Russophobia- biased, hostile, suspicious, hostile attitude towards Russians and/or Russia; a special case of xenophobia, represents a specific direction in ethnophobia.
The opposite in meaning term “Russophilia” is also known - love for everything Russian, for Russia, for Russian culture, as well as for the Russians themselves.
Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev. Portrait by Alexandrovsky The word “Russophobia” was first used in 1867, in a letter from the great Russian poet and diplomat Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev to his daughter. Tyutchev’s remark turned out so well that it can be inserted into modern articles without correcting a single word in it:
“This is the Russophobia of some Russian people - by the way, very revered ones. They used to tell us, and they really believed so, that in Russia they hate the lack of rights, the lack of freedom of the press, etc., etc., that it is precisely because they love Europe so dearly that it undoubtedly has everything that is not in Russia. What do we see now? As Russia, seeking greater freedom, asserts itself more and more, the dislike of these gentlemen for it only intensifies. On the contrary, we see that no violations in the field of justice, morality and even civilization that are allowed in Europe have in the least reduced the predilection for it. In a word, in the phenomenon that I have in mind, there can be no talk of principles as such; only instincts are at work here, and it is precisely the nature of these instincts that should be understood.”
The emergence of Russophobia in the West
Russophobia as a trend of ideology arose in the West in the 16th century, which was associated with the expansionist policy of Poland, which sought to subjugate lands in the East (that is, Russian lands).
Poland was the largest Catholic country closest to Russia, and much of the information about Muscovy came to Europe from the Poles, who worked hard to form in the West a negative image of “barbaric” “Asian” Russia, with which Poland fought repeatedly during the 16th-17th centuries. Then these Russophobic ideas were picked up by other Western countries, which came into conflict with Russia as its geopolitical positions strengthened in the 18th-20th centuries.
6 Most Famous Russophobes in Russian History
Chevalier d'Eon, aka Mademoiselle de Beaumont (1728-1810)
French secret agent, famous fencer, transvestite, spent the first half of his life as a man, and the second half as a woman. The question of the Chevalier's true gender remains open.
According to the publishers, d’Eon “discovered” the so-called in St. Petersburg and took it to France. This falsification was published in French in 1812 (immediately after the collapse of Napoleon’s invasion of Russia) in Lesure’s book “On the growth of Russian power from its very beginning to the 19th century.” According to the publishers, the document was a strategic plan of action for the successors of Peter the Great for many centuries to come, with the goal of establishing world domination by Russia; the goal was “to get as close as possible to Constantinople and the Indies.” This fake was originally created in the political interests of the French ruling circles and was then widely used in anti-Russian propaganda of the 19th-20th centuries, especially during the wars (Crimean and World War I). The origin of the “will” is not entirely clear, but at least some historians believe that d’Eon, who spied on the Russian Empress Elizabeth (daughter of Peter I) and tried to disrupt the Russian-Austrian alliance, could actually be involved in fabricating the original version of this forgery .
Michal Sokolnicki (1760-1816)
Polish general, participant in the Russian-Polish War of 1792, the Kosciuszko uprising and the Napoleonic Wars on the side of Napoleon.
In February 1812, he wrote a detailed plan for an attack on Russia and its subsequent dismemberment, “On ways to rid Europe of the influence of Russia, and thanks to this, of the influence of England.” In recent years, it is believed that this document played a crucial role in the beginning of the War of 1812. In the summer of 1812, Sokolnitsky was seconded to Napoleon as the main “expert” on Russia, which he called in his work the “Empire of Darkness.” At the same time, Sokolnitsky himself willingly passed off typical Russophobic myths as real intelligence data. Here, for example, is what he wrote, justifying the possibility of stirring up unrest on the outskirts of Russia:
“As for the Crimean Tatars, they could be easily influenced with the help of their neighbors - the Tatars living in Lithuania. For all their lack of education and downtroddenness, these nationalities are endowed with a certain natural ingenuity, and even a certain sublimity of feelings, which is not at all characteristic of the Russian nation.”
It goes without saying that in Sokolnitsky’s plan there was a place for Poland from sea to sea. However, the real significance of this plan is that Napoleon, far from sympathizing with such grandiose Polish plans, nevertheless accepted Sokolnitsky's derogatory characterizations of Russia and its people at face value and, as a result, started the War of 1812.
Astolphe de Custine (1790-1867)
French aristocrat and ardent monarchist, allegedly bisexual; gained fame through the publication of his notes on Russia. “Custine is considered a classic of world Russophobia, its champion and record holder.”
The author of the Russophobic book “Russia in 1839”, reprinted many times in Europe, where he described Russia as a country of “barbarians” and “slaves”, “universal fear” and “bureaucratic tyranny”.
The author of the meme about Russia as a “prison of nations”, in which Tsar Nicholas I is the “overseer”.
He accused Nicholas I of allegedly “being mired in debauchery and dishonoring a huge number of decent girls and women,” despite the fact that both contemporaries and historians consider Emperor Nicholas a man of extremely strict rules and a monogamous man who loved his wife all his life.
He colorfully described the severe Russian frosts, although he traveled around Russia in the summer.
Charles Stratford-Canning, Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe (1786-1880)
English diplomat. By 1832, he had created such a reputation for himself that Nicholas I flatly refused to let him into St. Petersburg when he was appointed ambassador to Russia.
Later, in 1841-1858. (with breaks in 1847 and 1852-1853) was ambassador to Turkey, where he contributed by all means to the beginning and expansion of the Crimean War. Upon his retirement in 1858, he also wrote Russophobic articles on the Eastern Question.
Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895)
The founders of communism. For many years they lived and worked with all the comforts in Britain - the center of world capitalism - calling from there for revolutions in their native Germany and in other countries. Due to the large number of Russophobic passages in their works, their complete collected works were never published in the Soviet Union (where Marx and Engels were considered luminaries of science and the highest authorities).
They considered Russia the main obstacle to the implementation of their plans for world revolution: “Slavic barbarians are natural counter-revolutionaries, special enemies of democracy” (Marx).
Engels created and spread the myth about the threat of Pan-Slavism to the “civilized nations” of Europe: “this is an absurd, ahistorical movement, which has set itself the goal of nothing less than to subordinate the civilized West to the barbaric East, the city to the countryside, trade, industry, spiritual culture to primitive agriculture.” Slavic serfs... Behind this absurd theory there was a formidable reality in the person of the Russian Empire... in every step of which there is revealed a claim to consider the whole of Europe as the property of the Slavic tribe.”
Engels wrote that there was a need for “a ruthless life-and-death struggle against the treacherous Slavs, traitorous to the revolution... a war of extermination and unbridled terror.” “Yes, the coming world war will wipe out from the face of the earth not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but also entire reactionary peoples - and this will also be progress!”
Franz Joseph I (1830-1916)
Emperor of Austria, and later of Austria-Hungary almost until the very end of the latter's existence. In 1848, he was very close to the Russian Emperor Nicholas I, who considered Franz Joseph to be a literal son and even helped keep Austria from collapse in 1848 during the Hungarian Revolution. Franz Joseph “repaid” for this during the Crimean War, demanding that Russia accept the terms of the ultimatum of the Western allies.
Soon, Austria was severely punished for betrayal by proxy - the country, which had lost its key ally, was immediately taken away from a significant part of its possessions in Italy, and then deprived of leadership in the German Confederation and turned into an unstable Austro-Hungarian Confederation, but Franz Joseph did not rest on this and accepted active participation in depriving Russia of any achievements following the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. Throughout his reign in Subcarpathian Rus' and, especially, in Galicia, persecution of Orthodoxy and local Russians continued. Under him, with the help of the specially created department of “history” of Lviv University and the NGO “Prosvita”, the history and ideology of “Ukrainianism” was composed.
In 1908, by exposing the insufficiently cautious Russian Foreign Minister, he provoked the Bosnian crisis. In 1914 he became one of the instigators of the First World War, during which he carried out the genocide of the Russian population of Galicia and Subcarpathian Rus. It is also famous for the fact that Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, the widow of Nicholas I, on her deathbed, in response to the priest’s call to forgive everyone, stated that “Yes, I forgive everyone except the Emperor of Austria!”
As a famous DNA geneticist, Anatoly Klyosov, who made a revolutionary breakthrough, fights pop geneticists and Russophobia in science.
DNA genealogy in Russia and the world continues to actively develop as a promising scientific discipline, and the debate around it has long left the academic corridors and now does not fade away on the Internet. This development is largely due to Doctor of Chemical Sciences Anatoly Klyosov, who continues to popularize his brainchild, open new horizons and break stereotypes. “The Bell of Russia” with Anatoly Alekseevich last year, and the excellent reason for a new meeting was the publication of the book “Who is stopping DNA genealogy?”, as well as the imminent opening of a DNA genealogy laboratory in Moscow.
“The Bell of Russia”: The title text on the cover of your new book reads: “Lies, insinuations and Russophobia in modern Russian science.” You directly blame opponents of your work for these sins. In our last conversation, we already discussed the letter “DNA-demagoguery of Anatoly Klyosov,” which was signed by 24 Russian scientists. Have you made any new enemies since then?
Anatoly Klyosov: The book is not just about these 24 scientists. Yes, in fact, most of them can only be called scientists conditionally; several people from this list do not have academic degrees at all. The work has several sections where the categories of my opponents are described in sufficient detail and with examples. The largest category is simply illiterate people who reason “in terms of concepts” and not in terms of science. They are ignorant and therefore categorical. The other category is charged with Russophobic ideology; for them, the honest history of Russians and Slavs is simply unbearable. The third category is close to Russian academic science and is associated with population genetics.
Indeed, after the first publications of my research, pop geneticists immediately became tense because I demonstrated an objective tool for describing the genealogy of people, populations and nations based on mutations in DNA. The most important feature of the DNA genealogy methodology is the determination of mutation rates in different sections of DNA and the application of these rates to calculations of the chronology of ancient events - ancient human migrations, the lifetimes of the common ancestors of the populations being studied. DNA genealogy examines the patterns of inheritance of changes in non-recombinant (“junk”, as they were previously called - approx. KR) sections of human DNA during its evolution on a time scale from tens and hundreds to millions of years.
These calculations are closely related to history, because this method makes it possible to calculate, for example, when the ancestors of modern man came to Europe. I came up with a figure many years ago - approximately 4800 years ago. And pop geneticists constantly named other data - about 30 thousand years ago. I tried to figure out where this figure came from. And it turned out that there are no calculations confirming it, the data was simply taken from the air.
And pop geneticists have a lot of similar unverifiable data. For example, they give the following argument: the age of the drawings discovered in caves in Western Europe (Spain, France) is exactly about 28-30 thousand years. At the same time, the Neanderthals disappeared, and it was immediately assumed that the ancestors of modern Europeans then supplanted them. Moreover, it is precisely the “ancestors of the present”, who else? But this is more like working “on concepts” rather than on direct evidence. On average, the error in the dating of pop geneticists is 300-350%, that is, the time periods differ from the real ones by 3-3.5 times. It also happens much more, as in the example above - with a difference between 30 thousand and 4800 years.
Another example: haplogroup (a group of fundamentally similar mutations in DNA that determines a person’s gender - approx. KR) R1a was conventionally called Ukrainian by them, because it supposedly first appeared in Ukraine. Where does this data come from, where is the confirmation? It simply doesn't exist. I began to look for the original source, and it turned out that about 20 years ago two Italian scientists first voiced such an opinion and indicated that they had supporting facts. But they have not yet been announced; obviously, it was their mistake. But pop geneticists still called haplogroup R1a “Ukrainian” for many years, and in the academic press. This is how they work, this is their style.
From our direct experimental data it turns out that according to group R1a, Ukrainians and Russians are one people, therefore, the haplogroup itself was formed neither in Ukraine nor in Russia. It came to the territory of the Russian Plain as a result of migrations about 5 thousand years ago. Therefore, it would be a mistake to say that this is a purely Ukrainian or Russian group. And according to other haplogroups, Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians are one people. They differ in territory, although only very recently, by historical standards, they differ quite a bit in language, and in origin they are almost identical, with the exception of purely geographical reasons, this will also be discussed a little below.
Let me give you another striking example: according to the findings of pop geneticists, haplogroup R1a allegedly appeared in India about 15 thousand years ago. On this basis they declared that no Aryans existed at all, and repeated this in article after article. The famous population geneticist Lev Zhivotovsky caused enormous damage to science by publishing, together with the Indians, a series of articles developing the idea that the Aryans were supposedly invented by the Anglo-Saxons in order to completely enslave India during colonization. Here, Indian authors, at the instigation of Zhivotovsky and other pop geneticists, make the assumption that the R1a group came to Europe from India, which is complete nonsense, because changes in human DNA allow us to clearly trace in which direction the migration went - precisely from Europe towards India. Archaeological data also speaks to this.
At first, pop geneticists, caught falsifying facts, hid for several years. But gradually they realized that I was creating a system of knowledge in which they had no place without recognizing their theories as erroneous. And they decided to go on an aggressive offensive: at the end of 2014, at the Moscow conference at the Russian Academy of Sciences, pop genetics Elena Balanovskaya, Oleg Balanovsky and Svetlana Borinskaya They announced from the podium that they would now take up my “pseudoscience.” I believe that the slander against DNA genealogy is done precisely for the purpose of self-defense of pop geneticists. After all, it is very difficult for them to accept the fact that they have been wrong for 20 years.
The group of my opponents also included a famous archaeologist Lev Samuilovich Klein. He has nothing to do with pop genetics; it would seem that he has nothing to defend in this field. We had a long correspondence, later published, during which I explained to him in detail what DNA genealogy was and how it could benefit the historical sciences. He apparently felt offended - how come some chemist suddenly appears (Klein constantly emphasizes my specialty) who crosses out part of the historical works of his entire life. He really didn’t like the fact that I conventionally called R1a an “Aryan haplogroup”; he immediately began writing publicly about my “racism.” I understand that Jews are sensitive to the concept of “Aryans,” but what does this have to do with the ancient Aryans and the Third Reich? After Hitler, the word “Aryans” became dirty and forbidden for a long time, although the historical Aryans were not to blame for anything. And so Klein decided to play on the phobia of a number of people towards the word “arias”, keeping silent that in his historical works he uses the concept of “arias” many hundreds of times. This is such a double standard.
Balanovsky said from the rostrum of the Russian Academy of Sciences that my book on the origins of the Slavs was published by the Algorithm publishing house, which also published the diaries of the Nazi ideologist Joseph Goebbels and the memoirs of the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini. Can you imagine to what level this scientist has sunk? I looked at the publishing house’s website and discovered that Algorithm also published the leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Gennady Zyuganov, the ex-owner of YUKOS Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the philosopher Alexander Zinoviev, the journalist Oleg Kashin, the economist Sergei Glazyev, the politician Dmitry Rogozin, that is, a wide variety of topical journalism... The case It’s not this, but the fact that Balanovsky indirectly threw a hint at me: studying the history of the Slavs is the same as promoting Nazism.
It is obvious to me that Klein, Balanovsky and others like them are open Russophobes, so for these gentlemen, DNA genealogy, showing the deep antiquity of the Slavs and ethnic Russians, is like a bone in the throat. At one time, the Balanovskys wrote an article in which they argued that Ukrainians gravitate towards Poles in DNA and are very different from Russians. They published DNA maps on which the genetic populations of Ukraine and Russia are shaded in different colors, and these maps became a tabletop for Ukrainian nationalists.
In fact, this is a lie, because our comparisons showed that the difference between Ukrainians and Russians is very small. We have a common group R1a, the only difference is in the Baltic substrate, which is more abundant among Russians (and Belarusians), since Ukrainians live geographically further from the Baltic Sea. Lithuanians and Latvians, for example, have approximately the same content of this N1c1 substrate as “northern Russians” - about 40% and higher. For the rest of the Russians, the figure is no more than 14% (for Ukrainians - 7.5%, Belarusians - 10%).
Based on these false data, some Ukrainians begin to talk about their exclusivity and call Russians “Mordovians” or “Horde”. This is outright sabotage on the part of popgeneticists. In those Ukrainian books on DNA genealogy that I mentioned above, there is obvious Nazism. For them, Adam was Ukrainian, and Noah’s Ark landed off the coast of Ukraine after the flood - in a word, utter nonsense. So it becomes clear who is being hampered by my research in the context of the information war. The main thing is that if scientific discussions make sense, then ideological disputes are completely useless - it is impossible to find a compromise in them. Likewise, a debate between a liberal and a patriot is counterproductive.
It turns out that DNA genealogy, in its objectivity, is also a patriotic science. It shows the true state of affairs, saying that the Slavs and their ancestors lived on the Russian Plain 5 thousand years ago, and not at all from the middle of the 1st millennium AD, as is commonly believed. This very concept of modern historical science can ultimately also be considered Russophobic. She replaces the historical concept of the Slavs with a linguistic one, but is silent about this. She eschews the historical concept of the Slavs and Russian ancestors in general, as if they did not exist at all. After all, no one uses the terms “proto-Germans” or “proto-Scandinavians”; they say “ancient Scandinavians”, “ancient Germans”, and going back thousands of years. However, for some reason, the “ancient Slavs” are only allowed to exist until the middle of the 1st millennium AD, and then they are not there, and this is considered the norm, as if they were somehow inferior and did not have a rich and deep history. And our discipline breaks into history and demands to reconsider hypotheses that have already been “bronzed”, revealing what many do not want to reveal. It is clear that this bothers many people.
KR: If I'm not mistaken, then your approach has obvious advantages in terms of the accuracy of the data obtained...
A.K.: Let's look at it this way - archeology often makes mistakes in determining the directions of migration of peoples. Historians know the famous aphorism: “pots are not people,” that is, it is difficult to determine the boundaries of the settlement of peoples based on the artifacts found. Linguistics works reliably only with written sources, and the further we move into ancient languages, the more philologists get lost there. And DNA genealogy, which studies haplogroups and haplotypes and is capable of determining the chain of primary and subsequent mutations in them, is obviously in many cases a more reliable tool.
There are two brave historians - Lydia Grot And Vsevolod Merkulov- who actively use DNA genealogy in their work and note that it helps to find answers to many questions. And the rest prefer to keep a low profile with her for now, since modern historical science is very conservative, and it tends to trust “authoritative opinions” rather than facts. I do not envy the historians within the RAS system who were attracted to my new discipline. After all, they may be deprived of grants or simply shown the door...
KR: I remember a lesson from the past: In 1749, the historiographer of the Russian Empire, German Gerhard Friedrich Miller, gave a speech at the Academy of Sciences entitled “The Origin of the People and the Russian Name,” after which Russian scientists, led by Lomonosov, filed a complaint with Empress Catherine II, demanding that Miller be executed as traitor. In their opinion, the speaker “in the entire speech did not show a single incident to the glory of the Russian people, but only mentioned more that could lead to dishonor, namely: how they were repeatedly defeated in battles, where they devastated and The kings were robbed of their treasures. And finally, it is worthy of surprise with what carelessness he used the expression that the Scandinavians, with their victorious weapons, successfully conquered all of Russia.”
A.K.: I constantly have to debunk opinions approved by science: they say that the Scandinavians brought crafts to Rus', they also engaged in diplomacy and military affairs, and the Slavs who lived here were stupid, essentially, they could not do anything. All this began precisely with the founding of the Academy of Sciences by German scientists, with whom Mikhail Lomonosov led an active polemic. The Norman theory of the emergence of statehood in Rus', supported by Miller, has become part of the flesh and blood of our science; in our country this is now considered the only correct concept. Listen to the Normanists, so Scandinavians lived in Rus', apparently or invisibly, they started with 20 thousand Scandinavians, then 50 thousand, then 100 thousand, and the same Klein says that previously up to 13% of the total population lived in Rus', that is, about 500 thousand people!
But DNA genealogy has clearly shown that this is all a lie. Scandinavia has a specific genetic mark called the Scandinavian haplotype group. I decided to check which ethnic Russians I could find it with. And he found only four descendants of Scandinavians with this mark from a huge number of DNA samples. I looked in Ukraine and didn’t find any there at all. In Belarus and Lithuania it’s the same. You see, even if 200 Scandinavians lived with us in ancient times, their descendants could not even disappear. I looked at the world map of DNA and it became obvious that clusters of this group are located in the Scandinavian countries and then go to the West, especially in the British Isles. And they practically did not go to the East, except perhaps with the troops of Charles XII, and there was a Scandinavian garrison in the area of the Oreshek fortress. Perhaps someone stayed with French deserters of Scandinavian origin from Napoleon's army, but in any case, their DNA trace in Russia is below a significant statistical level.
Okay, then supporters of this theory begin to talk about Scandinavian swords found in Rus'. But, you know, I also had a computer from Taiwan in Moscow, does this mean that the Taiwanese founded Moscow? And if a Walter pistol was found buried in the ground in Vladivostok, does this mean that the Germans reached Vladivostok in World War II? How can one make such global conclusions based on individual findings? Why should hexagonal logs in Ladoga, processed according to the Scandinavian method, be an indispensable evidence of the dominance of the Scandinavians in our country?
KR: Can we put an equal sign between those interested in DNA genealogy and patriots?
A.K.: Of course, DNA genealogy is based on patriotism. If only because only a patriot can want an honest history of Russia. When that same “liberal” wants to see her, she always ends up covered in black paint. For example, I don’t know a single person who is interested in and loves this discipline and at the same time says: “Let’s take Crimea back!” And vice versa, those who throw mud at my research would gladly give it to Bandera’s Ukraine. There is a very clear line of demarcation: either a person loves and is proud of the history of his country, or he does not consider it his own.
And for me personally, DNA genealogy helped me clarify my own roots; I got to the bottom of the 14th generation of my ancestors who lived in the 16th century. I found out that they were “boyar children” and belonged to the Russian hereditary military personnel. And how can I support the position that Crimea was annexed if my ancestors shed blood for it? Only those who do not remember their kinship can desire this.
KR: So, in addition to opponents, you definitely had to find like-minded people.
A.K.: I have like-minded people at different levels, they are just less visible. Firstly, I receive a lot of letters and approving comments on social networks, on my official website. People are interested, ask questions, and often write very touching things. For many, DNA genealogy has allowed them to discover their ancestors and their family history. Not long ago we organized a gathering of the Klyosovs in our family village in the Kursk region, which is called Klyosovo. We gathered near the old cemetery, spread out a tablecloth, and remembered our ancestors. A certain Konstantin Klyosov from Volgodonsk came to the meeting, who did not know his roots, he simply had the same last name. I took his DNA for analysis, like all the other guests. And as expected, his genes coincided with all the other participants in the meeting. He was happy to find his ancestry, the world blossomed with new colors for him.
Also, residents of the Caucasus often contact me, for whom it is vital to know their roots and honor their ancestors. For many, this memory has already been lost, and they are grateful for the opportunity to reconstruct their family tree. The Karachay-Balkars want to objectively confirm their origins from the Alans, the same as the Ossetians, the Tajiks from the historical Aryans, the Jews from Abraham, and so on. Numerous projects of the Academy of DNA Genealogy, which was officially established in the Russian Federation in July 2015 and operates in Moscow, are aimed at this.
There are also those who practice DNA genealogy professionally. I recently received a book in Slovenian, “The Origin of the Slovenes and Other Europeans,” and there are several pages of bibliography - about a hundred links to my books and articles. In general, of course, it takes time for science to fully recognize something new. For example, the first serious work on the Sumerian civilization was published in 1869, and science recognized the Sumerians and Akkadians only in 1918.
KR: Among your supporters you can find fans of the so-called. “folk history”, that is, fantasizing on the theme of the Slavic-Aryan Vedas or completely outright freaks. They don’t discredit DNA genealogy and give skeptics another reason to criticize you?
A.K.: How can alchemy discredit chemistry? The presence of those whom you call freaks is inevitable in any field of science - in physics, astronomy, and history. We’re not going to drive them all away, but how can we? It's just fun for them, and it should be the same for us. I am not a purist here, because I see how much garbage gets into academic publications, including one of the most respected scientific journals, Nature. And I am read by non-specialists of broad views, who are interested in many things. There's nothing wrong with that.
In addition, if I publish articles in the light genre in the Bulletin of the Academy of DNA Genealogy, there is always a preface at the beginning, which explains what should be taken seriously and what not. But in fact, on a scientific level, I don’t give such people permission; I always explain that their thoughts should be based on a hypothesis, and the hypothesis should be based on facts. If they like to seriously argue that the Aryans flew from Alpha Centauri, or came from the Arctic a hundred pounds of years ago, who forbids it? Fiction does not discredit science in any way.
KR: After a three-year wait, information has finally appeared about the imminent opening of a DNA Genealogy Laboratory in Moscow. What problems did you encounter and continue to encounter while working on its discovery, and why did the matter take so long?
A.K.: Now we are at the final stage of agreeing on the agreement, but signatures have not yet been delivered, so we will not get ahead of ourselves. The main problem here is the following: as several years of experience have shown, for performers the people being tested are a certain mass that brings in money and takes away results. For the existing Academy of DNA Genealogy, these are living people, we know many of them personally or by correspondence, and we sincerely want them to pay the minimum and receive results as quickly as possible. In short, everyone with whom we have worked so far did not suit us in the end - due to outright greediness, work ethics, or the fact that they turned out to be intermediaries in testing, although they positioned themselves as performers. And mediation inflates the price of tests beyond what is reasonable, because the intermediaries, naturally, did not forget about themselves. Now the situation is developing well, and we are careful that things are moving towards creating a laboratory. Our whole idea is to create a Laboratory in Russia, and so that money does not leave the country, and so that there is no need to send samples abroad, and to work on DNA fossils here, and much more that is important for the development of this area in Russia, and not somewhere else.
KR: What kind of DNA test are you planning to conduct and how much will it cost?
A.K.: The contractor, that is, our laboratory partner, wants to start with minimal tests, namely a 17-marker haplotype and haplogroup, plus one or two SNPs (mutations of the nucleotide sequence in DNA - approx. KR). And this already comes to a cost of approximately 15 thousand rubles. We continue to reduce the price, but so far we are faced with the reluctance of the contractor to reduce it, at least significantly. The performer is afraid of a small clientele and suggests starting small, this will be enough for most beginners.
KR: What will the result of such research give to people and science?
A.K.: The result obtained is written in the form of numbers and letters; by itself, it will not tell you much. Therefore, additional decoding will be required, which is included in the profile of our academy. And this is our main advantage - a personal interpretation of the results obtained, which has no analogues in any laboratory in the world. They provide only template information about what a particular haplogroup means. Nobody interprets haplotypes at all... The Academy of DNA Genealogy has long maintained a database of personal data on haplogroups received from abroad. Even by collecting a minimal set of haplotypes, we can fundamentally advance historical science; this will be a very big deal. Over time, thanks to joint work with archaeologists, we will learn, for example, who the ancient Russian Slavs were by haplotype. And then we will be able to determine for any person exactly whose descendant he is, what clan and tribe. According to the time scale, it will be possible to go very far into the past, so a more complete history of the Slavic tribes will appear. The same applies to other haplogroups. As soon as data on fossil DNA becomes available (that is, from analyzes of the remains of ancient people - approx. KR), we can expect a real breakthrough in archeology - many unknown facts will probably be discovered. And then opponents will simply be forced to listen to us and even cooperate.
The conversation was conducted by Ivan Vaganov
This map, taken from Turkish school textbooks, quite clearly demonstrates the aspirations of the Pan-Turkists
The intention of the Federal Center to make the study of national languages in the Russian republics exclusively voluntary, as expected, met with powerful opposition. The instigator, as expected, was Tatarstan. The position of defenders of the Tatar language against “imperial discrimination” was eloquently voiced at the end of September by an activist of the nationalist association “Azatlyk” Fanil Gilyazov. According to Gilyazov, the federal law “On Education” does not say that national languages should be studied in Russia only voluntarily. Azatlyk’s position in this regard is consonant with the course of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education of Tatarstan Engel Fattakhov.
Language course condemned Vladimir Putin and nationalists in Bashkiria. Head of the Executive Committee of the World Kurultai of Bashkirs Amir Ishemgulov, meeting on October 16 with the prosecutor of the republic Andrey Nazarov, stated: it would be useful for the Russian-speaking population of Bashkiria to study Bashkir in the same way as Russian children study the Tatar language in the neighboring region. “It has long been proven by medical science that knowledge of several languages improves the functioning and development of both hemispheres of the brain, - Ishemgulov justified his position. - It is also easier for people who know the Bashkir language to master many foreign languages, for example, English and German, since they share letters with the Bashkir language, for example, the letter “h”, which is difficult to pronounce without knowing the Bashkir language. People who look to the future with perspective understand perfectly the importance of the Bashkir language, which belongs to the Turkic group of languages, for international relations.” .
Nationalist activists from another Turkic region - Chuvashia - did not stand aside. October 21, the head of Chuvashia Mikhail Ignatiev received a threatening letter from the Chuvash national organization “Ireklekh” with a demand not to allow “discrimination against the Chuvash language” .
National (more precisely, nationalist) Chuvash associations on the language issue in the region intend to follow the same course as the World Congress of Tatars and the World Kurultai of Bashkirs. “Discrimination” of the Chuvash language in Russia will be discussed on October 28 in Cheboksary, at a meeting of the Chuvash National Congress.
Defenders of the “infringed” national languages from the Volga region also receive support from non-Turkic regions. In the fall, Kumyk and Lezgin activists from Dagestan, representatives of Circassian public organizations of the Krasnodar Territory, public figures from Yakutia, Komi, etc. spoke out that the languages of the regions of Russia should be compulsory for education on an equal basis with Russian.
In a word, the July meeting in Yoshkar-Ola, where Russian President Vladimir Putin called for an end to anti-constitutional and Russophobic trends in the educational sphere of the national regions, became historic. It is not only “domestic” defenders of regional sovereignties who oppose Moscow’s intentions. The anti-Putin nationalist wave that arose on the language topic was more than positively assessed in the scientific and political circles of Azerbaijan.
Yasemen Garagoyunlu
In October on the resource of the Azerbaijani party Yeni Musavat Bastainfo under a more than eloquent title “The path to weakening Russia is the development of pan-turanist ideas within it”.
Author of the article, employee of the Institute of Philosophy of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan (ANAS) Yasemen Garagoyunlu, stated that it expresses full support for the “linguistic” speeches of nationalists in Tatarstan and Bashkiria. “I believe that independent Turkic states should support these rallies and demands, - writes Garagoyunlu. - Turkic states must have educational, linguistic, cultural, and information programs for the Turkic subjects of the Russian Federation. Türkiye and Azerbaijan must keep Russian Turks in their cultural orbit." .
The scientist immediately explains why Baku and Ankara need to provide benefits to the Russian Tatars, Bashkirs, Karachais and other Turks of Russia: “So that they do not become Russified and assimilate.” Mrs. Garagoyunlu, following the template of the classical heritage of the Pan-Turkists, calls the historical experience of peaceful coexistence of Russians and Turks within Russia "genocide of the Turks". According to an ANAS employee, over the past 300 years in the North and South Caucasus, Russia has done nothing but carry out genocides and ethnic cleansing among the Turkic population.
“Armenia was created on the Turkic lands in the west of Azerbaijan, and the Turkic strip running from the Caucasus to the Black Sea and connecting the Caucasus with the Ottoman Empire was also destroyed” . By the “Turkic” corridor from the Caucasus to the Illustrious Port, Garagoyunlu means... the current Krasnodar Territory, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Georgia. “Batum was the center of the exit of the Caucasian Turks through the Black Sea to Europe, on this strip there were Akhalkalaki, Meskheti (region of residence of Meskhetian Turks - approx. ed.). Russia broke this ethnic-geographical-cultural thread, forming a Christian dominant in the Caucasus in the form of Georgians and Armenians, and prevented the integration of the Ottomans into the Caucasus and the Idel-Ur region l ( Volga region - approx. ed.)» .
Sprinkling salt on the wounds of Russian pan-Turkists with a generous hand, Garagoyunlu tells fantastic things: “During the preparation of the plan for the capture of the Caucasus and Central Asia, Peter the Great asked pan-Slavic scientists how to capture these territories, where to start? Pan-Slavists responded that it was necessary to divide the single Turkic language into separate dialects in order to create new peoples and split the Turkic identity. And today the Russians are implementing this program in order to Russify, Christianize, and assimilate Turkic geography. This policy is aimed at creating a demographic imbalance and ultimately reducing the number of Turks through Russification-Christianization and the placement of ethnic Christians in Turkic geographies.” .
This sample Russophobic myth-making, born from the consciousness of a representative of the humanitarian academic sphere of Baku, could be considered a variation on the theme of the myth beloved by Tatar “national patriots” about how the archers Ivan the Terrible Kazan Tatars were forced to be baptized under threat of death. This myth, like other variations on its theme, is now practically harmless. For reasonable Tatars, pan-Turkic legends about the capture of Kazan cause laughter at best, irritation at worst. But Yasemen Garagoyunlu does not take pan-Turkic narratives in their naked form, but sets them the vector of current political development. “The current Russian Federation is a symbiosis of Slavic and Turkic peoples. Russia contains two alternative civilizations and cultures: Russian-Slavic, Christian, Orthodox and Turkic-Muslim. This means that in order to collapse and weaken Russia, it is necessary to take advantage of the line of rupture between these two cultures. In the Russian Federation there are autonomous Turkic states - Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Altai Republic, Tuva, Karachay-Cherkessia, Khakassia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Sakha, Chuvashia, Crimea, Gagauzia, Karakalpakstan (so in the text - approx. ed.). Russia knows that the existence of Turkic autonomies is a fault line, and Russia will fall apart precisely from this line. Present-day Russia was formed by the capture of the Golden Horde. The fate, future, and in general the existence of Russia, which is the owner of vast territories of Eurasia, depends on the uprising and political will of the Turkic peoples who live under the yoke of Russia." . The Turks of Russia, according to Garagoyunlu, are now experiencing an unprecedented rise in passion and want to leave the “prison of nations.” In order not to fall apart like the USSR, Russia “carries out the forceful imposition of the Russian language and culture in Turkic subjects” .
Ms. Garagoyunlu's material looks quite menacing. But in the text of the Baku scientist there are moments that cannot be perceived without laughing. Describing Russia’s “genocidal” policy towards the Turks of the Volga region and the Caucasus since tsarist times, Garagoyunlu calls it the “Ilminsky-Tolstov doctrine.” Ilminsky is most likely Nikolai Ivanovich Ilminsky(1822−1891) - orientalist and educator of the peoples of the Volga region, who translated the Gospel and Psalter into the Kryashen language. At the end of his life Ilminsky wrote Konstantin Pobedonostsev that the Pan-Turkists, who are gaining strength in the Volga region, are trying to drive the Kryashens, who have never known Islam, into Islam, and from there into the Tatar nation and the “warm” common Turkic family.
With Tolstoy, who, according to Garagoyunlu, carried out the genocide of the Turks in the Caucasus, it turned out much funnier than with Ilminsky. Sergei Pavlovich Tolstov(1907−1976) - famous Soviet archaeologist, specialist in the ancient states of Central Asia. But it is quite possible that Garagoyunlu, an employee of the Azerbaijani Academy of Sciences, listed not the outstanding Soviet historian, but his relatives, as the “architects of the genocide of the Turks in the Caucasus.” Cavalry General Sergei Tolstoy, the grandfather of the orientalist, participated in the Russian-Turkish war of 1878-1879, from 1900 to 1905 he was the appointed ataman of the Terek Cossack army. In a word, an example of faithful service to his Fatherland and no signs that Sergei Evlampievich Tolstov could ever subject anyone to genocide. Pan-Turkists can only cling to the fact that the Cossack centurion Sergei Tolstov took part in the capture of Khiva in 1873. But according to Garagoyunlu, Tolstoy “genocided” the Turks not in Central Asia, but in the Caucasus! One would like to ask Mrs. Garagoyunlu: if she meant Tolstoy’s grandfather, did she not classify the Khiva Khanate as “Great Azerbaijan,” which was “historically divided” in the 19th-20th centuries? Although the lady scientist could have been referring not to Tolstoy, but to Tolstoy. I wonder which one. The world's most famous representative of the Tolstoy family, who is also the author of War and Peace, fought in the Caucasus in his youth. Another thing is that Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy did not “genocide” the highlanders, but even admired them...
“The Russian reader may perceive Garagoyunlu’s article as the ravings of a madman, - a member of the Russian Presidential Council for Interethnic Relations told the EADaily portal Ismail Shabanov, Chairman of the public organization “Talysh Diaspora of Russia”. - But they don’t keep crazy people at the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan. Garagoyunlu wrote her material, aimed in support of the Russian national separatists going against Vladimir Putin, in a more than sound mind. Yasemen Garagoyunlu came to science from the political field - from the youth organization of the Yeni Musavat party. Four years ago, Garagoyunlu called on the international community to pay attention to the “genocide” of the Turks in Iran allegedly carried out by the regime of the Islamic Republic. I can say for sure that these destructive calls, dangerous for peaceful Azerbaijani-Iranian relations, were coordinated with Baku political circles. Just as the anti-Russian article by Garagoyunlu, published in October, was agreed upon, where this young woman calls Vladimir Putin’s desire to protect the Russian language “genocide of the Turks.”
All public statements of Azerbaijani scientists undergo preliminary verification with the relevant supervising authorities. The Institute of Philosophy of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan is supervised by the head of the presidential administration of Azerbaijan, Ramiz Mehdiyev, academician of ANAS. And pay attention to the following. Most of the historical and political ideologies adopted in Azerbaijan, where Azerbaijan is assigned the place of a “victim” of a collusion of European powers, and the Azerbaijani people - the role of a divided nation, were developed precisely by Ramiz Mehdiyev.” .
On March 20, 2017, the General Meeting of the Russian Academy of Sciences was unable to elect a President, since all three candidates withdrew their candidacies at the last moment.
It was assumed that the brother of a personal friend of the president of the country, corresponding member M. Kovalchuk, director of the Kurchatov Institute, the inspirer and organizer of the defeat of the RAS under the guise of reforms in 2013, could be appointed president of the RAS. But something didn’t work out here either.
This is presented as a crisis. Although that is not the crisis at all. And it didn’t start yesterday.
But the systemic, basic problems of the RAS are not discussed at the official level, being replaced by petty chatter about insufficient funding, ownership of RAS buildings, rent, details of the RAS reform...
Part I. Russian Academy of Sciences vs. Russia
Academy of Sciences – a nest of Russophobes
When was the Russian Academy of Sciences created? When Russia, broken by baptism, was broken again by European Freemasonry, which Peter I, “having cut a window into Europe,” dragged to Russia. The Masons created many institutions in Russia, including the Academy of Sciences, filled with members of foreign Masonic lodges and sharing their views.
http://www.e-reading.by/chapter.php/139105/33/Burovskiii_-_Petr_Pervyii_-_proklyatyii_imperator.html
“Using the example of the development of Freemasonry in Russia, we can most clearly become acquainted with their dirty ways of moving towards even dirtier goals. Since these methods and goals have essentially remained unchanged to this day, by drawing certain historical parallels, we can understand the direction and nature of their activities in our days.”
Peter I and the Masons
http://spravedllivost.narod.ru/masons/2_1.htm
The historical parallels are indeed obvious. The Imperial Academy of Sciences and Arts, founded by Peter I in 1724, was an analogue of the current Skolkovo, and had a similar goal - to feed its people from abroad with Russian money, but most importantly, to create an official stronghold of foreign penetration into Russia. This stronghold exercised control over all aspects of Russian life in the interests of world Freemasonry. He performed the functions of a “supervisor” who held back the development of Russian science and impeded the work of Russian scientists.
The Academy of Sciences was created in St. Petersburg, a city built according to Masonic canons, rich in Masonic symbols.
One of the areas of work of foreign academicians (Miller, Bayer, Schlözer) was the falsification of Russian history, the imposition of the “Norman theory” of the formation of Russia, according to which culture was brought to the “Russian barbarians” by the Varangian princes.
Lomonosov spoke out against this lie; in his work “Ancient Russian History” he refuted the theses about the “great darkness of ignorance” that allegedly reigned in ancient Rus'. He was supported by other Russian scientists.
Several people filed a complaint about the dominance of foreigners at the Academy. The Senate commission headed by Prince Yusupov, which investigated the accusations, saw in the complaint “a revolt of the mob that rose up against the authorities.” The signatories were arrested, shackled and chained, then the initiator was executed, the rest were brutally flogged and sent into exile.
If the so-called Imperial Academy of Sciences settled scores with opponents in this way, it is hardly worth considering it as a scientific institution; rather, it is an organized crime group (OCG) with goals far from science, for example, the destruction of Russia.
In relation to Lomonosov, the same Senate Commission stated that he “for repeated discourteous, dishonest and disgusting actions both in relation to the academy, and the commission, and the German land, is subject to the death penalty, or, in extreme cases, punishment with lashes and deprivation of rights and condition." By decree of Empress Elizabeth, Lomonosov was found guilty, but was released from punishment. But his salary was halved, and he had to humbly ask for forgiveness from the academicians “for the insolence he committed.”
The Russian Orthodox Church also acted together with the Academy. The Synod accused the great scientist of disseminating anti-clerical works under Articles 18 and 149 of the Military Article of Peter I, which provided for the death penalty. Archimandrite D. Sechenov, the confessor of Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, demanded that the scientist be burned.
The death of Mikhail Lomonosov was sudden and mysterious, and there were rumors about his deliberate poisoning. Perhaps what could not be done publicly, his enemies did secretly.
Lomonosov's archive was confiscated by Potemkin by order of Catherine II and disappeared without a trace.
About the dominance of foreigners in Russian science...
http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/3840102/post276075609/
In total, the triple bundle - the imperial government, the church, the Academy of Sciences - destroyed Russian science and Russian scientists.
And nothing has changed in almost three hundred years since the creation of the Academy of Sciences in Russia.
And today, opponents of the Norman theory of the Russian state - supporters of the theory of a highly developed northern Slavic civilization - are being strangled, as under Lomonosov, thrown out of the Academy and generally from official science.
Let us remember that the Imperial St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences did not elect the greatest scientists D. Mendeleev and N. Lobachevsky as academicians. Let us remember that the President of the Academy, Grand Duke Konstantin, did not allow the candidacy of the great Russian physicist A. Stoletov to run for membership in the Academy, explaining his decision by the “impossible character” of the candidate.
This historical experience is at the disposal of the Academy at all times - a scientist of any degree of learning who does not agree with the “general line” of the authorities is not allowed into the Academy.
With the arrival of the Bolsheviks, a massive purge of such dissenters began.
Why were scientists shot and imprisoned in the USSR?
https://lenta.ru/articles/2016/07/05/repressions/
The great biologist Nikolai Vavilov died in the Gulag. The brilliant biophysicist, founder of helobiology, Alexander Chizhevsky, was accused of counter-revolution, in 1942 he was arrested and thrown into a concentration camp for 8 years, and then exiled to a settlement, and the Ionification Laboratory he created was closed, the publication and distribution of his works was prohibited. And this was after A. Chizhevsky was elected honorary president of the 1st International Congress on Biological Physics and Space Biology in New York in 1939, where he was called “Leonardo da Vinci of the 20th century.” Only in 1962 Chizhevsky was partially rehabilitated (completely posthumously). The great Russian designers Andrei Tupolev and Sergei Korolev passed through the NKVD prisons, and a countless number of scientists perished in the Gulag.
Scientists on Stalin's execution lists
http://rys-arhipelag.ucoz.ru/publ/gulag/uchenye_v_stalinskikh_rastrelnykh_spiskakh/57-1-0-4464
In 1922, on the “philosophical ships” the new government expelled historians and philosophers it did not like. “Self-flagellation and even rejection of one’s history is one of the symptoms of the illness of the Russian people, who have contracted the deadly virus of communism. With this approach, historical science simply dies.”
To finish off the “bespectacled men,” in 1929–1931, Soviet punitive authorities opened the so-called “Academic Case,” which is also called the “Case of Academician Platonov,” a historian of the old school, after the name of the main accused.
All 115 people involved in the case were traditionally accused of “creating an anti-Soviet secret organization and working for foreign intelligence services.” 29 people were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. In August 1931, a group of former officers of the Russian army who worked in the institutions of the Academy of Sciences were sentenced to death.
How the Bolsheviks invented Russia
https://sputnikipogrom.com/history/68755/fake-russia/#.WNuFR6LYXIU
It is no coincidence that I. Shafarevich’s book “Russophobia” was born precisely in academic circles, where there is plenty of material on this topic.
The Russian Academy of Sciences is destroying Russia
Having knocked out Russian scientists in 1917, Russophobes captured the Academy of Sciences.
Jews and foreigners from everywhere are taking big strides to become members - correspondents and academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences
http://ladaria.livejournal.com/4103599.html
There are institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences, where almost all employees are Jews, such as the Institute of Theoretical Physics or the Institute of Crystallography during the directorship of Academician Weinstein. And here is a board at the Institute of Space Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences, on which portraits of the honorary creators of space science and technology are hung: Valentin Semenovich Etkin, Pavel Efimovich Elyasberg, Yan Lvovich Ziman, Yakov Borisovich Zeldovich, etc. IKI is headed by Academician Lev Zeleny.
http://www.vitki.info/html
And no one would be interested in the national composition of the scientific elite if science worked. But she is dying. And people are looking for an answer to the question: why?
By 2019, about 10 thousand scientists may be fired, and this is after Fursenko-Livanov’s draconian cuts.
http://www.ng.ru/science/2016-08-02/3_kartblansh.html
Data for December 2016: in Russia, the number of dissertation defenses has decreased by 40% over 3 years.
http://www.vladtime.ru/nauka/522216
Members of the Academy of Sciences played an important role in the establishment of the disastrous “democratic” regime, in the destruction of the USSR. Academicians from economics A. Aganbegyan and L. Abalkin zealously proved the advantages of capitalism and the liberal market over the socialist system, and corresponding member N. Shmelev excitedly described the delights of the Western world.
Projects developed by initiative groups, which are alternative to market liberalism and aimed at preserving and developing the USSR, were discredited by the USSR Academy of Sciences. A member of the group developing the Soyuz project, A.D., recalls. Mazin:
“Gorbachev invited Academician L.I. Abalkin to consider the Soyuz Project, and if it seemed promising to him, to take it under the “wing” of the Academy. Abalkin responded boorishly: “I don’t talk to ignoramuses.” Then he was told that today we are talking about the very existence of the USSR. The answer was just as boorish: “You are politicians, so root for the USSR, and we are scientists, we will root for science.” In essence, it was the death sentence of the USSR pronounced by the Academy, and this happened on March 7, 1988. In essence, the USSR Academy of Sciences took the position: let the country perish, let millions of people die and become impoverished, but we will not allow consideration of a project for an alternative structure of the country. The media then also did not publish a single line about what was being done during perestroika, and why all this was being done. After this betrayal of journalists, it was no longer possible to save the USSR. That’s when Gorbachev signed the death warrant of the USSR, saying: “We refuse various kinds of Procrustean bed of schemes.” True, no one paid attention to this phrase. They made fun of it and forgot.”
About the project of the state system "Union"
http://pandia.ru/text/78/084/16825.php
Indeed, the Academy of Sciences played a fatal role in the collapse of the USSR, without offering society a single scientifically based program for overcoming crisis phenomena, supported by the authority of leading scientists. Among the academicians, only A.D. “distinguished himself” Sakharov, who became a toy in the hands of destructive forces and made his personal contribution to the direct collapse of the USSR. The Academy of Sciences refused to engage in dialogue with representatives of intellectual forces outside the narrow academic community. The media also contributed to the aggravation of negative phenomena by refusing to discuss alternative proposals for reforming the country, inflating the image of saving “light capitalism.”
Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. Tishkov lied, proving that “democratic” reforms did not lead to the extinction of the people, and at the same time justified the need to import labor. His institute actively scattered “expert” opinions in order to suppress the activities of Russian publicists and publishers, accusing them of “inciting interracial, interreligious and interethnic hatred,” although nations in Russia, according to Tishkov, do not exist.
War against reason
https://knigogid.ru/books/94819-voyna-protiv-razuma/toread
“Democratic” Russia has made the extermination of science and scientists its state policy.
Kill the smart one!
http://www.golos-epohi.ru/?ELEMENT_ID=10703
There is an opinion that by electing officials from law enforcement agencies - the FSB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Presidential Administration - as academicians under the guise of “major scientists,” the leadership of the Russian Academy of Sciences “tried to create a structure of a parallel government. Their people could meet absolutely privately, under a plausible pretext, without arousing any suspicion, and most importantly, all at once. The Russian Academy of Sciences was the new Kremlin, only more powerful... But the Jew Fortov was not lucky: Putin warmed him up for the officials - academicians of the Russian Academy of Sciences.”
http://sasha-portland.livejournal.com/125231.html
The main reason for the anti-Russian position of the academic elite, according to many experts, is the “dominance of revolutionary Jews” in the RAS, from 1917 to the present day.
https://cont.ws/@rastenie/442521
Academicians are loyal allies of the oligarchy that is destroying Russia. Thus, Academician V. Sadovnichy proudly called Moscow State University, which he heads, a forge of oligarchs, i.e. The rector is proud that the university entrusted to him trains swindlers and thieves.
https://news.mail.ru/society/28547945/?frommail=1
The decisive role in the final disintegration of the Academy was played by the so-called “reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences,” which began in 2013. Even the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia confirmed that the initiator of the reform was not the Ministry of Education and Science. According to the then minister D. Livanov, “this law was developed on the floors above.” Who was the “highest floor” for the Ministry of Education and Science at that time: Chairman of the Government D. Medvedev or his deputy. O. Golodets? Administration of the President? or Washington? Brussels? or maybe the CIA? Mossad? if not, then aliens? Or the Lord God himself? – remained unclear. The minister’s omissions and insincerity, his persistent reluctance to give a direct answer to the question about the authorship of the text of the bill, left the widest field for reflection on the topic “who ordered the Academy of Sciences.”
Who “ordered the Academy of Sciences:
http://www.za-nauku.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7587
The main conceptual content of the bill on the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2013, which did not change despite any amendments adopted by the State Duma and protests from the scientific community, was the final elimination of the Russian Academy of Sciences from scientific research by cutting it off from academic institutions, which were transferred under the control of the government represented by the newly created Federal Agency of Scientific Organizations (FANO). The Academy retained only expert and advisory functions, which finally turned it into a “club of outstanding scientists.” It is noteworthy that none of the academicians left the academy in protest against cutting it off from scientific activities, preferring to continue participating in the “club party.”
This fact outraged even the staff of academic institutions, who prepared a letter of appeal to the academicians.
Letter to academicians and corresponding members of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences and Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences:
http://www.za-nauku.ru/?option=com_content&task=view&id=7690&Itemid=39
“Dear senior colleagues! Research staff of the Russian Academy of Sciences are deeply disappointed by your conformist position in relation to the law on the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Regulations on the Federal Agency of Scientific Organizations. Back on July 1, 2013, your colleagues refused to enter the newly created “academy,” thereby winning our trust and respect. For more than three months, we, together with the July 1 Club and the Trade Union of the Russian Academy of Sciences, fought for the repeal of the law that was destructive for Russian science. You, while discussing responsibility to the collectives of institutions, have been conducting behind-the-scenes negotiations with the authorities all this time. And what have you achieved?
The law was adopted practically without changes. The RAS became a “club of interests” with a monthly allowance for silence. A draft Agency Regulation has been released, which directly states that your “interest club” has no rights. The majority of RAS employees consider your conformist position to be a betrayal.”
The fruits of the reform were not slow to affect the public position of academicians. At protest rallies against the reform of the Russian Academy of Sciences, held from June to September 2013, the slogan addressed to the country’s leadership regularly appeared: “You yourself are making the opposition out of us.” Left out of work, the academic “elite” turned to opposition ideas, but not to patriotic ones, demanding to work for the good of the people, but to liberal ones, speaking about “academic freedom.” Over the course of several years following the 2013 reform, the Academy finally switched to a pro-Western, anti-Russian and Russophobic position.
This position of the RAS was confirmed by the election of former head of the US State Department Henry Kissinger as a full member of the Academy on October 28, 2016. Let us cite just one statement from the new “Russian” academician. “I prefer chaos and civil war in Russia to the trend of reuniting it into a single strong, centralized state.” The fact that he was elected as an academician indicates that this position corresponds to the ideology of the members of the RAS.
Why did Henry Kisinger become an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences?
And here is another pearl of the new “Russian” academician: “There is no need to waste time and money on a war with Russia. This country is engaged in self-criticism and will destroy itself. Russia really doesn’t love itself and this is evident today: lack of demand for young people, drug addiction, alcoholism, prostitution. The nation is becoming physically weak, medicine is on the verge of collapse, and the state, unfortunately, is not very concerned about this.” Kissinger knows what he is talking about - he and his American colleagues invested a lot of work and 4 trillion dollars to destroy the USSR and make our country exactly like this.
Kissinger is a great friend of the GMO producer Monsanto and the author of the ominous Memorandum 200 on the plans of supranational elites to reduce the population primarily in developing countries with rich resources. Russia was included in the number of such countries as a developing country with rich resources and an “economically unprofitable” population.
Here is another gem from RAS academician Kissinger: “By controlling oil, you control states. By controlling food, you control the population..."
Chapter on Memorandum 200 from Engdahl's book The American Century
http://mir.zavantag.com/voennoe/415871/index.html?page=6
By electing Kissinger as an academician, the Academy of Sciences gave the green light to the extermination of the “economically unprofitable” population of Russia through the promotion of GMOs to the Russian food market, since GMOs are allergies, cancer, infertility... This “academic” anti-state activity is defined by the term “food fascism.”
For this alone, the academicians should have been put on trial if there were a pro-Russian government in Russia. But he's not there yet.
Such an Academy of Sciences is dangerous for the country.
Mafia under the nickname "Academy of Sciences"
To date, after including academicians of medical and agricultural sciences, their total number is 941 people. There are only 13 women among them. The number of corresponding members of the RAS is 1158. (VIKI).
The USSR Academy of Sciences had 323 academicians - three times less than in Russia, corresponding members - 586, almost half as many as in Russia, although the population of Russia is almost two times less than in the USSR.
And all this rapid growth of the academic population occurs at a time when scientific equipment is deteriorating, institutes have no money for research, are empty or even closed, scientific workers are impoverished, go into business, become drunkards, or emigrate in the hundreds of thousands. Academicians do not care that the salary of an ordinary researcher with an academic degree is poor: in the provinces 12-25 thousand, in the capital 30-40 thousand rubles.
In theory, academicians who lead science should be punished for the collapse of science. But instead, the Russian Government increases additional payments for the title of academician from 70 to 100 thousand rubles, corresponding member - from 30 to 50 thousand monthly, maintaining these additional payments for life.
In addition to the fee for the title, academicians and corresponding members have substantial salaries, since they mainly constitute the directors of scientific institutes. The USSR Academy of Sciences was called the “trade union of directors.”
In addition, they are entitled to large apartments in prestigious houses, special free medical care, frequent foreign business trips... They receive scientific prizes, state awards, grants... Funds from the rent of empty institutes were also in their hands, until they were appropriated by the bureaucratic office - FANO. But this situation is characterized by the Russian proverb “a thief stole a thief’s club,” since for science and ordinary scientists it makes no difference who owns these buildings.
And academicians take all these handouts for granted, obediently approving all the decisions of the liberal government, which was destroying Russian science. And none of them even squeaked about the destruction of science and knowledge-intensive industry, which simply eliminated the customer of science and made it unclaimed. And the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Yu. Osipov, kept quiet, enjoying life in Switzerland for six months. And Fortov mumbled indistinctly all about money, and about property, not about science.
According to the Academy's charter, the main duty of the Academy members is to enrich science with new achievements.
But academicians succeeded only in their own enrichment. In terms of scientific output in terms of investment in science, Russia ranks one of the last places in the world.
But nevertheless, this entire academic armada continues to feed from the Russian State Budget, while working against Russia.
It seems that the Russophobic government of Russia is paying members of the Russian Academy of Sciences for the work done to kill Russian science, and therefore Russia.
Academicians are a scientific oligarchy. And just like the oligarchs, they receive their bribes unjustly and unfairly.
Who are they - academicians, corresponding members? Cunning guys who know how to please their superiors and clearly follow the “general line” of the current government. This quality allows them to stay afloat both under the Bolsheviks and under the liberals, like, for example, Academician D. Lvov. This public has long forgotten what scientific work is, and at the start they didn’t understand it well. What is presented as their “great work” is usually the work of their employees. And they show little interest in the work of newcomers in the elections to the Russian Academy of Sciences. When selecting new members of the RAS, the main requirement for the candidate is not to be smarter than the existing ones. And of course, belong to the clan of “our own”.
Places at the Academy of Sciences are inherited.
We set a record for the number of chosen relatives
https://www.gazeta.ru/science/2016/10/28_a_10284935.shtml
Academicians even drag their own untalented children into the RAS.
http://www.za-nauku.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10923&Itemid=35
The activities of “academic dynasties” reliably ensure the continuity of the anti-state policy of the Academy of Sciences.
Thus, the scandalous Commission for Combating Pseudoscience is headed by Academician E.B. Aleksandrov, nephew of the former President of the USSR Academy of Sciences A.P. Alexandrova (from 1975 to 1986). By the way, A.P. Aleksandrov led the work on control and safety systems of nuclear power plants, in particular, the Chernobyl plant, and these systems caused a lot of criticism from specialists. It was during the reign of his uncle that his nephew, who defended his doctoral dissertation two years after his Ph.D. thesis, received the USSR State Prize in 1978, and in 1979 became a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences at the age of 43. Today this “scientist” is actively pushing GMOs into Russia.
It has become a sign that when things go badly at the Russian Academy of Sciences, a commission on pseudoscience is activated
On the subversive activities of the Commission on Pseudoscience of the Russian Academy of Sciences
http://www.liveinternet.ru/users/zdorovie_russian/post408664549
The “successful scientist” Mikhail Gelfand, the grandson of academician Israel Moiseevich Gelfand, is also working in the same field - promoting GMOs to Russia.
Not scary GMOs
Director of the Center for Bioengineering of the Russian Academy of Sciences, academician K.G. Scriabin, the son of Academician G.K. Scriabin and the grandson of Academician K.I. Scriabin, is also (how interesting!) an ardent supporter of GMOs.
It turns out in its pure form “ma-fia”, which translated from Italian means “my family”.
Katyuschik-TV. Scientific Tribunal. Pseudoscientific academician Alexandrov, Gaifulin, Buchstaber
Whom does the Academy of Sciences consider “its own”. Here is the opinion: “From 1917 to this day, the Russian Academy of Sciences has been divided between two clans - Jews and Tatars. They do not allow anyone from other nationalities inside. Hence the lack of scientific results.”
Who and when captured the RAS?
http://www.kramola.info/vesti/novosti/kto-i-kogda-zahvatil-ran
In summary, the Academy of Sciences is a nourishing feeding trough for its own people, a comfortable resting place, where no one asks the academicians for the results of their work. And there is no way to expel even the most unnecessary and harmful ones from the Academy. But if the tail of the distribution - the worst - is not cut off, the system rots. What is happening to the Academy of Sciences
An academician is a real scientist - a rare exception in the RAS. If there are any, they are not the ones who make the difference in this organization.
To be continued
N. Belozerova,
Yu. Tkachenko,
V. Selivanov,
L. Fionova
I was especially outraged by the definition of the resettlement of the Crimean Tatars from Crimea in 1944 as genocide. The description says that the film was shot for a British audience and after the presentation of the English version in London, the Russian version was also released. The screenwriter and co-director of the film is historian Oleksa Gaivoronsky, who in an interview with Crimea. Reality chatted that “Crimea is my home. And Ukraine is my state.” The general producer of the film is Amet Volodarsky, about him below.
From the very first minute, the reunification of Russia and Crimea is called “an unexpected transition under Russian control” and, with reference to unnamed political scientists, it is reported that this historical event is assessed “as the beginning of a new redistribution of European borders.”
More quotes:
Currently, according to official data, about 250 thousand people live on the peninsula (Crimean Tatars), which is probably somewhat underestimated.
The couple are engaged in the revival of the forgotten traditional crafts of the Crimean Tatars. They will become guides to the world of memories and hopes of their people, who now find themselves behind the new Iron Curtain.
But the Crimean Khanate did not remain independent for long. Soon, to replace the Golden Horde, Crimea had a new older brother - the Ottoman Empire.
The ancient law, which from time immemorial forced any newcomers to mix with the old-timers and turned them into children of this land, did not work in the new conditions of classical colonialism. Russian autocrats took up the construction of a new, their own Crimea.
For Russia, Crimea was the only corner of a subtropical paradise within the northern empire. And there was no place left for the natives in this cramped paradise.
There was little free land in Crimea and therefore the authorities were interested in pushing the Crimean Tatars out of the peninsula as much as possible. At times there were thoughts about their forced eviction.
The policy of exclusion continued for decades.
Under the pretext that the Crimean Tatars allegedly helped the troops of Great Britain, France, Sardinia and Turkey stationed in Crimea, the Russian authorities increased pressure, forcing at least 150 thousand more Crimean Tatars to a new exodus to the Ottoman Empire.
The recruitment of Crimean Tatars into Nazi battalions was equally unsuccessful. Their numbers have never been compared with the number of Crimean Tatars who fought in the Red Army. Nevertheless, after the expulsion of the Nazis, the Soviet government accused the Crimean Tatars of total collaboration with the occupiers and used this as a pretext for the total deportation of the Crimean Tatar people.
This action of Stalinist terror, contrary to custom, was organized not on ideological, but exclusively on national grounds.
The memory of this act of genocide (resettlement from Crimea) is an unhealed wound in the history of every Crimean Tatar family.
What is the Zekkiye Development Fund?
There is practically no information about this fund, but we still managed to find something. Zekkie is engaged in promoting the ideas of the writer Vladimir Polyakov and works closely with the Russian scientific community. For example, Polyakov’s lecture was organized jointly with the Academy of Linguistic Sciences and the Moscow Institute of Foreign Languages, and the presentation of his books with the same Scientific Council for the Study and Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage. President of the Foundation Amet Volodarsky.
Who is Amet Volodarsky?
Amet Aleksandrovich Volodarsky is the vice-rector for general issues and international activities of the Moscow Institute of Foreign Languages, and a certain Emma Fedorovna Volodarskaya also works there as rector. He also served as deputy head of the Scientific Council of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Amet Volodarsky organized the premiere screening of the scandalous film “Haitarma”, criticism of which cost the then Consul General of Russia in Simferopol Vladimir Andreev his post.
Here's something else interesting:
Deputy Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Russian Academy of Sciences Amet Volodarsky states that, as a sign of solidarity with the Crimean Tatar TV channel ATR, which Roskomnadzor did not give permission to broadcast, the implementation of all social projects related to Crimea is suspended. In particular, according to his information, the opening of the Department of Crimean Tatar Language and Culture in Moscow and the design and construction of an international educational center in Saki are suspended.
“Whoever’s game this is, it is detrimental to the development of harmony. I am sure that our decision is not emotional in nature, but only emphasizes the detrimental nature of pressure on the culture and self-awareness of the indigenous people of Crimea,” he wrote.
Who is Vladimir Polyakov?
From the statement of the Tauride Union KRO: Polyakov is known in Crimea as a consistent denier of pro-fascist collaborationism, which, in particular, played such a tragic role in the history of the Crimean partisan movement. Taking the point of view of the Russophobic ethnic organization “Majlis of the Crimean Tatar people,” Polyakov considers collaborationism an invention of Soviet propaganda and for many years has been actively whitewashing fascist collaborators. The lack of special historical education allows him to easily propagate his opinions, neglecting the existing documentary base.