I read the other day that at the Minister of Culture, Vladimir Midage, some two ghouls filed an application for the deprivation of his tech degree of the doctor of historical sciences.
Interestingly, I think it is based on Konstantin Erusalimsky and widged Ivan Babitsky to be based on Konstantin. Who are these? It turns out that the Yurusalim Doctor of Science (what only to check it is necessary), and it seems like an expert (also doubt) for that period of time, which the dissertation of Medinasky is written. And Babitsky generally dsming with the incomprehensible contents of the cranial box, to the story that is not related, but called the philologist. He was defended by the late Renaissance of the 16th century, and on this basis he decided that he had the right to question the competence of the doctor of science.
That is the most gobleord jerks bubitsky
The essence of the case is that these liberal citizens want to remake our story, and the dissertation of Midage, "the problems of objectivity in the coverage of the Russian history of the second half of the 15-17th centuries," consider unscientific. For this, the self-satisfied expert Ivan Babitsky from some on skouring hand The compressed "thesis" found unclean scientists, including not known non-known nonsense, who agreed to organize the minister's injury. This expert says the thesis does not represent scientific value and in general is absurd.
The correspondent of "Kommersant" asks Babitsky to bring a few particularly bright examples of absurdity, but there was not a single argument that there is no argument to say anything here in defense of their theory. Only foggy "We will soon publish a statement with detailed comments." Apparently, without senior comrades, this "specialist" on the Renaissance of the 16th century is not authorized to make his false statements to the Midage, suddenly something will say, the spruce immediately and will open.
And what's interesting, I was defended by Medina in the Moscow university, and the statement of these governments will consider the Disement in Yekaterinburg. Strange affair. Why so? I'd like to know. Maybe because they do not want to attract the attention of journalists, and so that around this dirty dolza was smaller noise? Babitsky is of course focusing, I'm not me and the horse is not mine, I don't know why in Yekaterinburg. And after all it is clear that it is lying.
Many cultural figures were defended by the Minister, including the People's Artist of the USSR Oleg Basilashvili, director of the St. Petersburg Theater "Russian Affrise" named after Andrei Mironova Rudolf Furmanov, Rector Gityis Grigory Zaslavsky.
I really liked the statement of Andrei Konchalovsky: "Each scientist has the right to his own point of view, and if someone does not agree with it, it is refuted by another scientific work. Write your scientific works! " And after all, he is right, write, Philologist Babitsky, refute.
Claims of the intelligentsia to Minister Midage are known and understandable. A former lucky piercer, then deputy of the State Duma, then the head of the "cultural laundry" is wherever nothing went. But fierce Russophile, an amateur historian, the exposer of black myths about Russia (and in contrast to them creating, on the convictions of many, new - pink - myths) - this is already all, bringing the dead man. Medinsky did not try so much to like the cultural community, that at times it seemed: he struggled to him exactly what would not like. Succeeded.
His appointment for the post of Minister of Culture The liberal wing of the political spectrum called the social taste. But no one could suggest which slap will be his activity. With the Commissioner, the MEDINSKIY ON CULTURAL ECONOMICS, by one hand, depriving whole industries and the factory, refusing to finance authoritative - and more often fashionable - institutions, sending respected figures, assigning people impossible (such as Kekhman), the other hand - creating new spaces and meanings , most advantage - patriotically oriented. Not that he demanded the appeal of all the music to the battalion "Glory to Fatherland!", But I expressed myself extremely clearly: "I will not finance movies about the rashka-shit." That is, frolic there as you want, but at your own expense.
Well, what is the fierce Ham, the guardian, almost the "second furseva".
Well, an amateur historian. Many said - grafoman. MEDINSKY rewrited the domestic history (at that of her origin who lives in the midst person's head, honoring the historic scientific scientific) with the same passion, from what a quarter of the century (in the other direction), liberal publicists rewritten, - he changed the refrain "What we are vigilant Dirty "on" We are honest and smart, unfairly obtasted. " In general, where the coffin was insets, there is a table.
Why then, the deputy-journalist Medinsky needed to acquire a degree of doctor of historical sciences - the god of the news. The fact of the dissertation, perhaps, gives the research of some scientific weight, but does not yet turn the functioner in the scientist, and the reputation of the official and deputy disins on the circle is the saddest, and you can not say that it is undeservedly. In dissertation "Problems of objectivity in the coverage of Russian history of the second half of the XV-XVII centuries." Medino exposed medieval resources - the compositions of foreigners about Russia, which for a long time were considered authoritative, independent testimonies. I can not judge the quality of these exposure, I am not a historian, but I admit that by some criteria they can be vulnerable. In science it often happens.
And so killed. Ivan Babitsky's philologist and two historians - Vyacheslav Koznakov from Ryazan University (mostly marked publications in the ZhZL series) and the Associate Professor of RGGU Medievist Konstantin Erusalimsky declared the insolvency of the ministerial dissertation and demanded from his degree of doctor of science. "The scientific community is still bad self-cleaning," the Babitsky stated, an activist of the discus, and the truth was worthy of the science and gave birth to the Sun of the Plugiators. But this time the dissisnets turned out to be not the case - his essay in 400 pages of Medina, to universal surprise, wrote himself. Therefore, Medina's dissertation was accused of "simply unsteaded, and in some places and simply absurd." VAC adopted a statement, and other day the Thesis Council of the Ural Federal University will consider the "Midage Case".
Regardless of the decision that Urthu will lead, the story is beautiful - "Archival boys against Velmazbi-Nevzheh". Boys are not supported by the scientific community, but not condemned to them. Public discussion takes place mainly in the form of updating the old, 2012, controversy to "Polit.ru", where one young historian calls this dissertation "coursewa", and several historians from the Russian Academy of Sciences are unlikely to stand up for Medicine, calling his work "not indisputable but interesting. " Midensky praised for the popularism, sluggishly scolded his opponents - but this is all ad hominem. Several articles in the media, expected reactions in blogs - and, in fact, everything. Although it would seem: honest young scientists in the insect nomenclature amateur with all the heat - Ole-Ole-Ole! But there is no mass inspiration. Why?
Because this story is not about scientific competencies, not about the quality of modern humanitarian knowledge and not even about mechanisms to combat an administrative resource in science. This is a story about how ideological opponents begin to use the scientific space for internal disassembly. "You do not want to reckon with us - turn off the gas (we take a doctoral)." The humanitarian field is our patrimony, so we will do in the best traditions.
I directly imagine how this know-how will focus on the country: if anyone who does not like, if you want someone's place to take - initiate the revision of the Doctoral, a couple of people can always find a couple of people. And the truth in the humanities is the concept of tensile. How many times was the harmful, the lack of something that after death turned out to be ingenious and breakthrough? Many times. So a wide space for activity: everything is against all, retestation and as a result - a large budget savings. To cut something a couple of thousands of doctors is always nice, especially if they hold down themselves. Beauty. Especially if representatives of the other, "neighboring" sciences can initiate the case. Historians do not consider philology science, philosophers do not consider the science history, and those and others often refuse to the status of philosophy science - how many copies are broken, how many reports are read, books are written!
But the accepted coin in the political fight is just scientific institutions.
Did not take the same Medical Doctoral degree himself? Babitsky and his colleagues claim: everyone who awarded it to him is completely incompetent - both the Scientific Council, and opponents (on preferably and on protection), and the leading organization and WAK. Specially came up by the company of non-specialists to rotate the boss, and now completely different experts will have to be cut (or not to cut) what specialists decided first. Is it possible to say with confidence that it will not come and their turn to walk in nonprofescionals? It will easily come. Now they are widely challenged, for example, the meaning of Le Noffa in historical science, they say, the compiler he and the court historian, and by no means a scientist. Any, absolutely anyone can be put upside down, there would be a desire.
Historians are not connected to the campaign against Medina, clearly not from service. This workshop in general, for the word in a pocket does not climb: I remember how this community protested against the exam and a single textbook, as actively behaved during the reform of the RFBR. The current apathy is alerting form: few people want to be used in frankly ideological disassembly. The involvement of the scientific community in this attempt of the scandal is meaningful only under one condition - complete depoliticization of the plot. It is possible to criticize the research of the Medina and necessary, but today the cards are decomposed so that any criticism outside of academic space enters the ideological context. And it is annoying. I know that there are historians, ready to perform with a constructive criticism of the dissertation, but to pumped Babitsky & CO are not considered possible; I know that there are those who are willing to act in defense (first of all - in defense of a critical approach in the research of the Russians), but do not want to look like lysoblyuds. Perhaps the climate will change, the poisoned waters will be cleaned, but while the outside observer is obvious: this campaign is primarily an ideological hit. Whatever deliciousness could write the minister in their scientists of writings - and would have awarded unless the delicacy on the network, but for the criticism of the Sigismund Herberstein and for the other, for the aggregate, merit, he must obey and repent.
Many pigeons will fly from these sleeves - and they will fly in different directions. Patriots will declare "simply unscientific, or even absurd" all the faint of the dissertations of the liberals (and there are many), Muslims will announce the delusions of Catholics scientists. All all will be insecked. And under the skeins, the new certification industry already swells, new revision commissions for the revision of old revision commissions, in the gears of which they will be lit by the best minds, and there are no interest to ease at least through them, even through the needle ear.
On October 4, 2016, the liberal scientific community is scheduled for a holiday. First of all, this applies to those candidates and doctors of sciences who managed to hook a piece of Western "cheese" for their research on the history of Russia, to get a solid cash grant due to their difficult labor from some American Foundation, or for the "supro-years" to learn to learn Mind to one of the prestigious Western universities. How much - not someone want to nail to a shameful pillar, and the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation, the chairman of the Russian military-historical society, a man who believes that Russia actually had a great history.
It all started with the fact that the author of the dissertation on the history of Russia V.R. MEDINSKY We decided to catch on weakly, hook the plagiarism allegedly in his work. Did not work out. The examination showed the absence of such. Then the artillery of larger caliber went to battle. Urgently mobilized researchers of the scientific profile related to the topic itself. Expert "Dissenote" Ivan Babitsky And his colleagues prepared a statement in VAC that the work of the Medina "unsuccessful, or absurd".
Indeed, today it is not easy to write about the history of Russia. And, as it turns out, the historian is especially hard to do this. And the point is not in the lack of scientific competence. The subject of the accusation of any historian who, God forbid, will allow himself positively to treat our past, with love talking about ancestors, critically refers to the Western interpretations of our history, - his scientific position becomes. And if it is pronounced, accessible and competently, then the liberals are time to beat the alarm. All their course for mixing our story with mud gives a crack, and you need to mobilize all the resources to defaulting such a person by all means.
Until recently, it seemed that the main field for discussions between our historians-Liberals and the Germans serves the twentieth century. The habit has already become a habit that researchers working here on Western handlers are not going to hide at the Molotov Ribbentrop Covenory, the Soviet "occupation" of Europe, the guilt of the USSR in the unleashing of the Cold War, "Atrocities" of the Red Army in Germany, etc. for Evidence of their conclusions are given by the opinions of high-tech scientists from the United States and the United Kingdom, memoirs of political and military leaders of various masters - up to the former Hitler's generals. That's just with the documents sometimes there are tight, but, as they say, there would be ears, and we always throw you myths. But it turns out that this is not enough. Now the purpose of our "applicants" becomes more ancient period - Russia's development in the XV-XVII century. Do they really not have anything left in the USSR?
So, a few years ago, the Dissertation of the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation, Chairman RVIO V.R. was defended in Moscow Medina "Problems of objectivity in the coverage of the Russian history of the second half of the XV-XVII centuries." The author critically reacted to the memories of various traveler foreigners, diplomats, etc., who visited Russia and brought a picture of the insufficient existence of its inhabitants, solid arbitrariness of the authorities, cruelty, vices, etc. V.R. Medina, studying this period for a long time, has already managed to write some large works on this topic. In other words, he had the full right to express his opinion in the dissertation work. Without challenging the achievements of their outstanding predecessors on historical Niva, he spent his analysis of the problem on a solid source database. His evidence and conclusions are not just interesting, but are relevant. Why? It appears that both in that distant period, and today the Western man in the street (and our liberals) tend to judge the history of Russia more on the estimates of foreigners than in genuine sources.
The main thing is that V.R. Medina's Medical study undermines the most important and already established algorithm of the liberals, with whom they were with a bang and accepted in any West University. The algorithm is simple: today Russia is aggressive, but this is because it has always been aggressive. Russian coarse and ignorant, so this is due to the fact that they have in the blood. Modern Russian rulers are authoritarians, they stretch their hands to someone else's lands, but we see the same picture in the past - after all, on the Russian throne they sat through one tyrant. In other words, the history of Russia (or rather, its version of the eyes of foreigners) serves for certain pro-Western circles to the instrument of discredit and modern politics Russian Federation. Whether to be surprised in this regard that our liberal "public" fell to the work of a person who dreamed to climb into the feeder myths, of which only a negative about our past was always blossomed.
And now essentially. "Applicants" who want to deprive the Medical Doctoral degree, they say that their claims are meaningful. Okay. But here is the content of some notes of foreigners. Is not a humiliating for any sensible historian and citizen are the fiction of the Englishman Fletcher The fact that our kings fed the Horses of Crimean Khanov, when they came to Moscow, as a sign of their citizenship. Every year, Fletcher writes, "The Russian king standing near the Khan horse (on which he sat), was supposed to feed her oats from his own cap, which was happening in the Kremlin Moskovsky." But Moscow sizards, and even more so the kings never submitted to the Crimean Khanty. Relationships were different: Ivan.III He was friends with Crimean Khan, then the relationship was upset, a turn went to Russian lands. But he and the historian, to see events in the dynamics, expose the sources of criticism, do not trust the compositions that are subjective. This task set itself the dissertation.
Or another example. Englishman GORUSEYwho king Fedor Ivanovich Without any evidence called "Poloil". This version later actively developed in various writings about Smoot. We read this version today in many works about the history of Russia. The conclusions are made from it: here, they say, and then the Russian despots were degenerated, and today it can happen. Other West West. There, almost one of the "enlightened" rulers were not initially.
But in fact, it only proves that "black myths" about Russia has already been introduced into the public consciousness of Europeans, they were not interested in truthful information. These myths successfully moved to us. Let us ask a question - whether today modern Russia needs to form the historical consciousness of their citizens. V.R. Medinsky responds unequivocally - no. Moreover, the Midage is read and listened to millions, his books are greatly popular. "Applicants" are, of course, like bone in the throat. Conclusion - you need to stop, defrave, do not influence the audience.
In his research V.R. Medino goes on. He is trying to identify the roots of these "black myths" about Russia. And it turns out that, for example, the Swede Petreywho described the atrocities of the king Ivan GroznyIt could be necessary to explain to the European public why the Swedish king intervened in Russian events and kept in his hands the Novgorod land. Justifying aggression against the sovereign state, the author outlined Russian people and their sovereigns.
So, touching the meaningful nature of the dissertation V.R. Medino, it turns out that the claim to it is only one. "Applicants" do not like that all their work on the scientific analysis of "notes" of foreigners, all their "new approaches" to the analysis of sources (which, by and large, are aimed at presenting the history of Russia in negative light) are relentless criticism in Scientific labor. And they are accustomed to science already to consider only their behavior. After all, the place has become a profitable place and stop feeding if someone is behind the hill you do not like how you work out your bread. Then the scientificity comes into force. After all, it is always possible to kill the hunt to kill any researcher to cross in your garden to any researcher. Like, you do not know or did not read the writings of this author, not familiar with the Latin language, did not take the source from that shelf - that's not falling into my business. But, gentlemen "Applicants", speaking frankly, you have nothing to argue essentially. This is the purest truth that many foreigners relate to Russia with bias, tolerated dark ideas against her rulers, had their own mercenary interests in its economy, carried obvious absurdity to its history! For them, the main thing was to get their benefits - money, place at the courtyard, etc.
And one moment. The thesis written by alive and bright language. Probably, this is also confused by the "applicants", which are simply not able to create a book or an article, which would be read with interest not only in the "narrow circles", but also by the majority of our country. Own infantability in this regard makes it look for "fleas" at its competitor. This long tradition among some members of the scientific community. But since the task was set to prove the "badness" of the dissertation, then it is possible to go everywhere and everywhere and not even bent with pulling the quotation from the context. "Applicants" must be in the root to destroy even the suspicion that Russia is possible more than any other country in the West, got from foreign conquerors. What exactly we saved the "cultural" Europe from invasions, becoming a shield from various Hords coming from the East and South. What exactly Russia lied millions of people, while Europeans developed their science and economy.
It is worth noting and an interesting turn of the case with the place where the examination of the dissertation of Medinsky will be held. It was possible to expect work to be directed from Haka to one of the prestigious Moscow universities or to one of the Institutes of the Academy of Sciences. But instead, the dissertation was sent to one of the most "liberal" universities - the Ural Federal University (URF). The old dislike of the rectorate of this higher educational institution to all historians-statestam is well known. What is worth at least his struggle against patriotic exhibitions "Second World War: History Lessons and Calls of Modernity" and "Communication Times: We are the heirs of the winners" who tried to expand on the university's walls in 2015. Already in the evening on the day of opening, the booths were painted. What is characteristic, the subject of vandalism was the stand with the name "Russian answer" (on the challenge of fascism) with photographs of the "immortal regiment" and the People's Army of the DPR. But instead of protecting the exhibitions, the rectorate ordered them to immediately remove. It is not difficult to guess, what will be the result of "examination" of the URF due to the dissertation V.R. MEDINSKY - that is, that man who has always uncompromisingly defended the truth about the Great Patriotic War And personally played with the initiative to create such exhibitions, exposing fascism and its modern manifestations in Europe.
On Tuesday, October 4, at 13:00 Moscow time in Yekaterinburg will make a consideration of a statement about the deprivation of the Minister of Culture Vladimir Medinsky degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences. Phlorentine University (analogue of a candidate of philological sciences in Russia), a specialist in neolatin literature of the Renaissance era and an expert of the community "Dussenet" Ivan Babitskywho became one of the applicants explained Victoria KuzmenkoWhy the official of the official is a propaganda pamphlet, and not a scientific study, as "patriotism" serves as a cover for non-professionalism and why deal with Lzhenauka.
The dissertation council of the Ural Federal University (URFU) should decide whether the dissertation of the Medina "Problems of objectivity in the coverage of Russian history of the second half of the XV-XVII centuries" by scientific work. To deprive the Minister of Doctoral degree demanded Dr. Historical Sciences Vyacheslav Koznakov, Dr. Konstantin Erusalimsky and Candidate of Philological Sciences Ivan Babitsky. In their opinion, the thesis that the official defended in 2011 at the Russian State Social University in Moscow is not scientific labor, and "propaganda pamphlet" and "bad course work."
The former Rector of RGSU, Chairman of the Dissertation Council in the RGSU, who gave the Medino degree of Doctor of Historical Sciences, and part-time - his scientific consultant Vasily Zhukov suggested that the Minister's work claims are related to "politics and intrigues".
Medina, that an attempt to deprive him of a doctoral degree is a manifestation of censorship. "The question itself seems to be a phantasmagoric and returns us to the best times. Soviet UnionWhen only the only point of view was considered correct, and everyone else is bourgeois, revisionist, outdated, cosmopolitan and any other, "he said. Officer, that the dissertation council will not deprive him of scientific degree.
The minister was defended by cultural figures as the theater critic and I.O. Rector Gityis Grigory Zaslavsky, Director of the Petersburg Theater "Russian Reminders" Rudolf Furmanov and director Karen Shahnazarov. In the Academic Environment of Medina, the MGIMO Zavorka Beginner was supported, a member of the Patriarchal Council for Culture of the ROC Yuri Vyazemsky.
Historian, co-chairman of the Central Council of the Interregional Trade Union of Employees of the Higher School "University Solidarity" Pavel Kudyukin the dissertation of an official "Halturnaya", "Not scientific, but a purely propaganda" work.
Application for the deprivation of the Minister of Culture of the Academic Degree Community "Thesis".
Ivan Babitsky
Photo: Julia Vishenetskaya / dw.com
Until now, loud scandals with the dissertations were associated with the activities of the community of "discount", which finds in the works of officials a blatant plagiarism. You went to another way and demand to deprive the Minister of Medicine Doctor of Historical Sciences on the basis of bad dissertation. Do we have this practice in our country?
There is a common idea that they deprive degrees only for incorrect borrowing. But according to the law, this can be done for the discrepancy between the criterion of an independent scientific research. In the case of media, we are talking about a doctoral degree that requires a very serious level of scientific. True, we have not had no cases with deprivation of degree for badness - the head of the Higher Attestation Commission, Vladimir Philippov, recently. He called the case of Medina unprecedented.
Personally, I did not see the dissertations of this quality as Medino. There are a lot of bad scientific works, but I'm not remembering such a frank parody of the dissertation. Usually even strongly written offices retain at least some genre likelihood.The only "competitor" of the Minister of Culture in my memory in this sense is the head of the Moscow election commission Valentin Gorbunov: in his dissertation there was a piece glued from the fragments of newspaper interviews, and it was seen that this is someone direct speech, and no dissertation. But usually the scientificness is still saved.
And in the work of Medinsky - we specifically included such a large quantity of quotation from it in our - there is an incredible even for far from the science of people the level of badges in everything, ranging from the style and ending with methodology and factology. Only one of this base can be deprived of it.
- Why did you still spoke not on behalf of the "discons"?
This could not be a project "thesis", because he is engaged only in incorrect borrowing, and the main claim to the dissertation of the Midage is not in plagiarism, but in the content of the work. But the very idea of \u200b\u200bsuch a statement was the result of the interaction of the "discount" and scientists.
For a long time, scientists believed that it was not necessary to engage in "dirty" work and deprive of someone: they say, we are in our circle and so we know who is worth it, and let the officials sit on and then sit with their pseudogelia. But such a position was not close to the "Dussenet", since then these false scientists begin to lead science.
It was clear that if we want to consider the scientist community and deprive the Medinsky degree as a person who deals with the discredit of science, then the expertise of his work should be done by professionals who specialize in the period that he covers in its dissertation. Threesomes are Professor Kozsov, Professor Yerusalimsky and I - conducted an examination and came to the conclusion that this is no scientific research, but the most advanced profanation.
Fragment of the statement with the requirement to deprive Vladimir Midensky Academy of Historical Sciences.
- You call the dissertation of the Medical propaganda pamphlet. What do you have in mind?
We are talking about the methodology. Medino frankly says that the story should serve propaganda purposes. These goals can be covered by good prepositions, say that we want to raise in the young generation love for homeland. Such pedagogical aspirations can be as much as wonderful by themselves, but the historical study cannot obey them.
Midage always proclaimed that he struggles with displacement of Russia from foreigners. The quotation of Oleg Platonov from the introduction to his thesis, in fact, describes the methodological approach of the Minister of Culture to history - a completely unscientific approach. "Criterion for a positive or negative assessment - according to our contemporary - a famous Russian scientist and thinker O.A. Platonova, can only be the national interests of Russia. The first question to which historical science should be honest - how much or another event or private act is responsible for the interests of the country and the people. Weighing on the scales of the national interests of Russia creates an absolute standard of truth and reliability of historical labor. "
For the Midage Criteria of Truth - the interests of Russia. It is a bit shocking for professional historians phrase. They love to remind that their motto is "Sine Ira et Studio" ("without anger and addiction").
History like science is something objective, and there is no place in it. Neither anger in the sense of the desire to blame someone, nor the addiction in the desire of someone to fence.
Separately, it's funny that the Medical refers to Oleg Platonov, calling him by the Russian scientist-thinker. This figure is more likely anecdotal - its publications are designed in the classic paranoid spirit: the liquidasonal conspiracy, the Judaization of the Russian civilization, the "Protocols of the Zion Wise men" and other samples of the genre of the ruptyloids.
Although in the case of Medicine it is difficult to understand something. On the one hand, he seems to be an anti-comma and professional patriot. On the other hand, he opened the memorial plaque Karl Mannerheim in St. Petersburg. So I can not say that the Medina is consistent at least in its anti-epipment.
The idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is needed to logically prove something, he has no de facto. To prove the infidelity of the judgment of a foreigner, he is enough to find any other view suitable for his point of view, without further analysis. If a foreigner writes something good about Russia, then this is true for him, and if negative is slander.
You can talk about a certain projection: if Medina considers it possible to write about history only in the interests of his country, then, of course, he suspects a similar approach and others.
All his analysis is completed by the conspiracy conclusions that foreigners wrote their memories by order of some political circles who wanted to blame Russia or use it for mercenary purposes. This completely uncompetitive approach looks extremely non-serious and even comical.
- What else have problems with his dissertation?
According to the text of the thesis, it is clear that the Medicine did not use any foreign scientific literature, although it is indicated in his bibliography. In the work of traces of acquaintance, at least with some foreign scientific works on history is not visible. And this is the more outrageous that a person writes the dissertation on the memoirs of people from Western Europe, which are well studied.
Source studies - a narrow-professional area in history, requiring very serious qualifications. The fact that a person who does not possess historical education went to this area, in the professional community is perceived in the bayonets.
Naturally, the real historian would have to read these texts in the original or at least use modern academic translations. But in general, a person who is not able to read in Latin, there is nothing to do in this topic.
The dissertation of the Medina is a catastrophe in terms of the disappearance of standards. I think any normal Russian scientist should feel offended by the fact that such text can be considered a historical study in Russia.
- What do you think Medina himself wrote this job?
I'm completely sure that Medinsky himself wrote this dissertation. Some workers have already had, because before that he had several books about the "Myths" about Russia. However, he borrowed a couple of paragraphs from the Warmer researcher and even made this fragment on protection as a copyright concept - this also serves as an additional argument for imprisonment of its degree. But in general, I do not have the slightest doubts that he wrote it all himself. If he had used the help of professional historians, he would have helped him a lot.
- Midage has already had a degree in political science. Why did he need one more story?
I do not know, although, of course, I have assumptions on this. I suspect that this can be indirectly due to the fact that now he leads the Russian military-historical society. I think, Midage once appeared ambitions to lead any associations of historical sense, and he needed a piece of paper that he was a historian.
Vladimir Medinsky during a meeting with disciples of Novosibirsk schools.
Photo: Kirill Kitigar / Tass
- Until 2011 and his dissertation MEDINSKIA was interested in history?
All his academic publications on history - articles in magazines from the list of VAC - began approximately nine months before protection. In the "Dzsenetovskaya" practice, this is a fairly common phenomenon when people do or even come up with publications for protection, because it is a prerequisite for the Rule of VAC. Since Midage at the time when he decided to become a doctor of historical sciences, there were no such publications, then with a high probability it can be said that they were quickly organized.
All ten articles of Medinsky were published in journals who were published in RSUs, where his researcher was his supervisor Vasily Zhukov. In one of these magazines, Zhukov was the editor-in-chief, in another - Chairman of the Editorial Board.
It seems that the beetles provided its supporting publications and began to do this for nine months before defense: almost every month in both magazines it was published under the article by Medina. At the same time, they did not imagine anything like historical academic articles, and the magazines were not their profile.
By the way, after defending the thesis, he no longer, as far as I know, did not publish in scientific publications.
Vasily Zhukov
Photo: Zhukovrgs.rf.
Why did Medinsky chose this university, and it is this supervisor, because Zhukov is not a specialist in the Doparyrovsky period?
Yes, his scientific leader defended his doctoral specialty "History of the CPSU". It is logical to assume that the acquaintance of Zhukov with Medina took place not on the basis of academic work, and objective reasons why the minister chose Zhukov with his tech, really no.
However, the specialists in the Doparyrovsky period did not appeal not only when choosing a supervisor, but also when choosing the dissertation council and opponents. It is very strange when a person is defended in Moscow, where specialists are enough for this period. It seems that the Council was chosen precisely because Zhukov was in him the chairman.
Now the attempts of Midage Defenders, not particularly disassembled in the subject, argue that the Minister attacks people who themselves allegedly have no relation to science, although Kozsov, and the Yurusalim - Doctor of Historical Sciences and recognized experts precisely in the Dopererovsky period.
- Who protects Medina?
On this occasion, people are sold mainly related to Medicine professional activity, that is, cultural figures: directed by Karen Shahnazarov, theatrical critic and I.O. Rector Gitis Grigory Zaslavsky, writer Sergey Shargunov. They have nothing to do with history and science, therefore it suggests that the Midensky is known only as the Minister of Culture.
From the academic environment, Professor MGIMO Yuri Simonovsky, but he starts his speech from the phrase: "I know Volodya Midnosky with his student bench," thus emphasizing that there is a personal acquaintance.
The entire line of protection of the minister is being built on the fact that he is a patriot, and this allegedly does not like the liberals: they say, they want to displacing the country, talk about "unwasy Russia."
A rather unsuccessful rhetorical attempt: there was no epic about the etching of media liberal liberals. This was originally a story about scientists against the opposites: no one has made complaints about his "patriotism" to Medino. It is precisely that his works are not science, but profanation.
This is such a Russian tradition - use assurances in patriotism as a cover for incompetence. If a person sniffed in non-professionalism, then you can often hear in an excuse: "I'm a patriot, and they don't like me for it." So it was with Saltykov-generous, so it remains in our time.
Since it is impossible to defend the dissertation of Medinsky in the academic plan, then, most likely, the leitmotif of the collusion of the liberals against Russia and the "historical truth" of Medinsky will sound further.
Why is your statements are considered not in Moscow, where did the Medinsky receive a degree, and in Yekaterinburg?
What the dissertation council will consider the application, solves the WAK. It can be assumed that the commission was the pressure to remove this consideration from Moscow and not to attract much attention to him. But so far there are no complaints about the advice in Yekaterinburg - professionals work there, including in the Doparyrovsky period. I hope that the current circumstances will not affect his decision. I want to believe that the scientific community is ready to support its standards and that there is an understanding that neglecting its own standards is destructive for science as a whole.
- What result do you expect for?
Of course, we cannot guarantee that the dissertation council and VAC will take the decision that, as we believe, suggests itself in this case. But at least we did what they had. In the scientific community it met a wide understanding. It can be said that the dissertation of the Medino is an experimental case precisely because the coherent work of the scientific community and the "discount" is happening. If a person takes a ministerial post, it does not mean that it should be subject to some other requirements than to any other historian scientist.
- Does the history of Medinsky mean that the process of self-purification of the scientific community begins?
I have some optimism in this regard. "Dussenet" began the process, which is already for almost four years. The Company realized that there is a problem of mass production of completely low-quality dissertations, the problem of dissertation business. If, in the case of Medino, the decision we and our colleagues will be made the only right thing, it will become the next step towards understanding that high positions do not give privileges in science that all work claiming to be considered ones are weighted on all .
In many ways, the understanding is increasing, and because many have already been deprived of degrees: for example, the former Minister Elena Skrynnik, the former Speaker of the Moscow Mosgosduma, Vladimir Platonov, a deputy of the State Duma of the past convocation Richat Abubakirov.
Under the influence of public opinion, with the Minister of Education, Dmitry Livanova, there were positive shifts: some requirements for theses were tightened, they began to pay serious attention to the record on the plagiarism, quite a lot of unfair dissertation councils were closed. The process of cleansing is already coming, and we all would like to be the story with the dissertation of Medinsky become a big step in this direction.
- The cultureologist Vitaly Kurenni recently wrote that the policy is harmful to be a scientist, because then he begins to memoriate himself in the entire connoisseur.
On December 6, the historian Ivan Babitsky visited Cheboksary, an expert of the scandalous project "Disseno Penet", revealing officials and politicians plagiarism in the scientific works. In October of this year, Babitsky called the dissertation of the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation Vladimir Midensky "Frank garbage". The correspondent "IDEL.RALI" asked an expert about his activities, attitudes towards politics and plagiarism in the dissertations of the Chuvash ministers.
Ivan Babitsky was invited to Chuvashi by the Coordinator of the "Open Russia" by Dmitry Semenov, which law enforcement agencies suspected in cooperation with the "unwanted organization" Great Britain. Guest stated that his such "black PR" does not scare at all.
We are not afraid to cooperate with anyone, because politics are not about us. "Dussenet" is not engaged in politics. We collaborated quite a long time with the anti-corruption of Alexey Navalny. At the first stages of the origin of our project, we had some legal uncertainty, since there were no lawyers. At that time, we were important to help from. And the "discount" at first signed Georgy Alburov, sometimes Alexey Navalny. It was important for us that they are lawyers.
- There is doubt: can I cooperate with the fight against corruption, remain apolitical?
This is a difficult question. What does it mean to be apolitical? We have a doctrine that we do not deal with politics, but we are engaged only by unscrupulous academic activities. At the same time, our experts do not carry some political addictions into the workflow itself, but they recognize their social significance and public items. We believe that our activity is somehow related to the struggle against corruption, in particular, in the education system, in obtaining bribes.
"Apple" removed
from the election race at once five people
since experts "thesis" found
in their works plagiarism
It is important to understand that the "discount" is struggling not with dissertations, but by reputations. Checking a certain person on the legality of receiving them a scientist, we check it, so to speak, for general decency. As you noticed, we check people who occupy a social and meaningful post or claim it, for example, during the elections - we try to check all candidates for deputies.
The "Apple" party took five people from the last election race in the State Duma, as the Experts of the Dissenonnet found in their dissertation work plagiarism. You can accuse us to "order", bias. But you agree, if in the black list of "thesis" more dubious scientists from the United Russia than from the "apple", then these are not our problems.
- "Dussenet" is often criticized by power, and from liberals gets?
Some such our patient Oleg Mitvol, the fact that the former deputy head of Rosprirodnadzor, Liberal, it seems like, the leader of the ecological party "Green". He really did not like that we found plagiarism from him. And after that, he frankly, using his privileged status, wrote on us denunciations in the investigative bodies. Mitvol in his statements to the authorities reported that we supposedly get it unclear from where money, we do not pay taxes for them.
- Why are the officials or deputies under the closer control?
Well, not only politicians, another university rector, employees of scientific centers ... Indeed, we have increased interest in politicians, governors, ministers, but our general principle is apolitical. Our experts check for the general decency of people who have an impact on the development or opinion of the social interlayer of society. We check absolutely on equal terms of adherents of all political views. It's just that corruption is fundamentally the political cell of society. It is impossible to fight with it, not touched people who are somehow related to politics, with the ruling party, including.
- "Dussenet" did not leave without checking and Chuvash officials. Thus, the project experts were revealed by plagiarism in the work of the Minister of Finance Chuvashia Svetlana Yenilina. Why did you decide to check it out? (Recall that the Minister of Finance Chuvashi Svetlana Yenilin was noticed by the experts "thesis" in poor-quality written offices of his scientific work. The main part of her dissertation repeats the work on a similar topic, protected in the Altai Territory Lobova.- "IDEL.Realia").
If we find a "factory", then we start checking all who defended their scholarship there
Investigation on the dissertation Svetlana Yenilina spent one of my colleagues, so I'm afraid I will definitely answer. I do not remember why she got in sight. This is possible for two reasons. First, in the blacklist, she could get as a minister, but, most likely, she defended in the dissertation advice, which is known for the "Dussenet" as the so-called factory, where the stamps of scientists to the right and left. In this advice, of course, the dissertations are produced. If we find such a advice, we begin to check all people who have defended their scholarship here. The scientific leader of Yenilina was the former rector of the Chuvash State University of Lion of Kurakov. And in the black list of "Dissennita" there are 31 work, protected in the Council, which came to the cookies. Based on the results of our inspection, it is clear that these works were protected with a plagiarism.
- And how did it happen that the Minister of Culture Chuvashi Konstantin Yakovlev turned out to be an unreal doctor of philosophy?
History with the Minister of Culture is not at all the Visnsnetovskaya. He answered the journalistic request that he had a scientific degree of a kind of fictional educational center. Such a phenomenon of false scientist is formed when a person wants to get some kind of status, and it forms, as we say, some intergalactic academy. This degree does not give any right to use it in professional activities, only becomes part of the business card. How much I remember, the Minister of Culture from Chuvashi seemed by the doctor of the philosophy of the Ukrainian Institute, which is not recognized by the WAK of the Russian Federation.
- Can an average citizen write a letter to check the honesty of getting a scholar?
Of course. The only thing possible, because of the big workload, we can not immediately do it. The main thing is to justify the reasons why you think it is necessary to check this person.
- In one of the interviews, Evgeny Roizman said that he was offered to spend 10 thousand dollars for the protection of the candidate and 25 thousand dollars - for the doctoral.
As a rule, this money is not going to those who write the dissertations, but those who provide them. Fear of being denounced in writing after 2013, when the "discovery" appeared, made it possible to reduce the number of people who wish to receive a degree, especially in the economy. Previously, everyone proceeded from the fact that no one after the defense dissertation does not look.
Subscribe to our channel in Telegram. We are talking about what others are forced to be silent.
