The article examines the problem of Dziga Vertov’s self-identification as an avant-garde artist, analyzed in terms of the “religiosity” of his programmatic journalistic texts. Based on the material of the kinok manifestos “We” and “Kinoki. The Revolution”, as well as some of Vertov’s poetic works, reveals the avantgarde's characteristic desire to present the world in the categories and images of Christianity, defines Vertov's revolutionary interpretation of such concepts as Eden, Epiphany, the all-seeing Eye, the Holy Trinity, etc. As a result of the analysis of the texts, conclusions are drawn about the radical differences between Vertov’s theocratic cosmogony and the biblical-evangelical one, and the evolution of the relationship between the artist and the “communist religion” is traced.

This article is a reflection on the fate of V.V. Kandinsky, on the fate of abstractionism in the art of the twentieth century and on the connection of all this with the logic of the world revolution. The author examines the internal connection between the logic of abstractionism in the art of the early twentieth century, the logic of its revolutionism and the logic of revolutionism in other aspects of the socio-cultural reality of this era. The idealdesign layers that allow us to talk about a single space of revolutionism, about symmetry and resonance between its various expressions are revealed. The dramatic correlation of ideal design and implementation plans in various aspects of the world revolution is shown. The paradoxical nature of secular esotericism is revealed, to which the path of Kandinsky can be attributed.

The international art exhibition “Art Preserves History” dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War was held in Geneva in the United Nations building. The exhibition features 45 paintings and graphic works from the collection of the international magazine “Russian Gallery — XXI century”. The works of contemporary artists embody the eternal values of memory, courage and peace. We discuss the significance of this exhibition and the importance of preserving historical truth in the modern world with the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN Office in Geneva Gennady Mikhailovich Gatilov.

The article separates two interpretations of culture: as a cult and as a rational construction; in the latter, the author, in turn, distinguishes between semiotic, psychological and social narratives. The characteristic of culture proposed by Mikhail Gefter is analyzed: culture is “an attitude towards something that is not given to a person directly, but has a saving and transformative meaning for him.” Based on it, the author argues that a person believes in culture, not only by thinking rationally, but also in terms of faith. The dual interpretation of culture — sacred and rational — was already formed in antiquity and is then reproduced in relation to different cultural conditions. Historical examples of such an interpretation are considered. Modernism, according to the author, is the last version of two versions of culture. Since modernism is ending, undergoing a deep crisis, the ideas about nature and personality that underlie the cult of modernism cease to be perceived as a sacred foundation, and rational constructions cease to work effectively. At the end of the article, the ideas of cosmic reality are discussed, as well as the stories put forward for the role of the new cult of the next big culture (futureculture). There are other contenders for the role of the cult for the futureculture, but all of them are not yet accepted by the main participants of the modern discourse of “Salvation”. The author raises the question of whether humanity has time to solve the Mont Blanc of modern problems.

With the connivance (and perhaps malicious connivance) of fundamental science, Russian philosophical and historical thought has been cut short and practically withdrawn from circulation in the 'educational process' — the 'militant youth' do not know Lomonosov, do not revere Tatishchev or Chernyshevsky, do not know Danilevsky and Vernadsky, have never heard of Freidenberg and Pumpiansky, do not read many published works by Losev and Likhachev — but such 'disgust' from 'Russian philosophizing' is formed precisely by the spread and free growth of the ' Norman question', which, in the opinion of modern 'Kropotkins of education', has not yet been clarified. For how long, we ask? Not clarified by whom? "The Norman theory" and its consequences: scaring and outraging with the snakes of thoughtlessness with all its 'horns and hooves', it turned into a sword of Damocles for the "Russian culture", in which "enlightenment" has lost not only its head, but also its shame. Passed through the windmills and mills of "optimization", modern structures of Education, growing in mass — in an effort to be either a Business Center or a Taj Mahal, playing "podkidnoy" with the authorities, put on the "masses", ignoring the very question of "borders" and "borderlessness" — why are the "value guidelines" in modern Russian culture worn down to mycelium — these same "masses" do not know which language to swear allegiance to, what to take on faith, whether to be beautiful or smart , to serve or to cast a spell , how to be and why to love? At the same time, the system-optimized new recruits are rushing around the country's universities like 'Ionesco's rhinoceroses', trampling the remnants of that "reasonable, kind, eternal" that parents managed to pass on — inject with birch sap — to their children. "The Norman theory" has become that "filth of Russian education" , thanks to which, as if in the power of a sprayed virus, Russian culture is heavily infected: all in pockmarks, and in places covered with scabs — turning into a "one-armed cowboy" is painful and tormenting for it: and it sings from someone else's voice, and shoots sparrows from a cannon — Thinking scrapes the bins and barns, but does not collect intelligence and reason from a handful — not a single Russian proverb or saying, not a song, not a prayer to help, not a poem to recite from memory, not a verse to compose yourself, not a button to sew on, not to defend your own honor, not to bow to the Motherland! These are all the 'roots and tops' of the 'culture campaign' that had been growing for 300 years and three years (since the reign of Anna Ioannovna), conceived against the backdrop of military disagreements and defeats that had occurred (the war of Peter I ), based on shamanism and idolatry of alien ideals, which was aimed at only one thing: the 'dissimulation of Reason' and the 'loss of identity' — Russian originality with its independent character and, to use a well-aimed word, the collective Russian Character. And the conclusion will not be at all superfluous: the ' Norman question' fosters: 1) alienation, or 'civic spinelessness'; 2) complete betrayal — very dangerous characteristics in the conditions of 'wartime'!

Native languages are studied by more than two million schoolchildren as a subject, more than three hundred thousand children — in extracurricular activities, seventy-eight thousand — in additional education and more than three hundred and fifty thousand — in preschool education. The diversity of cultures and languages is a distinctive feature of our country and its main asset. Director of the Institute of Native Languages Eset Bokova told the federal portal “Russian Education” about this.

A Japanese journalist who lived in Moscow for a long time was struck by the contrast upon returning home: for example, no one gives up their seat to mothers with children in the metro. Unlike Russia, where such a gesture is commonplace, the Japanese prefer to sit without looking up from their smartphones. The man described all his impressions in an article for Sankei Shimbun.