With the American historian Roger Keeran: what was everyday life like in a non-capitalist society, in this case, the USSR?

Article from http://jeunescommunistes-paris15.over-blog.com

Last Thursday the Young Communist League (15th Arrondissement, Paris) organized its first movie night since September. "Living in Rostov" is a documentary made by the French Communist Party in the 1970s. Neither a caricature nor Manichaeism, it is a remarkable record of the conditions of Soviet life.

The YCL was surprised and honored to host the historianRead More... (http://mltoday.com/what-was-everyday-life-like-in-the-ussr)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?d=yIl2AUoC8zA (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?a=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?d=qj6IDK7rITs (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?a=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:qj6IDK7rITs) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?i=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:F7zBnMyn0Lo (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?a=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:F7zBnMyn0Lo) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?i=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:gIN9vFwOqvQ (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/ml2day-recent?a=-cE12ae4B6s:GLYBA0iBKf4:gIN9vFwOqvQ)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ml2day-recent/~4/-cE12ae4B6s

More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ml2day-recent/~3/-cE12ae4B6s/what-was-everyday-life-like-in-the-ussr)

With the American historian Roger Keeran: what was everyday life like in a non-capitalist society, in this case, the USSR?

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ml2day-recent/~4/-cE12ae4B6s

More... (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ml2day-recent/~3/-cE12ae4B6s/what-was-everyday-life-like-in-the-ussr)

Bump

excerpt -

What did it mean to live in a non-capitalist society, the USSR?

1. - It meant democracy at the factory. The workers decided about the organization of work. This goes against the dominant ideology, but actually, the workers in the USSR worked at their own pace but conscientuously. Nothing was imposed on them concerning the pace of work without their prior agreement, without debate, without the help of mechanization. As many of them recall it, they ended the day with "little or no fatigue." This was heresy at the time of triumphant Taylorism-Fordism in France, which was criticized in the May 1968 events!

2 - It meant retirement at age 60, and a day of rest on Sunday. It meant two historical conquests now breaking down in France. Workers retiring at age 60 for men, 55 for women, or even earlier, for strenuous jobs. The work week of 41 hours (it was 40 hours in France in 1974) was also the rule, to guarantee rest on Sunday as well as the famous 8-hour day, a historic attainment of the labor movement.

3 - It meant culture for all, the democratization of knowledge: Imagine our surprise to find that the workers at the plant read, read a lot: from the verse of Heinrich Heine, and Balzac's novels, and verse and prose of Victor Hugo. How many French workers in France today read literary works of this quality? Libraries, cultural centers, study centers were present in every neighborhood, every factory. On Sunday, they were filled with workers relaxing, like young children, thirsty for reading more than for television.

4 - It meant lower rents, rents which did not impede life. In 1974 housing was no longer a problem in the USSR. As in France in the 1950s, 1960s, housing had been an urgent question. It was decided to build large complexes of apartment buildings which addressed, as best they could, this emergency. Result: The relative weight of rent in the salary of a worker in the USSR amounted to, on average, 5%. In Paris now, for us, it is between 20% and 50% in general!

5 - There were loans at zero percent interest. In the 1970s, the Soviets had wide access to household appliances, their color TV, their cars, their houses. The difference here is the financing. No greedy banks, the state as guarantor whose loans were at a zero percent rate of interest, a payment schedule.

6 – Instruction was available to all, with priority to all-round education. This was not only high-quality education from kindergarten to college level, which produced illustrious scientists. It was a people’s education, reflecting the social welfare.

For example, the early childhood /motherhood bond was ensured in the same structures ("educational combines") without the breaks of framework that people know today (this is a very recent thinking in France!) which can be traumatic for the child. Another example, evening classes set up for workers who want to learn, to get skills training. They were widespread in every factory, with a credential of national value. What a surprise for us here, when they have destroyed our occupational training!

7 - It meant real gender equality, defending women's activity in society. Even today, gender equality is a battle in France. In the USSR, gender equality was a reality , first in the salary. And in specific rights, we often forget that the Soviet Union was the first country to give the right to abortion! This genuine equality, was lived, not only in the laws, but in reality. Men actually helped women in their household tasks, as women were also involved in the production process.

8 - It meant the care for small children, and the possibility of being both a mother and a working woman. For a woman to be active, there must be time and energy for her to devote to activity. The Soviet state guaranteed it especially for young women who got maternity leave longer than what was in force in France at the time, and access to affordable nurseries open 24 hours, 7 days a week, with no waiting list. Still, what a contrast with France, where waiting lists are becoming an urgent problem (especially in Paris), where privatization has become synonymous with outrageous costs, where maternity leave as a fundamental right is questioned.

9 - It meant the complete satisfaction of material goods. Still another piece of the dominant ideology: in 1974 people said that the USSR was the second largest economy in the world. Like any country, it had its contradictions. However, stakeholders lived in assured material comfort, at least in the satisfaction of all basic needs: food, clothing, appliances, shelter. From the 1960s there starts the great turning to meeting cultural aspirations, centered on culture, art, education, and recreation in the broad sense. In Rostov, workers had access to courses in classical dance, to theater performances, to chess clubs, scientific conferences national and even international level. Not only would they go to them in huge numbers but they participated as amateurs and fans.

10 - It meant an "economic miracle" after the destruction of 1945. People have spoken of the Japanese economic miracle, the German economic miracle, but what about the Soviet economic miracle? In a country one third of which was destroyed, which had lost 25 million human beings, in 15 years became the second power in the world and met all the needs of its population. In the documentary, the memory of war is traumatic: the buildings razed, relatives dead, the city sacked by Nazi barbarism. The cry of "Never again!" and "No to war" was not abstract, but a reality lived in the flesh of each person.

11 - Unemployment in the USSR did not exist, there was no fear of the future. You can finish with this, but unemployment did not exist in the USSR …since 1927. Each enterprise restructuring forced the state to reclassify workers to find employment in another enterprise, or in another sector related to their skills, or even to offer them re-training.

New Year's wishes from Russia....

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6LT50pIMAA6kCP.jpg

"return of USSR" -60.5%

AS HAPPY AS A SQUIRREL UP A TREE
Zsuzsanna Clark
Next month Europe will mark the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Zsuzsanna Clark was born and raised in Hungary but after meeting her British husband, she moved to the UK in 1999. Here she explains why, contrary to Western beliefs, there were many benefits to life behind the Iron Curtain.......

When people ask me what it was like growing up behind the Iron Curtain in Hungary in the Seventies and Eighties, most expect to hear tales of secret police, bread queues and other nasty manifestations of life in a one-party state.

They are invariably disappointed when I explain that the reality was quite different, and communist Hungary, far from being hell on earth, was in fact, rather a fun place to live.

The communists provided everyone with guaranteed employment, good education and free healthcare. Violent crime was virtually non-existent.

But perhaps the best thing of all was the overriding sense of camaraderie, a spirit lacking in my adopted Britain and, indeed, whenever I go back to Hungary today. People trusted one another, and what we had we shared.

I was born into a working-class family in Esztergom, a town in the north of Hungary, in 1968. My mother, Julianna, came from the east of the country, the poorest part. Born in 1939, she had a harsh childhood.

She left school aged 11 and went straight to work in the fields. She remembers having to get up at 4am to walk five miles to buy a loaf of bread. As a child, she was so hungry she often waited next to the hen for it to lay an egg. She would then crack it open and swallow the yolk and the white raw.

It was discontent with these conditions of the early years of communism that led to the Hungarian uprising in 1956.

The shock waves brought home to the communist leadership that they could consolidate their position only by making our lives more tolerable. Stalinism was out and 'goulash communism' - a unique brand of liberal communism - was in.

Janos Kadar, the country's new leader, transformed Hungary into the 'happiest barracks' in Eastern Europe. We probably had more freedoms than in any other communist country.

One of the best things was the way leisure and holiday opportunities were opened up to all. Before the Second World War, holidays were reserved for the upper and middle classes. In the immediate post-war years too, most Hungarians were working so hard rebuilding the country that holidays were out of the question.

In the Sixties though, as in many other aspects of life, things changed for the better. By the end of the decade, almost everyone could afford to go away, thanks to the network of subsidised trade-union, company and co-operative holiday centres.

My parents worked in Dorog, a nearby town, for Hungaroton, a state-owned record company, so we stayed at the factory's holiday camp at Lake Balaton, 'The Hungarian Sea'.

The camp was similar to the sort of holiday camps in vogue in Britain at the same time, the only difference being that guests had to make their own entertainment in the evenings - there were no Butlins-style Redcoats.

Some of my earliest memories of living at home are of the animals my parents kept on their smallholding. Rearing animals was something most people did, as well as growing vegetables. Outside Budapest and the big towns, we were a nation of Tom and Barbara Goods.

My parents had about 50 chickens, pigs, rabbits, ducks, pigeons and geese. We kept the animals not just to feed our family but also to sell meat to our friends. We used the goose feathers to make pillows and duvets.

The government understood the value of education and culture. Before the advent of communism, opportunities for the children of the peasantry and urban working class, such as me, to rise up the educational ladder were limited. All that changed after the war.

The school system in Hungary was similar to that which existed in Britain at the time. Secondary education was divided into grammar schools, specialised secondary schools, and vocational schools. The main differences were that we stayed in our elementary school until the age of 14, not 11.

There were also evening schools, for children and adults. My parents, who had both left school young, took classes in mathematics, history and Hungarian literature and grammar.

I loved my schooldays, and in particular my membership of the Pioneers - a movement common to all communist countries.

Many in the West believed it was a crude attempt to indoctrinate the young with communist ideology, but being a Pioneer taught us valuable life skills such as building friendships and the importance of working for the benefit of the community. 'Together for each other' was our slogan, and that was how we were encouraged to think.

As a Pioneer, if you performed well in your studies, communal work and school competitions, you were rewarded with a trip to a summer camp. I went every year because I took part in almost all the school activities: competitions, gymnastics, athletics, choir, shooting, literature and library work.

On our last night at Pioneer camp we sang songs around the bonfire, such as the Pioneer anthem: 'Mint a mokus fenn a fan, az uttoro oly vidam' ('We are as happy as a squirrel on a tree'), and other traditional songs. Our feelings were always mixed: sad at the prospect of leaving, but happy at the thought of seeing our families again.

Today, even those who do not consider themselves communists look back at their days in the Pioneers with great affection.

Hungarian schools did not follow the so-called 'progressive' ideas on education prevalent in the West at the time. Academic standards were extremely high and discipline was strict. My favourite teacher taught us that without mastery of Hungarian grammar we would lack confidence to articulate our thoughts and feelings. We could make only one mistake if we wanted to attain the highest grade.

Unlike Britain, there were 'viva voce' exams in Hungary in every subject. In literature, for example, set texts had to be memorised and recited and then the student would have to answer questions put to them orally by the teacher. Whenever we had a national celebration, I was among those asked to recite a poem or verse in front of the whole school.

Culture was regarded as extremely important by the government. The communists did not want to restrict the finer things of life to the upper and middle classes - the very best of music, literature and dance were for all to enjoy.

This meant lavish subsidies were given to institutions including orchestras, opera houses, theatres and cinemas. Ticket prices were subsidised by the State, making visits to the opera and theatre affordable.

'Cultural houses' were opened in every town and village, so provincial, working-class people such as my parents could have easy access to the performing arts, and to the best performers.

Programming on Hungarian television reflected the regime's priority to bring culture to the masses, with no dumbing down.

When I was a teenager, Saturday night primetime viewing typically meant a Jules Verne adventure, a poetry recital, a variety show, a live theatre performance, or an easy Bud Spencer film.

Much of Hungarian television was home-produced, but quality programmes were imported, not just from other Eastern Bloc countries but from the West, too.
Hungarians in the early Seventies followed the trials and tribulations of Soames Forsyte in The Forsyte Saga just as avidly as British viewers had done a few years earlier. The Onedin Line was another popular BBC series I enjoyed watching, along with David Attenborough documentaries.

However, the government was alive to the danger of us turning into a nation of four-eyed couch potatoes. Every Monday was 'family night', when State television was taken off the air to encourage families to do other things together. Others called it 'family planning night', and I am sure the figures showing the proportion of children conceived on Monday nights under communism would make interesting reading.

Although we lived well under 'goulash communism' and there was always enough food for us to eat, we were not bombarded with advertising for products we didn't need.
Throughout my youth, I wore hand-me-down clothes, as most young people did. My school bag was from the factory where my parents worked. What a difference to today's Hungary, where children are bullied, as they are in Britain, for wearing the
'wrong' brand of trainers.

Like most people in the communist era, my father was not money-obsessed.
As a mechanic he made a point of charging people fairly. He once saw a broken-down car with an open bonnet - a sight that always lifted his heart. It belonged to a West German tourist. My father fixed the car but refused payment - even a bottle of beer. For him it was unnatural that anyone would think of accepting money for helping someone in distress.

When communism in Hungary ended in 1989, I was not only surprised, but saddened, as were many others. Yes, there were people marching against the government, but the majority of ordinary people - me and my family included - did not take part in the protests.

Our voice - the voice of those whose lives were improved by communism - is seldom heard when it comes to discussions of what life was like behind the Iron Curtain.
Instead, the accounts we hear in the West are nearly always from the perspectives of wealthy emigrés or anti-communist dissidents with an axe to grind.

Communism in Hungary had its downside. While trips to other socialist countries were unrestricted, travel to the West was problematic and allowed only every second year.
There were petty restrictions and needless layers of bureaucracy and freedom to criticise the government was limited. Yet despite this, I believe that, taken as a whole, the positives outweighed the negatives.

Twenty years on, most of these positive achievements have been destroyed.

People no longer have job security. Poverty and crime is on the increase. Working-class people can no longer afford to go to the opera or theatre. As in Britain, TV has dumbed down to a worrying degree - ironically, we never had Big Brother under communism, but we have it today.

Most sadly of all, the spirit of camaraderie that we once enjoyed has all but disappeared.

In the past two decades we may have gained shopping malls, multi-party ' democracy', mobile phones and the internet.

But we have lost a whole lot more.

http://neilclark66.blogspot.com/2009/10/goulash-and-solidarity-as-happy-as.html?m=1

Most Russians Would Return to the Soviet Economic System - Poll
Is anyone surprised?

Simon North

Originally appeared at Levada Center - public opininon company
Most Russians favor a return to a Soviet-style planned economy, according to a recent poll by the independent Russian pollster Levada Center, published on its website on 17 February.

Asked whether they would prefer a planned or a free market economy, over half of those polled (52%) opted for the former. About a quarter (26%) preferred the latter, while 22% were not sure.

Support for both systems dropped slightly compared to March 2015. Then, 55% favored a planned economy, while 27% wanted to see a free market economy in Russia.

Respondents were also asked to choose between three political systems: the Soviet system, the current Russian system, and "Western-style democracy". Again, the Soviet model proved the most popular with 37% of respondents, while 23% opted for the current Russian model. Only 13% favored the Western system, while 8% opted for ”other". Almost one-fifth of respondents (19 %) said they didn’t know.

It appears that both the Soviet and Western systems are slightly more popular then last year, while the current Russian system lost 6 %.
The poll was conducted amongst 1,600 people in 137 population centers across 48 regions of Russia, and has a maximum margin of error of 3.4%.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/most-russians-would-return-soviet-economic-system-poll/ri12952?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Bah, what do those Russians know......

About the Soviet Union, who were born after
colonelcassad
3 March, 14:29

http://img12.nnm.me/4/2/5/7/c/b23697d6140561cef932db7d766.jpg

Excellent article from a friend historian30h

Pro USSR those who were born after

The point of view of young people in the USSR, I heard , I now much easier to answer the question with which it all started: "And then what was the best?"

The youth, if he wants to understand the world in which it came, must necessarily be laid obtained knowledge in , to know the facts and phenomena in their relationship, to see both sides of the coin, to be able to adequately aware of their place and their interests in a particular system of society. Therefore, I beg you to try to understand the project as a Soviet system.

Human society has always been arranged in such a way that the elite had a notorious advantage over the people in the form of special rights and special property that allows you to automatically pump the money earned by the people in the elite pocket. At the same time were members of the elite who pay this Freestuff capital for the benefit of society, developing the economy, science, transport, etc., but nothing prevented the rest of the lead investor to live simply inherited prozhiraya easily national wealth. Nothing would do well to use as a private property right to the detriment of society, for example, overlapping access to the river or in the woods on the land ownership rights, falsification of food, food prices inflation during the famine, buying up patents, etc. Nothing prevented the capitalist fool, building unneeded factories, hotels, shops and other, and then broke. All this is described by Marxists in terms of private property, capital, exploitation, classes, socio-economic formations, the crisis of capitalism.

The essence of the Soviet Union that it was an attempt for the first time in the history of mankind to build a society where self-interest was subordinated to the public, which was eliminated the possibility the exploitation of man by man. Operation tool has been eliminated - private ownership of the means of production, land, subsoil. These assets come from society itself to manage in the face of the state or cooperatives. All that is usually remembered as the inhabitants of the USSR advantages - only the result.

Since the class was gone, pumping out its consumption of a huge proportion of the national wealth, the wealth so far in the hands of society has increased dramatically, even without an increase in productivity. Therefore, a poor Soviet 1930s. I could afford free education and health care, and a rich Russian with difficulty drags the remnants of the Soviet legacy.

As society nationalized capital, so far made ​​it easier to manage the available capital, organizing the construction of the most pressing factories, develop science, to invest in long-term projects. As society nationalized the international trade in so far as it could effectively manage all currency in the interests of the whole society. The world drug mafia hung with anger, not knowing as much as possible in the Soviet Union to supply the drugs if they receive no way to gain currency.

Since the missing factor of personal use, so far has risen sharply the labor status of the person, instantly vanished, unemployment, society quietly and calmly to ensure that migrant normal working day, sickness allowances, mothers, invalids, old age pension, holiday to relax, improve education, child care, safety equipment, clothing, etc. Just disappeared stratum of people who are interested to grab the funds to increase its rate of return.

Without all these hereditary buns and preferences in the form of capital, ownership of land and mineral resources, vast real estate citizens for the first time in history in fact, become equal to the opportunities afforded to them by society . The leaders of the state does not become sons and wives of presidents, and people from peasant and working-class families. Social elevator opened as wide as never before in history. Thing of the past patriarchal family, women and young people gained their freedom to choose their own path in life, given the right to love without property, national restrictions.

Any citizen of the USSR are guaranteed the basic right to housing, to work, to rest, to education, medical treatment, for safety. Therefore, the most low-wage workers felt free of personal dependence. Western problem of sexual harassment at work in the USSR seemed ridiculous - Soviet woman in a similar situation could through the support of the trade union or party committee crush career chief, in an extreme case, just change jobs at least paid and prestigious.

As a citizen of every opportunity for an honest life were provided and labor, to the extent in society sharply diminished soil for crime and conflict.

There was no need to steal for the sake of the sick child, the woman did not have to sell their bodies did not need to Caucasians or a Tajik leave the family and his native village to come in large numbers to Moscow or other any Russian city. Because there was a man with a large amount of capital, so far there was no one buy Soviet official and the Soviet journalist, a Soviet judge, etc. Soviet official could also be lazy and stupid samodurstvovat could have somewhere to steal and economize, but he had no other host other than their own people. Therefore, the Soviet cop did not know that such a club. Therefore, a serious investigation was conducted on the complaint of any citizen. Therefore, the Soviet judge had not watched any of the participants of the process thicker wallet. Therefore Soviet journalist wrote about the lives of citizens, and not naked ass next film star. In summary, I would like young people to realize here that systemic Soviet project, its advantages for the majority and disadvantages for minorities were not accidental, and not fallen divine grace from heaven. They were winning in brutal civil war with private capital and private interest. The victory in this war will never in the Soviet Union was not final as soon as the Soviet society itself felt complacent - it is immediately lost.

However, losing to the USSR breached the ideology of bourgeois society. Human labor was already free and respected and it will not be forgotten. Society will never forget that he was able to put under control the private interest. The state, too, will always be a choice of whom you will serve, his nation or oligarchy. The struggle of public and private will be continued, and every day we can see in the news of victory and defeat of the society in this fight. I'm not crying about the Soviet Union, I pay tribute to him their respect. I know that the Soviet project of return and liberate the entire world.

Http://historian30h.livejournal.com/4447 02.html - Zinc

Google Translator

This shines through Google's muddle.

This shines through Google's muddle.

Yeah, even I got it! Thgis is really hard for Americans to grok. Life, for the average person, was really good in the USSR. "But they had no freedoms!" How far from reality is the average US citizen...what will it take?

Meet the People of Transnistria, a Stuck-in-Time Soviet Country That Doesn’t Exist

TRANSNISTRIA IS A thin strip of land wedged between Moldova and Ukraine. It is home to more than 500,000 people and has a parliamentary government, a standing army, and its own currency. It has all the trappings of an independent nation—but isn’t.

Oh sure, it declared independence from Moldova in 1990 and fought a war two years later. And it’s got a constitution and a flag and even a coat of arms. But you won’t find it on many maps, and not a single member of the United Nations recognizes its existence.

But the people of Transnistria do not care. They cling tenaciously to a claim of statehood and their love for all things Russian.

“It’s quite tragic, really,” says Justin Barton, a British photographer who visited the countr…. er, autonomous territorial unit last year for his series The Transnistrian Patriot. “There are a lot of people who are very patriotic, but there are also a lot of other people just caught in the situation. And they’re amazingly isolated,” he says.

It all started in 1990, when Moldova broke away from the Soviet Union. Transnistria was home to many Russians and Russian speakers who felt political and cultural isolation in the new republic. They declared independence, hoping to establish a socialist republic and remain part of the Soviet Union. A war ensued, which ended in a ceasefire nearly two years later. The Soviet Union had crumbled by then, and the conflict never fully resolved even though Moldova granted Transnistria a measure of autonomy.

To all outward appearances, Transnistria is a sovereign state, albeit one that skews Soviet. Its flag includes the hammer and sickle and often flies alongside Russian flags. The Transnistrian ruble bears the images of Russian figures like the Gen. Alexander Suvorov and Catherine the Great. An enormous statue of Lenin guards the entrance to the Supreme Soviet, its parliament building. Pictures of Stalin and Putin are almost as ubiquitous as those of Transnistrian president Yevgeny Shevchuk.

http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ttp_05-289x361.jpg
Natalia Yefremova, seller of Transnistrian patriotic items in Tiraspol. JUSTIN BARTON
In return, Russia provides free gas and supplements residents’ pensions. It also provides more than 1,000 troops, to the consternation of those in Ukraine. Still, Russia has not formally recognized the breakaway state, and does not appear inclined to. Nor does Moldova. This does not bode well. “Despite Transnistria declaring its own independence, it will not achieve it, unless Moldova decides to recognize it—an unlikely scenario,” says Thomas de Waal, a British journalist and an expert on Eastern Europe. “The most likely future is either more of the same—an unrecognized status and shadowy semi-statehood, or a confederation agreement with Moldova.”

Barton became interested in Transnistria in 2014 while working in Ukraine. He heard that Transnistria was producing new plastic currency with colorful coins in different shapes. His interest piqued, Barton read all he could about the topic and decided to visit Transnistria and photograph its residents. It required a month of pleading with the Transnistrian KGB, which runs security, before Barton was cleared to photograph top officials. It helped that his wife is Russian and he had an especially well-connected fixer.

He spent a little more than two weeks there over the course of two trips. Many of the people Barton photographed were intensely patriotic, though he couldn’t always parse their political views. In Tiraspol, he found Natalia Yefremova and her small trinket shop. It sells busts of Stalin and busts of Putin, and it wasn’t clear whether she favored communist or capitalist Russia. Barton also photographed Igor Nebeygolova, a colonel in the KGB and commander of the Cossack regiment in Tiraspol. A huge flag from Russia’s imperial era adorned the wall of his office, along with Soviet and Transnistrian flags. “His loyalties seemed deeply split,” Barton says. “Everything he had was a symbol of one thing or another.”

Barton photographed some 20 people in all. He used a Nikon D810 and favored wider shots that emphasize the environment as much as the person. “You can find out a great deal about a place and, in particular, a mental space [that way],” he says.

It’s impossible to escape the sense of melancholy that pervades the series. It isn’t easy being stateless, and not everyone is optimistic about Transnistria’s future. Anastasia Spatar, who is 23 and has never traveled beyond Transnistria, showed great sadness when Barton asked her to think about her homeland. “[She said] she might burst into tears,” he says.

Barton found the experience as surreal as the country that isn’t. He recalls a conversation he had with a local of Transnistria he met while exploring Tiraspol. “Welcome to nowhere,” he told Barton.

http://www.wired.com/2016/03/meet-people-transnistria-stuck-time-soviet-country-doesnt-exist/

This story says more than it means to and it ain't what the author had in mind.

Entering the path of anti-Soviet, you certainly will come to the blatant Russophobia
colonelcassad
17 March, 13:06

http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/2661538.html

Great interview director Vladimir Menshov of modern intellectuals, liberalism, Russophobia and anti-Soviet discourse in the film.

"We need to understand what the people want"

- What are the factors of modern social life can get you off balance?

- The most annoying moments associated with the way the story is presented in our country of the twentieth century. To this one might have to get used to, but I did not get. I can not take officially triumphant glance at the history of the USSR, which is aggressively trying to introduce into the minds of the younger generation. Communication with those who shaped modern textbooks and television, often simply dumbfounded. The new generation is based in his opinions on the anti-Soviet officialdom, not familiar with an alternative look at the past and, therefore, unable to develop its own position.
If a movie or TV show anything about the Soviet Union, almost one hundred percent probability it is a falsification of history. We are convinced that life in the Soviet Union was hopeless, try to ensure that this idea has penetrated every cell in the public consciousness.
The West has long been a stereotype of thinking in relation to Russia, he skillfully formed deliberately. Their highbrow intellectuals can still operate with opposing concepts, but Western man in the street is in the absolute power of the anti-Soviet myth.
Here, for example, I saw the movie BBC «Who Killed Stalin?". Level experts sovietologists, peremptory assessments primitive wording initially produced a comic effect. But the course of action when the Russian actors depicting the "inner circle" - high-ranking Soviet politicians - started uncontrollably drunk, fall muzzles salad, turn into beasts, and drunken Stalin looked with a sarcastic smile on the orgy, the film was just an insult to our country ... But it is almost the same, in some adapted form, I see in the Russian movies!
most recently, with some pride, we presented the French film "the Concert". On our side, good actors involved, and before the premiere, they were told that he had received such a warm comic strip ... What do you mean, you guys look at it through the eyes of an ordinary Frenchman, who came to the cinema! What are the conclusions he comes out? .. It turns out, in the Brezhnev era, in the early '80s, the conductor of the Bolshoi Theater suffered for refusing to dismiss the orchestra all the Jews. He himself was fired, and the Jews were killed in Siberian camps. Only a little girl noble Frenchmen were taken to the West in the case of the double bass ... and my colleagues agree to play in the film and did not feel any sense of shame!
Even if all this nonsense was true, surely it would be necessary to participate? Maybe it's time to learn from the Europeans, which we always offer as a model of dignity and honor? Germans, for example, you are on a conversation not pull out of the war, there almost every skeleton in the closet hid grandfather, who fought on the Eastern Front. And try to touch on the shameful behavior of the French during World War II. As far as I know, there were directors who were trying to make a movie about collaborating, for which suffered brutal ostracism. In France, they say only of the resistance that even de Gaulle recognized only good propaganda myth. The Germans, in any case, were surprised to see on the signing of the surrender of the French as winners ... Try to talk to the British on how basely they pulled with the opening of a second front, waited for us with the Germans harassed each other.
Try to talk to Romanians and Hungarians who fought on the Nazi side, with the Czechs, who have made ​​at its plants, two of the three tanks of the German Army ... They are all cleverly ignore the shameful pages of its history, and will not allow anyone to raise these issues.
Self-flagellation always been inherent in the Russian mentality and especially it has blossomed with the beginning of perestroika. Any attempt to discredit the heroic pages of our history has been regarded as a contribution to the fight with the hated communist regime. It penetrated into the pores of our society, it has become commonplace. Then it will be very difficult to root out all-out anti-Soviet, which has found a strong root system, but to do so, of course, will have twenty-five years. We can not exist in a situation of utter historical injustice.
Program "Court time" became very indicative in this respect. Finally, in the public space able to hear the position opposite to the anti-Soviet. Concepts that after the 17th of the year in Russian history nothing good happened, were countered by strong, balanced counter. And of course, just hit the audience voting.

- Despite the flow of anti-Soviet in the media, it is the ratio of - ninety-ten. What do you connect?

- I can not explain it. I know that the results produced deafening impression on liberal intellectuals ... It would seem that the final figures to juggle, to offer something neutral - 48 to 52 (as it did in the studio, where debates were). But when switched on counting of votes in the country, the result does not coincide totally with the studio. Whether it is not realized in time, whether the organizers of the project have shown integrity.
The result was surprising also because it does not correspond to the results of any elections in our country. I do not believe that the election is a mass manipulation - then there is a reason for which the televoting reveals explicit support for socialist ideas, and real elections this does not happen. In general, I think it is very important to carry out profound sociological studies, spend a a lot of money and determine the condition of the our society. It is necessary to understand what the people want, what their preferences and discontent. After all, since Gorbachev, we learned a lot and a lot of variables their views.

- Your film is called "popular", and you - "national director". Did you know about the people something they do not know the rest ..?

- This is a very important topic for me. I remember that in his youth I was impressed with the idea, and I even wrote it: "The crowd - it's not the people, Pushkin - the people." Well, it sounds impressive. And now I think: why is it that the crowd, the masses refuse a manifestation of the national mentality? And because Pushkin and the genius that he was able most clearly and powerfully express the spirit of the people. While unjustly I wrote about a Russian revolt senseless and merciless. Ruthless - of course, but - is meaningless ... I'm much more impressed with the Bloc's position, which is in the riots, rebellions, revolutions seen mixing historical of accounts, a sudden spring straightening compresses for decades or even centuries. Arguing about people inevitably come in the area of fuzzy concepts, laws that can not be formulated. Yet implicitly understand that somehow everything that happens is filtered around the masses and crystallized beliefs and mythological representations. Gradually, the views, take a stable form - with respect to some of the ruler, the entire historical period or a specific event. On the surface of the social process can seethe disputes boil passions, but in parallel somewhere in the depths of the crystal forms - unshakable point of view, which is not affected. This process applies to all - including art. What I have seen in my life ephemeral, which hardly appeared, received the status netlenki. Sometimes classics appointed from above, but more often bottom arose a whisper: it must be seen, it is necessary to hear, it is necessary to read! Time passed, and genius became a capable guys, new bosses ... methodically, quietly Time and people have done their job.

- Crystallizing result always seems to you just?

- It's already out of the moral and subjective evaluations, it's like the laws of nature ... At the time, I read in the memoirs of the wife of Robert Rozhdestvensky, like all life butting each other Yevtushenko and Voznesensky, not humorous, but quite seriously, proving his own right to be considered the best Russian poet of the second half of the twentieth century. And just burned her resume on this subject: "But it turned out - Vysotsky ..." Exactly like Mayakovsky in "Conversation with fininspektorom poetry": "... These now verses and odes to the applause roar revmya, go down in history as the overhead made us - two or three ... "

- For your pictures crystallization occurred. Do you agree?

- "Love and Pigeons" undoubtedly became a folk painting, it is accepted by all social groups, it brings even the communists and liberals. The most interesting story of the "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears", which would seem to belong to his time. In it are included the realities of a bygone era, is not quite clear the current young people, but in a strange way the film is transformed into a matrix not only Soviet, but also a Russian national life.
But the picture is born, they say, from the breeze, was not the result of a -That serious preparation. At this time I was more interested in the movie social, political. More VGIK I wrote the script of the film "is required to prove" with the subtitle: "Based on the book of Lenin's" Children's leftism disease in communism. " When he read my teacher Mikhail Romm, he invited me to his home, closed the office door and said: "Vladimir, if you want to prove you're a person capable and even a talented, then you do it. But in a scenario not show anyone else to avoid serious trouble. " It is this upset me, because no anti-Soviet intentions I did not. The script came polemic, but then the "Children's Disease of Communism" highly polemical. It was written in connection with the Brest peace, it contains the arguments "for" and "against", which are then discussed in party circles. In fact, after all, the whole Party and the Central Committee did not accept the idea of the Brest peace, but Lenin was a rock ...
I was interested in this conflict, but then realized it was impossible to such material. Maximum polemical, which allows - it plays Shatrova. It seemed then unusually bold, today they look naive, but in the late 60's it "Bolsheviks" in the "Contemporary" became my strongest theatrical experience - outstanding direction of Ephraim, excellent acting work ... Scenario "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" by comparison global's plan seemed too small, uninteresting, toothless. But it made ​​me remember the biography of friends, relatives, workers episodes of his life (after school between going to college, I worked in a factory, mine). Incidentally fell notebooks I started a while back, I wrote down some phrases, expressions, successful acute. Fortunately, the working class was not for me that zhlobskie hostile community, which some are trying to portray intelligenstvuyuschie directors. According to the modern cinema, the working class - it's something deeply marginalized, wild drinking, not burdened by intellect. So are those who stand at the bench, cooks steel, collects bread ... And I loved these people, I began to understand them, appreciate their humor ...
Who reign kaveenovskie jokes, and we have forgotten the real Russian humor, and it's an amazing phenomenon. Its important feature is the self-irony. Russian humor is largely directed at himself, and not on others ... When I did this film, no Napoleonic plans are not nurtured and above all, worried about anything - not to disgrace. For the "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" was my first "adult" painting after the "Rally". The spectator success was stunning and totally unexpected for me.

- Stand in bólshey queue than "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears", was not necessary.

- Even gaydaevskie movies were blocked in half to two times. And above all due to the multiple views. Some viewers have written to me that the film looked at 10-20 times ...
Now it is clear that already worked and the time factor, and crystallization factor. I see a picture of the people selected. While that nobody has promoted, was not lobbyists intellectuals, on the other hand, critics urged the audience: those who like painting - immature people who have no taste ...
Suppose it does not sound very modest, but it is these films - "Love and doves "," Moscow Does not believe in tears "- I will stay in the memory," and for a long time will be the kind I the people "... But it is clear, and the other," Shirley Myrli ", and especially" Envy of the gods ", made ​​much more professional hand, were not included the fund of the national cinema, not crystallized. It is disappointing, it has to be stated.

- With regard to "Shirley Myrli" you can bet ...

- Yes, I hope, can be, this picture is made ​​with a certain ahead of time and will work on it. There is a lively sense of humor, transferred timeless atmosphere, crazy farcical '90s, but still, this film is not entered into the national consciousness as something inherent needed. A "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" was included. Her characters have become almost family, link to them, quote them, they are present in people's lives, and even serve as an example. Vera Alentova offended that she had not the winning role in the first series of its heroine hides reprises the heroine Irina ants and in the second - appears Ghosh and pulls the blanket over himself. And I seem to have found the right formula: you have the role of fate, a life you will do ...
Then I did not understand earnest hatred of "Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears" by the elite intelligentsia. People simply could not find words to express the extent of his contempt for painting and cattle, which it looks. For me the nature of this hatred was opened much later. She was completely social. Sitting in the kitchen, intellectuals agreed among themselves that here "in this country", one can not live. I also actively participated in such conversations, but I was thinking how to alter life for the better!
Read Now memoirs apologists restructuring, those who can be considered the current winners and wonder: they simply shook with hatred of the country. They claim that the system did not accept, but through the line clearly discerned: they did not take Russia, did not take the nation, which is reconciled with social systems and ugly monster Stalin. Of course, they could not accept the picture that proves that you can live, you can make a career, you can just be happy.

- If you dissect a piece of art belonging to the national category, look inside, what it consists of a mechanism, how it works?

- This mysterious a process that can be explained only in hindsight.

- But the general criteria, generic signs of "nationality" should be. You can offer, such as a version - folk art comforts and inspires ...

- However, in the "Quiet Flows the Don", these components hardly present. And even in "War and Peace". Now it seems strange, but the first in this novel is not so much to see his nation as historical discrepancies. It seems that even Denis Davydov had noted shortcomings: some regiment actually not stationed there. But then on the "War and Peace" began to work during ...
On the Great Patriotic War are not many works that could be called a true folk. Few managed to penetrate into the heart of the phenomenon, to show what a people-winner. Tvardovsky failed. Of course, "Vasily Terkin" - is the pinnacle ... But you know, I'm reading in concerts Simon, he did not seem the biggest poet considered, but his war poetry so poignant! And not just a textbook, "Wait for me." The war went through his destiny intertwined with a love relationship with Valentin Serov ...
These hits have many, maybe in each poet's life there are unique matches with the pulse of life. In Gudzenko, for example, two poems just great: "We do not need to feel sorry for ..." and "When death go - sing ...". Two or three masterpieces have every poet belonging to the wartime generation ... But with the military prose more complicated ...

- But the popular movies about the Great Patriotic set. - Apparently, this genius of folk art is always in motion

- today it is in the literature, tomorrow music, later in the film. The first thing to remember, "Ballad of a Soldier" and "The Cranes Are Flying." However, the picture Kalatozova for my taste, somewhat mannered, although it was a breakthrough in terms of visual culture. There were films of the second tier, for example, "The Living and the Dead", a wonderful picture Orda "Do your threshold" ... Directors, who returned from the front, remember the smell of sweat, blood and gunpowder, could not lie, they do very present and strong film . The Great Patriotic war was the incredible feat of the Soviet people. It seems that this feat we led the whole thousand-year history of Russia, to the highest point in our lives - we do not want to win ... which could not take advantage. Already after some forty years we have failed state. This is the result of the victory?

.. Stalin had not raised their successors. It is widely known to the audience mostly in "Romance of Lovers". We were much conceived in the early 90s, but nothing, unfortunately, was never implemented ... As long as slowly and painfully come up with the story alone.

Http://goo.gl/eyI7NR - zinc

PS. In fact, precisely because of such views Menchov impressed as much more than most of his colleagues in the craft spitting competing in Soviet and Russian history.


http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/2661538.html

Google Translator

Sorry if the editing is off, GT was really bad with this one.

Analytical Center of the NKVD 2.0 | Analytics (16+)

Back in the USSR, or whether we are worthy of a great country? 20th anniversary of the return of the USSR dedicated.

# Avtorskie_stati @ immortalnkvd

Since signing the Belovezhskaya agreements passed for 24 years, for which the time to grow a whole generation of people for whom it has become a kind of abstract Soviet Union countries. However, for many millions of our countrymen and citizens of former Soviet republics of the USSR forever remain the homeland, a country in which they were born, spent his childhood and youth. Who gave the oath and who met his first love. USSR for these people (and this writer, too.) - The image of eternal youth of the country, paving the way for the future

Today, we talk about how we present that Powers worthy of whose image we have retained in memory and ... if we can go back in the past? and the first, the most sensitive issue: what are you, dear reader, who gave an oath, did when the country needs your help?

Where were you when the three criminals in the Bialowieza Forest was cut to the quick power? This writer asked this question to several military - from Special Forces Strategic Missile Forces, motorized infantry, pilots, tank crews. And always with the pain in his voice was the reply, "What could we do?"

. Could a lot. In your eyes there was Perestroika. Did you see what everything was. And you, you personally, dear readers, are the most powerful army in the world. You can enter the tanks in Moscow and arrest Gorbachev. You might bombed by Belarusian woods, literally wiping off the face of the earth Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich. But you did not, preferring to hide behind the "What could we do?"
. History is written by those who are not afraid to go against the usual flow of time. Traitors do it, so they then won.

The second question is - can you, my reader, to abandon Western consumer goods? Yes, do not change the cell phone every six months. Yes, and foreign car loan will not take only domestic Vesta. And choose from the 100,500 varieties of sausage you will not. And even forget about Antalya and hotels all inclusive. And not because the government will be a dictator, but because the West is afraid of the return of the Soviet Union. Afraid of the shit up in a cold sweat at night, when he dreams it. And you, dear reader, must understand that if the Western world is closed Iron Curtain, and the current sanctions against Russia seem flowers.

And the third question. In our memory saves the image of the ideal country. In which it was always clean, people are polite and happy childhood. But you, my dear reader, think and answer: you yourself, your family and friends will be able to comply with this bright image? Do not park on the lawn. Skip pedestrian, not because his uncle with a stick prescribe a penalty, but because it is a norm of behavior. Yes, and bribe him not to offer. And to the butt bins donesёsh and will not throw on the sidewalk. And yet a lot of these small issues. Here personally you, the reader, can it? Just answer honestly to yourself.

Because these seemingly small things and formed the image of the Soviet Union, as we remember him. Country of childhood and adolescence, the country is a dream, a country of great people and achievements. But with the collapse of the USSR, they have not disappeared. And the question arises: what happened to them as immediately stopped to believe the best? And do not put the blame on hard times. In the 20s and 40s it was harder, but people believed in the future, creating a great country. So why should you, the readers, have forgotten how to believe?

... 15 March 1996, the State Duma of the Russian Federation. The Communist Party, with the majority of votes shall decide IIGD-157, which has become a truly sensational. It is no coincidence he trying to forget. Let him take a look:
On the legal force for the Russian Federation - Russian USSR results of the referendum of 17 March 1991 on the preservation of the USSR

STATE DUMA
OF THE FEDERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DECREE


dated March 15, 1996 N 157-II

of the State Duma of the validity of the Russian Federation - Russian
results of the referendum of the USSR March 17, 1991
on the issue of preservation of the USSR

Confirming the aspiration of peoples of Russia to the economic and political integration with the peoples of states created on the territory of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, in response to numerous requests from the Russian Federation, taking into account the results of the Republic of Belarus referendum 14 May 1995, with a view to the reconstruction of the state unity of the peoples of the USSR in any mutually acceptable forms of the state Duma of the Federal Assembly decides:

1. Confirm the Russian Federation - Russian validity of the results of the referendum of the USSR on the preservation of the USSR, held in the territory of the RSFSR March 17, 1991

. 2. To note that officials of the RSFSR person who prepared, signed and ratified the decision on the dissolution of the USSR, grossly violated the will of the peoples of Russia to preserve the USSR, expressed in the referendum of the USSR March 17, 1991, and the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, proclaimed the aspiration of peoples of Russia to create a democratic state of law as part of the renewed Soviet Union.

3. Confirm that the Agreement on the establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States of 8 December 1991, signed by the President of the RSFSR Boris Yeltsin and the State Secretary of the RSFSR GE Burbulis and is not approved by the Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR the supreme organ of state power, has not had and does not have void in the part related to the termination of the existence of the USSR.

4. To proceed from the fact that the interstate and intergovernmental agreements on political, economic, defense and other issues, the prisoners in the framework of the Agreement on the establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States, remain in force for the concluded their countries to their free and voluntary decision on the re-establishment of a single state or to their solutions the termination of the said agreements.

5. Propose to the Government of the Russian Federation to take the necessary measures to preserve a common economic, political and information environment, the development and strengthening of integration ties of states created on the territory of the USSR.

6. Deputation of the State Duma of the Interparliamentary Assembly of States - members of the Commonwealth of Independent States Inter-Parliamentary Assembly contribute to making an effective instrument of integration and cooperation among States, established in the territory of the USSR.

7. The State Duma Committee to develop and submit to the State Duma Council a package of measures to eliminate the consequences of the collapse of the USSR, especially in relation to Soviet citizens still do not have defined their nationality.

Federal Assembly State Duma Chairman Seleznyov

Moscow
March 15, 1996 year
N 157-II DG

If interpreted literally document, paragraph 3 states directly that the USSR and the Russian equivalent of the concept. This same author confirmed and lawyers, to whom he turned for clarification of this point. It is no coincidence in those spring days the noise was raised in the press and tried to forget about the document. But it did not work, and it is from time to time continue to emerge. Despite the fact that the decision of the State Duma are not of higher legal force, the situation with this document is unique - it is based on the referendum citizens of the USSR, so we can safely say that no decisions have no force in regard to this document. Moreover, if we consider the Soviet Union exist de jure, its legislation remains in force. In principle, any citizen of Russia on the basis of this Decree, shall be entitled to disassemble the case under Soviet law. Another question is whether such a hearing is delayed.

http://cs629525.vk.me/v629525558/468de/pqtWMzeUxX4.jpg

Thus, the Soviet Union alive. And now the time has come for each of us to answer the question of the title of the article: "Are we worthy of the Soviet Union?".

http://vk.com/wall-64029906_182662

Google Translator

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cdw0OcGVIAEq2dY.jpg

just sayin....