"Vladimir Rostislavovich spoke very powerful against Russophobia"

Defenders of Medinsky brought arguments in favor of his dissertation at a special press conference

On October 18, a press conference was held “Problems of objectivity of coverage of Russian history: dissertation of Vladimir Medinsky”. The presence of Medinsky was expected, but the minister did not come. His interests were defended by historians Anatoly Korolev, Konstantin Averyanov, Grigory Gerasimov and Nikolai Starostenkov.

From the deputy chairman of the dissertation, who considered the dissertation of the minister, Nikolai Starostenkov, we heard that the defense of Medinsky took place in violation of paragraph 3.6.7 of the Regulation on the dissatisfaction, which prescribes the referen from the Rosobrnadzor. Starostenkov admitted that the “correct” abstract, that is, the “third version”, the one in which the opponents were the Tymchik, Semin, Korolev, laid out the day before on the Twitter of the Russian Military Historical Society (RVIO), never sent to the highest certification commission (Higher Attestation Commission) and was not posted on the Higher Attestation Commission. Starostenkov admitted that the “wrong” (that is, “first wrong”) version of the abstract was sent to the Higher Attestation Commission (there are now three of these versions in total).

Starostenkov also admitted that the “wrong” (in this case is the “second wrong”) version of the abstract was, possibly, it was sent to a number of institutions on the list of newsletters, which is also a fatal violation of the position on the dissolution and the provision on the award of academic degrees. The fact of being in the Russian State Library (RGB) of the “wrong” (second) version of the abstract he did not challenge. The “correct” version of the author’s version of the abstract, which was sent yesterday, took place, according to him, from the library of the Russian State Social University (RSSU), which is not in doubt-on the cover, if you look closely, the Stamp of the Russian State Service for the RGSU with page 3 shines through (while the representative of the Russian military-historical society, Vladislav Kononov, in an interview with Novaya, said that this is a version from RGB).

The protection of Medinsky should be considered invalid due to violations of this requirement - references of the abstract to the Higher Attestation Commission and newsletter to the library.

Starostenkov confused the audience, saying that the applicants' claims to the confusion of abstracts were dismantled on the council in Belgorod. The New Gazeta wrote about the third version of the abstract, while the applicants' claims were related to the confusion between the first and second versions (located in the Higher Attestation Commission and in the RSL, respectively).

Former member of the Expert Council on History in 2011, Konstantin Averyanov said that the meeting of the expert council and discussion took place. We will remind, earlier members of this council told the “new” reverse - there were no meetings and discussions of the dissertation of Medinsky. When asked whether Averyanov believes that his colleagues lied, he did not give a direct answer, while saying that "you will find out who was a speaker in this case on October 20."

One of the “events” of the press conference was the performance of one of the three supposedly “opponents” of the dissertation of Medinsky-Anatoly Korolev. The rest, as he explained, could not come "for technical reasons."

First of all, Korolev explained why he agreed to become an opponent of Medinsky. He stated that he had a monograph and a number of articles in scientific publications on the topic "The image of Russia through the eyes of foreigners", which "is directly related to the theme of the dissertation of Medinsky." “Now, if there are publications from three and higher on the topic of the dissertation, you can oppose it. Then, six years ago, there was no such demand, ”Korolev noted.

Another reason why the historian agreed to oppose Medinsky: he was attracted by the previous work of the minister, "where he protects our national interests, which the West encroaches."

According to the queen, because of some metaphysical fear, "the West looks and looked at Russia as some huge black storm, which is about to erupt, thunder will be heard and rain will be overlooked."

“In short, Vladimir Rostislavovich spoke very powerfully against Russophobia, which has mental, psychological roots and with which we have to fight, then to some extent to perceive. This is now used in the framework of the information and psychological wars, which is west against Russia. The image of Russia often seems to be ... [inaudibly] people are illiterate, uneducated, who only drink. In general, the work complies with the requirements that are presented by the Higher Attestation Commission. This problem is solved systematically <...> Six years later, in general, I support the tonality, the philosophy of the story that he adhered to, ”concluded Korolev.

Recall, the Ministry of Culture was called the Queen, Tymchik and Semin with the narrowest specialists on the topic of the dissertation of Medinsky. At the same time, all three historians specialize in the 20th century, and the topic of the dissertation of the minister touches the 15-17th century. As it turned out that these people allegedly became opponents of Medinsky, Korolev could not clearly explain.

“Some kind of idea that we are finished idiots. Even during the years of Soviet power, I was engaged in God know what problems. I studied the work of Tolstoy Leo Nikolaevich <...> During this time, over 26 years of post -Soviet power, I dealt with so many problems - I have 400 works <...> I wrote work on civilization - Russian, Russian <...> This concerns the problem that the respected dissertation dealt with.

In addition, there are works “Russia between the West and the East”, I was engaged in Masons, the history of the party - God knows what he was doing, ”said Korolev.

According to the information in the RSL catalog, the doctor’s doctoral dissertation is devoted to the CPSU policy to increase the role of state bodies and public organizations in the communist education of youth, the doctoral dissertation of the Tymchik - the Civil War of the 1918-1922. Doctoral Semina could not be found. His candidate was written on the topic "Activities of the Communist Party for Propaganda of the Lenin Military Theoretical Heritage during the Great Patriotic War."

After the completion of the press conference, Starostenkova asked additional questions. In particular, why, being in Belgorod in the dissolution, he did not make fun of applicants who stated that the specialization of the opponents of Medinsky (Lavrov, Borisov and Hasanov) did not correspond to the topic of the dissertation of the minister. He replied that he did not pay attention to this claim of the applicants.

A couple of days ago, Sergei Parkhomenko said at the Echo of Moscow radio stations that we must wait for the flood or fire in which the Author of Medinsky would die. Yesterday and today, the abstract in the RSL was not available in electronic and solid form. Yesterday they said that "the abstract was issued to someone." Today - that he is in the "first section". And with the electronic version - "Technical difficulties". And exactly at the moment when they began to deal with that, what kind of technical difficulties there, the RSL was evacuated.

And after lunch, they suddenly declared the resignation of Nikolai Arister - the chief scientist of the VAK and the main savior of Medinsky, who arranged a circus with the review of the case from Yekaterinburg. According to the "new", the certification of Medinsky 2011 is no longer in Vak. Where is this business - Arister should know. Fortunately for Medinsky, now there is no one to ask in Vake.