of the novel here).
Social activity
Konstantin Krylov became one of the active participants in protests against election fraud in Russia in 2011 and 2012. In particular, he spoke at rallies on December 10 and 24 in Moscow, which became the largest protests in history Russian Federation. In May 2012, Konstantin Krylov took part in protests at Chistye Prudy at the monument to Abai Kunanbaev.
Statements
In an interview with the National Democratic Alliance website he said:
In fact, nationalism and democracy are practically the same thing. Now it is important to rid Russian organizations of the last remaining prejudices towards civil society, democracy, free market. Authoritarian sympathies are more like a disease of movement, like chickenpox or measles, you need to get over it. But those who recovered from the disease received immunity for life. In fact, I believe that the best democrats come from former fascists.
Bibliography
- Krylov K. A., M. Pedagogical search, 1997
- Alekseev M.Yu., Krylov K.A., M , Art Business Center, 2001
- Kharitonov M. Yu., M, AST, 2004
- Kharitonov M. Yu., M, AST, 2005
- Krylov K. A., St. Petersburg, Vladimir Dal, 2006
- Kharitonov M. Yu., St. Petersburg, Vladimir Dal, 2010
- Krylov K. A., M, Skimen, 2010
- Krylov K. A., M, Algorithm, 2012
- Individual stories and articles under the pseudonym “M. Yu. Kharitonov” were also published:
- in the newspaper "Special Forces of Russia".
- In the magazine " Noon XXI", No. 2 for 2003;
- In the magazine " New world» No. 10 for 2004;
- in the collection “Fantastika-2005” published by “AST”;
- in the collection “Fantastika-2005” published by EKSMO;
- in the collection “Fantasy-2005” published by “EXMO”;
- in the collection “Perpendicular World” from EKSMO;
- in other collections and magazines.
I have mixed feelings about this. VERY mixed.
All the comrades who understood the question told me a week before the event: Konstantin, you understand that he will come to the meeting in best case scenario about twenty people. And only if you try really hard and invite people all week. Because it’s Friday, because now no one goes to any presentations, because they read books from e-mail, because you understand.
Well, I decided to listen to my understanding comrades, and I really began to invite people. Waiting and hoping that not twenty people would come, but at least forty. With whom I’ll have a nice chat and everyone will leave happy.
The first thing I didn’t take into account was the specifics of the venue.
I - as I thought - had once been to the Tsiolkovsky store, and everything seemed to be fine there in terms of location. It turned out that I had been to the wrong Tsiolkovsky. That is, over the years he moved to a tiny room on the fourth floor of an old house. Which room is a little less than completely littered with books. But I didn't know that. As well as what the store management, based on the same considerations outlined above, will give for the presentation small hall, from which even the tables with books were not removed. Because “twenty people can fit normally.” From the same calculation we bought two packs of books. Well, there were some more in the store.
Don't think that I'm blaming anyone. People came from their own experience. Well, yes, “Fluid FreeFly”, a niche book, written for friends and acquaintances, including the publisher. How many such books have already been and will be, we know.
Who thought it was this time... but in order.
In short, not a lot of people came, but a LOT of people. I would say that the event organizers underestimated our audience by a factor of ten, or even fifteen.
First, the hall itself was packed - tightly, to the last somewhat usable seat, to the last chair (including mine, I donated it). But this didn’t really help, because there wasn’t enough space in the hall for many people, and they stood in the corridor and other halls. Well at least the broadcast worked.
At the same time, at first I did not see how many people did not enter. And when he came out to them, he went crazy. To be honest, I was wildly uncomfortable - although it was not my fault. All I could do was offer to pass notes with questions. As a result, there were a lot of notes, and I voiced them ahead oral questions. But that was all I could do in this situation.
General impression. People gathered who have read the novel, know it, are interested in the details and understand the subtleties. In some places I had to give a slight spoiler, in others I had to wrap up the question. But overall it was - for me personally - VERY interesting.
After the event, I promised everyone an autograph book. Well, I signed autographs for everyone who managed to purchase the book. I’m telling you, it turned out that there wasn’t enough of it, many left without it. This is where I started to feel really bad. Especially when they said that it was ending in publishing too. “Somehow it went wrong.” I hope they will finally print it now.
Overall. Quantitatively speaking, I should feel something like pride. At the store they told me that this hadn’t happened since 1914, when they were selling some book about rock music. Kind of a success.
But I don't feel any of it. Instead, I feel painfully ashamed in front of the people whom I invited to the party, and they stood in the corridor and, as a result, did not even receive an autograph book. And you can say as much as you like that it’s not my fault, and indeed it’s not mine - but they came to me, and here it is.
Please forgive me.