Yandex gave Muscovites 2.9 points for self-isolation

01.04 start at 07:45

Andrey Medvedev. About Sokurov and not only ...

Russian political observers, according to director Alexander Sokurov, should appear before the Hague Tribunal. "They should be punished. They are just criminals who work on both state and private channels," Sokurov said. Andrei Medvedev, a political commentator for the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, discusses the statement of a famous cultural figure ...

Russian political observers, according to the director Alexandra Sokurova, must appear before the Hague Tribunal. "They should be punished. They are just criminals who work on both state and private channels," Sokurov said.

Andrey Medvedev, political commentator for VGTRK - discusses the statement of a famous cultural figure ...

Everything is bad!

This is the leitmotif of the life-sense of the Russian intelligentsia. And always. This is the context in which the domestic intellectual liberal "get-together" has been for the last 200 years, and 150, for sure. In general, the interview with director Sokurov can be described as follows. The Russian intellectual took up his favorite business: he began to talk about what he absolutely does not know and does not understand! But he talks about this from the position of a prophet, a creator of meaning, a person who carries an unconditional and immutable truth.

There are a lot of funny things in the interview: both about Islam and about journalists. According to him, "someday these political observers will appear before the Hague Tribunal as provocateurs who have caused enormous damage to the humanitarian space of Russia and the entire Russian people." This is about Ukraine and how they covered events in Ukraine. "These radio and television heralds are engaged in throwing matches during a fire. In the place of power, I would pay special attention to these people who create the preconditions for international conflicts. They are just criminals who work on both state and private channels." ...

The tradition of domestic intellectuals is to sympathize with terrorists

Who does the director Sokurov consider criminals? Journalists. And the presence in Ukraine, where a fire is blazing, about which these journalists periodically talk, private neo-Nazi punitive battalionswho are fighting under Nazi symbols and Nazi slogans, which, by their atrocities, have quite caught up with the guys from the SS "Galicia" divisions and punitive battalions formed from Ukrainian collaborators during the Second World War? Sokurov does not dislike this. They are not needed in The Hague. He somehow does not notice them at all, although even the Ukrainian Themis was forced to notice them. Remember the case with battalion "Tornado", which was so sold out that they were forced to arrest him even in Kiev. They committed such atrocities that even the Kiev authorities were forced to bring them to justice. Here they do not bother the director Sokurov by the very fact of their existence, The Hague is not about them.

Or director Sentsovwho sat down for terrorism, because he and his friends were preparing terrorist attacks in Crimea. And, nevertheless, he evokes sympathy in Sokurov. Other people who could have suffered, he does not sympathize with. Although, in fact, it is such a tradition of Russian intellectuals: to sympathize with terrorists.

To understand the director Sentsov, the Ukrainian authorities wanted to change. That is, from the whole group they only needed Oleg Sentsov. They wanted to spit on everyone else. And they came out with a sly proposal to change it to someone who could be needed by Moscow. According to some operational data, the director O. Sentsov coordinated the activities of several cells on the territory of Crimea. And the fact that he participated in the activities of Automaidan and, in all likelihood, in the defeat of the Anti-Maidan column, which were returning to Crimea, was simply not closely involved.

The man was preparing terrorist attacks, and he was taken on this. Well, they committed several comical acts of terrorism, burned down, for example, the branch of United Russia. Well, the next one was uncommon. IED (improvised explosive device) they collected something.

"Peacekeeping" position of the director

Creator Sokurov says: “We must have a categorical condition - not to fight with our neighbors. I would add to the Constitution the principle of compulsory peaceful coexistence with all countries with which we have common borders. Even if we were attacked, we must find the strength not to use the army, not to invade someone else's territory. You can quarrel with your neighbors, but you cannot fight. "It is a pity that the Ministry of Defense did not know about such outstanding peacekeeping abilities of Sokurov in 2008, when the Georgian army attacked Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia and simply killed both peacekeepers and civilians in Tskhinval. If one knew then about such principles of the director Sokurov, there was no need to send troops there. It was necessary to send Sokurov to South Ossetia. He would have come out and probably reached an agreement with the Georgian military. Right there on the spot. I would have found the strength not to use the army, I would have been able to. No? It seems to me that a word spoken by a person should find practical application.

A. Sokurov on Russia's pivot to the East

Director Sokurov called Russia's current pivot to the East "just stupidity." According to him, "you never know what stupid things were done by the Russian state, which cannot really be created yet." That is, the thousand-year history of the Russian state does not lead Sokurov to think that the state was created, that it was formed.

The state is, first of all, traditions and experience, tested by time and confirmed by national consent. Apparently, we have neither traditions nor time-tested experience. However, other historians, more serious, believe that Russia has its own historical experience, which is very difficult and complex, but, nevertheless, gives Russia a special place in the world and special prospects.

It is interesting that the Russian liberal intelligentsia every time Russia made an ideological and political turn to the East, showed incredible indignation. When Russia began to annex Turkestan, it is clear that there was no economic logic in this, but it was political logic. If Russian troops had not appeared there, British military and British military bases would have appeared there within two days' march from Orenburg. And the entire liberal community then said that we did not need this at all, a senseless waste of time and money. When Nicholas II made a turn to the East at the beginning of the 20th century and began to actively invest in the Far East and China, when he did not agree, together with the European powers, to arrange the forcible division of China into occupation zones, in fact, he saved China as a single state, then Nicholas II was also liberalized terribly condemned. But then there was a whole economic program: the construction of a railway to the Far East, and the construction of new ports, and investments in China. But all this caused terrible indignation of the Moscow oligarchy, Moscow bankers, because then the economic center of gravity could shift from Moscow to Kazan, which would become a transit point through which goods would go to China and Asia, and new economic ties would be established. This economic pivot to the East was badly condemned. And as a result, as a result of intrigues, it was slowed down, and, in general, Russia was drawn into the military alliance of the Entente (with England and France) and further into the First World War.

Russia is the heir to the Byzantine civilization

When Sokurov says that Russia is more civilizationally connected with Europe, I again have a question. Religion, state traditions, cultural traditions and traditions of writing Russia received not so much from Europe, but from the Byzantine Empire, which in its pure form was not Europe. Yes, this is the Eastern Roman Empire, but Byzantium was never Europe, either geographically or ideologically. This is what allowed one or the other Pope to declare crusades against Orthodox schismatics. And this allowed the crusaders to plunder Constantinople quite calmly and kill Orthodox Christians-residents of Constantinople.

Russia just got all its civilizational traditions from Byzantium. Including the lack of colonialist thinking. Russia never had colonies, but the West did. Because in the Catholic and especially in the Protestant consciousness there are those to whom it is given, and there are those to whom it is not given.

A. Sokurov said that the church in Russia should be separated from the state and that, as soon as a decision is made to create an Orthodox party, the flywheel of the country's destruction will start. And if an Orthodox party is created, then rival Muslims will immediately join the race. And then a life-and-death religious war can happen inside Russia.

A. Medvedev: It seems to me that Sokurov is simply writing some kind of script for his new, next wonderful film, which, as always, no one will see, which will receive an award at some festival and which will be filmed, as always, with state money, so that then the director Sokurov could criticize the state.

In general, however, I wonder if there is such a person who stood up straight and went to watch Sokurov's films at the cinema? Sokurov's films are predominantly artistic. It is believed that this is a special, auteur cinema, not for every cattle like political observers, for whom The Hague cries, but for decent people. I have a question: among decent people with good faces, are there many of those who sat down straight and watched Sokurov's movie from beginning to end? I'm not talking about film critics, I'm talking about ordinary people.

Cinema about European values

In the last film A. Sokurova "Francophonie" shows the beginning of the Second World War and the personal history of the director of the Louvre, who defended the national collection of this museum when the Nazi invaders invaded.

A. Medvedev: Let’s assume that the fascist invaders didn’t strongly invade France. And there was no need to protect anything especially. In the entire French Resistance, fewer people fought with fried liver and young Beaujolais than the French served on the side of the Nazis in the Vichy army and fought on the Eastern Front. It turns out that Sokurov is interested in filming not about how, say, in starving, dying Leningrad, the collection of the Hermitage was saved, not about the employees of the orphanage, who one after another died of hunger, but did not steal a piece of bread from the children. He is interested in European values.

What was there to save, excuse me? Have you seen the newsreel footage of the Germans entering Paris or of the Germans being in Paris? The Germans from the Eastern Front traveled to France as an encouragement to rest and heal wounds, take a walk, hang out with girls. What was there to save from whom? You know, this is some kind of distorted perception of life.

Understand and forgive?

It's like the terrorist Sentsov. Again, this is very traditional for Russian liberals. Vaughn Sokurov says to forgive Sentsov, because he did nothing wrong. In the same way, when Alexander II was killed, the entire domestic liberal intellectual crowd wrote to Alexander III that he should forgive the assassin, forgive the Narodnaya Volya, that they should not be hanged. As our intellectuals like to talk about nothing in general.

For me, there is no difference. Whether Sentsov, Whether Basayev, Whether Kibalchich, Stepnyak-Kravchinsky, or Boris Savenkov. These are all people of the same rank. They are terrorists, murderers who have been destroying and trying to destroy my country.

However, the Russian practice of combating terrorism does not carry any special grain and content. For example, in the UK just now a teenager who tweeted in support of ISIS was given two full years. A 15-year-old boy, jokingly, wrote a tweet in support of ISIS, a group of some kind made up of Mujahideen brothers, and two, as they say. In the West, in general, for stories with virtual terrorism on the Web, with the support of terrorists there, with the creation of groups, people are constantly imprisoned and given full sentences. Two, three, five years. For tweets, for posts on Facebook.

Resentment

We are all discussing Sokurov's interview. And I understand what the problem is with Sokurov. He says that Putin has his own cinematic biographer Nikita Mikhalkov. That's how he let it slip. All because of resentment. I would like to be a cinematic biographer myself. And he says he knows "many directors who would like to be among the biographers." Although the president himself does not need it. The creator has some kind of resentment.

Sokurov is not satisfied not only with the conditionally degrading Russia, but he also says the same thing about the European leaders: that they are all degenerates, that they are all completely undignified. And in general, they let go to themselves, it is not clear who. Merkel is a sad sight.

About the wrong profession

And at the end he says that "it seems to him that he chose the wrong profession, in the cinema he has not fully realized himself, what can we say now." Excellent! A person lived his life, made a movie for state money, a movie that nobody really needed, and then he says: damn, Putin has a different biographer, and I have not fully realized in cinema.

The first and last paragraphs of Sokurov's interview are the most important. Everything in between is the grumbling of a frustrated, upset person.

I look at Western creators, I look at Riddley Scott, for example. He makes a wonderful, very good movie. I look at Steven Spielberg. Talk to them frankly, they will probably say that they also did not complete something. But they are just commercially successful guys. And I'm sure you will never hear such whining from them. Are they making bad movies? No. Does their cinema touch some subtle matters, does it touch the strings of the soul? Sure. Do they have bad films? No. Commercially successful? Yes. That is, somehow people have everything harmoniously combined.

Or take the movie Schindler's List. An absolutely commercially successful project. But is he important? Important. About people? About people. About the feat? About the feat. Does it give you the opportunity to think? Gives. And there are a huge number of such examples. After all, not only militants are filming in the West. "Schindler's List" raised 15 times more money than it was worth, which cannot be said about any of Sokurov's films. Maybe it's just that the person has chosen the right profession?

World renowned film director Alexander Sokurov never hides his civil and political views, even if they ask for it. Because of this, he lost a lot of useful contacts and made enemies. Alexander Nikolaevich answered questions from readers and the editors of Znak.com during the Days of Sokurov at the Yeltsin Center. We talked about Putin and Ramzan Kadyrov, Orthodoxy and Islam, art and censorship.

"Putin has his own cinematic biographer - Nikita"

At the Days of Sokurov festival at the Yeltsin Center, your film about Boris Yeltsin, An Example of Intonation, was shown. Can you express Yeltsin's intonation in a few words? You talked, you were connected by friendly relations.

If I could express this in a few words, I probably would not have made a film. I have many intonations associated with Boris Nikolaevich. And what I have shown is clearly not enough. I just touched on this topic a little. Besides, I wasn't the only one who filmed about him. In Moscow, he actively made contact with other directors and journalists, who seemed to him and Naina Iosifovna more simple and accessible. I was too abstruse for him. However, with me he always had an intonation of understanding, patience, nobility, respect and even some kind of gentleness. But this is my personal, private feeling, because he was not quite like that, since he was engaged in hard work.

- You have repeatedly and quite frankly, as you admit, talked face to face with the current president. After these meetings, did you understand what kind of "intonation" Putin has? Would you be interested in making a film about him?

- Vladimir Putin has his own cinematic biographer - Nikita. He has already made films about him. In general, thank God, this place is taken. Although I know many directors who would like to join this row, the president himself does not need it.

- You said that in personal conversations he appears different than in public space ...

I assure you that even Zhirinovsky in public space appears in one hypostasis, but in personal communication he is completely different. And Boris Nikolaevich was different. I was sometimes surprised to see him on TV. I didn't recognize him, he was so different. In general, any large-scale personality in chamber communication looks different: arrogance, the desire to win a special place in the historical or cultural space is leaving. In one-on-one communication, these are always other people. Much to our regret.

Don't you think that modern world leaders are getting shallow right before our eyes? It is enough to compare the leaders of the leading European states and the United States with those who stood at the helm half a century ago, the comparison will clearly not be beneficial to the current ones. What do you think is the reason for the crisis of political elites?

Indeed, degradation is evident. And this is due to the fact that they are not witnesses of major historical processes. Our life, of course, remains difficult, but the current leaders are unable to see it or anticipate it. I said ten years ago that war with Ukraine is inevitable. Many then twirled their fingers at their temples, but for me it was quite obvious. And I wonder why this was not obvious to Russian and Ukrainian leaders. This suggests that the current political elite is made up of myopic people. That the level of culture, intelligence, and indeed the scale of the individual is leveled today. Look at the current German chancellor. What is it? It’s just a sad sight. And the Italian prime minister or the last presidents of France ...

Since you foresaw the events in Ukraine, let me ask you: do you think a peaceful way out is still possible? Otherwise, if you listen to our political observers, the point of no return has already been passed ...

I hope someday these political observers will appear before the Hague Tribunal as provocateurs who have caused enormous damage to the humanitarian space of Russia and the entire Russian people. These radio and television heralds are engaged in throwing matches during a fire. In the place of power, I would pay special attention to these people who create preconditions for international conflicts. They must be punished. They are just criminals who work on both state and private channels. And there, and there there is no responsibility for such behavior. If the political vector changes, all these commentators will instantly reorganize. We saw this well in the example of the conflict with Turkey. They shouted the loudest about the murderers of Russian pilots, but as soon as they were told that Turkey was no longer enemy number 1, they immediately changed their rhetoric to the opposite. It's so vulgar and vulgar. They are worse than women who sell themselves.

- Women with reduced social responsibility, as they say now.

- Yes, I mean prostitutes. But when a woman gives herself to a man, there is at least some naturalness in it, and there is nothing natural and organic in the behavior of these commentators.

Russia had an open military conflict with Georgia. However, Russian tourists visit Georgia with pleasure and do not face aggression against them. How long does it take to plan a vacation in Kiev?

- Indeed, I have recently been to Georgia and have not met anything but cordiality and hospitality there. And in the case of Ukraine, this will not happen soon. Mutual contradictions and resentments are too strong. The fact is that for some reason the Russians are sure that they are one people with the Ukrainians, and this is the deepest delusion. Ukrainians have long dreamed of breaking away from Russian influence and living apart from us, ceasing to be a shadow of Russia. Soviet practice has brought our peoples closer together, but still we are just neighbors. We do not live in the same apartment.

Imagine that you have neighbors and you suddenly start declaring them to be your brother and sister. “Why on earth? they say. "We're just neighbors!" - "No! We live on the same staircase, we are already relatives! " But the neighborhood does not imply that we should change husbands, wives or children.

The Ukrainian people have their own historical path - extremely difficult, sometimes even humiliating. Their history is always the subject of outside interference, when someone is constantly dividing your country, forcibly introducing it to their culture. Life is hard for the Ukrainian people, hard. And then there is clearly not enough intelligence in Ukrainian politics. In a difficult historical moment, the people did not nominate large-scale politicians who could delicately get out of difficult confrontational circumstances. Carefully separate the “Siamese twins” that have become Russia and Ukraine, which have grown together by economies and national characteristics. But there were no politicians who, even taking into account the accumulated irritation towards the Russians and the pressure of the nationalists, would steadily and delicately carry out all the processes. This means that these institutions of power have not matured. Indeed, in order to build relationships with such a large and difficult neighbor as Russia, a wise political elite is needed. Unfortunately, it does not exist in Ukraine yet. Because, unlike Georgia, Ukrainians have no experience of statehood and government.

And besides, we are still very different from the Georgians - we have a different alphabet, a completely different culture, traditions, language, temperament, but everything we have is different. And with Ukraine, there is certainly a dangerous semblance of commonality. But this is only an appearance, and I, often visiting Ukraine, saw the powerful energy of rejection and desire for independence from Russia. The closer nations are, the harder their relationship is. You yourself know: the most painful conflicts occur precisely between relatives.

That is why you proposed to fix the impossibility of military action with neighboring countries at the constitutional level?

We must have a categorical condition: not to fight with our neighbors. This applies to the Baltics, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. I would add to the Constitution the principle of compulsory peaceful coexistence with all countries with which we have common borders. Even if we were attacked, we must find the strength not to use the army, not to invade someone else's territory. You can quarrel with your neighbors, but you cannot fight.

But all over the world countries, if they fought with someone, it was more often with their neighbors. Germany has repeatedly fought with France, and in the history of relations between France and England, there was even a hundred-year war. And nothing, somehow they find a common language.

Let's not forget that Germany was never part of France, and France was never part of England, although they fought all the time on a territorial basis. Of course, territorial claims always exist. Italy, too, dreamed of getting a part of the French lands from Hitler. But no one has ever been part of each other, as in the Soviet Union. In Europe, there is only one exception in this regard - the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

"We are dealing with a bomb that could explode at any moment."

Alexander Nikolaevich, you have always been aloof from political life. They said that not a single party has ever approached you with a proposal to be included in its electoral list. And suddenly, in the parliamentary elections in September last year, you headed the St. Petersburg list of the Yabloko party, while remaining non-partisan. Why did this happen right now?

I lost my patience. Of all the parties or groups that are professionally involved in politics, only Yabloko is engaged in urban protection activities in St. Petersburg. It was thanks to Yabloko that I myself understood a lot in the city protection work (The Sokurov Group is engaged in the defense of historical St. Petersburg - ed.). They've always used professional tools. For example, they organized big lawsuits against Gazprom, which the St. Petersburg city protection movement did not dare to do. They helped us, and in the end they won almost all the courts. And then, there are people to whom I respect. Although, of course, I had no illusions. I understood that this was an impassable option. But my position was: stop sitting in the kitchen - you need to show your position and support those who think the same way. Of course, I made life difficult for myself, but I do not regret it. You have to pay for everything. Including for such political behavior.

You are the head of a public group of city rights activists, conducting a dialogue with the authorities about protection from the destruction of old St. Petersburg. Last year, you wrote a letter to the Governor of St. Petersburg, Poltavchenko, asking him not to name the bridge over the Duderhof Canal after Akhmat Kadyrov, but they did not listen to you.

Unfortunately, the point has been raised on this issue. And I regard this decision as nothing more than terrorist activity on the territory of Russia. This threat comes from the Chechen sector. We are dealing with a bomb that can explode at any moment. In my opinion, this is a real military threat. Chechnya is a region of Russia that is not subject to Russia. It has its own army, and only a signal is needed to move these armed people in some direction. It is obvious to me that this is outside the Constitution of my country. And I'm sure a collision is inevitable for a variety of reasons.

Of course, I hope that the president understands who Ramzan Kadyrov is, and the boundaries of his capabilities have probably been defined. But at the same time, I have no doubt that if an instruction to the armed men follows from him, then in a number of Russian cities there will be large casualties.

At one time, you wrote a letter to Alexander Khloponin, who was the presidential representative in the North Caucasian District, where you proposed to convene a serious conference of Orthodox and Muslim clergy under the auspices of the state, raising political issues ...

- And, of course, did not receive any answer. Nobody paid any attention to this. In the meantime, we see what is happening. Young people who have escaped from the Caucasian cities behave outside of any norms, not only of the life of Russians, but in general outside of any moral norms. And law enforcement officers in Moscow are paralyzed by fear of Grozny, because it is there that death sentences are passed. And if a person is sentenced to death in Grozny, no one will be able to protect him.

- Few dare to speak about it aloud. And it's clear why. Did you feel this danger yourself?

Sure. But let me not be specific. I understand what I am doing and saying and that I will have to answer for this. And the federal government needs to answer the question: is the Constitution of the Russian Federation a law in force on the territory of the entire Russian state? If so, appropriate action should be taken. However, we see that this document no longer works. Maybe a new Constitution is being prepared? There is even an assumption who is ready to head the Constitutional Commission - this is one of the most odious and aggressive women in Russian politics.

- Irina Yarovaya?

Yes. Women are generally unlucky in Russian politics. I think maybe they can not be allowed there? For some reason, as soon as our beautiful women break into the political elite, they behave there more aggressively than men. The most cruel parliamentarians in Europe are our women MPs.

- How do you explain this?

One word cannot be explained here. The fact is that the role of men in Russia has long been leveled out. This can be seen in the role of fathers in families, and because of how our boys develop in schools. I think it's time to return to separate education - separately for boys and girls.

- And the entire XX century was spent in the struggle for the emancipation of women.

But if women want equal rights, then let them be taken with equal responsibility. And after all, we still have a child with his mother in court proceedings, fathers do not have a single chance in this struggle. Then the husband must also leave his home, and let him live as he knows. If we are equal on paper, then let it be so in everyday practice.

However, all these are details, and most importantly - the psychophysical surrender of the positions of the entire male population. And it starts from school. And if you ask which part of the male population in Russia is the weakest, without a doubt, I will answer - our military. This is the most pampered category of men. Even the officers of the special services with great difficulty psychologically adapt to the new living conditions - the military is so used to comfort.

Quite an unexpected statement from the son of a career soldier, who spent his entire childhood in military camps. Did they begin to notice something like that already then?

My father was still a front-line soldier, but that generation had a different problem - everyone drank. It was the scourge of military camps. And they drank at home, and drunk people often appeared at the service. Of course, there were garrisons that did not cross certain boundaries, but to a large extent this concerned everyone ... Drunkenness is generally a huge problem for our country. I was struck by the scope of this phenomenon as a student in Gorky, and when I was already studying in Moscow, whole faculties there were in a semi-alcoholic state. At VGIK they drank incredibly, the forms sometimes took on some wild proportions.

It is with alcoholism that I associate the degradation of the Russian male population. Indeed, there is no such problem in Muslim regions. Religion there helps to preserve the national order. And since the Russians have long been a non-religious people, and our national way of life, closely associated with the rural way of life, was destroyed by the Bolsheviks, now we seem to have no support that would stop this fall into the abyss.

"It is a gigantic mistake to give some of the power to the Orthodox Church"

- Alexander Nikolaevich, at the Echo of Moscow you once said: “Our huge country is torn apart. There is no general energy. The idea of \u200b\u200bfederalism has largely outlived its usefulness. The federal principle must be changed. " Which one?

What do you think about this?

In the Urals there has already been an attempt to change the federal principle, creating the Ural Republic in the first half of the 1990s ...

I remember Yeltsin's reaction very well, he only talked to Rossel on the phone several times in my presence on this matter. AND?..

- Nevertheless, this idea had enough supporters.

Both in Ufa and in Irkutsk I also met supporters of such federalism. This idea is still alive today. For example, Kazan is about to make a decision to change the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin alphabet, which will finally tear us apart. This is happening all over the country. I see it.

It is important that the government is seen. And they thought, looked for ways to hold the country together, until it was too late. Citizens of the Russian Empire, and then the Soviet Union, felt themselves to be a single whole, although there was no Internet or television ...

- How do you answer this question yourself?

Well, I can only be responsible for what I remember personally. I think people were held together by the idea of \u200b\u200buniversal equality, some social guarantees, the idea of \u200b\u200binternationalism, a common cultural space, affordable free education ...

I would even say an equally accessible high-quality education that a person could receive in the capital, and in a small town, and in a remote aul, and in a Ryazan village. Basically, it was close to being implemented. And today's education is class-based. So we will never have any Shukshin: in modern conditions he could not get an education. All my attempts to resist payment for higher education led to the fact that I spoiled relations with a large number of officials and rectors ... In general, you yourself answered your question, having formulated everything accurately enough.

- But if these "braces" do not work today, will Russia withstand the current "braces"?

Where I agree with the communists is that the church should be separated from the state. The present state, however, is absolutely criminally disposing of relations with religious cults. We are making a gigantic mistake by giving up some of the power to the Orthodox Church. They are people, to put it mildly, strange and politically imprudent.

As soon as a decision is made to create an Orthodox party, which will become one of the official state parties, the flywheel of the country's destruction will start. Everything goes to that, and the Russian Orthodox Church collects property so that this party was rich. But after all, large Muslim parties will appear next, and then the question of the existence of the Russian Federation will be removed from the agenda.

This is not difficult to foresee: if in a certain territory an Orthodox religious force receives a part of political power as a gift from the state, then, accordingly, in other places the Muslim population will quite rightly demand a part of political power for their religious organizations. Believe me, Muslims in this matter will not concede in anything. And when the interests of Orthodoxy and Islam enter into political conflict between themselves, an interreligious war will begin - the worst thing that can ever happen. In a civil war, you can still agree, but in a religious war they fight to the death. Nobody will give in. And everyone will be right in their own way.

In one interview you said: “We are strangers in the European space. Aliens, because they are big - in terms of the size of the country, the scale and unpredictability of ideas. " And in another you exclaim: “Aren't the Russians Europeans? Hasn't Europe raised us? "

There is no contradiction here. In one case I was talking about culture, in the other - about ways of behavior. But, of course, Russia is more civilizationally connected with Europe.

- And how then to perceive the current turn to the East?

It's just stupidity, that's all. How many stupid things were done by the Russian state, which cannot really be created yet? We are changing the social system, then we are at war with our neighbors, then we are kindled with some crazy ideas ... And the state is, first of all, a tradition, experience, time-tested and confirmed by national consent. We cannot find agreement even in small things.

Here in Yekaterinburg, on the city pond, they are going to build a church, although part of the society is against. But it would be nice to see how such issues are resolved in Germany. There, if even a small part of the population is against, the decision is postponed. Thus, they protect themselves from hasty steps. The Russian state has always lacked rationality and balance, and it is still lacking today.

"Our Muslims are silent and are waiting for where it will break out and which side to take."

Alexander Nikolaevich, you say that it is necessary to establish strict boundaries in the relations between power and religion, but, on the other hand, you liked Iran, although this state can hardly be called secular ...

Iranians are Shiites, and this is a very special branch of Islam. In my opinion, it is much softer. And everything that we are told about the Iranian regime is not entirely true. I talked there with different people and will go there again soon. I think it is necessary to study the Iranian experience. They found themselves in complete isolation, but did not degrade, but, on the contrary, proved that everything is possible to develop within the framework of one self-sufficient nation - the economy, military and chemical industries, agriculture, hydrocarbon production and scientific research ... They even shoot films several times more than Russia. And very good ones.

In general, this trip gave me a lot of thoughts about the development and strength of the Muslim world. Serious attention must be paid to it. He is energetic and no longer ready to stay within the confines of his space. We must understand that it will cross borders and expand.

This is already happening. And you sound the alarm, saying that in no case should the mixing of cultures be allowed. But this thesis contradicts the current official European values, aimed at multiculturalism, open borders, and political correctness.

Europe today is ruined by the fear of admitting that the national is superior to the international. I call it infection. An infection just got into the body, and he fell ill. In order for the Christian and Muslim world to exist in harmony and harmony, it is necessary to draw a clear border, through which neither side can cross. We must not allow the mixing of cultures. This cannot happen without conflict, because culture is a code, a worldview. And the second rule is not to violate the norms of the root people. There should be modesty in the guest, but as a rule, there is none. This is not to say that Europe will disappear if mosques appear everywhere. But culture will undoubtedly die.

Europeans forget that civilization must be protected, this combination of national and Christian norms must be preserved. The European world has accumulated vast experience in socialization, various political compromises and political practices. And the ability of people to work well. After all, the main thing that attracts Arabs and Africans in Europe is that you can come to the ready-made. For some reason, they do not want to fight for the creation of their high-quality states. They will not do this, but want to go to where something has already been done. But since they do not have the skills of assimilation, there is no habit of respecting other cultural and religious principles, then, naturally, the current situation in Europe will lead to major conflicts and wars on the territory of European countries.

In general, we need a distance, a noble distance between peoples. Or, one can draw a line under European culture and prepare for a drastic change in the entire European way of life. Either we must resist, or we must agree that we will lose.

- And how to resist if you yourself say that you are increasingly encountering censorship in the West?

Unfortunately it's true. Today in the West people are much more dependent on the authorities than they were 5-7 years ago. More than once, European journalists have admitted to me that editors do not always allow publishing what they have written. My interviews there are now subject to censorship, and television channels have often refused those on which I would like to discuss. Degradation of democratic traditions is taking place in Europe.

In one interview you said: “Napoleon was considered a murderer, not shaking hands, and now he is almost a French national hero. Even the brand - cognac, cologne ... And with Hitler it will be the same - rationality will prevail over morality. " Will humanity really forget everything that Hitler did?

Within 15-20 years, everything will start to change dramatically in estimates. But if you ask what my belief is based on, I will not answer. I just feel it intuitively. This is my perception of the pace with which there are changes in modern evaluative categories. Well, who among the representatives of my generation could have imagined 30 years ago that Nazi youth organizations would exist in St. Petersburg? It seemed unreal to us under any circumstances. Especially in Leningrad, where witnesses of the Blockade, participants in the Great Patriotic War, are still alive. Nevertheless, they are. And not the heirs of Russian nationalism, but the followers of precisely German fascism, who accept its entire system and ideology.

- But our society still considers them to be marginal ...

So far this is so, but, unfortunately, the boundaries between concepts are very quickly erased, and the ground for this has been prepared.

In the same Europe, the topic of the Russian threat is popular today. Does it hurt you as a Russian citizen? Or do you think that the fears of the West are justified?

Recently he staged a play in Italy and, of course, talked a lot with the local intelligentsia. Among them there is a certain fear of the invasion of the Russian army into the territory of Europe. Even more often I face these concerns in the Baltics. I say to the Balts all the time: do not be afraid, this will not happen. It's just that the Baltics and Poland need to form an association of neutral states - this is an ideal way out for them. After all, when you do not have NATO bases on your territory, then Russia will not need to send missiles in your direction. Be smarter: don't plant raspberries in the bear's den.

In general, it is time for Europe to understand that there is a much more dangerous enemy than Russia - this is the Muslim revolution. After all, why is it so difficult to cope with ISIS - because it is not just a terrorist organization, but a revolutionary ideological movement of the Muslim world. It can arise anywhere, like Bolshevism. After all, no matter how pressured Europe, it could not suppress the Bolshevik rebellion in Russia. And after all, there was also an ideology - to spread Bolshevism throughout the world: Lenin and his followers dreamed of organizing revolutions in Europe. ISIS is guided by similar principles: Christianity has outlived its usefulness, has decayed, let's send Christian civilization to the dustbin of history and replace it with a new order - Muslim-political. And since the idea cannot be defeated with missiles, to fight ISIS without entering into negotiations with them as a system means dooming oneself to defeat.

- This is how the principle sounds: "do not enter into negotiations with terrorists."

So it is outdated. Now you need to learn to negotiate with them. And this requires wisdom. You see why our Muslims are watching all this so reservedly? They are silent and wait, where it will break out and which side to take.

"You shouldn't think that cinema is harmless, this is a delusion"

Back in 2002, you told the Izvestia newspaper: “American cinema aggression is killing a feeling and thinking viewer. Russia is defeated in this sense. " Has anything changed in 15 years? How do you assess the completed Year of Russian Cinema?

Nothing changed. If the Year of Culture ended with the closure of libraries, then in the Year of Cinema we will lose all documentary film studios in Siberia, the Urals, the Far East, the northern regions and the North Caucasus. The state, of course, allocated a little more money for the debuts, but this is not serious. Our cinema needs 80-100 debuts a year to develop fully, and now we have allocated funds for 16.

Nothing has been done for the mechanism of the existence of cinema. I am not talking about the need to ban the distribution of Western films or sell more expensive tickets for foreign films, as is done in France. I'm talking about legal and economic measures that can contribute to the development of national cinema as an industrial direction, when there is a technical base, reasonable budgets, cinemas, access to television ... This is exactly the kind of systematic work that the Ministry of Culture should do, but it does not do it at all.

Unfortunately, this is a feature of the controls in our time. When everything seems to be in place, but in fact no one is doing anything. We regularly see how the president asks them: why hasn't it been done, and why hasn't it been completed? They answer something to him, sometimes, he even catches someone in a lie, but nothing changes. If this is the case everywhere, then why should it be different in our cinema?

Now there is an active fight against Internet piracy, but many of your films can be watched only thanks to torrents. And in general, for people living outside of large cities, torrents, in fact, are a window to the big world.

So it seems to me unnatural when an artist is against his work being seen by as many people as possible. I, of course, do not make a production film, which rigidly requires a return on invested funds, and I myself have never received money for the rental of my films, but I still don’t understand why we thus deprive a whole layer of our compatriots of the opportunity to choose. I don't think there should be any restrictions in the artistic space. The audience today is very poor, so it seems to me wrong to ban the reprint of books, to restrict access to musical works and films.

We are creating a state to fulfill its functions. And one of its main functions is to support society in a civilized state with the help of culture. The state must have the resources to compensate for possible losses to copyright holders when opening free access to films or books. In general, I think that an international agreement is needed within the framework of UNESCO or the United Nations on the universal availability of works of world culture. But again they will say that I, like a city madman, propose something unrealizable.

Is this how your call to the organizers of class A festivals to give up films with scenes of violence was perceived? But then a whole layer of genres will disappear. How to film, say, "Peace War"?

I do not urge you not to shoot about the war at all. I proposed to abandon violence on the screen as a professional, dramatic tool, to abandon plots and images associated with the glorification or aestheticization of violence. For many years I have been talking about this and calling for it, but they do not hear me - neither here, nor in Europe. Unfortunately, I am sure that this may be one of the few cases where I am absolutely right. The heroization and aestheticization of violence inflict much more damage than, for example, any environmental problem.

The propaganda of evil is when you are shown on the screen a method of murder, torture of a person. Such a movie is irreparable harm to the human psyche, because for a modern young man, death is not sacred. It seems to him that it costs nothing to kill. Cinema convinces him that a person can be killed in different ways: rip out the guts, rip off the head, gouge out the eyes ... Do not think that cinema is harmless. It's a delusion.

- But this is why the age categories "12 plus", "18 plus" were introduced.

However, they do not solve the problem - today, thanks to the Internet, any child can see anything. Although this can be dealt with, I assure you, there would be a desire. The electronic world is such a manageable and vulnerable segment that 3-4 buttons are enough to remove all this from public access, but apparently no one needs it.

And what about your appeal to your peers, directors, to stop cinematographic activity for at least a year and give all the funds allocated by the state to young directors? Did anyone react?

Of course not. I’ve got used to the fact that any of my initiatives do not cause any reaction in my homeland. Journalists still ask about this, and my colleagues, obviously, are completely uninterested in my point of view on topical issues.

In the West, many famous directors have gone to television. A recent example: Paolo Sorrentino, who directed the best film of 2015 - Youth, according to the European Film Academy, recently released the TV series Young Pope about the Pope. Would you be interested in filming a series?

Well, I've done great documentaries for television. For example, "Spiritual Voices" or "Obligation", which lasts five hours. These are large works dramatically arranged for the teleformat. But I don't want to work under the conditions in which Russian serial cinema exists today. I am not interested in these topics, they have nothing to do with me.

- And abroad?

I was offered, but a number of circumstances did not allow me to do this.

Alexander Nikolaevich, you are one of the most titled Russian directors, while among your colleagues you are considered a “black sheep”, and the domestic audience has not seen many of your works. Do you consider your professional career a success?

In general, it seems to me that I have chosen the wrong profession.

- This is a confession!

It's just that at the moment of the choice I was too young to realize the full responsibility of this step. And for several years now, I clearly understand that the choice was wrong. There are other areas in which I would be more in demand, could do more. Because in cinema I have not fully realized. What can I say now ...