Siamese antipodes

Russia has no more natural ally than the United States

Russia's influence on world events in the twentieth century was by no means limited to superpower rivalry. It was more multifaceted and wider. The influence took place in both directions: not only the United States influenced Russia, but also Russia influenced the United States. Not only at the level of individuals (for immigrants from Russia throughout the twentieth century created Broadway, Hollywood, Las Vegas and a number of industries, largely making America what it became), but also at the level of states. Despite the colossal differences in the principles on which these powers were built, and in the implementation of these principles, similar processes took place in Russia and the United States. Moreover, the interaction between the two countries was by no means only confrontation and rivalry, as it might seem at a superficial glance. Drawing attention to Russia's multifaceted and comprehensive influence on what is happening in the world in general and America in particular is especially important in an era of crisis, when the entire world civilization is at a crossroads. The decision of where to go and with which allies largely depends on each country’s adequate understanding of its place in the world.

The October Revolution and its influence on the West . Could the revolution that began with the Russian Empire spread to the West? When the Bolsheviks spoke about world revolution, these were not empty words. The world in which the vast majority of people in all countries were convinced of the “sacred right of kings” to rule, and also that “all power comes from God,” collapsed. The injustice of the world that arose from the ruins of monarchies, in which it is not the nobility of birth that rules, but money, was obvious. The rulers of European countries (starting with Germany, but also in the United States, which by the end of the twentieth century had more social benefits than under communism, which the Bolsheviks promised) were afraid that the revolution from Russia, which proclaimed the takeover of power from capital, would spread to the West . And they made colossal concessions to the working people, unimaginable before the Bolshevik victory in Russia, just to prevent an uprising that would sweep them away. And they succeeded.

Until the fall of Bolshevism in Russia, more than seventy years later, social benefits in many European countries were given with an eye on the USSR. As soon as the USSR fell, social benefits in many Western countries began to decline. Representatives of the middle class told me this with surprise (and chagrin) as a fait accompli in a number of European countries. At the same time, the connection between the reduction of social benefits in their countries and the fall of the USSR, in which social justice was proclaimed (perhaps hypocritically, but loudly) as the main goal of the system, was obvious to the interlocutors. The cruelty and hypocrisy of the Soviet system did not relieve European leaders of the need to carry out social reforms precisely because of the existence of the USSR. Moreover, free medicine and free education from school to universities in the Soviet Union were real social guarantees. Moreover, medicine and education became free in all states influenced by the USSR, from the Warsaw Pact countries to Cuba.

The second coming of the intelligentsia to Russia. After 1917, the Bolsheviks did everything possible to destroy the intelligentsia. Its outstanding representatives - from philosophers and engineers to scientists and artists - emigrated or were forcibly deported abroad. Those who remained were destroyed: by hunger (like Blok), by bullet (like Gumilyov), or by disappearing in the Gulag (like Babel, Meyerhold, Mandelstam). In addition, since any word, even in the mildest form, condemning the government, threatened with camps or execution, the intelligentsia began to disappear: the older generation that had formed in the Russian Empire was destroyed or died out, and new ones stopped being born. For in order to become an intellectual, at least minimal social conditions are necessary. However, thirty years passed, and a new intelligentsia appeared in the USSR, not similar to the pre-revolutionary one, but just as bright and original. How did this miracle happen?

Without claiming generality or depth of research, I will express several obvious considerations. The beginning (or at least one of the beginnings) of the revival of the intelligentsia in the Soviet empire, paradoxically, was the creation in the Gulag of charazkas focused on the creation of atomic weapons. And then (after the destruction of the Gulag) science cities, the number of which (as now, after declassification, it turned out) numbered in the dozens: a scale disproportionately larger compared to the Los Alamos laboratory created in the USA to achieve the same goal. There was neither time nor uranium for experiments: the bomb had to be detonated the first time. And it was blown up the first time. This marked the beginning of the Soviet leadership's respect for the role of theory in science. And this, in turn, left an imprint on the entire Soviet science of the second half of the twentieth century, on its originality and power. And also for the second coming of the intelligentsia in general.

However, scientists and “techies” are one thing, and the intelligentsia are not necessarily the same people. The episode that marked the beginning of the second coming of the intelligentsia to Russia - this time to the Soviet Union - was the legendary dialogue between Stalin and Beria. He told the leader that anti-Soviet talk was circulating among the creators of the bomb. “Leave them alone, Lavrenty,” Stalin allegedly said.

Considering that the attitude towards Russia as a superpower throughout the world to this day is largely due to the country’s presence of nuclear weapons (bombs) and delivery vehicles (missiles), strategically such an unprecedented relaxation justified itself. Whether these words were uttered by Stalin or slightly different ones, the party line after the death of the Generalissimo gave birth to the Soviet intelligentsia. A powerful and original force that influenced the situation in the country and the world. So influential that, recently talking in New York with non-Russian speaking people belonging to the establishment, I heard: “Today the intelligentsia as a class has survived only in one country in the world - in Russia.”

Freedom of speech in the USSR of Brezhnev and Andropov was allowed not everywhere, but in specially designated places: in the kitchen, in the smoking room, near the beer stall, and also in the forest (where only a woodpecker or a trusted friend could be an informer) - which created a unique a culture of subtext that stimulates creation in all areas of creativity and cognition. Gradually, a way of thinking and living in which imagination and dialogue came to the fore became the norm for the entire educated class.

People of this generation today (in an era when the intelligentsia as a class influencing events in the country has again almost disappeared) are mistakenly called sixties. Consciously or unwittingly belittling the role of the educated class (I emphasize: not a stratum, but a class!) in Russia in the second half of the twentieth century and its influence on the world as a whole. After all, young people in the Soviet Union turned into intellectuals in the 70s and 80s. In addition, a similar class arose in all the countries of Eastern Europe that were under Bolshevik rule. The fact that East Germans are generally more interesting than Western Germans, not as professionals, but as individuals, is perceived with surprise, although in fact this is natural. The same is with modern Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland. And this is a colossal achievement of the USSR. Not just underestimated, but ignored.

After the collapse of the Land of Soviets, the position of the intelligentsia in Russia became, to put it mildly, unenviable, despite the expansion of freedom of speech. The truth, however, is that in other countries the situation is little better for independent thinkers. Respect for people of intelligence in the United States at the beginning of the third millennium is incomparably less than, say, for those who make money by playing on the stock exchange or exchange rates. During the crisis of the end of the Bush era, this became a colossal problem in the States. Suddenly it turned out that American children, after graduating from school, do not go into science or technology. American universities are still the best in the world, but the students in the faculties of physics, chemistry and engineering are mainly Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, and Indians. Who are increasingly leaving the USA for their homeland, taking their know how with them. As a result, the “center of gravity” of technogenic civilization is shifting to Asia.

It is symptomatic that the problem of a sharp decrease in respect for people of intelligence at the beginning of the third millennium arose in the United States and Russia almost simultaneously. Moreover, it was recognized as a problem in the Russian Federation earlier than in the States. Again, there is a strange similarity - restoring the country's leading position in science and technology was set as a priority task almost simultaneously by the presidents of the United States and Russia. And this is a colossal potential for cooperation, important not only for the two countries, but also for civilization as a whole.

Youth protest in the USA and the USSR . Hipsters appeared in Moscow almost immediately with the death of Stalin. When it was still impossible to express dissatisfaction with the authorities in words. But walking silently through the streets, dressed differently from other Soviet citizens, was risky, but possible. Hipsters had their trousers, skirts and hair cut off and were expelled from the Komsomol. That is, in the mid-fifties, dressing differently from everyone else required courage. However, people were not shot or sent to the logging camp for having trousers like pipes and a hairpin on their heads, which was colossal progress.

The dudes movement was the first youth protest against what was happening in the world after the Second World War. The protest of young people against the existing order in Russia was ahead of that in Europe and the United States by a whole decade. In the excellent new Russian film "Hipsters" (dedicated to how the grandfathers of the youth of the 21st century lived), one of the characters, having arrived in Moscow from New York, tells his friends: "I have bad news for you. There are no dudes on Broadway!" In fact: in the fifties there were no dudes on Broadway. But they appeared all over America - and then throughout Western Europe - in the early sixties, ten years later.

If in the USSR the sixties were intellectuals, the Pentecostals (a term undeservedly unused) were dudes who expressed their protest silently. Where have the dudes gone? They were destroyed by the new concept of the party and the KGB. But not in the same sense as it was in the thirties. The hipster - paradoxically - was destroyed by dosed freedom, which, compared to the complete absence of it under Stalin, was a giant step towards civilization and humanism. After the death of the “leader and teacher,” the KGB began to control the country not with blood, but with fear. Allowing you to be dissatisfied in smoking rooms and kitchens, to tell jokes about Khrushchev and Brezhnev in pubs and face to face. But at the same time, any business accompanied by material gain was equated to a crime. The combination of the ability to speak and the inability to do gave birth to the Russian intelligentsia of the second coming. As for the dudes, they simply disappeared into the rest of the crowd. The width of trousers has ceased to be a sign by which a person is identified as “not ours.” The dude who spoke turned into an intellectual.

The advent of the intelligentsia was a force opposing the party and the carrion it generated. The spirit of free conversations, hints, anecdote, and irony penetrated all pores of society. The intelligentsia was the frame of reference for party workers and ideologists who officially fought against it. It is known that Andropov had one of the best collections of jazz recordings in the country and was an avid reader of samizdat. Brezhnev loved jokes about himself and listened to Vysotsky's songs. The children of party officials and dissidents studied at the same universities, spent time at the same parties, and competed over the same girls. Vysotsky performed not only in research institutes, where he was idolized, but also in front of the KGB officers who persecuted him: the rules of the game are on the verge of madness.

Among educated girls, a poet was rated higher than a factory director, an artist higher than a general's son, a doctor of science higher than a district committee secretary, a pianist higher than the owner of a car with a driver. A system of research institutes was created, covering millions of citizens - a figure commensurate with the number of literate Russian people in pre-revolutionary Russia. The Academy of Sciences, expanding almost continuously, became a powerful spiritual force, especially in Moscow, Leningrad and academic campuses. A world conducive to intellectual creation emerged in the country. In which intangible values ​​were a thousand times more important and vital than official slogans.

After the flight of the first satellite, America came to its senses, discovering that the study of exact sciences in the USSR was better organized than in the USA. (By the way, with regard to school education, this situation still remains.) After which, funding for education and the study of exact sciences in the States has sharply improved. This influence of the USSR on the United States - and indirectly on Western Europe - was powerful and positive.

The global financial crisis and its coordinated overcoming . The collapse of the USSR marked not only the liberation of the country from ideology, but also the beginning of a crisis, in particular the crisis of the intelligentsia. The country, freed from dictatorship, contrary to expectation and logic, simply did not give a damn about professors and scientists, as well as doctors, engineers and teachers, calling those who are the core of any civilized nation, the basis of prosperity and development, with the contemptuous word “state employees”, which was absent before perestroika in dictionaries. It is not surprising that the intelligentsia in free Russia began to disappear in the generations that emerged after the collapse of the Union. A strange repetition of the process that took place after the Bolshevik revolution: the conditions seem to be diametrically opposed - but the result is the same. The values ​​of intelligence and decency, which seemed unshakable in the second half of the 19th and the second half of the 20th century, collapsed and began to cause irony and hostility in society. And this is not surprising: an intellectual does not fit into the world of property redistribution, “assaults” and “roofs”. He organically does not know how to give bribes. He doesn't know how to steal and be "cool". He can only create. Intellectuals and generally professionals in any field of creation in Russia, freed from Bolshevism, are pushed to the margins of what is happening.

It would seem, well, let them die out like dinosaurs. But who will revive Russia as an industrial power? Oligarchs? Security forces? Bankers? Officials? Thieves in law and above the law? Party functionaries? Without a change in the moral climate and the return of respect for the intelligentsia in Russia, transferring the economy to a technological basis from raw materials is impossible in any future, this is obvious.

Will there be a third coming of the intelligentsia to Russia? To do this, at a minimum, it is necessary to revive respect for people of thought in general and creators in particular. Without a revival of respect for intellectual work, calls to transfer the country to high-tech rails, sounding from the highest stands, will remain mantras.

It is all the more striking that similar processes of throwing the intelligentsia and, in general, people of scientific and technological creation to the margins, and again with a delay in comparison with Russia, began to occur in the United States. For completely different reasons - but the result is the same: a sharp drop in the prestige of creators in any field of science and technology. The idea that similar problems between Russia and the United States should be overcome not through confrontation, but through coordination seems natural.

Let's summarize. Some processes in Russia and America occur similarly due to the geopolitical claims of these countries. Another source of similarity is opposition, an effect reminiscent of the one through which a negative can be restored to a positive. In any case, Russia and Western civilization are “Siamese antipodes.” Interaction between them, based on cooperation and not on confrontation, can lead to progress and prosperity for Russia and America. And also Europe. And with them the whole world.

In order for this to happen, Russia and the West need to get rid of complexes and prejudices. A new world and a new relationship can be born if the two great countries that were the superpowers of the 20th century realize that, despite their differences, they are closely related to each other. The similarities between the North American and Russian civilizations (compared to, say, the civilizations of China, India, Korea, Malaysia and Japan) far outweigh the differences. The mutual influence is colossal. In the interests of both countries and human civilization as a whole, it is necessary to overcome the dividing barriers. Each of the two great powers in the recent past needs to take a sober look at themselves from the outside, changing their self-esteem where necessary. Correct mistakes made, sometimes serious ones. And together with all civilized humanity, stand in the first ranks of those who are building a new, harmonious and creative world.

In the United States, with the advent of the new President Obama, people at the very top are openly talking about the crisis in all areas without exception - from education to the banking system and innovation. There is no doubt that the Russian Federation should also undertake a similar course reorientation. Russia has no more natural ally than the United States. Russia has no territories that need to be divided with the United States. If it is necessary to divide markets, Russia, which does not produce anything at all, but only extracts, will only benefit from this.

The idea that in the multipolar world poles with each other should fight and be enemies is extremely dangerous for the country, whose leaders think so. Poles of the multipolar world may not be repulsed, but attracted, not resisted, but to cooperate. If Russia borrows from the United States the best that is in this country - the triumph of the law in a multinational and multi -confessional society, the equality of people not in words, but in fact, a powerful creative principle - this will give us a chance to get out of the crisis by rebirth and at the same time restore The status of superpower. Such a strategy will be in the interests of Russia and all mankind.

Yuri Magarshak, professor, New York-Moscow