Rehabilitation of Stalinism in the years of stagnation Brezhnev. The rehabilitation of Stalinism and the revision of history: Russia as “a territory of new meanings. Who muddies the waters
Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev was born on December 19, 1906, in the village of Kamenskoye (Ukraine). He married in 1928. A year later, Brezhnev's wife gave her husband a daughter, and later a son. In 1931, Brezhnev became a member of the party. He entered the Kursk melioration school and graduated in 1937. During the Great Patriotic War, he was the head of the Southern Front. In 1943 he rose to the rank of major general. The rise of his political career began after 1945. During that period, he managed to visit the secretary of the regional committee of Ukraine and Moldova. In 1952 he became a member of the Presidium of the Central Committee. And after Khrushchev came to power, Brezhnev was appointed secretary of the com. Parties of Kazakhstan.
Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev was able to return to the Presidium only in 1957. The years of Brezhnev's rule began after successful participation in the conspiracy and the removal from office of Khrushchev. The country stops moving along the path outlined by the former leader. Since 1965, the seemingly unhurried and more modest reforms of Brezhnev began to be implemented in the USSR. Their goal is to build developed socialism. However, it was precisely the systematic implementation of these reforms that made it possible to significantly raise the standard of living in the country, especially in rural areas. Nevertheless, by the beginning of the 70s, the first stagnation phenomena appeared in the economic sphere. Despite the curtailment of Khrushchev's reforms within the country, in foreign policy, the course of dialogue with Western countries has remained. The agreements enshrined in the Helsinki agreements on disarmament in Europe were extremely important for both sides. But, after the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan, international tensions again sharply increase. Since 1974, Brezhnev's health began to deteriorate significantly. There is no complete data on his diseases. But it is known that he suffered from heart disease and possibly gout. Despite his deteriorating health, the news of Brezhnev's death was unexpected, because a few days before that he had hosted a parade to mark the anniversary of the October Revolution. Information about the death of the leader was circulated on November 11, 1982
The period of stagnation (era of stagnation) is a period in the development of the Soviet Union, which is characterized by the relative stability of all spheres of life, the absence of serious political and economic upheavals and the growth of the well-being of citizens.
The era of stagnation is usually understood as the period between L.I. Brezhnev in the mid-1960s and the beginning of perestroika in the early 1980s. On average, it is possible to conventionally designate the years of the stagnation period from 1964 to 1986.
Stagnation period concept
The term "stagnation" was first introduced into circulation in the political report of M.S. Gorbachev at the 27th Congress of the CPSU Central Committee, when he noted in his speech that some stagnant phenomena began to appear in the development of the Soviet Union and the lives of citizens. Since then, the term has been widely used by politicians, economists and historians.
It should be noted that the term does not have an unambiguous interpretation, since stagnation is understood as both positive and negative phenomena. On the one hand, in these twenty years, according to historians, the USSR reached its highest development - a huge number of large and small cities were built, the military industry was actively developing, the Soviet Union began to explore space and became a leader in this area; the country has also achieved significant success in sports, culture and a wide variety of industries, including the social sphere - the level of well-being of citizens has increased significantly, confidence in the future has appeared. Stability is the main term that describes that period. However, the concept of "stagnation" has another meaning. The country's economy during this period actually ceased its development. By a fortunate coincidence, the so-called "oil boom" took place and the prices of black gold rose, which allowed the country's leadership to profit simply from the sale of oil. At the same time, the economy itself did not develop and demanded reforms, but due to the general prosperity, less attention was paid to this than required. Because of this, many call the stagnation period “the calm before the storm”. Thus, on the one hand, at this time the USSR reached its highest dawn, provided citizens with stability and became one of the world powers, and on the other hand, it laid not the best foundation for the country's economic development in the future - during the perestroika period.
Who is trying on Stalin's mustache? What is behind the attempts to rehabilitate Stalinism
The 70th anniversary of the Great Victory is approaching. Veterans are preparing for the parade. Participants in the battles, military historians, politicians recall the dates of the largest battles. Television broadcasts films about the exploits of soldiers and home front workers.
The memory of the Great Victory lives on in the people's memory and in art. And taking into account the number of total losses (27 million people), this memory nests in almost every family. She also lives in politics, and lives in different ways. Depending on ideological orientations and attitudes towards the “price of victory,” the assessments differ markedly. Especially among politicians. Some emphasize the role of the people, their military and labor exploits, analyze the causes and consequences of the war, which continue to influence today's European politics.
However, there are those who persistently shift the emphasis to the roleStalinin Victory. "Without Stalin there would have been no Victory." It must be admitted that these voices are in the minority in the general hum of the country. But they are very persistent, sometimes aggressive. On the eve of the 70th anniversary of the Victory, the propaganda activity of the communists sharply increased, especially in the regions. From dozens of cities, proposals are pouring in to rename streets and squares in honor of Stalin, to install busts and memorial plaques. And in Oryol they decided to erect a full-length monument. “We will erect a full-fledged monument,” says the head of the Oryol regional committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Demands for "perpetuating the memory" were received by the mayor's offices of St. Petersburg and Moscow. Moreover, the Moscow communists demand to erect a monument at the highest place of the capital - on the Sparrow Hills, where they planned to erect a sculpture of the Baptist of Russiaprince Vladimir.
Who muddies the waters?
The activity of the Stalinists is not accidental, it is growing and will increase as the crisis deepens. This activity is based on the growth of fears and conservative sentiments among the population. The already poor population is becoming impoverished. Especially in the regions. The prices for food and utilities are growing. Unemployment is increasing, wages are falling. And throughout the Soviet decades, the myth of how good and fun life was in the USSR under Comrade Stalin, how strong the state was, how Soviet democracy expanded from year to year, how bread, milk and kerosene became cheaper. That as a result of Stalinist collectivization in the country 5-8 million people died of hunger; that 2 million died in Stalin's camps; that from their places of residence were forcibly deported to the North, to Siberia and Kazakhstan, 6 million peasants, Germans, Balts, peoples of the Caucasus. The fact, finally, that during the Stalinist period 20-25% of the population, mainly Russian, died in the country, and that the country “under Stalin's sun” lived in an atmosphere of constant fear, of course, was not mentioned. Demanding new monuments to the leader, the communists do not like to remember his atrocities.
Memory or benefit?
And the point, of course, is not that the communists have a short memory. During the Stalinist repression tens of thousands of honest communists suffered, and their children and grandchildren, of course, remember this. The point is in the current political conjuncture, in the struggle for a place in the current system. The communists, who after the loss of their "leading role" have become moderately bourgeois, Orthodox, and docile, are now successfully integrated into the system of power. It is even difficult to call them the opposition, so at the moments necessary for the Kremlin they merge with the power almost in a hot Brezhnev kiss. But they want more - to restore the lost positions. And they understand very well that in crises, in conditions of impoverishment of the masses, the influence of the left parties always increases. So they will seize the moment.
Stalin is a convenient figure for a propaganda offensive. His image is presented as a symbol of order and a breakthrough "into a bright future." Against the background of an ideological vacuum and the absence of a clear project for the future, the Stalinist project of rapid "building socialism in one single country" looks very attractive in the eyes of the disoriented population. The image of Stalin is selling well even in conditions of isolation and sanctions. After all, under Iosif Vissarionovich, the country was really cut off from the rest of the world, “the border was locked,” the heroes of the country were border guards who caught spies along the entire perimeter of the USSR.
Who should we pray to?
It is interesting that the local authorities, while not encouraging initiatives to rehabilitate Stalin, do not oppose them in any way. Only in Moscow, the Moscow City Duma responded to the request of the Communists to erect a monument to Stalin with the question: is it necessary to excite people? The regions are watching and listening: how will the central government react, what will the Kremlin say? And, as always, they are afraid: what if we don't guess?
After all, political guidelines are blurred, trends are contradictory. On the one hand, the statements are still memorable V. Putin about Stalin's crimes: “There can be no justification for these crimes. A clear political, legal and moral assessment has been given in our country ”. He repeatedly gave a harsh assessment of Stalin and his comrades-in-arms responsible for the mass repressions and D. Medvedev ("Waged war with their own people"). But today these assessments are not emphasized in any way. Moreover, the images of "unshakable" Stalin and Iron Felix become part of patriotic and anti-Western propaganda. The Kremlin is silent. This enables the Stalinists to widen the angle of attack. And it brings results. According to the testimony of sociologists, the number of Russians who positively assess “the actions of comrade. Stalin ”, has increased by 10% over the past 10 years. If this trend continues (and the crisis contributes to this), then a photo of a man with a mustache may appear in the offices of Kremlin officials next to a familiar portrait. Or the one who will try on this mustache. Challengers seem to be looming on the horizon ...
Valery Rashkin
Let's not do everything in two colors. As a person, like any citizen on the globe, Stalin is diverse, and his activities can be assessed both positively and negatively. There are mistakes and achievements. Stalin himself is a great personality who lived in his era, in an environment that required making decisions, maybe even somewhere harsh, and they were not made without mistakes. But if we evaluate his overall activity as a theoretician, as a manager, personnel officer, leader of our country, which I am proud of, I would estimate this: he is 90 percent right, and 10 percent had to be corrected. There were merits, and they are colossal. Victory in the Great Patriotic War can also serve as an assessment of his activities.
Alexey Isaev
Of course, there were achievements with a plus sign, but there were also with a minus sign. That is, in the political arena, there was a completely destructive struggle against dissent, but at the same time the country was reared up due to industrialization, centralization of management of all areas of the economy, the ability to concentrate on any one task. Nevertheless, it is impossible to unequivocally assess whether it was good or bad then. This is the ground for a great discussion.
Is the rehabilitation of Stalinism possible in modern Russia?
Valery Rashkin
We are not talking about the rehabilitation of mistakes, we are talking about the personality of Stalin. If we talk about political repressions, then we must talk about all repressions, starting from the tsarist period, when innocent people, women and children were shot on bloody Sunday. These were the same repressions that should be discussed. In the 90s there were also political repressions perpetrated by Yeltsin
Alexey Isaev
Of course, yes, and, in my opinion, this is expressed in an attempt to make black and white out of “gray” (pros and cons), that is, only good or only bad. What is the rehabilitation of Stalinism? This is the promotion of the thesis that all the repressed, for example, were really to blame for something. That there was no illegal repression, that it was done right and that it was good. This is the thing that is very dangerous, including for the future of the country. In fact, the topic of repression has been poorly developed historically, so such assessments will lead to the fact that this topic will continue to be poorly worked out.
Who and why might need to rehabilitate the crimes of the Stalinist regime?
Valery Rashkin
People who do not want peace in our country need to talk about repression in general. If someone justifies the repression indiscriminately, I am not a supporter of indiscriminate justification. I am a supporter of specific proceedings. When there was a process of rehabilitation of the repressed Soviet period, because there were 70 percent of people convicted of theft, murder, violence, corruption and bribes.
Alexey Isaev
For those forces that seek to rely on the ideas of the Stalinist period. Accordingly, for this support to be strong, it must be flawless. It should be big, white and fluffy Joseph Vissarionovich. In the interests of this political group, the following measure may be useful: to recognize the repressions as legitimate and correct, and so on. It might be interesting for them.
Is this process dangerous in a global sense?
Valery Rashkin
Repressions in our country continue to this day. If we talk about rehabilitation, we must talk about the inadmissibility of repressions of all periods in our country.
Olga Vasilyeva's appointment as the new Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation caused lively discussions in the expert environment.
Despite the fact that Dmitry Livanov, the predecessor of Vasilyeva in this post, was an unpopular figure, many experts do not expect anything good from the new personnel decision of Vladimir Putin.
Andrei Illarionov in his blog on Livejournal notes: “The current authorities did celebrate the 25th anniversary of the GKChP coup, and V. Putin still could not deny himself the demonstration of an emphatically symbolic act. It was in Crimea and on August 19, 2016 that V. Putin, at the suggestion of D. Medvedev, appointed O. Vasilyeva as Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation ”.
According to Illarionov, what will happen in the near future with Russian education and with history, as with science, can be judged by some statements of Olga Vasilyeva at the youth forum "Territory of Meanings on the Klyazma" on June 29 this year. In this speech, Vasilyeva, then still an employee of the staff of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation,
in particular, she said: “The most important thing for a teacher of social sciences, sciences of the humanities cycle is the worldview platform on which he stands. Because any fact can be taught with one accent and another accent.
Any historical consciousness must be prepared for what is called a historical fact. It is impossible to build the future without a foundation, and this foundation is patriotism - nothing else can be imagined. "
Vasilyeva also sharply negatively assessed the role of the Ogonyok magazine during the times of perestroika and glasnost, noting the “corrosive core of the history of“ white spots ”. It was literally said: “The myths that were created every Wednesday by Korotich's“ Fire ”were stunning. We agreed to revise the borders, to the point that two totalitarian regimes fought, over one of which the Nuremberg trials took place, over the other - did not take place. We agreed that Baikal and Siberia came to (Russia) by accident ”.
In the same speech, Olga Vasilieva spoke positively about Stalin for the revival of the concept of "patriotism."
"We already went through this in the Soviet era"
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Deputy Chairman of the Council of the Scientific, Information and Educational Center of the Memorial Society Nikita Petrov I am convinced that in today's Russia there are no random appointments, and such statements by the Kremlin official at the youth forum are very symptomatic.
On the other hand, the historian believes that the rehabilitation of Stalinism as such is currently out of the question: “There is a state program to perpetuate the memory of victims of political repression. Therefore, neither the repetition of the practices of Stalinist terror, nor its complete justification, is impossible, "Nikita Petrov believes.
At the same time, he calls what is happening “the cunning inherent in the Kremlin”: “On the one hand, one thing is being done, on the other, something is being done to balance it. After all, what is now taken as a basis for statism and patriotism is the return of certain ideological schemes, which, by the way, are strictly prohibited by our Constitution, ”the historian notes.
And he continues: "As a result, we see that there is an attempt to build school history teaching not on the basis of accurate knowledge of facts, and not on the basis of scientific understanding of these facts, but on the basis of introduced ideological schemes, such as statism, patriotism or even Orthodoxy."
According to Nikita Petrov: "Kremlin ideologists do not consider history to be a science, but only as an instrument for fostering patriotic consciousness." But in this, the expert believes, lies the biggest delusion of the propagandists of state patriotism: “If we are pursuing a line of emphasizing some positive aspects in history and hushing up the crimes that are characteristic of the Soviet era, then we are drawing some false conclusions and a false history. And it is impossible to create any moral education on the basis of a lie about Soviet history. And ultimately, we will also replicate cynicism, because sooner or later students will still find the facts that the teachers hid from them, and will not believe anything at all. This is what we went through in the Soviet era, ”recalls Nikita Petrov, Doctor of Historical Sciences.
"All inconvenient facts are simply ignored."
Another expert contacted by the Voice of America correspondent is a historian Boris Sokolov - also analyzed the articles and speeches of the new Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation. And he came to the conclusion: “It turns out that textbooks will not talk about complicated issues of the history of our homeland, but will only be discussed in some additional textbooks. But how these textbooks will interpret history, and who gets to them at all is a big question, ”Sokolov concludes.
And he explains that, thus, all difficult and unpleasant moments for the history of the state will be omitted. “For a very long time in relation to Russian policy, even before 1917, the terms“ colonial policy ”or“ conquest ”were not used. We are always talking about the "accession" - the Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Kokand and everything else - to Russia.
Of course, this is a rather primitive technique, which is intended to indicate that England pursued a colonial policy in India, while Russia did not at all in the Caucasus or Central Asia, "the VOA interlocutor gives an example.
According to Sokolov, the current Russian government has an ambivalent attitude towards Stalin's times. On the one hand, repressions are not denied, and no one bothers to carry out actions like "The Last Address".
On the other hand, Stalin, although he is subjected - albeit very moderate - criticism for repression, but at the same time is praised at the official level for pursuing an imperial policy. “The same Olga Vasilyeva in one of her speeches said something like this: if you find a document in your archive, do not rush to publish it, but first think about how you can explain it scientifically. Otherwise, you can seriously harm your country, ”recalls Boris Sokolov.
After giving this example, he continues: “But, as a rule, first of all, any publication of a document is accompanied by an attempt to interpret it. And secondly, it is possible to comprehend, study and explain the document only after it has been published and made public ”.
And, summarizing what has been said, Boris Sokolov assesses the prospects for teaching history: “I don’t think that Russian schools will slide, relatively speaking, to the level of parish schools. Of course, Olga Yuryevna herself (Vasilyeva - AP) is, first of all, a historian of the Orthodox Church, but she was, as they say, “in a past life”. For quite some time now she has been simply a Kremlin propagandist. And in this capacity, of course, he very carefully selects historical facts. That is, all unnecessary ones are simply ignored. "
“The main thing for the authorities is the greatness of the state, not the people”
Member of the Board of the International Society "Memorial" Yan Rachinsky believes that the replacement of the head of the Ministry of Education and Science may be associated with the upcoming elections to the State Duma. "Since a number of claims have accumulated against Dmitry Livanov - partially justified, partially unfounded - nevertheless, in order to defuse the situation, it was decided to" throw him on the spears "of not the worst minister," he said.
On the other hand, taking into account Olga Vasilyeva's professional specialization, the historian notes a clear tendency towards the strengthening of clericalization and the growing role of Orthodoxy in worldly affairs.
“And this can hardly lead to something good,” Rachinsky notes. And he continues that most of all he does not agree with the position of Olga Vasilyeva on the relationship between the individual and the state. “She (Vasilieva - AP) has repeatedly articulated the idea that the interests of the state are above all. Although, as a state person, she must respect the Constitution, which says that human rights are the highest value for the state. In addition, although I am a non-religious person, it seems to me that such a position contradicts the Christian doctrine, where it is called to love your neighbor, ”notes Jan Raczynski.
The other day the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia called on the new Minister of Education and Science to clarify their attitude towards Stalin's personality and his role in the history of the USSR, so as “not to leave room for ambiguity, because this is important not only for the education of Russia, but also for the future of the country in general. ".
The reason for this appeal was Olga Vasilyeva's speech at the forum "The Territory of Sense on the Klyazma", and, in particular, her words that Stalin "revived patriotism." In addition, this week it became known that the international airport in Volgograd may be given the name "Stalingrad".
Mentioning these facts in an interview with the Voice of America correspondent, Yan Rachinsky noted that, in his opinion, we are not talking about the conscious rehabilitation of Stalin by the country's top officials: “Neither Putin nor Medvedev are fans of Stalin and are not inclined to justify repression. The decision to erect a monument to the victims of political repression was quite sincere, as were the words that Putin and Medvedev said in Butovo, Magadan and elsewhere. "
The problem is that the top leaders of Russia do not understand that with their system of values \u200b\u200bthey are reviving Stalinism, the basis of which, according to Rachinsky, is the exaltation of the basic role of the state and complete disregard for human lives.
“And what Mrs. Vasilyeva said, not yet being a minister, boiled down roughly to the same: yes, there were victims, but the territory of the state increased, but they won the war, but carried out industrialization - and a lot of other similar arguments. That is, it is similar to what Andranik Migranyan said when he justified Hitler in his article in Izvestia. And it turns out that the new Minister of Education of Russia believes that the main thing for the country is an increase in its territory and an increase in military power, and not at all an increase in the well-being of citizens, "said a member of the board of the International Society" Memorial ".
As for the proposal to assign the name “Stalingrad” to the international airport in Volgograd, Yan Rachinsky emphasizes that the initiative comes from some veteran organizations. And he explains: “You have to understand that these veteran organizations have little in common with real war veterans. There are many people who were born after the war, and besides, these veteran committees were built by the communists and the Soviet authorities since no time, and the same communists are still running there. "
This initiative, according to Rachinsky, also comes from the communists-Stalinists, and finds some support in society due to the implanted mythology of "a wise and great leader who outplayed everyone" and the lack of an adequate assessment of Stalin's criminal activities in foreign and domestic policy. “And a revived ideology is superimposed on this: the main thing is that it is good for the state, and it does not matter at all how people live at the same time,” concludes Jan Raczynski.
Once he noted a rather cool paradox: when, according to the history of the twentieth century, the USSR should be scolded, Stalin is remembered and condemned for "his" repression, and when it is necessary to praise, they recall Stalin's victories and successes, which, of course, have nothing to do with him. The only place where it is impossible not to praise Stalin is when it comes to the Yalta Conference. And then everyone says that there are no politicians of this magnitude anymore.
Personally, it seems to me that a kind of historical schizophrenia manifests itself in this regard.
And not just me. For the scale of what was accomplished in the 30-50s. XX century. it is impossible to consider outside the personality of Stalin. Of course, this does not mean that Stalin should be presented as white and fluffy. Not at all. But within the framework of a general strategy, Russia now needs a new Stalin: not a tyrant, but a leader and strategist capable of adequately responding to the challenges of History. And its appearance is a prerequisite for the revival of Russia.
Therefore, it is curious what Leonid Maslovsky writes about Stalin's rehabilitation.
We look.
My articles on the history of the Fatherland cover the period of Russian history from the 10th century to the present. But they were based on the events that took place in the period from 1917 to 1953. From the articles published on the website of the newspaper "Zavtra" it is clear that Russia, including Stalin's time, has a great, bright, pure and kind history. All the innocent blood and dirt that was shed into it were brought by the slanderers of Russia.
The slander about the massive Stalinist repressions, the Holodomor and the mistakes of the Stalinist government was born by the American special services obsessed with Russophobia and anti-Sovietism and their loyal servants inside our country.
They could not find any facts compromising socialism, and came up with massive Stalinist repressions and famine. Only they did not explain why the government, which every day in the 1930s expected an enemy attack, was to exterminate and starve its citizens. They did not explain how a physically healthy generation could grow up in a starving country to the surprise of the whole world, who defeated the army of Europe.
The barefaced accusations of our Western "partners" have long been refuted by Russian scientists and researchers on the basis of factual material. There were no mass repressions, no Holodomor, no significant government mistakes in Stalin's time, but the most humane, just and cultured state on earth, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), was created and preserved with all the peoples inhabiting it.
It was in the United States in the 1930s during the Great Depression that there really was a famine. In 1930-1933, the volume of industrial production in the United States fell by half to the production level of 1901. Most of the population was left without a livelihood and died out, unable to buy food. The terrible famine was accompanied by epidemics. The number of victims of the Holodomor in the United States is still classified, but there is every reason to believe that the number of people who died of hunger and epidemics in the United States during the Great Depression is many millions.
In the USSR, in difficult times, the country switched to a rationing system for providing the population with food, which excluded the death of a Soviet person from hunger.
Under JV Stalin, the material standard of living of people increased from year to year. At that time, a new Russian generation was brought up - the most educated, physically prepared, spiritually elevated, morally stable. There has never been a more noble generation on earth than the generation of Soviet Russia in the 1930s. This generation, after three destructive wars, created a great power, and it was happy.
The population of the USSR in the 17 years of the pre-war rule of I. V. Stalin increased by more than 50 million people. In 1945, the Russian Empire was saved and preserved for the third time in the 20th century. The glorious Victory of 1945 saved the Russian state, the Soviet Union, and 175.5 million Soviet people.
The population of the Soviet Union (USSR) at the beginning of 1989 was 286.7 million people, including the Russian Federation in 1990 - 148 million people. At present, the issue of preserving and multiplying the peoples of the Russian Federation is more acute than ever, since with the beginning of perestroika, since 1988, for a quarter of a century, the population of the Russian Federation has been constantly decreasing, and only in 2013 the decline in the population was stopped. The RSFSR had a stable population growth of about 1 million people. in year.
The amazing rates of growth of industry and agriculture in the USSR during the Stalinist period left the West no chance of enslaving our country and exterminating our peoples. Failed to break the USSR and the monstrous hordes of European conquerors, thrown on the USSR in 1941. After the defeat of the European conquerors in the war with the USSR, the West came up with massive Stalinist repressions and the Holodomor in the USSR.
After Stalin's death, the anti-Stalinist opposition seized power in our country and began to instill in the minds of Soviet citizens a malicious lie about Stalin's time. To do this, it was necessary to replace 800 thousand civil servants who, together with the entire people, ensured our victory in the Great Patriotic War and the rates of development of industry and agriculture, especially science-intensive industries, which have never been achieved by anyone in the world. The indicated number of civil servants was replaced between 1953 and 1956.
The coming to power of the anti-Stalinist opposition immediately after Stalin's death indicates that Russia remained the most humane, kind country in the world even under Stalin. Representatives of this very anti-Stalinist opposition, many of whom became representatives of the 5th column of the West, from 1956 to the present, support the image of Stalin created in the United States and his time of ruling the country. Every day on television programs today are shown and voiced through and through false feature films about Stalin and Stalin's time, stories of the so-called "witnesses" of that time and anti-Stalinist "historians".
More than 60 years have passed since the death of JV Stalin, and the tight-fisted West still spends millions of dollars to maintain a negative attitude towards Stalin among Russian citizens. For what purpose has the West been spending huge amounts of money for 90 years spreading slander about JV Stalin all over the world?
The goal of the West was and is to create a new generation of Russian citizens who hate both Soviet and today's Russia.
After the death of J.V. Stalin, the United States was able to instill in young citizens of the USSR an inferiority complex, to cultivate hatred of socialism, Soviet power, the USSR, to present life in Soviet times as an alternation of crimes committed by the state, as the darkest period in the history of our Motherland.
More recently, a great and independent people began to feel ashamed of their past. Self-deprecation has become the norm. The USSR ceased to be the highest value in life for the Soviet people, socialism - the most effective and just state system, and they renounced the USSR and socialism.
This happened despite the fact that the socialist time is the most unique time in the entire period of human existence. For two thousand years of our era, ordinary people have always been disenfranchised, humiliated and insulted, deprived of most of the benefits of life.
In Russia, the USSR, the only state-family on earth was created in which people were equal and were not divided into the chosen and the outcast.
But we are told every day that socialism is bad in all respects, that the Russian people are incapable of building anything worthwhile and have made some mistakes in their history, that we can live normally only under the dictation of the United States.
Since 1989, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Sakharov, Gaidar, Shevardnadze and other destroyers of our country began to fulfill the will of the United States. As a result of the fulfillment of the will of the United States, the economic and military cooperation of the socialist countries was destroyed, the population and territory of the Russian state was halved, a huge number of weapons, factories, research teams and agricultural enterprises were destroyed. The population of the newly formed capitalist Russian state began to decrease by almost 1 million people. in year. The US applauded Yeltsin, showered favors on Gorbachev, and wrote about Khrushchev's great anti-Stalinist report.
Russia can avoid the fate of the USSR only in the case of the rehabilitation of Stalin, the Stalinist and all Soviet times, during which our country in the pace of development was two or more times ahead of the United States and created technically more advanced science-intensive products and manufactured these products at technologically more advanced enterprises.
Russia can avoid the fate of the USSR only if the citizens of our country are proud of its history, including the history of the greatest Stalinist time. And it should be noted that if the United States succeeds in destroying Russia, as it did in the Soviet Union, it will exterminate the entire population of our country and populate the vastness of Russia with other people who will never think or say that this is their land.
The question of restoring the good name of JV Stalin in today's Russia for its peoples is a matter of life and death, for only a self-confident nation can withstand the pressure of the richest and most insidious country in the world. The untold wealth of Americans must be helpless in the face of the resilience of the confident Russians.
This is not about the restoration of socialism in our country. It is about restoring the truth about JV Stalin and the Soviet era.
Of course, the socialist socio-political system is a blessing for our country, but, in my opinion, only once in a thousand years conditions arise when it is possible to take wealth from the rich by nationalizing and transferring private property to the state. We must thank fate that Russia fell into this day and hour of a thousand-year history, built socialism and, thanks to socialism, ensured the salvation of the Russian and other peoples of the Great Russian Empire.
Currently, we are studying most of the periods of our country's history using textbooks written in the United States and introduced into our schools and institutes by representatives of the 5th column, which are abundant in all branches of government, research teams and the media. In the USSR, these people were called dissidents. Today's servants of the West do not and cannot have their own opinion inside our country, but they do and say what the West dictates to them.
For decades, the measures taken to discredit our country have yielded results. Today the majority of the population of Russia was brought up not on the real events of our past, but on the virtual ones invented by our enemies. The many stereotypes formed in the minds of the majority of the citizens of our country do not correspond at all to the events that actually took place, both in the Soviet era and in the whole period of the existence of thousand-year-old Russia.
For example, the most humane of all European monarchs of his time, the Russian Tsar IV the Terrible was declared a despot, while over the thirty years of the reign of this “despot” 3 thousand people were sentenced to death. JV Stalin was also declared a despot. The modern policy of the West must open the eyes of all thinking people.
It is obvious that the West discredits those leaders and those states that pursue an independent policy aimed at the benefit not of Western countries, but of their own state and their citizens.
I. V. the Terrible, like A. Nevsky, did not fulfill the will of the West, as he understood that the West was seeking to destroy Russia. I. V. the Terrible annexed Siberia, the Kazan and Astrakhan kingdoms to Russia, defeated the German order in the struggle for the Baltic Sea, strengthened the Orthodox faith and family. That is why he is hated in the West and is presented as a despot of a genius statesman and a kind person who has dedicated his life to Russia.
JV Stalin built a socialist state, defeated all internal and external enemies of our country, did not allow anyone to interfere in our internal affairs and turned the USSR into a superpower. This is why he is hated in the West and is afraid that his descendants will adopt the experience of the second genius statesman in the history of Russia. JV Stalin also devoted his entire life to serving the Motherland.
The United States even today spends millions of dollars to maintain in the minds of our citizens the image of Stalin they created, as they fear the Russian people, their creative mind and courage.
They are afraid that the Russian people will see all the greatness of the history of Russia and against its background the insignificance of Europe, the United States and the whole West in general.
Despite all the efforts of the West, the huge costs of manipulating the consciousness of our citizens, the truth about Stalin and Stalin's time makes its way through the darkness of the lies that enveloped Russia. Today is the time to restore the good name of J. V. Stalin. Otherwise, Russia will be defenseless against the ideological machine of the West that destroyed the USSR. It is unacceptable to repeat the same mistake twice. The delay in the rehabilitation of JV Stalin is similar to death for the Russian state and all the peoples living in it.
Leonid Maslovsky
