Today the Minister of culture Vladimir Medinsky became downright headliner news. In the morning, discussed the issue of the deprivation of his doctoral degree, but Medina did not attend because of a business trip. The evening in the same trip he called those who questioned the authenticity of the feat of 28 heroes Panfilov “fucking scum”. And the attack on his thesis, “denunciation” and “Lysenkoism”.
photo: Natalia Gubernatorova
Meanwhile, in the morning in Ekaterinburg began the loud process. Dissertation Council of the Ural Federal University named after Boris Yeltsin must make a decision on the issue of deprivation of the Minister of culture of the degree of doctor of historical Sciences. He is accused that he wrote “non-scientific” thesis. The first meeting, held on 4 October, the results did not bring the majority of Council members voted for its postponement, as the Minister couldn’t fly to the capital of the Urals.
The statement considers the dissertation Council of the Ural Federal University, came from the philologist Ivan Babitsky and two historians – Kozlakova Vyacheslav and Konstantin Erusalimsky. The reason for the appeal to the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation became the Minister thesis “Problems of objectivity in the coverage of Russian history in the second half of the XV-XVII centuries.”
As explained to the correspondent of “MK-Ural” Ivan Babitsky, who came specially from Moscow to Yekaterinburg, the work of Vladimir Medinsky unscientific. According to him, the Minister not prove or substantiate the facts. His work is a gross error, which should not allow even a first-year student of history Department. So, in the thesis the Minister said that in Russia all the Orthodox books were written in Russian (in fact often used the Church Slavonic language). Ivan Babitsky indicates that Vladimir Medinsky does not know that Denmark belonged to Scandinavia.
– Dissertation Medina – ‘kind of a parody of scientific research. In fact, any scientist who has read that thesis, I’m surprised that something like this can exist, – says Ivan Babitsky.
Vladimir Medinsky presented his dissertation at the Russian state social University (RSSU), where after the defense and received the degree of doctor of science. According to the applicants, in the dissertation Commission of the University was not a single historian who would be involved in the period of XV–XVII centuries, which was written by the Minister.
To challenge the decision on awarding of a scientific degree Vladimir Medinsky was in the same institution, where he defended himself. But RSSU do not actually work 33 of the 38 branches, so the Higher appeal Committee decided to hold a meeting of the dissertation Council on the basis of Urfu.
In Ekaterinburg came to a few of the defenders of Medina. According to the head of the Center history of wars and geopolitics of Institute of General history, RAS Mikhail Myagkov, a statement by Babitsky, Erusalimsky and Kozlakova – insulting, since the author of the thesis, they speak in a derogatory sense.
“The impression from the statement that a thesis just pulled what they needed. The authors of the statement say that the Medina there is something confused. But this is a completely unscientific approach. It’s more like a settling of accounts – said Mikhail Myagkov. Expressions in the statement about the incompetence of the author are not in correct scientific discussion. The applicants have crossed the line, which must be present among colleagues. They become personal, and it is not a science.”
Professor, Department of history and theory of politics, faculty of political science of Moscow state University Sergei Chernyakhovsky moved the statement about the thesis of Medinsky in a political plane: “Two out of three applicants are obvious political opponents of the Medina. I don’t like it. I am against populism and against thus reduced scores. Babitsky is not a scholar, especially the historian. Jerusalem is better known as party political action and not academic discussions. He participated in the actions of “Parnas” and Bulk”.
Yevgeny Tarlo, who called himself a representative of the interests of Medina, said that the criticism of the thesis of the Minister is made “in the worst traditions of bad journalism.” The statement of Mr. Babitsky and his colleagues, according to the lawyer, instead of scientific facts and methodology contains insults. Tarle said: “I Know what fun it is to judge a Minister! But it’s reminiscent of mob rule: court crowd of scientists, politicians. I hope that the Council will avoid these extremes.”
Dissertation Council of the Ural Federal University did not consider the statement by Babitsky, Kozlakova and Erusalimsky 4 Oct. According to the Chairman of the Council of the Ural Federal University in historical Sciences Dmitry fray, on the day of the meeting received a letter from the Minister. Medina asked to postpone the meeting since he personally intends to attend.
Members of the dissertation Council of the Ural Federal University by the majority of votes (14 of 19) voted to adjourn the meeting. Dmitry Redin said that a new date has not been determined, the meeting will be held in the next two months.
As explained after the meeting Ivan Babitsky, a transfer is a frequent practice in such matters. Earlier Vladimir Medinsky said that instead of itself sent to the Ekaterinburg representative. Why is the Minister’s position has changed, is not known.
In Kazakhstan in absentia Medina opponents said, describing the claims to his thesis as “phantasmagoric” and calling them “denunciation”, which was made “in the tradition of lysenkovshina”.