{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026452527161076995, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004723665564478035, 'mean_word_length': 4.966197183098592, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Wars of Historical Memory (to the Statement of the Problem)

The article is a study of historical memory wars. In particular, the director of the Institute of European, Russian and Eurasian Studies of the School of International Relations named after Elliott, George Washington University (Washington) Marlene Larwell most convexly and provocatively outlined the front of the wars of historical memory: “By identifying who can be labeled a ‘fascist’, we get the perfect Europe”. If Russia is fascist(that is, Putin’s regime can be typified as fascist or the Soviet past, which the Kremlin does not want to condemn, is equivalent to Nazism, as Central and Eastern European states claim), then Russia should be excluded from Europe. In addition, it was analyzed that politics continues to interfere with the interpretation of history, sowing antagonism between peoples. It has been found that “wars of historical memory” have become one of the important components of modern geopolitics, and as such they deserve to be the subject of a separate scientific study. Today, this is especially true to those pressing issues of history that flared up on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II. Emphasis is placed on the fact that the problem has matured before, and now has simply entered the phase of “wars of historical memory”, there were anniversary events in Moscow in honor of the 70th anniversary of the Great Victory five years ago (2015). After Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, these celebrations took place without the presence of Western leaders. This was perceived by the Kremlin (or portrayed by him) as an insult and denial of the great victims of World War II – because they often write about the 27 million “Russians”who laid their lives on the altar of Victory. At the same time, the multinational composition of the Red Army is somehow not specified. And this approach does not improve mutual understanding between peoples. The article concludes that history, unfortunately, has become a political tool through which to legitimize or delegitimize a particular socio-political system.