“How wonderful it is for those who give grand names to their trivial activities and even their petty passions, presenting them to humanity as grand feats in the name of its benefit and prosperity.” — Goethe, The Sorrows of Young Werther

The Proposal for a New National Idea

WE NEED TO REVIVE THE RUSSIAN IDEA A proposal to create such an idea comes from Igor Chubais, Doctor of Philosophy, author of many scholarly and journalistic works, and initiator of the introduction of a new subject, “Russia Studies,” into the Russian education system. This was reported in “World of News,” pages 20-21, at the end of December. It’s undeniably a great idea. As far as I understand, this subject will cover everything about Russia: history, linguistics, landscape, geography, culture, and more. I believe introducing such a subject into the education system is a good idea. People should know the history of their country. The only question is how truthful and objective the textbooks for “Russia Studies” will be.

The Challenge of Objectivity in History

It seems to me that for the next 30-40 years, it will be impossible to create a textbook where the history of the country is presented impartially, without the influence of “Reds,” “Whites,” and other perspectives. For now, some historians cannot free themselves from Marxism-Leninism, while others see the Soviet period only in dark colors. I’ve heard that, at the request of Solzhenitsyn’s widow, his novel One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich was introduced into the educational system as a history textbook of our recent past. It’s an interesting novel. For us Soviet people of the 1950s, it was intriguing because many of us didn’t know what was happening in the camps and prisons of the country. I read it in 1964, and it certainly made an impression on us. During those years, many stories and novellas on this topic appeared. Personally, I was more struck by a novella—I can’t remember which magazine—called The Bas-Relief on the Cliff. In Siberia, on a huge cliff near Baikal, a bas-relief of Stalin had to be carved so that passengers on passing trains could see the “father of the people” from the train windows. A sculptor, who was a prisoner, did this work and froze to death on that cliff while carving the bas-relief. After reading that story, I couldn’t shake it for a long time. Khrushchev proposed that One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich should be nominated for the Lenin Prize, but public opposition was strong, and Khrushchev’s proposal failed.

Balancing the Narrative of Soviet History

Of course, all this happened, and the next generation needs to know the dark sides of our life. I grew up in that era and know all the “delights” of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” period firsthand. But who said the country’s past should only be shown in a negative light? Was there nothing bright? Yes, there was Ivan Denisovich, but there was also engineer Krivonosov, the girl from Uzbekistan, Mamlatkat, who set a record for picking cotton. There was Chkalov, Stakhanov, the Papanin expedition, and heroic polar aviators. The Soviet people, in unbelievably difficult social and living conditions, in the hungry years of the first five-year plans, built the industrial base of our state, which enabled the country to produce enough weapons for the front during the tough years of the Great Patriotic War. In the end, there was also the mass heroism of Soviet people on the battlefield, without which victory would have been impossible.

Critique of Igor Chubais’ Proposal

However, Mr. Chubais suggests removing the Soviet years from Russia’s history. An interesting idea, but first of all, you cannot erase anything from history because it’s simply impossible. There was such an attempt in Egyptian history, but it was unsuccessful. It’s also a bit strange to hear such proposals from a 15-year veteran of the Communist Party. After all, he graduated from a Soviet educational institution with a degree in philosophy, a component of Marxism-Leninism theory. And he received his academic degrees in this field. So by rejecting Soviet power, he would have to renounce his higher education and degrees! Yet he claims to be a Doctor of Philosophy. There seems to be a contradiction. He even received a scholarship from the Soviet government he now despises. As a historian, I sometimes don’t understand why some scholars believe Tsarist Russia was a paradise for our people. I won’t argue whether that was entirely true, but I would advise these ultra-patriots to read the classic literature of the 19th century more carefully. Everything they wrote was about real life. None of them were communists like Chubais. By reading Gogol, Chekhov, Kuprin, and Leskov, among others, one can see that life wasn’t that sweet for many, especially for serfs who were freed without land and fell into bondage again. By the way, lieutenant or cornet Obolensky was not a serf; such titles were not given to serfs in blessed Tsarist Russia.

Historical Context and Lessons

I would remind these defenders of the Tsarist regime of Lermontov’s words: “Farewell, unwashed Russia, the land of lords, the land of slaves. And you, blue uniforms, and you, obedient people.” I believe no further comment is needed. The simplest truth is this: a well-fed, clothed, and satisfied people will not revolt. This is a fact. In 1991, Soviet power collapsed because it couldn’t provide food, clothes, shoes, and appliances to the people. Everything boils down to one question: how am I living? If I live well, I love the government; if I live poorly, I hate it. Therefore, instead of erasing the Soviet period from history, we should study it thoroughly. During those times, we lived, worked, defended our homeland, and made breakthroughs in space, and our country was not considered a third-world country like it is now. Therefore, we should not just present Ivan Denisovich to our children but also the positive, patriotic, and progressive achievements of the Soviet years, so the next generation can be proud of their people’s past. They should be proud of their fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers and not call them “sovoks” (a derogatory term for Soviet people). This is the basis of patriotic education. We should speak of them in such a way that descendants can be proud of their forebears who built an industrial nation. Ivan Denisovich’s story should not overshadow the heroic labor of our ancestors. As for Ivan Denisovich, if Mr. Solzhenitsyn were serving his sentence today in our detention centers and colonies, the conditions Ivan Denisovich faced would seem like a holiday home.

On Patriotism and National Identity

Mr. Chubais asserts that you cannot be a patriot of both North and South Korea, even though as a people, they are united. Using this logic, he concludes that you cannot be a patriot of both Russia and the USSR. Perhaps Mr. Chubais doesn’t understand that one cannot be born and raised in both North and South Korea simultaneously. This is a common tactic of those skilled in sophistry. I can say that I have loved my homeland since childhood and still love it today. I love my homeland, not the political system. And if needed, I am ready to serve my homeland just as faithfully as I did during the Soviet era. I repeat, especially for those who don’t quite get it: I serve my homeland, not the political system. Love for one’s people and country should be the guiding principle of all our actions and our national idea.