From: sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu (Sergei Borodin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Re: Shafarevich
Date: 10 Sep 92 01:48:02 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


 
aps@sonia.math.ucla.edu (Alexei Stolboushkin) writes:

>>In article <88227@netnews.upenn.edu> sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu 
>>(Sergei Borodin) writes:

>>  But you're sure that's a bullshit, aren't you?  I personally don't give
>> a damn for "Litso..", but what, again, have people found antisemitic in
>> Belov's book?  Yury, at least honestly said he didn't read the book,
>> however, put it in a bullshit category. I would understand if some 
>> oversensitive Jewish guy call Belov an antisemite (although, this 
>> understanding would be reffered to this oversensetivity, but not to
>> Belov's behaviour). I'm curious, what had Mr. Stolboushkin found offencive
>> to Jews in "Vse vperedi"????

>why? Do oversensitive Jewish guys have a monopole right to express their
>views? What opinions am I entitled to have? Please advise...
>Quite a Soviet argument, I should say.

 Quite a strange turn, however. But might be my guess was wrong - 
 I thought that Mr. Stolboushkin is not an oversensetive Jew.
 That why I asked what he had found offensive (thank you, sir) to
 Jews in "Vse vperedi". In other words why do you call Belov an 
 antisemite?
 You're, of course, entitled to have *any* opinion, but why do 
 you, being asked to explain it (explain why do you call 
 the book "antisemitic"), start calling the *question* 
 "soviet argument" and show to everybody that you're terribly
 offended? 
   
>Do you expect me to follow the same level of arguments (like, e.g.,
>``these defenders of Belov should first learn how to spell the word
>``offensive'', and only then participate in the discussion about
>Academy of SCIENCE'')?

 What do you think you're doing? Pretending that you have not said 
 that? But you right the level is different.
  
 It's like :
 -Cto-zh vy pirozhki ne kushaete?
 -Spasibo, ja uzhe tri sjel.
 -Nu, ne tri, a chetyre, da kto-zh schitaet?
 
 Nonetheless, I appriciate your corrections. They were made with the great
 sense of tact.

>>  Will you, guys, provide some prove for your words?  It's getting rediculous.

>I definitely can provide some proof that ``all this stuff was published
>before the perestrojka'', including ``Vse vperedi'', etc. Is it what you need?

 No. That is not what I need. If that's not clear I leave this 
 chalenging question to you.
   
>Also, the argument was to demonstrate that it had been possible to publish
>antisemitic texts long ago, and you are seemingly agree with the claim.

 Depending on what you call antisemitic. No, I didn't agree. I don't think
 that "Vse vperedi" is antisemitic.  Although, there is one personage,
 supposedely of a Jewish origin, which had been painted in bad colors.
 In the same sense, "Sobachje Serdtse" and, btw, some other Bulgakov novels
 might be considered antisemitic too.
 Some oversensetive guys might have found them to be offensive (thanks again).
   
>As for ``Vse vperedi'', I read the book once, and got a definite impression
>that it is antisemitic:

 I didn't get that impression.

> it is clear, that the author do not like people of
>the Jewish ethnicity, and feels them responsible for everything bad happening
>to Russia and Russians.

  It's not that clear for me.

>If you are seriously interested in the topic, I would suggest you read
>some books of professionals, like ``Krasnoe i korichnevoe'' by Semen
>Reznik. 
 
 What is his "profession"? 

>Its annotation deserves to be reproduced here (seems to me it
>is exactly what you are looking for):

> { the annotation, where V. Rasputin, I. Shafarevich and S. Kunjaev
   are called "leaders of the modern nazism" has been deleted}
   
>  Izd-vo "Vyzov", Washington, 328 s. (s ill'ustr.). Tsena $14.-

  Right, it's worth mentioning.  Now I won't spend my $14 on this book.
  
>More generally, is it really necessary to read all the nazist books
>to blame them 
 
 Are they marked in a some special way? Like nazi sign or something?
 Well, I guess some people might read books of professionals like
 Semen Reznik. I prefer originals.

> We do somehow have an opinion about
>``Mein Kampf'' or Rozenberg's books without reading them.

 Yahh, I remember comsomol meetings. We did have the opinion
 about Solzhenitsyn's books without reading them. However 
 Solzhenitsyn is known as a writer and a dissident, when
 the two guys you mentioned are known as murderers. In other
 words, writing wasn't the goal of their life.

> Do you insist
>that we should read ``Main Kampf'' to call Hitler a nazi? Please
>explain.

 Peredergivaesh. We know (don't know if you do) that Hitler was
 a nazi not from reading his books. Was it needed to be explained,
 I wonder?

>--Alexei

 S.B.