Boris Kagarlitsky: "When a school is made particularly stupid, it just becomes a protest generator. Boris Kagarlitsky - biography and books Who is Boris Kagarlitsky

The son of famous literary critic and theatrandran Yu. I. Kagarlitsky.
He was a student of Gitis, where his father was a professor. He was reading the literature prohibited in the USSR. In 1980, he was interrogated in the KGB and excluded from guitis. Worked the postman. In April 1982, he was arrested and a year with a little spent in the Lefortov prison on charges of anti-Soviet propaganda. For the sake of his liberation, there was about a hundred students of Gityis, including generally not accustomed to his anti-Soviet "shadows." Especially distinguished himself on the court over his ex-friend Mikhail Rivkin, giving testimony against him, the most as the basis of the sentence of M. Ravkin (9 years of the camps). To blame himself in the eyes of slander and stipulated people B. Kagarlitsky later composed a slanderous bike about the fact that he did not knock on him, but he was knocking on him, accusing two student-classmates in the denunciation on him - A. Farajeva and A. Karaulova. In the choice of the names of the victims of his slander B. Kagarlitsky was coldly calculated, he was guided by the fact that at that time of all the victims of his denunciations and the names of the name A. Farajeva and A. Karaulov were especially for hearing. A. Karaulov by that time became a famous public and media journalist, and the name of A.Farajeva stood in the posters of the brightest theatrical performances of those years, that is, it was also public. But Kagarlitsky's lie was exposed as direct participants and witnesses of those events, for example, M. Rivkin, and well-known dissidents and human rights defenders who received access to the archives of the KGB. It turned out that A. Farajev and A. Karaulov could not "convey" to Kagarlitsky, because among the tens of other students were interrogated after his arrest, when he was sitting in Lefortovo prison and, having come to the transaction with the investigation and with his conscience, For the sake of his own release, he wrote a repeated letter to the KGB and dozens of denunciations, including A. Farajeva and A. Karaulov. Based on these denunciations B. Kagarlitsky A.Karaulov and A.Farajev and were questioned.
After falling on the slander and lies, the diamospher and the provocateur B. Kagarlitsky, who gave his friends, slandered dozens of non-private students of Guityis and the Institute of Culture, tried to remove and reassure. But, pressed against the wall, risking to subjected to prosecutions for slander, Kagarlitsky was forced to "clean" his false autobiography in the network. From the allegedly "donous" he struck out by A.Farajev, and I softened the role of A. Karaulov in the history of his arrest. True, without specifying that in fact it was not they conveyed to him, but he is on them. A. Farajev and A.Karaulov became victims of Donos Boris Kagarlitsky. However, these "edits" did not affect the very dubious reputation by B. Kagarlitsky, who remembered Hitis's students not talented articles about the theater, but with his borrible fanberry, as a particularly founded arrogance. And, of course, dozens of denunciations.

Born on August 28, 1958 in Moscow. The Son of Theatersdran and Literary Russian Julia Kagarlitsky.

In 1975-80 He studied at the State Institute of Theatrical Art. A.V. Lunacharsky (Gityis) in the specialty "Sociology of Culture". The diploma defended Candidate of Political Sciences in 1988 (1995).

In 1980, he was excluded from candidates for the CPSU member and from the Institute (with the wording for antisocial activities "; the formal reason for the exception was the penis letter of Andrei Karaulov, written by him after a conversation in the KGB, in which Karaulov recognized that he received anti-Soviet leaflets from Kagarlitsky) .

In 1977-1982 He was a member of the underground levosocialist mug in Moscow, which consisted mainly of young scientists - historians and sociologists.

I published the underground magazine "Left turn" ("Socialism and the future"), participated in the publication of the "Options" magazine.

In early April 1982, he was arrested in the case of the so-called "young socialists" (except for him, Pavel Kudyukin, Andrei Fadin, Yuri Khavkin, Vladimir Chernetsky and others were arrested, and later, Mikhail Rivkin).

After a written promise, not to engage more anti-Soviet activities was released with Kudyukin, Fadin and some others in April 1983. The decision on pardon to the court was submitted by the Presidium of the USSR Sun (led by Yuri Andropov). In July of the same year, he performed as a witness at court over Mikhail Rivkin. Although the Cagarlitsky court stated that the contacts of Rivkin did not consider the Control Code with him under the action of Article 70 of the Criminal Code, its testimony was used to condemn Rivka, sentenced to 7 years of the camps and 5 years of reference.

In 1980-1982 He worked the postman, in 1983-1988. - Lifter.

In the fall of 1986, together with Gregory Pelman and Gleb Pavlovsky participated in the creation of a club of social initiatives (KSI) - one of the first informal formations of the restructuring period.

In 1987-88. - One of the leaders of the Federation of Socialist Public Clubs (FSK).

In 1989-1991 - IMA-PRESS Agency Observer.

In 1988-1989 One of the leaders of the Moscow Popular Front (MNF), a member of the MNF Coordination Council.

In the summer of 1989, he was one of the initiators of the creation of the Moscow Committee of New Socialists (MCNS) - from among the consistent socialists in the MNF.

In 1990-93 - Mosovet deputy, member of the Executive Committee of the Socialist Party, one of the leaders of the Labor Party (1991-94).

Since the spring of 1992 - Observer of the newspaper of trade unions "Solidarity", from March 1993 he worked as an expert of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia (FNPR).

After the actual termination in 1995, the work of the labor party is mainly engaged in political journalism.

He worked as a senior researcher at the Institute of Comparative Political Screen of the Russian Academy of Sciences (the former Institute of International Working Movement).

In November 2001, he made one of the initiators of the anti-globacy movement "Peace - not a product!".

From April 2002 - Director of the Institute for Globalization Problems.

From April 2005 - Member of the Editorial Board "Truth.info".

In the summer - autumn 2005 - one of the organizers of the "Left Front" (LF), on October 10, 2005 elected a member of the Moscow State Unitary Enterprise.

From December 2005 - Chairman of the Strategic Council of the Council of Rossigric Grounds of Russia CFR).

For published in London, the book "Thoring Cane" (in English) in 1988, Daecherovskaya Prize was racing. In 1990-1991 In London, his books "Dialectics of Change" and "Farewell, Perestroika" were published in English (also published in Japanese and Turkish languages), in Berlin (in German) - the book "Square wheels (Chronicle of the Democratic Mossovet)". In 1992, he published in Moscow the "Collapsed Monolith" (based on the series of its publicistic articles 1989-1991), which was also published in English, German, Swedish and Finnish.

Kagarlitsky Boris Yulievich

Biography and books

In 1975-80 He studied at the State Institute of Theatrical Art. A.V. Lunacharsky (Gityis) in the specialty "Sociology of Culture". The diploma defended Candidate of Political Sciences in 1988 (1995).

In 1980-1982 He worked the postman, in 1983-1988. - Lifter.

In 1977-1982 He was a member of the underground levosocialist mug in Moscow, which consisted mainly of young scientists - historians and sociologists.

I published the underground magazine "Left turn" ("Socialism and the future"), participated in the publication of the "Options" magazine.

In 1987-88. - One of the leaders of the Federation of Socialist Public Clubs (FSK).

In 1989-1991 - IMA-PRESS Agency Observer.

In 1988-1989 One of the leaders of the Moscow Popular Front (MNF), a member of the MNF Coordination Council.

In the summer of 1989, he was one of the initiators of the creation of the Moscow Committee of New Socialists (MCNS) - from among the consistent socialists in the MNF.

In 1990-93 - Mosovet deputy, member of the Executive Committee of the Socialist Party, one of the leaders of the Labor Party (1991-94).

Since the spring of 1992 - Observer of the newspaper of trade unions "Solidarity", from March 1993 he worked as an expert of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia (FNPR).

After the actual termination in 1995, the work of the labor party is mainly engaged in political journalism.

He worked as a senior researcher at the Institute of Comparative Political Science RAS (a former Institute of International Working Movement) (1994-2002).

In November 2001, he made one of the initiators of the anti-globalistic movement "Peace - not a product!".

From April 2005 - Member of the Editorial Board "Truth.info".

In the summer - autumn 2005 - one of the organizers of the "Left Front" (LF), on October 10, 2005 elected a member of the Moscow State Unitary Enterprise.

From December 2005 - Chairman of the Strategic Council of the Council of Rossigric Grounds of Russia CFR).

Since 2007 - Director of the Institute for Globalization and Social Movements, Chairman of the Editorial Board of the Left Policy magazine.

The author of such books as the "Thinking Reed" (in English) (London, 1988; Winner of the Duchera Memorial Prize (United Kingdom)), "Dialectics of Hope" (Paris, 1988), "Dialectics of Change" (London, 1989), "Goodbye , Perestroika! " (London, 1990, also published in Japanese and Turkish languages), in Berlin (in German) - the book "Square wheels (Chronicle of the Democratic Mossovet)" (1991), "The collapsed monolith. Russia on the eve of new battles "(based on the series of its journalistic articles 1989-1991) (London, 1992; M., 1992, also published in German, Swedish and Finnish languages)," Restoration in Russia "(M., 2000), "Globalization and left" (M., 2002), "Uprising of the middle class" (Ekaterinburg, 2003), "Peripheral Empire. Russia and myrosystems "(M., 2004)," Marxism: Not recommended for training "(M., 2005)," Managed democracy. Russia, which we imposed "(Ekaterinburg, 2005)," Political Science Revolution "(M., 2007).

Kagarlitsky is printed in various Western left magazines ("New Politics", the press of the Italian Socialist Republic, etc.) ... In Russia, since 1991, he was published mainly in the "Solidarity" and "Revolutionary Russia" newspapers, as well as in the "independent newspaper", "free thought "," New Gazeta "," Computer "," The Moscow Times ", the newspaper" Century ", etc. Now (2009) is printed mainly in the newspaper" Look ", Skepticism and Russian Life magazines, and Also on IMSI sites, Eurasian House and "Rabor.Ru." Since 2000, a member of the scientific community (fellow) of the Transnational Institute (Amsterdam).

Publication date on the site: 09/08/2008

In the summer of 1990, a scandal occurred. The article "Intellectuals against the Intelligentsia" appeared in the May issue of the magazine "Horizon". The author of the article - Boris Kagarlitsky encroacted the most holy for Russian society - doubted the abilities of modern intelligentsia to him affect the development of events in Russia, that she did the impact of centuries, i.e. Her political impotence.

"For externally visible crises (in the literature, theater, cinema ...), Boris asserted another deeper and serious - the intelligentsia crisis. Not only the conditions of creative activity changed, the stereotypes of behavior, principles, key values \u200b\u200bchanged. Why 10 years ago Some people went In prison, spreading the "Gulag Archipelago", even if they did not agree with the ideas of the author, and others were so cruel to this, as discovered, not so much more terrible activities? And those and others believed due to the word. and writers and those who pursued writers and writers , plugged her mouth, believed that there was a cauldly of omissue, it could be dangerous in itself. This is a traditional Russian and eastern idea, alas, repressive tolerance will come into place - the traditional principle of the liberal culture of the West: you can say everything What you want, nothing will change anyway. The writer no longer transforms the world. He only supplies the goods to the book market. "

Soviet dissident and sociologist believes that the education reform and the arrival of the ROC in the school are partly to blame for the arrival of young people in protest movement

Last weekend in Russia, a wave of protest shares under the banners of the fight against corruption were rolled. What are the true causes of discontent of the population? How did Alexey Navalny opposition lead the protest movement? And what are the options for the development of processes? A well-known political analyst, director of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements Boris Kagarlitsky, was told about all this in the author's column of "real-time".

"He said:" We live bad because they steal. " This is absolutely not true. "

There are already a number of things that everyone saw and commented. And I also noticed that the protest looked sharply. A walk through Tver gave very strong impressions in this sense. We saw, heaps of boys and girls - high school students and freshmen, who used to explicitly did not participate in any political promotions, were simply fallen out of the subway, not to mention the protests 2011-2012, not to mention earlier events.

An obvious question: why did this happen and happened exactly? In my opinion, there are certain circumstances, much more fundamental than usual thinking. All begin to say that the cause of the smallest movement is on the Internet, and the forms of agitation with which the Navalny work turned out to be more efficient for the Internet generation, for representatives of young people who are not very watching TV and live in a few other information space. It's all so, but not more than tactical moments that have already influenced the event form.

But there are deep circumstances. In our history for the first time in a few decades, not even since the times of the Russian revolution, but before, a generation appeared, which firmly understands what will live worse than its parents. Moreover, this is a fundamental global process. All who are engaged in both the United States and Western Europe are fixed that social dynamics not only slowed down, but for the first time since the beginning of the 20th century, went in the opposite direction. Of course, I'm talking about the average process: anyway, someone will live better, someone is worse. If earlier the total expectation system assumed that children in any case would live no worse than their parents, and better, now she got the opposite. Even if it is not formulated by words, very often people feel emotionally, and there is some unpleasant feeling.

"Navalny simply gave this generation a clear identification marker and object claim." Photo Maxim Platonov

It should be added that the relative successes of Russia at the beginning of the XXI century, which affected the growth of consumption and some domestic comfort, this situation is rather sharpened than soften. First, now consumption is reduced. On the other hand, quality improvement and quantitative consumption growth in the previous 10 years partly compensated for a rather sharp reduction in social opportunities for the population. In other words, earlier children of unqualified workers became qualified, engineers or doctors. This means that they rise to a steps in a new social category. And at the beginning of the 21st century it turned out another situation when they say: "Yes, your children will not rise to the next step of a structural-professional, social hierarchy. They will not have more prestigious and career more opening prospects for work, but at the same time they will consume more than you consumed in youth. And life will be more comfortable: new cafes will open, new gadgets will appear, cheese varieties, etc., which you did not have. " Then the crisis begins, and it turns out: it is not enough that they will not have these career, professional status prospects, but it will not matter with consumption, because it is becoming more difficult to buy "iPhone". There is a generation that is frustrated at the start.

Navalny in this sense simply gave this generation a clear identification marker and object claim. When hopes are frustrated, you want to focus your claims and resentment on someone or something. Navalnya uttered a formula, which is actually from an economic point of view is absolutely ridiculous, but very convenient as a signal to start this process.

He said: "We live bad because they steal." It is absolutely not true, but it is very convenient to launch the process of social mobilization against the presumably guilty. And the culprits turned out to be stolen officials. Although this, in fact, no more than the culprits of the first row.

If you punish all begged officials, you will find that it has become no better, everything remained even as it was, since economic conditions did not change either on iota. But it will still be a progressive phenomenon. If you drive out all the tormented officials, and put on their place honest and discover that nothing has changed, then you are already mobilized and organized, because you know that someone expelled. Accordingly, you have a desire to move on, you begin to make more serious complaints and think at the next level.

That is, the generations have occurred on a specific social background.

"You can also add stupid patriotism lessons, any promotion at school, including Popov and Orthodoxy lessons, which, naturally, cannot cause anything, except for a radical disgust, because children do not like school at all." Photo Pravkamchatka.ru.

As the defeat of the education system gave trumps in bulk

The second reason that all this gave rise to the education reform, which, according to the authorities, should create a loyal attenuent, generation, and created a generation of poor, but extremely easy-sensitive protest provocation, and at the same time not very loyal. This loyalty is not for changing. They think that if the population is not informed, culturally, intensively and will not have a large number of knowledge for understanding society, it will perceive government propaganda and follow what the authorities say. And in fact, an even account occurred on the contrary, because people are not perceived by government propaganda, because they are getting worse, but with ease of any anti-government propaganda due to what they think uncritically.

The government of its social reforms and practically defeat system of education created a protest basis for Navalny. In other words, if the youth had been a highly educated, humanitarian advanced, read, informed, its protest would have completely different forms, another ideological orientation and, oddly enough, would be less radical, but deeper in content. A poor educated person is more prone to radicality. A more educated person looks at what consequences may be, suddenly everything will turn out as he does not want what problems may be. The educated person is more cautious in his actions, so neravicalen.

You can also add stupid patriotism lessons, any promotion at school, including Popov and Orthodoxy lessons, which, naturally, can not cause anything except radical disgust, because children do not like school at all. And when the school is made particularly stupid, it just becomes a protest generator.

We know what role the Soviet social science at the exit, which role was played by official Orthodoxy in Tsarist Russia even earlier. A significant part of radical revolutionaries, and especially terrorists, was formed by church schools and seminary. We still know that, because all the time we look at the Bolsheviks, among which were fewer terrorists, including because among them there were fewer people who were educated in seminary and spiritual schools. And if you look at the Socialists and others, it is clearly visible by the connection between the official Orthodoxy and the willingness to blow the kings, Popov. This environment forms people who are ready to kill those people whom they are supposed to love.

The education reform clearly worked and will be even more efficient, actively work on this radical protest.

"I do not know where the breakworthy, but it is impellent, because the material itself is already indulged, he will ever break through. But this situation is unpredictable. " Photo Timur Rakhmatullina

Elections in 2012 showed that Putin had quite a lot of support at that time.

The third component is that the development model is simply exhausted. I do not know where it will break, but it is imperative, because the material itself is already indulged, he will ever break through. But this situation is unpredictable, including for your submissive servant. As stated in the famous saying, I would know where I drop, straws would be stuck. And to sharpen somewhere straw here quite meaningless.

Therefore, there was a breakthrough, which could happen because of something else: could happen because of the truckers, accidents at the aircraft factory - anything could be. But Navalny hit the weak point, after which all system things fell apart. Unlike the events of 2011-2012, the events were technically started in the province, this time worked time zones. In the 11th year, the rebellion began in Moscow, then a week later, riots began in the province and then fed. Now the situation is somewhat different. Events began after all the same in the province, although the initiative proceeded from Moscow. And Moscow has already come out, knowing serious performances in Khabarovsk, Vladivostok, Novosibirsk.

At the same time, it is impossible to hope for the repetition of the situation 2011-2012 in terms of countermeasures, because two important circumstances have changed. The first is that in 2011-2012, it was about fair elections, which were not very clear - to whom and why. It was unclear who to choose: there will be more honest elections, more honestly consider, and Zhirinovsky will receive one extra mandate - because of this, or what to go out?

In fact, everyone understood that the protest was against Putin. He is popular in society. And when it turned out that they were dealing with Putin, the power was able to mobilize the counter-protesters to their rallies. And this movement was real, despite the fact that people were engaged on buses, etc. Elections in 2012 showed that Putin had a fairly big support at that time, and there was an asset of people who could carry out this support on Nizakh.

"All development development depends on how navalny and the company will manage to keep their activists and ideologues from transferring all the discontent immediately to the first person." Photo Maxim Platonov

"This does not mean that people will be for Navalny or against power"

Now the situation is different, those people, structures that organized movements in defense of power in 2012 are now removed or demoralized. Those social groups that supported it are also extremely unhappy during the crisis - social well-being has changed. I note that the same story with Uralvagonzavod, which turned out to be on the verge of stopping after 2014, is also very indicative. This does not mean that people will be for Navalny or against power. But they became less motivated, less convinced, and at best, their support will be inertial. On such a basis, it is very difficult to mobilize people.

At the same time, the Government of Medvedev and the Prime Minister himself is extremely unpopular. What is very important, unpopular not only in oppositionists, youth, they are unpopular from the provincial and significant part of federal officials. In this sense, the blow to Medvedev turned out to be a very successful tactical course of Navalny. Here he showed himself an extremely effective tactic that guessed that very weak point. All the development of motion depends on how navalny and the company will manage to keep their activists and ideologues from transferring all the discontent immediately to the first person.

Because then they have two ways to politicize the process. One way, if they can focus on Medvedev, and all this will develop for his resignation and reformatting the government. This slogan is clearly supported by a vast majority of the country's population. And if they keep from aggressive attacks on the country's leader, they will rather quickly put the president in front of the dilemma: either he will have to resign the government and allow a certain process of change, or it will have to stay until the latter hold for Medvedev.

There is a third option that Putin will simply lead this movement. It would be the strongest course if Putin pushed Navalny and became Navalny himself. Let's see what scenario will develop everything.

Editorial opinion may not reflect the views of the author

Boris Kagarlitsky

reference

Boris Yulievich Kagarlitsky - Russian political scientist, sociologist, publicist (left views), candidate of political sciences. Director of the Institute of Globalization and Social Movements (Moscow). Chief editor of Rabkor.ru magazine. Soviet dissident.

Born in 1958 in Moscow in the family of literary criticism and theatershedras Yulia Kagarlitsky (Professor Gityis).
He studied in Gitis.
Since 1977 - left dissident. He participated in the publication of Samizdatov magazines "Options", "Left turn" ("Socialism and the Future").
In 1979 he became a candidate member of the CPSU.
In 1980, after a well-banned state examination, according to the denunciation, it was interrogated in the KGB and excluded from Gityis and candidates for the members of the Party for Antisocial Activities. Worked the postman.
In April 1982, he was arrested on the "case of young socialists" and 13 months spent in Lefortov prison on charges of anti-Soviet propaganda. In April 1983, pardon and released.
From 1983 to 1988 he worked as a lifter, wrote books and articles published in the West, and with the beginning of restructuring - in the USSR.
In 1988 he was restored in Gitis and graduated from him.
The book "Thoring Cane", published in English in London, received the Daughter's Memorial Prize in the UK.
From 1989 to 1991 - Ima-Press agency Observer.
In 1992-1994, he worked as a browser of the newspaper Moscow Federation of Trade Unions "Solidarity".
From March 1993 to 1994, an expert of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia.
From 1994 to 2002 - Senior Researcher of the Institute of Comparative Political Science RAS (ITS RAS), in which he defended his dissertation.
In April 2002, he became the director of the Institute of Problems of Globalization, after its separation in 2006, he headed the Institute for Globalization and Social Movements (ICSO).
Chairman of the editorial board of the journal "Left Policy". In parallel, the active journalistic work was led in a number of publications - "The Moscow Times", "New Gazeta", "Century", "V.", and also read lectures at the universities in Russia and the United States.
Member of the scientific community of the Transnational Institute (TNI, Amsterdam) since 2000.
Author of a number of books, journalistic and scientific articles.