The article deals with some major difficulties of the contemporary Russian thought – the problems which are, in fact, the results of the so-called effective history of the 20th century in Russia and the West. The problem seems to be two-fold: on one hand, since the 1920s, there has been, both in the Soviet Russia and in the Russian philosophical emigration, a progressively expending ruptures in connection to the contemporary Western philosophy; on the other hand, some corresponding advances in the post revolutionary, yet non-Soviet Russian thought in the 1920s should be taken into consideration: these are more or less known today but can hardly be shared productively “after the interval”. The consequences of the ruptures seem to be tragic, yet in the 21st century. The habits of thought that had been appropriated in the Soviet century, and even much earlier have not at all disappeared; they function today, more or less unconsciously, in the forms of the prejudices and anachronisms and conceal the reality by our images as discourse. As a result, a new, post-Soviet, rather unexpected problem or difficulty has emerged: nowadays, it seems not so much the question of the available texts to read, but the question of the socio-historical “life-world” behind the text. If we don’t know this “behind-the text”, the latter might appear to us alien and “foreign” even it was written in our own language. In any case, even in epoch of the so-called the “end of history, what really matters is not so much the “history of philosophy” in the traditional meaning as the “historisation” of thinking as such. As Alexander V. Mikhailov put it: “The world is becoming historical, and alongside with this, philosophy is becoming historical, too”.