Piotr writes:
I was thinking mostly of the Stalinist period, which ended almost half a
century ago, and its immediate aftermath. As time went on, Russian
scholars were allowed more freedom (in fact, Illich-Svitych died in a
street accident on Americal soil). BTW Party membership was a privilege,
not a duty. Whether you were in the Party or not, you were a "comrade"
-- that is, you had certain obligations to the Party (like paying lip
service to Marxism-Leninism whatever you wrote about) and your career
depended on what Party bureaurocrats at various levels thought of you.
The Communist leaders believed in controlling every aspect of social
life -- that's what totalitarianism is about.
Gerry here: What you say above rings true, except for the instance of
Valery Alekseev. Now, I'm quite sure he never belonged to the Communist
Party, but I am quite sure he enjoyed certain favors that only being an
"insider" could provide. Did you by chance know Alekseev? Is it
possible he could have favored both the Communist Party and the West?
Piotr: Freedom is something so vital that science begins to die even if
you suppress it just a little. The freedom of speech, the free
circulation of opinions, easy access to books, journals (and now to the
Internet, of course) are things that even a genius can't work without.
Gerry: Alekseev always said that he could never be a "geni" because his
country did not embrace biology. Too bad he died so early; he could
have had access to the internet and become a "geni" on his own.
Piotr: Remember that the freedom of speech and publications was
introduced in Russia about ten years ago! Of course Alekseev could
continue his work in the Soviet Union if he watched his step and avoided
conflicts with the big fishes in the Soviet academia. Some good scholars
were political opportunists -- they played various games with the Party
to get funding for their research; some were good Communists themselves.
I don't know how he coped. At any rate, he was in a far worse situation
than any Western scholar.
Gerry: Yes, it's amazing that he was able to cope. And on that basis
alone, I'd call him a geni. But don't forget that he was married to
Tatiana who was a scholar in her own right. And I'm sure she received
some funding for her scholarly pursuits. Do you know Tatiana?
Piotr: As for Russians and Poles -- there are mutual resentments, but
not in my case. Our mutual friend Sasha Stolbov, for example, is a very
competent scholar and a great guy in all respects. I'm sure we'd get on
very well if we met. I joined Cybalist on Cyril Babaev's invitation, and
I have a high opinion of him, too.
Gerry: I've never communicated with Cyril Babaev but Alexander Stolbov
is one of my "buddies". I have a high opinion of him, too.
Piotr: As for political correctness, it has positive aspects -- like
making people sensitive to the feelings of minority groups.
Gerry: Good point. Yes, that has happened so well that if we folks in
the US don't wake up, the US might disappear.
Piotr: In the long run, however, it is potentially a very dangerous
thing -- a threat to academic freedom, among other things. It can be
used to intimidate opposition -- you know, when somebody says "Shut up,
you're a fascist (or a male chauvinist) swine!" instead of "I think you
are wrong, because ...". The worst mixture is that of political
correctness and post-modern relativism, which could be summarised thus:
"All views are equal, but politically correct views are more equal than
others" -- when correctness becomes the main criterion of truth. I hope
this particular tide will turn. Any Russian would laugh at the equation
of political correctness in the USA with Soviet Communism. For the time
being you can't be sent to a labour camp or locked up in a psychiatric
clinic for being politically incorrect. But I agree there is good reason
for concern.
Gerry: But if you're part of the academy how can you allow your views
to be broadcast when most of the other folks in the academy are
politically correct? Wouldn't your job be in jeopardy even though you
might have tenure? This also is very scary. No longer is there Freedom
of Speech in the academy. And from what I've been reading, Freedom of
the Press has for the most part disappeared as well. Perhaps the only
place (for the time being anyhow) anyone can express his/her non p/c
views is here on the internet. But who knows how long this will last.
Gerry
Thanks for the chat,
Gerry
--
Gerald Reinhart
Independent Scholar
(650) 321-7378
waluk@...
http://www.alekseevmanuscript.com