From: aps@sonia.math.ucla.edu (Alexei Stolboushkin)
Subject: Re: Shafarevich
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 05:03:27 GMT

In article <88404@netnews.upenn.edu> sergei@upenn5.hep.upenn.edu (Sergei Borodin) writes:
>
> 
>aps@sonia.math.ucla.edu (Alexei Stolboushkin) writes:
>
>>> ... 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?

this question you have actually asked below. Here the point was, that
people of the Russian ethnicity (an implicit reference to which was made)
are not sensitive enough to feel antisemitic ideas of the book in question.
While, I believe, Russians should be extremely sensitive to antisemitism,
as, for example, many Western Germans are after WWII. It is a national
shame...

> Nonetheless, I appriciate your corrections. They were made with the great
> sense of tact.

quite right you are. I apologize for the joke. However, I also think that
a reference to opponent's ethnicity, implicit or explicit, is not
a good argument in discussion.

>>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.

I meant, that you agreed that at least ``Litso sionizma'' 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).

let's ask ourselves, what is the key idea, embodied in the book by ``artistic''
means? Does the ``Sobach'e serdtse'' survive, if we replace ``Shvonder'' to
``Kunjaev'' (for example)? I think yes, and without any damage to the book.
While ``Vse vperedi'' is strongly based on the fact that this personage
is ``supposedly of Jewish origin''.

>>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"? 

writing books perhaps. He is known as the author of a dozen of.

>  Right, it's worth mentioning.  Now I won't spend my $14 on this book.

it is generally unwise to save on books: they may make a person more sensitive,
and thus contribute to his/her personality, which is invaluable.

>  
>>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.

more precisely, as ``organizers of mass murders''. Their writings
were a mean of this organizational work.

We also know, that Belov et al. are not just writers, but
organizers of the ``Pamyat' '' society and of ``black hundred''
press like ``Den' '', ``Nash sovremennik'', etc. They are
public figures of the very definite orientation.

>
>> 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?

this is exactly the point. We know that Belov, Rasputin, Kozhinov,
and Kunjaev are nazists NOT from their writings (somebody of them
we read, and somebody didn't; though to answer your question in
advance I should say I experienced to read all of the above listed
persons), but due to their public activity.