Stalin and the Wind of History- I : Andrei Fursov
[Andrei Fursov is a Russian Historian and Sociologist, who has written extensively on the real agenda of de-stalinization and the psychology operating behind it. Socialist India is publishing this very important essay by Fursov in 3 parts. This is the first part of the essay. ]
Stalin once said that after his death his grave will cause a lot of garbage, but the wind of history will dispel. All and so it was, as anticipated the chief. Has not passed also several years as one of the main “Stakhanovite of terror” of the 1930-ies N. Khrushchev (on his request to increase quotas for the shooting of Stalin wrote: “shut up, fool”) began to pour mud at the leader.
Khrushchev was not the first in this regard: a systematic watering Stalin (though interspersed with real criticism) began Trotsky, but not released mind is an ex-Trotskyite Khrushchev left only watering. Then Khrushchev as “scavengers” have joined the most zealous of the “sixties”, but what about the dissidents, “sang” the strangers “voices” and “floated” on other people’s “waves”, and say nothing — they were part of a Western anti-Soviet propaganda.
Restructuring marked a new stage in the defamation of Stalin. Here, however, Stalin was the main target, and Soviet socialism, the Soviet system, Soviet history, Russian history in General. After all, said one of the demons of the restructuring that the restructuring they broke not only the Soviet Union but the entire paradigm of the millennial Russian history. And the fact that the main figure of the break was chosen by Stalin, once again demonstrates the role that the person-a phenomenon not only in Soviet but in Russian history — Stalinism, among other things, active and great-Russian form of survival in the twentieth century in an extremely hostile environment to set their sights on the “final solution of Russian question” — Hitler in this regard not just it — by plebeian manner — loudly shouted, repeating what had accumulated in the Anglo-Saxons. (“The USSR collapsed, destroyed the Soviet system. It would seem that somatotopy can calm down about Stalin and the USSR. But no, itching to do them. However, the current destalinization shape mostly farcical and offensive, look small compared to the perestroika punk. On TV screens rigged miserable social types like half-educated Paterno-fake publicist, academician dropout with the manners of a rat, of an alcoholic with pretensions to the role of international businessman and other mediocrity. It does make me think of Karel čapek (“they come like a thousand of masks without faces” — about the salamanders) and Nikolay Zabolotsky (“All mixed up in a General dance,/ And fly to the ends/ Hamadryas and British/ Witches, fleas, dead… / Candidate of former centuries,/ Commander of new years/ my Mind! These freaks —/ Only fiction and nonsense”).
Indeed, otherwise as delusions not to name the fact that “kovërnye the anti-Stalinist” served as “argument”. It’s either solid, on the verge of hysteria emotions in the spirit of Amateur club with cries of “nightmare”, “horror”, “shame”, very reminiscent of the Jackal tabaki from Rudyard Kipling “Mowgli” with his “Shame on the jungle!”, — emotions without any facts and figures. Or manipulation of fantastic figures of victims of “Stalinist repression”: “tens and tens of millions” (why not hundreds?). If you think about and refer to, “the GULAG Archipelago” Solzhenitsyn. But Solzhenitsyn was a master of legendirovannyh and blanks “pads”. For example, he did not claim to “Archipelago…” on the arithmetic precision; moreover, it was expressed in the sense that the work is, so to speak, impressionistic character. Insure “the Winds” — that means school.
But over the past quarter century on the basis of archival data (the archives are open) and our, and the Western (primarily American) researchers, most of which are not noticed in sympathies for Stalin nor the USSR, nor even to Russia, estimated the actual number of repressed in 1922-53. (recall, incidentally, that, although the “Stalinist” era formally began in 1929, in fact, only since 1939 formally possible to speak about full control over Stalin’s “the party and the government”, although there were some nuances), and no “tens of millions” or even a “tens of millions” and there is no smell.
In recent years, there have been well-documented work, showing the actual mechanism of “repression of the 1930s” which were unleashed massive as it is the “old guard” and “regional barons” like Khrushchev and eikhe as a response to Stalin’s proposal on alternative elections. To break the resistance “of starogardzie” the leader could not, but the point (not mass!) blow to their staffs struck. I leave aside the struggle with real conspiracies — the opposition left the globalists Stalin-the Comintern, like Trotsky, who believed that Stalin had betrayed the world revolution, etc. Thus, the real picture of the “repression of the 1930s” is much harder than it is trying to present Stalin’s detractors; it’s a multilayered and multidirectional process of completing the civil war, in which the “Stalinist segment” is not a big part.
Similarly fails the second main unit of the charges Stalin — how developed in the first months of the Great Patriotic war: “blinked”, “asleep”, “did not believe Sorge”, “believed Hitler”, “escaped from the Kremlin and the three days was in prostration” etc. All the lies disproven long ago documented, the researchers aware of this — and that Stalin did not conquer, and that in fact never believed Hitler, and that right did not believe Sorge, and the real fault generals on the eve of June 22. This is not the place to parse all of these questions, but one comment doesn’t hold. I laughed as the anti-Stalinist over the TASS statement of 14 June 1941; the statement said that the relations between the USSR and Germany, everything is fine, that the Soviet Union continued to pursue peaceful course etc. “Scavengers” interpret this as “folly and weakness of Stalin” as “kowtowing to Hitler.” They never think that the destination application were not Hitler and the Third Reich, and Roosevelt and the United States. In April 1941, the U.S. Congress decided that in the event of a German attack on the USSR the US would help the USSR, and in the case of USSR attack on Germany — Germany.
The TASS statement fixed the complete lack of aggressive intentions of the USSR towards Germany and has demonstrated that the absence of the USA, not Germany. Stalin was well aware that in the inevitable battle with the Reich its only real ally may be just the US, they will keep the UK from slipping into a German-British anti-Soviet Alliance. And, of course, it was impossible to prevent careless movement, which pushed the Russian Hitler provoke the North Atlantic (or rather, the world — with the participation of Japan and Turkey) anti-Soviet bloc. In this case, the Soviet Union (relative military capabilities on the 1937 — 14%) would have had to confront the USA (41.7 per cent), Germany (14,4%), UK (10,2% excluding Imperial possessions), France (4,2%), Japan (3.5 per cent), Italy (2,5%) plus smaller dragons. By the way, given these numbers and the fact that the decision of Congress all of the obvious falsity of the scheme rezuna and others like him about the alleged preparation of Stalin attack Germany in particular and Europe in General.
There is one more psychological nuance into allegations of scientific and pseudo-scientific brethren addressed to Stalin. All, or rather, all that is negative in the reign of Stalin (positive is along the lines of “in spite of Stalin”) blame one person as supposedly endowed with absolute power, but because of the Almighty. But first, Stalin managed to consolidate his power only towards the end of 1930th years; before that, the struggle for life and death, walking on the blade, constant readiness to respond to a cry of joy pack: “Akela has missed”. War is not the time for unilateral decisions. Well, the period 1945-1953, is the time constant infighting different nomenclature groups with each other — and against Stalin. Postwar 8th anniversary — is the story of the gradual obkladyvaniya, the environment, the aging leader nomenclature (with the participation of certain forces and structures from abroad); Stalin’s attempt to strike back at the XIX Congress of the CPSU(b)/CPSU (1952) and immediately after it ended in the death of the leader. Thus, in the real, not a “Professor” of history, about which Goethe noticed that it has no relation to the actual spirit of the past is “…the spirit of the professors and their concepts, That these gentlemen out of place/ Over the true antiquity of the issue”, Stalin has never been absolute ruler — the ring of Power he had. This does not mean that he does not bear sole responsibility for any errors, cruelty, etc., — together with a brutal era, and according to the laws of nature which we want to estimate.