The author analyzes processes that take place within ruling circles of post-Soviet Russia and focuses on the elite split and struggle of competing clan-based factions. The author traces transformations that occur within the Russian ruling circles depending on the Republican or Democratic administrations come to power in the USA. Mechanisms of V. Putin accession and his transformation from a «man of hope» to a «man of hatred» in perception of influential elite groups of the USA are discussed. The author emphasizes that old American plans for territorial dismemberment of Russia have reappeared and argues that by the moment of Bratislava summit the US principal demand was the US control over nuclear weapon in territory of Russia. If the issue of «Declaration on the enslaved nations» implementation is brought into the US agenda it will transfer process in Russia into the lethal phase. The only chance for resurrection of Russia is a new accelerated modernization and assertion of the modern project as the value. The first and indispensable prerequisite for that is modernization of the Russian power-holding class which has to accept the modern intellectual substrate into its core.

The second part of the article deals with the consequences of ‘inter-confessional dialogue' which was initiated by the Western Christianity and changed into process of unilateral concessions. Europeans proved to be unprepared to meet not just demographic challenge but also the spiritual and geopolitical challenges of Islam. Sound analysts and geopoliticians of Europe acknowledge the fact nowadays. However the dominant European circles refuse to do the same for these circles follow interests of transnational elites, even though these interests go against needs of the European nations. Meanwhile aggravation of problems in development of international processes and deepening of internal European social and ethnic and religious contradictions are gradually acquiring the nature which puts the EC leadership in the situation when it is necessary to develop and implement independent strategy which has to proceed from genuine interests of «Europe of nations» and not of «Europe of transnational corporations».

This article is devoted to one of imperial Russia’s learned societies, the Society of Friends of Science, Anthropology and Ethnography, or OLEAE by its Russian initials, and to its most visible enterprise, the Moscow Polytechnical Museum. Based primarily on the minutes of the meetings of OLEAE and of the museum organizing committee, the article attempts to rescue from oblivion both OLEAE and the Polytechnical Museum. The article examines the mission of the founders of OLEAE, the relationship between OLEAE and the government, and the role of a private association in the foundation of an enterprise on the scale of the Polytechnical Museum. The first part of the article places OLEAE and the museum in a larger European context. The grand museums of science, industry and the arts were a hallmark of the modern city and a vehicle for the dissemination of science, what economic historian Joel Mokyr calls the «industrial enlightenment.» They came about owing to the mobilization of resources by governments, associations, municipalities, the business community, and private philanthropists. To many contemporaries, such museums displayed the wonders of applied science and industrial design to the public. The second part of the article establishes the origins and mission of OLEAE. Founded in the heart of the Era of the Great Reforms by professors at Moscow University, OLEAE stated that its goal was public science, the «democratization of science.» Like many learned societies in imperial Russia, OLEAE received the endorsement and patronage of the government. For its part, OLEAE thought of its goals and those of the government as one in the same—the betterment of Russia. The last part of the article examines the founding and early years of the Polytechnical Museum, founded in 1872. The Polytechnical Museum became one component of a rapidly growing «scientific potential» of Russian society. The founders of the museum strove to disseminate applied knowledge by means of visibility and publicity. In the conclusion, I argue that the Polytechnical Museum was an ambitious enterprise that not only helped stimulate public science. Founded by scientists who framed their projects in terms of a public, the museum helped create a public. In the eyes of its founders, the Polytechnical Museum was a patriotic endeavor that enhanced national prestige and civic pride. It enabled Moscow to display distinction and gain recognition as a center of industry and learning. Finally, although OLEAE functioned within a very restricted framework, its many scientific enterprises encouraged private initiative. As the product of collaboration between private associations, the municipality, and the state, the museum was an example of a budding civil society in action.

This is Part II of an article on the 1924 show trial of A.M.Krasnoshchekov, head of the Bank of Industry and Trade (Prombank). This part compares Krasnoshchekov’s punishment to that meted out to others accused of similar offenses and discusses what is known about the lifestyles of members of the new Communist elite. The article then considers why Krasnoshchekov was singled out for harsh treatment. Five scales of causation are considered: personal qualities and relationships, the conflict inside Prombank, inter-institutional rivalries, the needs of the country’s ruling elite, and the broad issue of how to construct socialism. The last factor is especially important – Krasnoshchekov’s alternative «new economic policy» deserves recognition as a «road not taken», one that was fundamentally different from «socialism in one country».

The article deals with an episode of D.D.Pletnev, prominent Russian physician and one of founders of cardiology. Liberal opinion D. Pletnev held from his young years were well known. In spring of 1907, when Pletnev was a private associate professor of Moscow university Ministry of popular education allocated funds necessary for his long-term mission abroad. About six months later when the German police by a mistake acquired serious doubts in political reliability of Pletnev who carried on research in University of Berlin. However these doubts were dispelled with no harm for the suspect. Nevertheless correspondence between the German and Russian police chiefs went on for about 5 months and these messages are deposited in the Police department and Moscow security department archives.

Introduction of so called «concetrical» system of instruction in the secondary school has been one of the most important educational «reforms» of 1990s. Nowadays the curriculum consists of two separate «concentrates» which has to be learned twice: in the incomplete school training which is mandatory for everyone and then in the higher secondary school (in the 10th and 11th classes) for students intending to enlist higher education institutions. One could find certain logic in this transformation: for example, it is easier to explain the serious scientific problems researchers of ancient Russian history confront with to 16 year old student than to a younger student provided someone really intends to discuss scientific problems with students. However new textbooks for higher secondary schools proved to be by far more primitive and remote from the contemporary science than textbooks for younger children. Therefore the author could not pass by one of the most popular textbooks for the Russian secondary school. «The history of Russia from the ancient times…» for the 10th class is published by a major publishing company and has got a recommendation from the Ministry of education. Only extra print run of the textbook indicated in the imprint data comprises 100 thousand copies. How does the textbook deepen and improve knowledge of history school students have obtained in the «first concentrate»? How does the textbook content relate to the most recent achievements of scientists, in particular, to works of Novgorod, Smolensk and Ladoga archeological expeditions that have seriously changed our perceptions of the most ancient period of the Russian history?