Homo russicus

Rusophobia as a fresh crime in Russia
The unholy Cremolovian human rights fighters are preparing another anti-social bill for the Russians: about fighting Russophobia. It is expected that the fresh recipe will be perfectly meaningless, due to the fact that in Russian law there is no definition of “rusophobia” and doubtful that specified a recipe would arise. That is why for the machinery of repression it will be a very delicious bite: it will be possible to plant practically anyone who has expressed unflatteringly about Russia and the Russians
There is, probably, a second reason for the appearance of the Russophobia Act. By adopting 1 more draconian law, its authors hope to blur the work for repression. any will make laws, others will charge them, 3rd judge, and 4th watch over the execution of the sentence. Then no 1 will be guilty – everyone only fulfills his duty.
There will be no shortage of Rusophobes. You wrote a abroad word alternatively of a Russian counterpart, you're a rusophobe. You said Venice is more beautiful than St. Petersburg, you're a russphobe. You went on vacation in Maldives, not Sochi – you are rusophobes.
The first accused under this law would have been if he had lived, Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin, who wrote to his wife 2 centuries ago:

– I was born in Russia with a soul and talent.

Homo russicus. Now we're gonna kick everybody's ass due to the fact that we're Russian... Empire as revenge, culture as genocide

There's no specified thing as rusophobia. This is simply a Russian propaganda designed to manipulate European and American consumers with their ideas of tolerance and inadmissibility of any discrimination. There is no rusophobia, there is only a reaction of a healthy organism to crimes and wickedness emanating from Russia. It is simply a manifestation of cultural hygiene and social distance. It's like an outbreak.

In the early 1950s, István Bibó wrote a program essay The poorness of tiny east European countries. About 30 years later, Milan Kundera published the text West kidnapped or the tragedy of Central Europe. Both writers addressed their articles to Western Europeans, for whom the existential fears of east Europeans remained incomprehensible. This position can be felt in both cases erstwhile we look at what nations the authors put on the list of endangered peoples. They meant Hungarians, Czechs and Poles, whose existence for centuries threatened empires: Austro-Hungarian, German and Russian.

Only the second survived, posing as a socialist empire for a short time.

Although neither Bibó nor Kundera referred straight to Ukraine and Ukrainians, it was their past in the early 21st century that showed the planet that the concerns of tiny countries of Central and east Europe about their own existence are not fictional.

Russian aggression against Ukraine, with its unprecedented cruelty and cynicism, is usually compared to the German Nazi war against Europe. However, this comparison is at most highly contractual.

German Nazism is simply a phenomenon mostly accidental and short-lived, caused by Prussian militarism at the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries and rematching after Germany lost planet War I. The Russian Empire is simply a phenomenon of a different order, of large historical permanence. Existential fears of neighboring nations require not only a fresh thought to defend their future, but besides a redefining of our knowing of Russia's past and its cultural and anthropological type.

Dreams of their own uniqueness

In his essay, Kunder asked a question that he left unanswered: was the russian Empire, meaning communism, a negation or a kind of fulfillment of the Russian Empire? Today, it is clear that the russian Empire was only a pseudomorphosis of historical Russia, which was achieved thanks to the Russian ability of the mimika to be converted with the aid of the fashionable Marxist vocabulary in the 20th century, which yet landed in the basket, and the mask was dropped. The species Homo sapiens overlooked the birth and evolution of a peculiar kind of people, Homo russicus, aptly referred to in Ukraine as “racishists”, which formed a circumstantial Russian mir, or “Russian order” or even “Russian world”.

In times of the USSR, the general characteristics and values of various degrees and proportions for all its inhabitants were attempted to be referred to as Homo sovieticus. This kind of people was to be characterized by: deficiency of requirements as to the quality of life and the results of its work, which frequently takes the form of a rumble; constant complaining of its fate; hypocrisy; justification of theft; paternalism; alienation from public life; deficiency of solidarity and a sense of responsibility; blame on others; refusal to defend its rights; opportunisticism as a customary form of passive complicity in the ideology and crimes of the state; false designation of causal-effect relationships; inability to real self-esteem; distorted perception of reality; religion in conspiracy explanation of history; and yet suspicion and aggressive isolationism. All of this is widely recognised as the consequence of a social experimentation in the USSR, aimed at creating a fresh russian man.

The russian Union collapsed, but Homo sovieticus He didn't vanish with him. Moreover, the view of Russia's past confirms the worrying presumption that it is not a russian product, but only a survivor from the laboratory that created it. This kind of man existed long before the USSR. So that's who it should be called. Homo russicusand the erstwhile attempts to apply this word to conventional and affirmative values as a kind of alternate and other to Homo sovieticusThey sound false in this context.

Existing descriptions Homo sovieticus, in fact Homo russicusThey sin in many inaccuracies. This may be due to the improper spirit of tolerance in this context, or possibly to the Russian origin of any authors, embodying the same kind they sought to describe. The desire to avoid any form of work is an inherent feature of the representatives of all mankind, but only in the rusco mira empire has it been almost anointed with pietism associated with the cult of the leader on whom the burden of work lies. However, this is not an essential feature of the Homo russicus. Above all, it is simply a misconception of its own importance, uniqueness and undervalue by the planet around it. As a result, there are a number of complexes associated with low self-esteem and victimization, and the compensation mechanics requires uncovering a rebound that takes the form of an arrogant attitude towards neighboring nations and external aggression as a false way to be appreciated. For this reason, there is simply a "normality" in Russia. It is different from the ruling civilised society formed on European values. A Perfect Example Homo russicus There is Vladimir Putin sending an army to systematically destruct Ukraine; or a soldier who kills, robs and rapes civilians; and yet a crowd who enthusiastically demands further demolition of Ukrainians.

When a school teacher starts a war

As in any system, there may besides be fluctuations, irregularities in Russia, but they never find the direction of improvement and the interior atmosphere in the country. Moreover, anomalies themselves besides come from the Russian world. Most Russians who passively do not accept the “Russian War” and “Russian Peace”, have rather comfortably adapted to the existing system, trying to distance themselves from today's realities through interior emigration. A characteristic indicator of the Russianness of specified social fluctuations is public hysteria about visa sanctions against Russians as a threat to their own comfort, i.e. tourist trips to Europe. The pretext to hysteria is so for them to reject the rule of collective responsibility.

They're inherent features. Homo russicus.In this case, we are not talking about collective responsibility, but individual responsibility, both moral and practical. The granting of a visa by a abroad state is simply a question of trust, and so an individual approach to a peculiar person. Life is not a trial. There's no presumption of innocence. The main principles that we follow in life are work for what is happening, and awareness of the origin and effect, especially by a citizen of a state aggressor who has violated global law. This, however, is not taught by Russian culture and history. The demands of individual Russian citizens to exclude them from sanctions at a time erstwhile Russia is conducting a war to destruct a neighbouring country and its inhabitants are in line with the thought Homo russicus of their own uniqueness and undervalue by the West, which only emphasizes their subconscious affiliation with the Russian world.

Another sign of this affiliation is the conventional mistake in building causal relationships. It is not their own state that is blamed for their failure of comfort in life, but the West, understood as a collective creation that imposes sanctions, trying to halt the improvement of the Russian empire. Meanwhile, in their knowing of reality, Western sanctions give Putin a chance to grow again and again, quoting Winston Churchill, “the iron curtain has fallen across the continent.” It is this aversion to Europe and America that is simply a hallmark Homo russicus. Instead, it would be worth it if the Russians considered the measurement of their own work for what is happening. The logical consequence of these reflections should be to accept the inevitability of the consequences of the disaster, including the awareness of the request to break from Homo russicus. Finally, the main origin that unites people and at the same time the building blocks of societies are not identity, but values that modern politics and discipline do not pay adequate attention to, rather, the former.

The Russians are trying to get distant from what's happening. They pretend that “we have nothing to do with this”. They hope that shortly "everything will be as it was." specified attitudes are inevitably plagued by disasters, as they undermine all the principles of Russian social culture and based on which it inactive exists. All of this makes it possible to measure what happened in Russia in the early 21st century as an anthropological disaster.

There are 2 reasons for this disaster: human and internal, Russian. Homo sapiens has not biologically changed for 40,000 years of its existence. The only thing stopping him from primitive cruelty is culture and law. erstwhile cultural and legal barriers fall or are intentionally destroyed by the state, man returns to cave condition. Let war, army, prison, and fascism be utilized here, where, as in a primitive tribe, force and worship of leaders flourish. This could happen to any nation. At 1 time the German authorities, referring to the most primitive human emotions, liberated Germans from the “chimera of conscience”, forming a fascist society. Today, Russia created them, freeing its citizens from the same "chimera".

After a painful process of denazification that brought an acute awareness of the nightmare of his own history, However, the Germans rapidly returned to civilization by referring to the respective cultural traditions. Russian traditions make it hard for her to return. They do not “make it impossible” due to the fact that the Homo sapiens can theoretically be reformed, but the issue is so much more hard that we are talking about Homo russicus. For the success of specified evolution, it is essential to re-evaluate and transform the perception of our own culture, based on reflection, re-assessment and realized awareness of our national past as a series of crimes worthy of appropriate punishment.

The causes of the Russian anthropological disaster should be seen not only in the propaganda of fresh years. War is won not by the general, but by the school teacher. This conviction should be paraphrased: the school teacher starts war. Propagandists are undoubtedly liable for what is happening, and they will pay for it someday, but their function should not be overestimated due to the fact that they offer society only additional motivation and modern hatred speech.

Even before Putin, in the 1980s, erstwhile I was in military service in the russian army, we were commanded by an elder ensign. The “Russian idea” was formulated better and clearer than all modern politicians and propagandaists. To be able to print, let us put it this way: “We have always been able to kick everyone, and now we will besides kick everybody due to the fact that we are Russians.”

By the way, he was a Tartar. And of course he utilized a different verb. To put this cannibalist ideology into practice for so many years, it takes a long practice.

In economical and social sciences, there is simply a concept of "path dependency", i.e. the dependence of society on the current way of development, on its cultural trajectory. So it turns out that the carriage of Russian past is stuck in a deep queue of unbeaten roads. It remains to be understood how Russia fell into the railway in which it was born and raised Homo russicus.

Medieval USSR

Russia's past begins in Kiev and then leaves this place forever. It begins with lies and violence, which became an archetype of Russian identity. In the 8th century, the Viking bands began to dive further into east Europe to plunder the surrounding areas and trade with the arabian East. These troops were gradually joined by representatives of the local population – Slavs and the Ugrofi peoples. In the process of common acculture, a fresh ethnosocial group, the alleged Rus, was created, which differed from both Scandinavians and Slavs, whose name comes from the Scandinavian word Drōts marking a group of rowers.

Let us believe the Kiev monk Nestor, the alleged author of the oldest chronicle of east Europe entitled A fresh of the past years that describes the past of the Russian state from the earliest times to the beginning of the 12th century. In the late 9th century, a band of Russians approached Kiev. Their Duke Oleg introduced himself as a merchant, not a warrior. After believing him, the citizens of Kiev accepted him with open arms, after which Oleg killed Askold and Dira, the local princes, simultaneously capturing the city. In this way Kiev became the metropolis of Russia over the central Dnieprem – the Russian Land, but not the “mother of Russian cities”, as it tries to translate the chronicle of Russian historiography and propaganda.

As time passed, Kiev as the centre of the Russian Land began to grow its power to another areas of east Europe, treating it as its colonies: they collected tribute, sent officials, sent displaced people there. The consequence was a bizarre horizontal confederation of lands, which did not match a vertical unitary state in anything. The inhabitants of these lands evidently recognized the importance of Kiev, but did not consider it their capital. Moreover, they did not see themselves as Russians. The men of Novgorod lived in Novgorod, in Halicz – Halicz, in Włodzimierz – in Włodzimierz – in Włodzimierz, and in Kiev – in Russian. However, this did not prevent the western and northern neighbours of Ukraine – Hungary, Poland and Lithuania – from calling residents of Halicz and Volyn Rusami or Rusinami. Similarly, Russian and russian people in the West were called Russians regardless of their cultural background.

Russian Kiev – as a united, powerful state with 1 ancient Russian people and a common strategy of power, courts, taxes and borders from the White Sea to the Black Sea and from Bug to Volga – was invented by russian historians only in the 1930s. It was simply a concept of a united and powerful USSR, moved to the mediate Ages, thanks to which the recently created creator received a thousand-year legitimacy, and Kiev – the ephemeral position of the first capital of the Russian Empire (Soviet).

But let's go back to the past. In east Europe, Kiev and the Rusk Land gained prestige. In the 13th century, even before the Mongol pogrom, the fight for the Kiev heritage began, first of all, between the Halico-Wolynian power and the Włodzimierz-Suzdal land, or the future Moscow principality. The Halic land shortly became part of the Polish Crown and Volyn and Kiev became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The chances of independent political improvement have been lost for centuries. Moscow Rurykowicz has since had no competitors. Already in the 14th century Moscow rulers traditionally utilized the dynastic title of Prince of the All-Ruse, but by the end of the 15th century specified rhetoric received ideological justification: Moscow declared itself “New Russian Land”. Those who came under Moscow's power not only became Moscow's subjects, but besides gradually assimilated into a emerging imperial society that forced them to adopt a fresh identity. For this reason, the inhabitants of Novgorod, Tver and Riazania changed into Moscow, or in the inhabitants of “new Russia”, which in the late 15th century began to be called Russia.

The concept of Russia allowed the rulers of Moscow to conduct a kind of cultural cleansing in border areas. The fresh axiology was based on a re-interpretation of the origin of the nation and the state, which confirms the common origin of the various population groups in east Europe. Moscow princes proclaimed themselves heirs not only of Kiev, but besides of cities that never belonged to Kiev or Moscow (Halicz, Lviv, Vladimir, Minsk or Brest) and began demanding their return from Poland and Lithuania. It was more crucial for Moscow to become “new Kiev” than “third Rome”. The basis of this expansion was the social psychology of the antilithian and postordinian resentiveness – a mixture of a false sense of historical resentiveness with the request for vengeful revenge and external expansion. The national story of lost size, created by Moscow chroniclers of the 15th–16th century, coincided with plans to grow the political princes and tsars of Moscow. The late medieval Russian nation, which had developed since the end of the 15th century, created an empire for itself, so Russian imperialism was born long before the conquest of Kazan and Astrachania in the mid-16th century, and its main intent immediately became the lands on which Ukraine was built. This resolution continues to this day. It is the basis of social life and state policy in Russia, distinguishing the Russian planet from another nations that, if they had akin complexes, could overcome them.

Cultural genocide

Russian imperialism has another peculiar feature, whose remaining European colonial empires, always emphasizing the difference between the metropolis and the colony, are deprived. Their cultural and educational policy led to the creation of local elites who led the national free fight in the 20th century and led the fresh states. Russia, enslaved by fresh lands, imposed its culture on them, turned their inhabitants into Russians, blurring the national and cultural features. cultural identity could be here only in the form of folklore and ethnographic curiosities. specified a national-cultural policy is genocide. The conquered nation is destroyed, and in its place a fresh 1 arises, in the image and likeness of the Russian people. Russian imperialism should be defined as as assimilation colonialism.

As a result, the anticipation of creating nationally liable elites in Siberia, Asia and the Caucasus was virtually destroyed. Local authorities and the population feel comfortable in the Russian colonial system. You don't gotta take work for what's happening, the Tsar who sends money from Moscow decides everything. As a result, conquered nations became more Russian than the Russians themselves. The fall of the Russian Federation, like the fall of any colonial empire, is inevitable, but it will be a long and painful way to find its own national work by the federalized ethnos so far and get their skills of utilizing it.

Russia's dependence on the railways of history, which became part of the Duchy of Moscow, on medieval complexes and myths, was full revealed in an effort to Europeanize Russia by Peter I. It failed, just as the effort of Russian reforms from the 1990s failed, which did not influence the fundamental foundations of the functioning of Homo russicus and its world. Under the transformation mask that Europe so willingly believed in, Russia was hiding the same forerunner with old complexes and hatred for all who are not like Russians – Europeans (including Ukrainians) and Americans. As shortly as the chance arose to drop the mask of European culture, Russia immediately pushed it into an angle. October 1917 is simply a real large anti-European revolution, a delayed reaction of the nation to the reforms of Tsar Peter the Great. Let us remind you that the Latin word revolutio virtually means “back”, “rolling backwards”. The warrant of this return were peasant masses with rifles in hand, carriers of conventional Russian complexes, dressed in soldier rails from the large War. As a result, archetypes and social relations, which in Russia never died, took over power, disdaining man as an individual and striving to reconstruct the empire. The civilian war and the Bolshevik run against Poland are not exports of the revolution, it is the restoration of the borders of the empire, historical Russia, to which Putin so frequently refers, and which has become temporarily known as the USSR.

In the fresh anti-European revolution and the Russian attack on Ukraine Putin is nothing. It's the name-symbol that makes the dream of millions of Russians making up Russian mir real. This Russian order stands on 3 pillars: Orthodoxy, Bolshevism and utmost “hence” (from the Extraordinary Commission, the alleged Czreyczna Komissiji – Cheka – created by Bolsheviks to fight their opponents). 1 would think that the physical embodiments of these perfect giants will be found in 3 political institutions – the Church, the ruling organization and peculiar services (whatever they are called: Cheka, KGB or FSB). But at the level of national ideology they turn into a series of slogans: we have the right, due to the fact that we are right; we are great; there are many of us, we are mostly (Bolshevik), we are unique, we are extraordinary, extraordinary. That is why we, the Russian people, “we have always been able to kick everyone, and now we will besides kick everybody due to the fact that we are Russians”, paraphrasing my erstwhile commander again. We will not build a normal, orderly world, for our component is extraordinary situations. We come out victorious due to the fact that our neighbors, who live by law and order, are not prepared for them. specified reasoning is far from European values. Russia's wars begin at school and at home. It is there where the centuries-old tradition of superiority of the Russian planet is passed. The rulers and propaganda only complete this process.

followers of Chlestakov, heir of Raskolnikov

The Russian planet created a story about its wonderful culture. This is very Russian: to divide cultures into ‘higher’/‘lower’, ‘small’/ ‘large’. Meanwhile, no hierarchy of cultures exists. Each has its own function; denying it seems to be cultural racism.

The story of large Russian culture is only a projection of the story of large Russia, which must be overthrown so that everyone can see the real place of Russian culture in the world. If Russian literature and culture as only European phenomena are correctly read, they can become the main whistleblowers of the Russian world

If there were no reforms of Peter the Great, there would be no Russian literature. But even Europeanism did not deprive this literature of russico mira. Russian literature is like a chameleon. He's changing colors by staying himself.

It is said that "the enemy is not Pushkin, but Putin" (as their open letter was titled on 6 March by German writers associated with PEN Club). Therefore, it is worth reading Alexander Pushkin carefully, for example his poem to the Liars of Russia, written in 1831 after the suppression of the November uprising, to which Adam Mickiewicz replied with a poem To Moscow's friends. Pushkin's song is well-constructed poetically: metrum, verses, alliterations and asonanse, and the poet is besides elegantly shading meanings. But what is it? Read a passage from Julian Tuwim:

“What is the cry, the Tribune of the People? Why

Are you threatening Russia with an anatomy?

Why are you so upset? Lithuanian rebellion and punishment?

It's a Slavic dispute, a household dispute,

You're not going to solve it with crass words.

The destiny of our old feud has long been judged.”

Do not these nineteenth-century verses sound as if they were written today, in Moscow, and directed right now to the global community? Could Pushkin be moonlighting as the author of Putin's speeches? Isn't that Pushkin quoted by Russian minister Lavrow? Here's a complete set of movie of Russian propaganda: the encroachment of a common victory, in this case over Napoleon ("in the ruins / burning Moscow, under violence, / We did not admit the impudence and the god under whom you were lying, bobbing?]; the threat “we can repeat this” (So send us, krasomkas, their bitter sons of the hufkas, / In the fields of Russia there is adequate area for them / Among the non-foreseeable grave clumps); and the classical conviction “it is you who hatred us” (but you are recklessly snatching you / the courage of conflict desperate – You hatred us) caused by the inferiority complex.

The continuation of this subject can be found in the poem by Józef Brodski Ukraine’s independence 1991: “Let’s talk about the sound of substance pauses, meaning severely: Cross to your way, chachy, lichen to your way. Go dressed in Żupany, not to say – in uniforms, / In Russian 3 letters, in the planet 4 pages” (translated by Leszek Sharuga). This inconsistent verse and rhyme are in fact a reflection of the inconsistent reasoning of an imperial drug addict on hunger who lost access to his drug erstwhile the russian Union dissolved. Therefore, he enrages Ukraine to go "in Russian 3 letters", which did not happen. But we know perfectly well that a Russian warship went into it a fewer months ago.

It is said that Russian culture teaches humanism and compassion, shows the fragility of human personality towards the device of the state. The problem is that it only teaches this to a individual grown up in European culture. A man of Russian culture teaches something completely different.

Russian literature has 2 main characters – Chlestakov from the Review of Mikołaj Gogol and Raskolnikov from Crimes and punishment of Fyodor Dostoevsky. The first is simply a liar, not a same - glories, as we were taught at school, and a liar lying for his own material benefit (he has a double in the authorities of Gogol, who holds a hoarding office, who claims that the widow of the officer “she herself flogged herself with rod). Its heirs are Russian propaganda and generals who claim that Ukrainians kill each another and destruct their own cities. The second hero, Raskolnikov, is simply a murderer, although later he regretted his decision. Again, we are dealing with archetypes derived from the above - mentioned manuscript A fresh of Past YearsThat's lies and violence.

For a European born in the values of Christian civilization, both these literary heroes are fundamentally antiheroes, an example of how not to act. The Russian, on the another hand, is an example to follow. Lies in Russia are normal, and “Russian boys” drew their own conclusions from Russian literature.

In Dostoyevsky's time, they could inactive uncertainty whether they were “quick creatures and whether they had the right” and, as in the Karamazov Brothers, give God a ticket to this planet with respect for the tears of a kid bitten by dogs. They don't uncertainty today. They kill Ukrainian children due to the fact that they “have the law”. They don't request penance or doubt. They are "harmed and humiliated." Dostoevsky wrote about them (yes, again Dostoevsky!). Only they experience their injury and humiliation differently. Demeaned by the Russian power, for which a man is nobody, in everything they search signs of injury and see humiliation in the fact that individual next door lives differently, better, more freely. Not being able to take revenge on the state, being a part of it, they are willing to take revenge on others, to pour out their anger on them so that they can become like them, in Russians, and if they fail, they can always destruct them.

The behaviour of a Russian soldier in Ukraine is simply a distinctive feature Homo russicus, a typical resenty.

It must besides be remembered that there is no culture, athletics and discipline outside politics. Anyone who says so either engages in the most disgusting politics or pursues his own interests, becoming a useful idiot in the service of corrupt politicians. Russian culture spreads along with its carriers, sometimes better called carriers. They themselves and their dissemination of culture should not find a place in the European public space, with all these shows, festivals and competitions, where they become a tool of propaganda and a means of rehabilitation of the misanthropic Russian world. Russian literature, Russian historical discipline and archaeology are full liable for today's Russian aggression on Ukraine.

Russian Manual

However, Russian culture can and must be re-read and reinterpreted, observed and redefined. It belongs in a museum, library, university hall or, if we want, on an operating table, where a surgeon must execute a vivisection on it to realize how this mysterious organism functions and what kind of cancer eats it. Only reading the past and conventional culture of Russia through the eyes of its neighbours shows the planet its actual image.

Russian traditionalism makes society appear predictable. If Russia can inactive surprise you, you don't know Russia. Let it be regulation number 1 for us. And here are the remainder of the instructions, a kind of 10 commandments.

Rule number two. If Russia promises to do something good, it won't. The agreements with Russia are so not worth the paper on which they are written.

Rule number three. If Russia promises not to do something wrong, it will do it erstwhile you have time to believe that it will not.

Rule number four. If Russia promises to do something wrong, it will surely do it at the most inappropriate minute for itself and with negative consequences for itself.

Rule number five. If Russia accuses individual of committing a crime or a crime, she has already committed it.

Rule number six. If Russia accuses individual of preparing evil or crime, it prepares it itself.

Rule number seven. If Russia makes an authoritative statement, it's lying.

Rule number eight, Russia does not realize the language of strength, it understands only strength. The ultimatum and negotiations with Russia are so useless due to the fact that it takes them as a sign of weakness.

Rule number nine. If you're afraid that your actions will lead to the escalation of Russian activities, you're wrong. The escalation has been planned by Russia for a long time and requires no additional reason or pretext.

Rule number 10. If you're inactive afraid of Russia, quit your fear. You just don't know her.

Applying these simple principles will defend the European man from complex ethical and applicable problems. There's no specified thing as rusophobia. This is simply 1 way of manipulating, invented by Russian propaganda, designed for European and American consumers with their ideas of tolerance and inadmissibility of any discrimination. There is only a reaction of a healthy organism to the crimes and wickedness emanating from Russia. It is simply a manifestation of cultural hygiene and social distance. It's like an outbreak.

There is no certainty that after Russia's defeat in the war against Ukraine and the subsequent political disaster of Russian society, it will be able to improvement itself, overcoming itself Russian mir and reeducation Homo russicus. It is more than likely that the inevitable fresh effort to Europeanise Russia and "sapienization", that is, humanity Homo russicus, it will be decorative and short-lived again, as has happened in history.

Therefore, it is worth learning to live with Russia right next door, to defend yourself from it and not to be afraid of it, but to always have in your hands reliable means of protection and to apply the unwritten commandments in force in the GUlag: “Do not believe, do not be afraid, never ask” (as quoted by Alexander Solzhenitsin in GUŁAG Archipelago And I've broken Shalamov in Wheel Stories).

Today, after the countries of Central Europe that were worried about István Bibó and Milan Kunder, it came to Ukraine to break its existential fears, creating a fresh algorithm for dealing with the neighboring empire. Ukraine re-reads Russian culture and history, clearly defining their distinctive features to the world.

The Ukrainian and Russian versions of this essay were published by Ukrainian net portal Zbruc .