Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky: biography. Russian philosopher, writer and publicist Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky: biography, creativity and interesting facts Galkovsky’s historical concept

My father was an engineer, my mother was a dressmaker, my ancestors were of clergy. In 1977 he graduated from German special school No. 51. He tried to enter the university four times. Worked at the plant named after. Likhachev in the same workshop with Leonid Yakubovich. He also worked as a laboratory assistant at the Academy of Armored Forces named after. Malinovsky.

In 1980 he entered the evening department of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1986. He couldn’t get a job; he made his living by illegally publishing and selling banned literature.

In 1987 he wrote the philosophical novel “Endless Dead End”.

In 1988-1989 he collaborated with Alexander Morozov’s samizdat magazine “Paragraph”. For some time he enjoyed the patronage of Vadim Kozhinov, who in 1990 got him a job in the magazine “Our Contemporary” (Galkovsky left there a year later with a scandal), and in 1991 helped publish a fragment of “Endless Deadlock” in the magazine “Soviet Literature”.

Other fragments in 1991-1992 were published in Literaturnaya Gazeta, Novy Mir, Continent and other publications. The New World also published the article “Soviet Poetry” (1992, No. 5) and the script for the film “Friend of the Ducklings” (2002, No. 8). In the early 1990s he taught at the Moscow Theater Lyceum. He also participated in commercial projects.

After a series of polemical articles in 1992-1993 (“Underground”, “The Broken Compass Shows the Way”, “Eliminating the Shortcoming”, “Stuchkin’s Children”), he refused to cooperate with the Russian (in his terminology, “Soviet”) press, accusing it of persecuting his creativity.

A certain number of texts have been written about me as a writer, usually in all kinds of textbooks and scientific aids. And there two “problems” are constantly being solved: am I a postmodernist or not, and which direction of postmodernism do I belong to. What does it matter? This is “neither mind nor heart” nonsense.

No, to write the TRUTH:

“Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky, Russian writer. Because of his social and ethnic origin, he was boycotted by the authorities of the USSR and then the Russian Federation all his life. Despite his obvious literary abilities, he has still not been able to publish a single book of his. Gained fame thanks to the Internet. However, a systematic campaign is being waged against Galkovsky on the Internet, portraying him as a mentally ill person and a brawler. Meanwhile, it is known that Galkovsky is a balanced and sociable person with a university education, a teetotaler, and the chairman of the bloggers club.”

You are not a slave!
Closed educational course for children of the elite: "The true arrangement of the world."
http://noslave.org

Material from Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia

Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky(born June 4, Moscow) - Russian philosopher, writer and publicist.

Biography

My father was an engineer, my mother was a dressmaker, my ancestors were of clergy. In 1977 he graduated from German special school No. 51. He tried to enter the university four times. Worked at the plant named after. Likhachev in the same workshop with Leonid Yakubovich. He also worked as a laboratory assistant at the Academy of Armored Forces named after. Malinovsky.

In 1980 he entered the evening department of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1986. He couldn’t get a job; he made his living by illegally publishing and selling banned literature.

In 1987 he wrote the philosophical novel “Endless Dead End”.

In 1988-1989 he collaborated with Alexander Morozov’s samizdat magazine “Paragraph”. For some time he enjoyed the patronage of Vadim Kozhinov, who in 1990 got him a job in the magazine “Our Contemporary” (Galkovsky left there a year later with a scandal), and in 1991 helped publish a fragment of “Endless Deadlock” in the magazine “Soviet Literature”.

Other fragments in 1991-1992 were published in Literary Gazette, Novy Mir, Continent and other publications. The New World also published the article “Soviet Poetry” (1992, No. 5) and the script for the film “Friend of the Ducklings” (2002, No. 8). In the early 1990s he taught at the Moscow Theater Lyceum. He also participated in commercial projects.

After a series of polemical articles in 1992-1993 (“Underground”, “The Broken Compass Shows the Way”, “Eliminating the Shortcoming”, “Stuchkin’s Children”), he refused to cooperate with the Russian (in his terminology, “Soviet”) press, accusing it of persecuting his creativity.

A certain number of texts have been written about me as a writer, usually in all kinds of textbooks and scientific aids. And there two “problems” are constantly being solved: am I a postmodernist or not, and which direction of postmodernism do I belong to. What does it matter? This is “neither mind nor heart” nonsense.

No, to write the TRUTH:

“Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky, Russian writer. Because of his social and ethnic origin, he was boycotted by the authorities of the USSR and then the Russian Federation all his life. Despite his obvious literary abilities, he has still not been able to publish a single book of his. Gained fame thanks to the Internet. However, a systematic campaign is being waged against Galkovsky on the Internet, portraying him as a mentally ill person and a brawler. Meanwhile, it is known that Galkovsky is a balanced and sociable person with a university education, a teetotaler, and the chairman of the bloggers club.”

Family

Wife Galkovskaya Natalya Vyacheslavovna, two sons - Georgy and Gennady (10/5/2015).

Characteristics of creativity

Galkovsky’s philosophical, journalistic and artistic prose is characterized by the aesthetics of the fragment, the ironic play on “someone else’s word” (in many ways, these features go back to V.V. Rozanov, one of the central characters of “Endless Dead End”). The surrounding world is contrasted with a vulnerable, but at the same time omniscient “I” relating to it with irony (“Odinokov” in “Endless Dead End”, “Galkovsky” and “Dmitry Evgenievich” of later texts), the image of the father is also important for Galkovsky’s world. Galkovsky’s philosophy is largely “metaphilosophy”; an important role in it is played by the understanding of the philosophizing of previous eras, especially Russian religious philosophy; he treats the philosophizing of the Soviet era with constant contempt.

The style of Galkovsky’s later works is characterized by a number of constant metaphors and images (“octopuses”, “mushrooms”, “aliens” - crypto-colonialists; “Jewish Murzilkas” - anonymous in LiveJournal, “spread out on the tatami” - a favorite pastime of the Soviet secret services). Since the mid-1990s, Galkovsky has been interested in online computer games and the Internet in general. The novel “Endless Dead End” was constructed as a hypertext long before the era of information technology.

Historical theories of Galkovsky

Galkovsky's historical concept briefly boils down to the following. The Russian Empire is an enlightened, strong state, a representative of the European principle. The reason for its crisis and death lies, firstly, in the incomplete subordination of the Asian elements (peasantry and “gypsyism”) by European civilization; secondly, in the activities of Great Britain, whose secret services used hostile social, ethnic and religious groups (Asian minorities, including Jews, Old Believers, Balts, uneducated lower strata, etc.) to undermine the government and army in Russia and destroy the Russian states. Galkovsky attaches great importance to the role of Great Britain in world politics during its heyday, as well as in the modern era. According to him, many states are and are "crypto-colonies", - officially sovereign, but actually subordinate to the powerful state. Dmitry Galkovsky lists, in addition to the countries of the British Commonwealth, as cryptocolonies of Great Britain, many other states, including the Soviet Union and post-Soviet countries. There are only three “full-fledged” players left since the Second World War: in addition to the sub-hegemon of Great Britain, this is the world hegemon of the United States, and France, which, due to the sophistication of its elite, managed to maintain political capital and complete independence even after the defeat and German occupation. The political status of all other states in the world varies from “junior ally” to “colony”.

Galkovsky treats the Soviet system (both “Leninist-cosmopolitan” and “Stalinist-nationalist” model) and the KGB as a combination of “Asian” and “peasant” elements with contempt: he views Soviet philosophers, scientists, and writers mainly as charlatans. The last chance to return to the times of the Russian Empire was, according to Galkovsky, missed with the collapse of the Soviet Union; now the Russian nation has finally degenerated into a new entity that has no more in common with the pre-revolutionary one than Latin Americans have with the Spaniards; The current system in Russia is also similar to Latin America.

Galkovsky also considers it possible for a large-scale falsification of world history and its artificial lengthening: for example, the creation of “ancient” languages, in which pseudo-ancient texts can then be produced, he considers the works of the Church Fathers and information about Viking voyages to be fabricated; considers the discovery of birch bark documents to be scientifically untenable. Galkovsky considers the 15th century to be “the limit of optics,” that is, more or less reliable modern European history. With all this, he, in general terms, recognizes the reliability of the history of Ancient Greece and Rome (adjusted for the imperial propaganda of Rome, later (XV-XIX centuries AD) distortions and simply lost data). The main issue, in his opinion, is not the authenticity of the history of the period from the 5th century. BC e. according to the 5th century n. e., and the question of continuity between Renaissance Europe and late Rome. Separately, we should consider the gradual transformation of the Eastern Roman Empire into the Ottoman Empire - the “combat” history of the Ottomans, including the siege and capture of Constantinople, is a lie.

Theoretically, Galkovsky’s historical concept was formulated by him in several postulates: .

• When a population can grow exponentially, it must grow exponentially.
• The state is a hierarchy of policies, the first stage of the state is the union of policies, and the primary form of state life is the polis.
• As soon as the right diplomatic relations are formed, a world community arises with a rigid hegemon-subhegemon opposition.
• The hegemon defines the historical era and creates the dominant historical concept of his time.
• The story of a defeated hegemon is always an evil caricature.
• Democracy is a natural and therefore the most ancient state of human society.
• The fantastic level of church history is 100%.
• Any state history is automatically aimed at maximum aging, maximum increase in territory, population, level of economic and cultural development of a given state.
• Political economy is not a science, but the economic interests of the “producing country” disguised as scientific knowledge.
• A political party is a social corporation designed to improve the social position of its members by legal (or relatively legal) means and using demagogy as a disguise.

Characteristics of world wars

• The First World War is a “primitive military conflict.”
• The Second World War was, first of all, an ideological war.
• The Third World War was an almost bloodless war of human-built mechanisms.
• The fourth world war is a war of computer programs.

Sub-hegemonic concept

Galkovsky is the author of the “sub-hegemonic concept”. According to this concept, in geopolitics, along with a clear hegemon dominating on a global scale, there is the so-called. “sub-hegemon” is a state entity that is next in power to the hegemon, inevitably conflicts with it in all aspects and strives to take its place.

Hegemon-subhegemon table illustrating the concept:

At the moment, out of 193 countries in the world, only three countries pursue a completely independent policy - the USA, Great Britain and France. The status of the remaining countries varies from "junior ally" to colony. The Federal Republic of Germany has a special status, as it is the arena of struggle between the three powers. The economic development or military power of a state actually has little effect on its status - for example, Japan is a crypto-colony of the United States, and huge China is a crypto-colony of Great Britain. Since 1917, the USSR has been a crypto-colony of Great Britain, and since 1991. Russian Federation and CIS countries.

Criticism

Galkovsky's work received a lot of critical attention in the 1990-2000s; reviewers, not agreeing with the writer on everything, as a rule, assessed his work as an outstanding phenomenon. Thus, the editor-in-chief of “New World” Andrei Vasilevsky, in a review of the “Basic Text” of “Endless Dead End”, notes that “Endless Dead End” (“notes”) is “one of the most significant (I won’t say the best) books written in Russian language in the 80s,” “not a cultural monument, but rather a kind of natural phenomenon,” notes Galkovsky’s ability to “create his own special, almost magical “Galkovsky” space (something akin to Tolkien’s Middle-earth), within which Galkovsky turned out to be completely invulnerable.” . Vasilevsky considers the publication of the “main text” not as successful as the previously published text of “Endless Deadlock”.

In a review of “The Broken Compass,” a critic of “Znamya” sees “no small cultural evidence of our time,” “the private enterprise of an honest man,” supports Galkovsky’s positive program, but criticizes him for “a well-developed and thoughtful method of literary provocation.”

Main works

Write a review of the article "Galkovsky, Dmitry Evgenievich"

Literature

Notes

Links

• LJ-author - Dmitry Galkovsky in LiveJournal
• - server by Dmitry Galkovsky
• - old website of Dmitry Galkovsky Publishing House
• - new website of Dmitry Galkovsky Publishing House
• - site about the work of Dmitry Galkovsky
• - quotes from the works of Dmitry Galkovsky on the social network VKontakte.

Electronic texts

• - integral archive of Galkovsky’s texts (up to ZhZh900)

Reviews

Interview

Radio appearances

An excerpt characterizing Galkovsky, Dmitry Evgenievich

“... You can’t pretend to be something for a long time - you have to be. It’s easier to pretend to be a jerk and a boor than to be decent and whole - and entropy carries players along this path. But you can’t pretend to be a boor - you can only be one. Therefore, virtual games inevitably lead to schizoidism and degradation of the personality of their creator.”

Not long ago, the well-known Galkovsky D.E. allowed himself unprovoked, malicious rudeness towards the famous Russian philosopher and writer K. Krylov. The said Galkovsky, in extremely offensive terms, unprovenly accused Krylov of “Gebism”, they say, Krylov is a primitive puppet of the Gebni - the fierce enemy of the Holy Passion-Bearer of the Russian Intelligentsia. On this occasion, Galkovsky came up with the teasing “drama” for Krylov’s comrades. When we, armed with considerable patience, tried to point out to Galkovsky that he was factually wrong and that his tone was unacceptable, he declared us “Murzilka” too. It must be said that Galkovsky previously used the phrase “Jewish Murzilka” for authors writing on the RuNet under a pseudonym. However, the situation has changed, and now, due to the search for highly paid service from Jewish “liberals”, the definition of “Jewish” D.E. refused for reasons of principle in the fight against Great Russian chauvinism.

Then Galkovsky for some time, with impunity, ranted with pathos about the Morality and Honor of the Intellectual, demanding that his opponents disclose personal data and sources of income (hinting that we are being eaten up in GB). People wondered why the author who has been honestly expressing his thoughts under a pseudonym for many years is morally defective, and why the comrade who grimaces under his name is worse than any “Murzilka”, in Galkovsky’s opinion, is undoubtedly a worthy member of society - a man of honor. Here Pensive clearly explains the basics of the ethics of pseudonyms to the Intellectual Galkovsky, we also gave seemingly exhaustive explanations, all to no avail. Galkovsky simply does not deign to answer people on the merits of the question, but you know, he repeats his own: drums, murzilkas, murzilkas, drums... Galkovsky would be stupid, otherwise he doesn’t want to understand simple things. There must be a special reason for this mysterious paradox.

In the end, the lying Dmitry Evgenievich was persistently asked (repeatedly!) two fundamental questions: 1) did he perform under a pseudonym (that is, in his terminology, does he use “Murzilok”), and 2) what are his sources of income, does it work where or how?

Galkovsky completely ignored these direct legitimate questions, proudly did not want to explain himself, portrayed a figure of silence and deliberately indulged in memories of the horrors of Soviet totalitarian slavery, the truth about which is allegedly hidden from the people by the same Gebnya and its faithful lackeys “Dramba”.

In general, the source of Galkovsky’s current inspiration is obvious and is not hidden by the client - D.E. is going to take part in a well-paid activity headed by the odious owner of a porn gallery, Marat Gelman, also a well-known liberal political strategist for the bankrupt Union of Right Forces. (Actually, Galkovsky began to insult Krylov precisely in a dialogue with Gelman, when Gelman called Krylov an “artist,” which the jealous D.E. could not bear). Apparently, Galkovsky thus convinces Gelman of his ideological loyalty to the cause of Russian “liberalism” and proves his ability to accept the subversive “Russia-2” project announced by Gelman. This explains a lot, but does not at all justify Galkovsky’s mischief. Moreover, it is impossible to excuse the fact that Galkovsky solves his personal problems at the expense of others (Krylova and others).

Let's return to the essence of the conversation, accidentally forgotten by the absent-minded D.E. Let's help our dear D.E. proceed to a sincere confession about his Jewish murzilkas and the stormy otherworldly murzilka life of the Master (as he likes to be called).

The LJ of the writer D.E. Galkovsky is primarily a theater of masks - Galkovsky and his trained murzilkas (“fool’s corner” of naive people). Galkovsky has... a lot of murzilok, prepared in advance for various needs. Some are quite harmless, they lead long, intelligent discussions in D.E.’s own journal. (this can be attributed to Met’s favorite “self-commenting”). Murzilkas are also used to mock interlocutors and boorishly harass opponents (see the example of petty rudeness of the Jewish Murzilka Galkovsky). And here is another example of how Murzilkas are used to fool the public within the framework of the Russia-2 project: all this Murzilka chatter was started for the sake of one phrase mobilizing the intelligentsia:

“The period of freedom from now to now is greater than under the Soviet Union. Although Putin’s reforms are narrowing it and narrowing it..."
“a short glance at the list creates an alarming impression: on almost EVERY item a threat from the Putin regime is felt...”

However, Mater's nasty pranks are the last thing that worries us. There is something more serious to think about.

The last time Galkovsky, instead of answering essentially our legal issues arrogantly advised us to “think” about his, Galkovsky, Unshakable Rightness. We have been carefully reading Galkovsky for the sixth year now, and all this time we have been thinking diligently about what we read. We will now share the results of these reflections with the reader. But I wonder what D.E. himself was thinking about when he carefully prepared a bucket of slop to pour it on the head of the respected K. Krylov? Now, with his own garbage can on his head, the Master is absurdly waving his arms and legs, but confidently asserts that everything is going according to His plan, that He planned and foresaw it all three years ago. Oh well.

I can’t say that Galkovsky’s current shameful incident is a complete surprise to us. When it comes to the kind D.E., for a long time many authoritative knowledgeable people mournfully twist their fingers at their temples. At the first acquaintance with the work of Galkovsky, who was then still highly respected, he noticed with emotional chagrin (it was hard not to notice) the Master’s penchant for nasty intellectual antics. Then he optimistically estimated the intelligence coefficient at 30% and hoped that the powerful intellect of D.E. will overcome the shameful infection. Alas, alas...

Many things are by no means hidden in the abyss and depths of the universe, but lie on the surface. Both prejudices and stereotypes and deliberate deliberate misinformation hinder our ability to see and understand them. Let's take a break from the heart-rending shrieks of the intelligentsia about the damned “Gebni” and “Asianism” (what an irony, Galkovsky himself can discern Mongoloid features). Let’s look at “Galkovsky” strictly rationally, and apply to him the method of analyzing the observed reality and the people around him that he practices. I assure you, the result will be impressive.

Galkovsky loves to tell the public about social mechanics. Well, let's take an impartial and ruthless look at Dmitry Evgenievich from this “mechanics” point of view.

According to the abundant memoirs of D.E. himself, from childhood he was distinguished by extreme social envy. What about childhood and adolescence, the man is already in his fifties, and he still cannot forgive his parents for his low social origin. There are, if not clinical psychopathologies, then severe psychological complexes.

Who is “Galkovsky” socially? A simple—Galkovsky himself would say “peasant”—a boy from a difficult Soviet working-class family (his father is an alcoholic). At school, the quarrelsome, stubborn boy studied very poorly, showed no abilities, and was distinguished by pronounced antisocial behavior. According to Galkovsky, in order to successfully study in a Soviet school, it was necessary to bribe teachers immediately in the first grade. Whatever bribe the parents gave, the children received such grades. Mitya’s proletarian parents did not give anything to the teachers (they didn’t think of giving them, they had nothing), and Mitya was doomed from the very beginning in the Soviet school. Therefore, he still did not teach lessons, and in retaliation he harassed the teachers. However, the humane Soviet school still issued a certificate of secondary education to the ignoramus and hooligan Galkovsky.

Galkovsky did not join the Soviet army due to mental illness (he claims that he was faking it, but who knows... we are not a doctor). He got a job as a factory worker, but didn’t want to work in production, he totally despised the Soviets around him, imagined himself as an undeniable psychological leader and a genius at manipulating other people’s consciousness (apparently, then the young man finally developed an intelligence complex). Our Soviet worker boy, who had barely graduated from high school, was not going to get a real human profession-specialty; he wanted to become a “Soviet philosopher” from the machine. The caring Soviet government in the field of education for workers had a lot of privileges, thanks to which Galkovsky, due to his proletarian origin and work experience in production, four years after graduating from school, finally entered the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, evening department (he claims that he again allegedly gave a bribe to the admissions committee ).

Let us note that in Europe, given his insignificant social status and mongrel origin, lack of success in education and pronounced asocial inclinations, Galkovsky would never have received a diploma from a reputable university (college, i.e. technical school, at best). All his life, educated Western people would condescendingly pat Galkovsky on the shoulder - a nugget, a homemade product. Such is the inexorable social mechanics. And without crusts, what would our Philosopher’s claims be worth? With all his talents, for Galkovsky the approval of the notorious writer Kozlachkov would be flattering and honorable (he nevertheless rose to the rank of ensign).

Thus, Galkovsky owes literally EVERYTHING to the Soviet government; without it, his family is socially NOBODY. Nevertheless, Galkovsky fiercely hates his native Soviet power. Hatred and contempt for one’s benefactors is generally a signature psychological trait of intellectuals.
The archetype of the Russian intellectual, even during the social emergence of the intelligentsia in Russia, was exhaustively outlined by F.M. Dostoevsky - please love and favor: F.F. Opiskin. Anyone who intends to understand the psychology and character of the Russian intellectual as a type is recommended to carefully study “The Village of Stepanchikovo.” The Russian intelligentsia is the collective Foma Fomich of Russia and the Russian people.

Dostoevsky's Foma Fomich is stupid and mediocre (for the intelligentsia these are typical traits). The same cannot be said about Galkovsky. But this is the only significant difference. Galkovsky has also been terrified all his life of the arrival of “Korovkin”, a potential competitor to his place as the ruler of thoughts. This time the kindest D.E. He suspected the hated “Korovkin” in Konstantin Krylov, hence the explosion of insane jealousy in the face of Gelman and loud scandalous consequences.

Even in terms of his lifestyle and social status, Galkovsky is a typical Foma Fomich - arrogant and evil, he took root. And he has the nerve to interrogate people about their sources of income! The editor-in-chief of Spetsnaz Rossii, reviled by Galkovsky, Krylov, successfully publishes a lot and lives by literary work. Your humble servant is a virtual “Pioneer” in the world Ph.D. and, as he has repeatedly reported, earns his daily bread in the scientific and technical field. Everything is transparent here, no mysteries. But the sources of existence of D.E. himself. are covered in dark secrets, Galkovsky never reveals them.

He publishes little and cannot support himself with literary earnings. It seems that D.E. lives on handouts from his fans. And let him, if only he behaved more modestly. But Galkovsky considers himself entitled to insult people who live by their labor. And what is especially disgusting is that he is publicly rude to his benefactors, and does not consider it necessary to at least cover up his contemptuous attitude towards them with hypocrisy. Galkovsky visited France and was invited to visit him there. Upon his return, Galkovsky described the hospitable hosts as “ middle class scum", and like a true Foma Fomich, he gave them a lecture on French real estate (which he saw there for the first time). Then I was greatly impressed by the Master’s shameless spontaneous rudeness towards the kind people who carelessly let him into their home.

In general, what does “Galkovsky treats people well” mean? - the kindest Dmitry Evgenievich has not yet had time to take revenge on the scoundrel, while he is collecting incriminating evidence. This is Galkovsky's general approach to people.

Azef of Russian literature

By his own admission, Galkovsky reflexively turns conversations with people into interrogations, the main topics of which are: “be the first to decipher the conversation,” “who do you work for?” and “I haven’t seen your file.” The revelations of opponents, in the end, boil down to exposing them of homosexuality (or other shameful sexual perversions). It is obligatory for Galkovsky to accuse his opponents of criminal offenses (listing the articles of the Criminal Code) and colorful stories about how his cellmates will “let them down.” Those who dare to present to the inquisitive D.E. The scrupulous Master certifies his passport and income statement as “petty cowardly scoundrels.” The question is, who does this kind of approach to business, way of thinking and action resemble? Think slowly...

D.E. loves to hysterically squeeze out thieves' tears from his listeners - self-pity for the unfortunate, innocent victim of the cop-KGB lawlessness. However, let's look at the matter with dry eyes. Young Galkovsky, according to the memoirs of D.E. himself, led a petty criminal lifestyle - speculation, forgery of documents, etc. actions (hence a good knowledge of criminal psychology and customs). One might argue, “it’s totalitarianism, they didn’t allow books to be read.” However, in the West, for illegal business, forgery of documents and fraud with benefits, our D.E. would have received a significant prison sentence.

Here's D.E. tells how he miraculously escaped Andropov’s raid. Was there a miracle? After all, as you know, there are no magical miracles... The damned hebna of the petty anti-Soviet black marketeer Galkovsky was swept away. So what is next? No, they weren’t thrown into the Gulag. As a result of the preventive conversation, the student sincerely repented and signed an agreement to cooperate with the authorities. A minor KGB informant informs the authorities about the speculative environment, anti-Soviet sentiments and the actions of acquaintances, and denounces his clients who are interested in anti-Soviet literature. And so on in the same spirit.

However, we believe that all this - a sudden KGB raid, a noble student in the clutches of the merciless secret police - is a romance far from life. An angry, ambitious proletarian boy, immediately after entering the Faculty of Philosophy, proactively approached the authorities with a proposal for cooperation. Why? Why wait? The philosopher himself in his writings explained in detail this train of thought: for a person from the people - without connections, without patronage, for a poor evening student, it was practically impossible to make a career as a “Soviet philosopher” otherwise than through the Organs. Is it really worth reading atheistic lectures and educational political information in collective farm clubs all your life?.. Did they fight for this?

That is why the authorities looked condescendingly at the dubious deeds of the student Galkovsky - forgery of documents, reproduction and speculation in anti-Soviet literature. A useful man, he deliberately does a dirty job that is necessary for the Soviet Motherland.

The secret employee from Galkovsky turned out to be diligent and devoted. Organs were the only support in the life of a young Soviet philosopher from a proletarian environment. The activity is just according to his nature - working with people, interesting. The romance of intelligence work. The young assistant of the Organs was looking for difficult, intellectual tasks for himself. Apparently, he worked as a Freemason. He tried to infiltrate the descendants of the white emigration, to become their representative in Russia (unsuccessfully, however, darling). In the course of writing reports to managers and curators, the young man discovered great literary talent and a unique outlook on life.

Now we understand the true meaning of the unbridled flattery of the intelligentsia and calls for class solidarity against the Gebni, and the hysterically evil denunciations of the soviet - the usual comedy of an experienced agent in order to infiltrate the anti-Soviet intelligentsia environment. They get a simple and natural explanation for the oddities in Galkovsky’s biography, which many observers tend to explain as psychopathology.

Here Galkovsky scandalously, under a far-fetched pretext, refuses a literary prize and declares a blockade of the Russian Federation. A few years later, without any reason, he suddenly returned to Russian literature, explaining his return by the fact that, they say, he hoped that Galkovsky’s departure from literature would bring some sense to the population of the Russian Federation and change the course of Russian history. And since the course of history has not changed, Galkovsky considered it possible to return to literature.

Previously, Galkovsky had refused a literary prize with contempt, he seemed to be disdainful, but now he entered the service of the owner of a pornography establishment. One can be amazed at the twists and turns of the psychology of the Genius. However, the secret of the Master’s actions, in our opinion, is extremely simple - the instructions of the Curators. Now he has been given the last directive - to kill Russian nationalists, to infiltrate the liberals’ subversive project “Russia-2”. Philosopher No. 007 has begun the task of the Organs!

Does all this seem incredible to you? An absurd conjecture? Why, because Galkovsky’s cooperation with the Organs explains EVERYTHING. One has only to distract oneself from the howl of the ideological jammer in the person of D.E. himself, get rid of the point of view imposed by Galkovsky and look at the matter impartially, and much of his biography, full of schizoid paradoxes, receives a natural interpretation.

Now, as part of M. Gelman’s new project on his LiveJournal, Galkovsky is creating crude, almost parodic anti-Soviet propaganda, fooling intellectuals, mockingly playing on their well-known complexes and prejudices. The question is, where is our ardent anti-adviser D.E. was it before? Yes, yes, what did Galkovsky do before 1991? The end of the 80s and the beginning of the 90s was the heyday of anti-Soviet propaganda, people made careers and made a lot of money. What about our D.E.? Nothing, sir. With his journalistic talents and supposedly unquenchable hatred of the Soviet Union, he could have made a name for himself and a HUGE anti-Soviet career, including getting a lot of money and settling in the coveted West. However, for inexplicable reasons, Galkovsky does not publish poisonous and destructive pamphlets against the USSR. But his activity in the press was first noted after August 1991.

At first glance, Galkovsky, in his scandalous speeches after the fall of the Soviet Union, denounces Soviet writers and “philosophers” and almost demands lustration for them. However, you should know that Galkovsky’s performances always have a double or triple bottom (if not worse). In fact, we have Galkovsky taking revenge on the Soviet estates that betrayed Soviet power. Galkovsky writes bitterly about the failure of the Soviet “masters of thought” and clearly explains to them that there is no place for them in the new life. Those. in fact, this is an attempt (provocation!) to set up influential Soviet intellectual circles against “liberal reforms”, to frighten and mobilize them in favor of the Soviet restoration. After the final defeat of the Soviets in 1993, our hero of the invisible front refuses to publish in the Russian Federation and goes into the shadows.

And Dmitry Evgenievich returns to Russian literature... after the security officer Putin came to power. Hehe, what else can you say.

What other conceptual ideas is Galkovsky known for? The concept of the need for emigration of the Russian educated classes to their spiritual Metropolis - to the West. We must admit that this idea—pro-Western opposition intelligentsia voluntarily leaving the country en masse—is very convenient for the security officers.
Or the discovery that the USSR is a crypto-colony of England. At once, responsibility for the crimes of communism is removed from both the Organs and the Soviet government in general, and the traditional intellectual hopes for the Good West are undermined.
Etc. and so on.

So who are you, Mr. Galkovsky? ...KGBist Murzilka.

While I was writing this text, I discovered Galkovsky’s confessions in his very ambiguous attitude towards Soviet power. Here he explains that he belonged to almost 1% of the Soviet elite.

“...my position was rather privileged. For example, I am a native Muscovite. This is a huge social benefit. Or, despite all the everyday disasters, I at least grew up in a complete family. I had a father and mother, I never considered myself an orphan. I have never lived in a communal apartment. Moreover, after the death of her father, her mother went to work in a fur studio and began to earn good money. So in 1980-90 I ate much better than 9/10, and perhaps 99/100, of Soviet people. At Moscow State University I wore expensive jeans, a sheepskin coat, a leather coat, and wore an expensive watch with a microcalculator - an outfit worth $1,500 at current prices.

Moreover, I had a lot of relatives, some of whom occupied very high positions. For example, my cousin was married to the daughter of a Politburo member. Even without real patronage, this played a role in a caste society.”

Judging by this text, Galkovsky initially felt like a Soviet prince from a noble but impoverished Soviet family.

On the attitude towards creative heritage. Once upon a time, alas, back in 1999, I discovered with great interest the work of D.E. Galkovsky. True, some aspects initially caused bewilderment and rejection. Gradually, as we became more familiar with the subject, wariness grew, at times turning into amazement and disgust. And there was no longer any human possibility of tolerating Galkovsky’s latest vile act and leaving it unpunished. The limit of ugliness.
So how should we treat Galkovsky and his “Endless Dead End” in the light of these new circumstances? Whoever left a noticeable mark in Russian literature. There were murderers, terrorists, executioners. And now it has turned out that the author of one talented Russian book is a sexist and a provocateur of the Soviet Organs. What can I say... The spirit breathes where it wants.

Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky(born June 4, 1960, Moscow) - Russian philosopher, writer and publicist.

Biography

My father was an engineer, my mother was a dressmaker, my ancestors were of clergy. In 1977 he graduated from German special school No. 51. He tried to enter the university four times. Worked at the plant named after. Likhachev in the same workshop with Leonid Yakubovich. He also worked as a laboratory assistant at the Academy of Armored Forces named after. Malinovsky.

In 1980 he entered the evening department of the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1986. He couldn’t get a job; he made his living by illegally publishing and selling banned literature.

In 1987 he wrote the philosophical novel “Endless Dead End”.

In 1988-1989 he collaborated with Alexander Morozov’s samizdat magazine “Paragraph”. For some time he enjoyed the patronage of Vadim Kozhinov, who in 1990 got him a job in the magazine “Our Contemporary” (Galkovsky left there a year later with a scandal), and in 1991 helped publish a fragment of “The Endless Dead End” in the magazine “Soviet Literature.”

Other fragments were published in 1991-1992 in Literaturnaya Gazeta, Novy Mir, Continent and other publications. The New World also published the article “Soviet Poetry” (1992, No. 5) and the script for the film “Friend of the Ducklings” (2002, No. 8). In the early 1990s he taught at the Moscow Theater Lyceum. He also participated in commercial projects.

After a series of polemical articles in 1992-1993 (“Underground”, “The Broken Compass Shows the Way”, “Eliminating the Shortcoming”, “Stuchkin’s Children”), he refused to cooperate with the Russian (in his terminology, “Soviet”) press, accusing it of persecuting his creativity.

In 1997, he published “Endless Dead End” in an edition of 500 copies (numbered).

In 1996-1997, Galkovsky published his own magazine, “Broken Compass” (3 issues were published). In January 1998 he created the website “Samizdat. Virtual server of Dmitry Galkovsky." Author of “Yuletide Stories,” which were published in 2001-2003 in Literaturnaya Gazeta, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, Day of Literature, and in the Konservator newspaper. Compiler of the anthology of Soviet poetry “Utkorech”, published in 2002. Since October 2003 he has been running LiveJournal. In 2003, a collection of articles “Propaganda” was published, in 2004 - “Magnit”. In 2005-2006 he was published in the online newspaper “Vzglyad”, in 2007 - in the magazine “Russian Life”. In 2007, the third edition of “Endless Deadlock” was published, this edition became the first official one.

According to the results of a survey conducted by the Openspace website, in which more than 40 thousand votes were cast, Galkovsky took 12th place among the most influential intellectuals in Russia.

He wrote about himself on his blog:

A certain number of texts have been written about me as a writer, usually in all kinds of textbooks and scientific aids. And there two “problems” are constantly being solved: am I a postmodernist or not, and which direction of postmodernism do I belong to. What does it matter? This is “neither mind nor heart” nonsense.

No, to write the TRUTH:

“Dmitry Evgenievich Galkovsky, Russian writer. Because of his social and ethnic origin, he was boycotted by the authorities of the USSR and then the Russian Federation all his life. Despite his obvious literary abilities, he has still not been able to publish a single book of his. Gained fame thanks to the Internet. However, a systematic campaign is being waged against Galkovsky on the Internet, portraying him as a mentally ill person and a brawler. Meanwhile, it is known that Galkovsky is a balanced and sociable person with a university education, a teetotaler, and the chairman of the blogging club.”

Family

Wife Galkovskaya Natalya Vyacheslavovna, two sons - Georgy and Gennady (10/5/2015).

Characteristics of creativity

Galkovsky’s philosophical, journalistic and artistic prose is characterized by the aesthetics of the fragment, the ironic play on “someone else’s word” (in many ways, these features go back to V.V. Rozanov, one of the central characters of “Endless Dead End”). The surrounding world is contrasted with a vulnerable, but at the same time omniscient “I” relating to it with irony (“Odinokov” in “Endless Dead End”, “Galkovsky” and “Dmitry Evgenievich” of later texts), the image of the father is also important for Galkovsky’s world. Galkovsky’s philosophy is largely “metaphilosophy”; an important role in it is played by the understanding of the philosophizing of previous eras, especially Russian religious philosophy; he treats the philosophizing of the Soviet era with constant contempt.

I will respond briefly to the comments in the previous thread.

1. I was surprised by the amazing naivety of many users about Abkhazia: “Abkhazians love Russian people”; “The Russians will get a wonderful resort for themselves.” The reality is that a small ethnic group has driven three or even four times its population out of its area and is living in half-empty cities. Cities are gradually being destroyed due to the economic crisis and low level of culture. Russians were expelled from Abkhazia just like Georgians. 1/5 of the original number lives there, and only on paper. As long as the Russians are politically advantageous, the Abkhazians will pay them oriental compliments and treat them to Turkish delight. As soon as the Russians get in the way of the political interests of the emerging Asian state, they will begin to hammer nails into their skulls.

To what extent is Abkhazia a capable state? None. Achieving independence by a people whose number is less than 1 million people is a thing perpendicular to international law. This is possible in the case of island territories, they have a special status. An exception may be made for the richest territories - this makes it easier for an international consortium to manage. But no one is interested in creating a kaleidoscope of Voronye Slobodki. Abkhazia does not have not only a million, but also 200 thousand. The territory is microscopic, there are no natural resources. There are very, very bad tangerines and very, very bad people (rogue thieves). Culturally, the Abkhazians are of course included in the Georgian area, adjusted for even greater backwardness and greater alienation from Russia (due to Islam).

It is said that the Russians must take care of the Abkhazians and protect them from the Georgian massacre. There will be no massacre there; this is not Africa, but relatively cultural Asia. Perhaps they will fight a little - this is even beneficial for people at such a stage of development. Anything is better than selling drugs.

There is also talk about betrayal by Russia of the noble Abkhazians - I will leave this without comment. Learn international law. In this regard, I will emphasize once again (I have already said this) that obtaining citizenship of a particular country is a Privilege, not a right. If a “potential subject” appears on the threshold and declares in a relaxed tone that he will live here, this is not a reason for immoderate enthusiasm, but an incentive to close the door more tightly. The Abkhaz must explain long and hard why the Russians need them. Seriously. Not at the level of “I love you”, but “what can you offer”. Ethnically, the Abkhaz are a foreign people, and religiously too. The cultural level is extremely low. The dowry is as big as a gulkin's nose. The claims are the most incredible.

The Abkhazians could be accommodated in the newly created North Caucasus Republic - a sunny leper colony for brilliant Asians. Let them live for 20 years before finally being thrown into outer space (not into independence, but into oblivion). But since there is no such buffer (with its own monetary system and armed forces), 100 thousand Abkhazians the day after joining will end up not in an autonomous cabinet of curiosities, but in Moscow. Some will engage in wholesale trade, some in restaurants, some in banks, some in drug sales, some in smuggling, some in the hotel business, some in publishing, some in television, history, philosophy, painting and sculpture. Abkhazia will receive a colossal loan “for the development of the hotel business” - it will be stolen at the receiving stage (“branzuletka!”); if the Russian cashiers (poor women) remain alive after this “financial operation” - very good.

2. Now the thing is more abstract, but actually more concrete. Core. People do not understand that in politics, and in the social field in general, truth and lies not only do not exist, but play a subordinate role. The main thing is interests. For example, in almost every thread of my LiveJournal there are several fools who graduated from the Uryupinsk Agricultural College and are shaking the received tugament before their eyes: I am the history of the CPSU, and soil science, and the diagram of a combine harvester with excellent marks, the teachers are in my arms, I am assembling a lawnmower blindfolded . What are these, cretins? No, normal people. They have INTEREST. They believe that the introduction of a law against fools, at least indirectly, can undermine their social status and splay out in a wind tunnel (not turned on). In such a position, some social demagogue will grab them under the white hands: “That’s right Vanechka, YOU DON’T NEED ANYTHING AT ALL. Get a bubble and watch football on TV. Just vote for me." The demagogue has his own interests. But what in reality? AND NOTHING. "Struggle of forces." Because to manipulate a dude you need some intelligence, so most likely the demagogue will have a university education, or even two. A la Zhirinovsky-Mitrofanov. The manipulator doesn’t care how to play – up or down. Amplitude and dynamics are important. Therefore, it makes no sense to talk in politics about “good” or “bad” peoples or social groups. Whoever took the stick is the corporal. Since he is a homo sapiens, his teeth are knocked out with a stick, as a rule (but not always), by a more highbrow individual.

In reality, a person can identify only elementary interests in the vacuum of social mechanics. This is the “truth”. “It’s not that the house is dilapidated, so it will collapse,” but “give me a new apartment.” And reinforcement: “otherwise I’ll pick at the wall with a nail and you’ll all die.”

Something can be corrected by adjusting interests. Sometimes people make mistakes, because mechanical actions and calls (“let’s eat!”) are accompanied by emotions in people. Under the influence of emotions, people make mistakes. They start gnawing on stones or reproaching the attending physician for his isolation from the people and his university education. As a rule, life itself corrects people here.

It’s interesting to read how two posts about Georgia caused diametrically opposite reactions. An anteater deftly pulls cockroaches out of cracks, a jellyfish sours in the sun, kombucha grows gratefully in a sugar solution, a woodpecker unsuccessfully knocks on a saucer of porridge. And vice versa: the anteater waddles around with a meter-long cord of its tongue in a bread bowl, the jellyfish is blissful in sea water, the kombucha arrives on the asphalt, and the woodpecker gratefully hollows out the bark beetles: “Dmitry Evgenievich, thank you for the post”; "This is a provocation"; “Out of my mind”; “I completely agree.”

The person has a university education: “Dmitry Evgenievich is ours, from the university.”

No: “You bastard, I dismantled the harvester overnight with these hands.”

Ossetians say one thing, Georgians say another. Khokhol third. What unites all these people? A lot of things are INTERESTS. Not specific interests, but their very presence. Recognition of interests is, consider, 75% of political culture. Next is a matter of technology. I mean, politicians.

The same applies to the interests of states. The USA is a hegemon and behaves like a hegemon. The hegemon's accusations of hegemonism are INSANE. Unless, of course, this is an element of the classical defense of the sub-hegemon and the diplomatic coalition created by the sub-hegemon. Georgia is an outsider. Again, accusing an outsider of playing without rules, duplicity and focusing on the strong is meaningless. This is the political weight and position of the object.

Here you can make claims to the political leader regarding the CORRECTNESS of his actions. Saakashvili is acting CORRECTLY. Putin is a political pederast standing on his head. In psychiatry there is such a definition: “wrong behavior.” This is a clear sign of mental illness. For example, the actions of a thief are generally correct. Although immoral. But a kleptomaniac who has a bank account, publicly steals cheap chips from a supermarket and then runs from a dozen police officers in his underpants is acting WRONG. The guy has PROBLEMS.

I'm not saying Putin is crazy. We just see part of the picture. His actions are absurd from the point of view of the head of a large state. Or maybe he is the head of a small state. Or not states at all. And not the head. Saakashvili is the head of his country. Georgia is operatic, but Saakashvili is not. And his goal is to make his homeland a small, capable state of the Balkan type. Like Bulgaria. - REASONABLE. Especially in light of the policies of our northern neighbor.