Cult approach

Arounded by suddenly and look, mildly, exotic, even in the present time, the "Fundamentals of State Cultural Policy" are not signed by anyone. What can be accepted either as a claim to the creation of a sacred text like a “short course in the history of the CPSU (b)” or “moral code of the builder of communism”, or as a gloomy reminder that in the difficult years of building socialism in a single country, individual inventions were carried out anonymously in institutions called sharahs.

One way or another, the mentioned “foundations” are either a conscious, or an unconscious attempt on a common restorer, in the spirit of the same, but adapted to the new realities of the “scoop”, build something like socialist realism - a universal “creative method” that is mandatory for everyone who wants to sing and laugh like children.

I will not even talk about the prospects of this bold attempt: they are too obvious. But such an intention is understandable and even in a sense is logical. In a homogeneous society, which they try to slap from heterogeneous, non -glued and not jamming details, there should be a homogeneous culture in the idea (in their idea), the functioning of which should be regulated by state institutions.

The most catchy point of this layered document is, of course, the brisk slogan "Russia is not Europe." The question is interesting. Ekaterina the Great, for example, once stated that Russia is a European state, that is, Europe, and it was somehow not accepted to object to the monarchs. But the anonymous authors of the “foundations” from under the wing of the cultural minister of Medinsky tell us that no, not Europe. Who to believe? And to whom you want. In any case, while they give, you can argue.

But Russian culture, at least in its most viable manifestations, is European and no other culture. Here at least argue, at least not.

It was she, Russian culture, the one that our ancestors and we studied in gymnasiums, schools and universities, who created the optics, through which many generations of educated Russian people are used to looking at their country, their history, and their lives from the position of a European person. That is, from the side.

The authors of the "Fundamentals" all the time talk about some such special and not similar traditions that ... well and so on. So, the tradition of Russian culture - as, indeed, in general, European - this is primarily a tradition of critical understanding. Understanding of history - both domestic and world. Comprehension of oneself, that is, this tradition itself. This is the tradition of constant updating, capturing and mastering the language of modernity, no matter how disturbing and uncomfortable modernity would seem. This is the tradition of the active resistance of an individual person with hostile and inert circumstances, and not lazy junk in the standing water of state-owned self-love, for some reason called patriotism.

It is this tradition that is freely fits into the European and world cultural context, it was it that gave rise to a number of names that create an idea of ​​Russia as something really and worthy of existing, and not as an annoying historical misunderstanding.

But I came across a recent reasoning of the minister, who did not refute, but as if clarified this scandalous thesis - about the fact that "not Europe". He reported something like the fact that Russia is just Europe. And even more than Europe. At least territorial terms. But Europe has long been no Europe, and so - the devil knows what it is.

This kind of revelations - by the way, are not at all unique today - I, perhaps, will not undertake not to analyze, but even comment on. It requires a specialist in a completely different area.

In general, “Op-Pa, Opa, Op-Pa! Russia is not Europe! And if Europe ...” Then let the reader crush himself, as far as possible, avoiding the most obvious rhyme.