The author deals with the following principal questions: Are all totalitarian regimes equivalent? Was Trotski right when he was one the first persons who noted resemblance of Stalinism, i.e. the real Communism, and Nazism? It follows from the article that even though the West accepted the strategic partnership with the USSR to fight Hitler (Churchill's role is mentioned in the positive way), in years of the cold war principle of Communism equation to Nazism was laid in the basis of confrontation. The same principle proved to be dominant in formation of national memories about WWII in the Baltic states, in Ukraine and in some countries of Central and East Europe. The author points out the intimate connection between «theory of totalitarianism» which has gained a considerable popularity in the recent years and revision of the historical memory about the war and partial rehabilitation of Hitlerism. The Jewish aspect of attitudes to theories that equalize Communism and Nazism is examined. The author does not pass by silence the Islamic fundametalists' attitude to these problems. Tallying up the author notes that comparison of Communism and Nazism based on principle of totalitarianism ignores the essence of these ideologies, their nominal content. The difference between Communism and Nazism is as follows: while Communism makes its absolute of equality Nazism makes its absolute of inequality; Communism calls «for the sake of life on the earth» while Nazism declares «Long live the death!» If the positive sense is eliminated a society can sustain only due to the fear of chaos and anarchy. This fear is to be maintained by ruthless repression. Logically that may results in ideologically sterile super-totalitarianism.

If D. Hazoni's articles deals with methodological principles of the «new archeology» D. Kontorer exposes the political underlying reasons of the «new archeology». The present day Israelis have demonstrated vulnerability to the powerful psychological pressure which has always exercised on the Jews and begot many renegades who assimilated the image of Jewry the anti-Semites instilled. The author concludes that when there is a social demand for ideas of certain kind these ideas find a place in any science. The Israeli scientists cultivate the intellectual soil for the forthcoming genocide of Jews.

The author expounds his opinion of neo-Eurasian movement, its participants and those who oppose it. At the present time the neo-Eurasian movement can be considered as an experiment aimed at synthesis of Islam and Teutonic component. Its main potential danger for the contemporary Russia consists in the fact that from a marginal doctrine it may emerge as the state ideology. The history of neo-Eurasian movement starts in the 1960s when people who looked for alternative to the Communist ideology emerged within the Russian elite. After collapse of the USSR new participants joined veterans. These newcomers arrived from the circle of those people who previously were pretty satisfied with the Soviet official ideology. The author emphasizes that despite their obvious anti-Semitism (which is particularly strong among the Islamic part of the movement) the present day Eurasians are ready to embrace Jewish «zealots» in order to legalize their doctrine with the help of Jewish participation. The danger posed by this rapprochement is beyond any doubt for the author. Reaction of A. Dugin, a leader of Eurasians, to the article which was initially published in Tel-Aviv newspaper «Vesti» and rejoinder by D. Kontorer form the logical conclusion of the publication.