Всего хорошего, и спасибо за рыбу! (С)
Apr. 19th, 2026 11:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
profiИнтересная и очень глубоко продуманная (автором) история о том, как высококлассный интеллектуал Сергей Радченко (на минуточку - профессор Университета Джона Хопкинса) отказывался от российского гражданства. Кто читает по-английски - читайте в оригинале.* А кто не читает - включите автоматический переводчик, результат неплохой. В общем - оно того стОит!
Wrestling with myself over these questions, I turned to philosophy. In 1946 German thinker Karl Jaspers published a famous polemic titled Die Schuldfrage (usually translated as On the Question of German Guilt). Jaspers, who had been dismissed from his university post in 1937 for being insufficiently enthusiastic about national socialism, and for having a Jewish wife, undertook to examine Germany’s – and, by extension, his own – responsibility for the horrors of the Third Reich.In the book, he distinguished between different types of guilt. First was the straightforward criminal guilt that concerned only those who actively committed wartime atrocities. Then, there was political guilt, which, he wrote, “results in my having to bear the consequences of the deeds of the state whose power governs me and under whose order I live”. Added to this was moral guilt – supporting the regime through one’s actions or inaction. Finally, Jaspers also wrote about metaphysical guilt: the idea, which at some level I shared, that I was responsible for the death of innocent people because I had not risked my life to save them.
Jaspers fudged the question by failing to distinguish between guilt and responsibility the way Hannah Arendt did in her famous 1968 essay on collective responsibility. “Where all are guilty, no one is,” she argued. And yet she, too, found that you could be held responsible for acts you did not commit simply by virtue of belonging to a political community. Rejecting this responsibility was thus hypocritical on my part. After all, I did not grow up on a desert island, even if Sakhalin at times felt that way. I took the state for granted and availed myself of its benefits like any other citizen. I could not evade this responsibility. Or could I?
...
After a while I was called to the window. I was handed a piece of paper. “Spravka,” it read at the top. “On the cessation of Russian citizenship.” I skimmed the text. It had a stamp and a signature of a senior embassy official. “Thank you,” I said. “Do svidaniya” (see you again). Then I caught myself thinking: I am not seeing you again. For Christ’s sake, I am never – ever – seeing you again.
* Warning! Тех, кто впадает в истерику при упоминании газеты "Гардиан" просят не беспокоиться!
Wrestling with myself over these questions, I turned to philosophy. In 1946 German thinker Karl Jaspers published a famous polemic titled Die Schuldfrage (usually translated as On the Question of German Guilt). Jaspers, who had been dismissed from his university post in 1937 for being insufficiently enthusiastic about national socialism, and for having a Jewish wife, undertook to examine Germany’s – and, by extension, his own – responsibility for the horrors of the Third Reich.In the book, he distinguished between different types of guilt. First was the straightforward criminal guilt that concerned only those who actively committed wartime atrocities. Then, there was political guilt, which, he wrote, “results in my having to bear the consequences of the deeds of the state whose power governs me and under whose order I live”. Added to this was moral guilt – supporting the regime through one’s actions or inaction. Finally, Jaspers also wrote about metaphysical guilt: the idea, which at some level I shared, that I was responsible for the death of innocent people because I had not risked my life to save them.
Jaspers fudged the question by failing to distinguish between guilt and responsibility the way Hannah Arendt did in her famous 1968 essay on collective responsibility. “Where all are guilty, no one is,” she argued. And yet she, too, found that you could be held responsible for acts you did not commit simply by virtue of belonging to a political community. Rejecting this responsibility was thus hypocritical on my part. After all, I did not grow up on a desert island, even if Sakhalin at times felt that way. I took the state for granted and availed myself of its benefits like any other citizen. I could not evade this responsibility. Or could I?
...
After a while I was called to the window. I was handed a piece of paper. “Spravka,” it read at the top. “On the cessation of Russian citizenship.” I skimmed the text. It had a stamp and a signature of a senior embassy official. “Thank you,” I said. “Do svidaniya” (see you again). Then I caught myself thinking: I am not seeing you again. For Christ’s sake, I am never – ever – seeing you again.
* Warning! Тех, кто впадает в истерику при упоминании газеты "Гардиан" просят не беспокоиться!
no subject
Date: 2026-04-19 08:31 am (UTC)В истерику не впадаю - я вообще за последние несколько десятилетий в неё, кажется, не впадал ни разу - но за предупреждение спасибо, пожалуй беспокоиться не стану!
no subject
Date: 2026-04-19 08:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2026-04-19 08:53 am (UTC)тяжела и темна его доля?
Date: 2026-04-19 09:23 am (UTC)PS Я волюнтаристским образом закрываю тему "читать или не читать Гардиан". Прости, но мне это не интересно. Я удивлен, что именно ты отреагировал на это предупреждение. "Стареешь, Зинка?" (С) Все мы с возрастом становимся более консервативными, но... Всему есть предел. Определяемый здравым смыслом.
no subject
Date: 2026-04-19 03:58 pm (UTC)Раньше они мозги ебали гораздо сильнее
no subject
Date: 2026-04-19 04:27 pm (UTC)