Historians Alexander Filippov and Pavel Danilin (author of the chapter "sovereign democracy") to answer questions ...
Teacher's Book "The recent history of Russia. 1945-2006 gg. "Aroused controversial reviews in the media. Newspapers write that Stalin called "one of the most successful leaders of the USSR," and repression in 1937 interpreted as a way of lifting the country from the crisis & quot ;. Do you really think the repression of the 37th factor in upgrading or you misunderstood?
- The book, as you can see by its name, is not devoted to 1937, it is only mentioned in the section on the dispute about the historical role of Stalin. I'm not saying that repression - a way of lifting the country. I say that terror was a management tool and an integral part of the strategy of accelerated modernization of the country. So he attacked all sectors of society, including the ruling elite. The result of "cleansing" the top was the formation of a new management layer adequate to the task of modernization in conditions of scarcity of resources is certainly loyal supreme power and immaculate from the point of view of executive discipline. Roughly speaking, the stamp perestroika "Ogonyok" about the "senseless brutality" is false - it was meaningful and carefully calculated brutality.
- What are the challenges in front of you were when writing grants? Is it true, as they say the media that these goals were set in the Presidential Administration?
- Can identify two problems as the most important: explain why the Soviet Union collapsed, and consider the events of the last fifteen years in the same time scale as the previous decades, thus making, the history of independent Russia, such an integral part of national history, like the Soviet period. Administration of the President supported our work, but to talk about goal setting would be an exaggeration. The need to introduce a new version of the terms and in the history due to the development of society and the progress of science. Each generation, each in its own era saw the past. New views expressed in the peer-reviewed literature and the book for the teacher - only the form of their popularity.
- The media are reproached that problem when writing grant writers put almost from the Kremlin ...
- In front of me was a goal: to show the action of the Russian state in 2000 in their complex and integrated, without apology and without name-calling. Give factology and give an explanation of the facts cited. Line up the chronological sequence and, most importantly, a causal link between a number of decisions and actions, between political actions and economic dynamics. In general, the task in front of me were the same as before any historian, except that we had to work to improve the relevance of the material. As for the President's Administration, and then to work, and in the process of working on the material I have no contact with her staff and has not received from anyone of them no "plants».
Talking about the applicants, students, school children, we need to understand that they, individually, put their heads in the historical myth. We, the teachers, can only influence the formation of this myth, trying as much as possible to bring it closer to reality. In this regard, of course, book for teachers - is a tool that will allow the teacher to work more effectively with students, since the main purpose of the book - to inform teachers of communication and the logic of events in the history of our country. Armed with this knowledge offered in the complex, the teacher will be able to work more productively, helping students.