Samokhin AV: Vladimir Nikolaevich, can I ask a question? During the two days before the congress, we have been trained. It was held for our future deputies. It dealt with various topics, roundtables were held. And we realized that one of the main aspects of our activity is the “conceptual apparatus”. Most importantly, that inside the movement and in the Family Homesteads themselves, we speak the same language, understandable to one other.
So I would like to ask the following question: What do you – the author of these books – think should be the correct term? This issue was born because some used the concept of “eco-settlement”, and more than once, while others calls such rural areas “family settlements”, and others say “settlements consisting of Family Homesteads”. Thus, images from different concepts and their interpretations are born differently.
Today you just voiced the concept of “family settlements”. Do you think these are the same image, settlements consisting of Family Homesteads, and family settlements, or are they different concepts?
Megre VN: Saying “family settlements”, I misspoke. It was correct to say “settlements consisting of Family Homesteads”. As for this eternal dispute, how to correctly call these settlements, based on the ideas of the books about Anastasia, I will say this:
Say someone begins to call the settlements, “eco-settlements”. Yes, it’s a simple name. And at first glance, what’s wrong with using this term? It is possible to call our territories “eco-settlements” as if the essence will not change. But nevertheless, the essence is changing just like that. And from this, the essence of the future changes.
I am not just saying that banal phrase, “What should you call a ship, so it will float?”. That is not the case here. The issue is that someone is engaged in purposefully drawing us astray. I know who it is, I can name specific names, surnames, and organizations that do this. It is very good that you raised this topic.
There is a world movement, the “eco” movement. In the United States of America, for example, there are “eco-settlements”. There are only a few, very few, and not everything in these “eco-settlements” is arranged like in Family Homesteads. And coming out of this movement, attempts were made to call our settlements consisting of Family Homesteads, “eco-settlements”.
For what, and why? Because decent enough money comes by the development of the “eco” system, “eco-settlements” and so on. Those people who receive this money would be interested to have all of a sudden – straight away! – four hundred additional settlements consisting of Family Homesteads which they could call their “eco-settlements”! Maybe they would even help, a special international fund, maybe they would even help with money.
And overall how many of these “eco-settlements” are there? Single digits! And what is their organizing principle? What kind of ideology? They say: “We will fight for better habitat.” That’s the only goal. It is not right. This is a completely different ideology. This movement is not accepted by the people, neither in our country, nor in other countries. If it were accepted, these settlements would already be in their millions. But they are in single digits. So something is not right. Because the human heart does not respond to this idea. And it will not respond in the future. Therefore, the terms must be treated very, very carefully.
I talked with these people when I spoke at the United Nations [New York, 23 July 2015. See: https://youtu.be/KYCA-4uYs5s]. They are good guys, but they don’t understand anything fully, and they continue their attempts. So there are people there who do not share our opinions. Let them look into it themselves.
What’s really not great is when we have a newspaper that declares itself ostensibly to help Family Homesteads, then suddenly it prints an article saying that every one needs to be renamed from “Family Homesteads” to “eco-settlements”. “Family Homesteads” should become “eco-settlements”. And this is not the only assault on this topic made by the newspaper, which is supposedly, ostensibly, ours. They write everything well, well – nicely about the Family Homesteads. Then, all of a sudden… And look at this material, no one even submitted it. It was written by a man who is now dead, and was just being pulled out. For some reason, they pull this material out and print it. I think we need to understand this situation and treat it accordingly.
Remark from the audience: Is this the newspaper “Lyubimaya Rodina”?
Megre VN: No it’s not. What is it called?
Reply from the audience: “Rodovaya Zemlya”.
Megre VN: Yes, “Rodovaya Zemlya”.
Remark from the audience: Can I ask you a question? Do not you think that “slyness lies in the nuances”? [Russian idiom] Do you not think that this confusion was specifically created to hinder the process of creating family homesteads? That is to say, there is a substitution of concepts, some new nuances are introduced, and then people behold an “eco-settlement”. They have something that does not work. Let’s say another energy goes into it, some other conceptual things, and so on. People look at “eco-settlement” and see some kind of nonsense. Therefore they think there must also be something wrong with Family Homesteads. It seems to me that this is a counter-offensive from the other side, using a substitution of concepts.
Megre VN: Absolutely. You just said everything. That this is a diverting off course, certainly. Therefore, indeed, we need to relate to the terms more accurately.