2 carnations to Comrade Stalin. 03/05/2023
March 5, 13:38
As part of the traditional action "2 Carnations to Comrade Stalin" on the 70th anniversary of Stalin's death, 6,400 scarlet carnations were laid at the grave of the father of nations near the Kremlin wall.
http://stalinizator.ru/2gvozdiki-26/# - zinc (a more detailed photo report will be posted there)
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8203621.html
“Stalin is all of us, and no one individually”
March 5, 9:18 am
“Stalin is all of us, and no one individually”
Tomorrow (or rather today) is the 70th anniversary of the death of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, about which a significant part of bloggers and journalists will definitely speak out, one way or another, positively or negatively. Maybe I'll speak up too.
The fact is that in Karelia I am often called a “Stalinist”, especially after the publication of my book about Sandarmokh. I remember that at its presentation, one journalist who fled to Norway after the start of the SVO asked: “Tell me, are you a Stalinist?” It seemed to him that this question was with some kind of cunning overtones, they say, I now have to confess to something bad. Prior to this, a still young, but already reeking of mothballs from the 90s, a person clearly did not realize that if more than half of Russians positively assess the role of Stalin in our history, then there is nothing wrong with this word ... Well, okay.
The results of one of the opinion polls. From open sources.
Although I do remember those times when a few kind words in defense of Stalin, spoken publicly, automatically brought a person into the number of "outcasts." When Zyuganov, in an interview with the media, said phrases like “We officially recorded in our documents that there was a congress that condemned the 20th congress, that we agree with it. That we vow not to repeat and that we must move forward.” Why is there Zyuganov, earlier even Nina Andreeva in her famous article, just in case, had to make a reservation: “I will immediately note that neither I nor my family members have anything to do with Stalin, his entourage, close associates, exalters.”
Now the picture is completely different. In the name of Stalin, pro-government propagandists, even deputies from United Russia, hide behind. And how many self-proclaimed gurus on the Internet, under the guise of the name of Joseph Vissarionovich, are carrying nonsense and nonsense!
So, in the understanding of the latter, I am definitely not a Stalinist. Because I do not consider Joseph Vissarionovich a celestial who cannot be criticized, nor a super-computer who could not make mistakes. Moreover, from the point of view of Marxism, it should be perfectly clear that all the achievements of that era, as well as failures, cannot be attributed exclusively to him. I already wrote that the whole history of that time was created not by the “totalitarian” leadership, but by millions of active people. Very often illiterate, with their own ideas about how to do it right, with their own interests, often selfish or even selfish. Many of them went through more than one war and were afraid of little. And all this - on the territory of the former peripheral empire, the multinational Empire.
On this path, there could not be "jambs"! And the Stalin era itself was not a paradise on earth. Read the newspapers of that time, there is so much criticism and self-criticism ...
However, this not only does not detract from the achievements of Stalin and the entire Bolshevik Party, but rather emphasizes them. To create a superpower on such a base, under such conditions, is something really fantastic. The country made an unprecedented leap forward in all respects - in social, economic, cultural ... Moreover, this success was so stunning and obvious to the then inhabitants of the entire planet that Russia became an example for many peoples. They just forgot about it now.
At the head of this process was one person, Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin. So much has already been said about him that I will not repeat myself. Except for one thesis - he, like any person, could make mistakes and had the right to make mistakes. And his actions as a politician could not in all cases look ideal from the point of view of abstract morality and abstract humanism. Also, I will not focus on ideology, on the fact that for all leftists and communists there is simply no other experience of socialist construction, except for the seventy-year path of the Soviet Union. And the left idea can only be developed on the basis of his heritage, of colossal social progress, the significance of which is only becoming clear now. I think this is understandable.
I will dwell on only one aspect of my "Stalinism". And for his understanding, I will retell an episode of one modern film about Stalin's son Yakov Dzhugashvili. The actors could have played him better, but that doesn't matter now. War. 1941, a dialogue somewhere in a trench:
- I'm not Stalin, I'm Dzhugashvili ... And in general, my father once told me that even he was not Stalin!
- How is he not Stalin? Who is Stalin then?
- Stalin is people's faith in a just person. So my father once told me ... Stalin is and no one individually, as you don’t understand, it’s all of us, and no one individually ... -
You are talking wisely, comrade senior lieutenant ...
It seems to me that in this episode, which repeats the well-known apocryphal story about the son of Vasily and the portrait, the essence is captured quite correctly. And for me, the historical defense of Stalin is the defense not only of him personally, but of millions of people who lived in that era, including my own ancestors. Who honestly worked, fought, raised children and built a new life. Because they believed. And enjoy that life!
And then some deceitful and thieving scumbags decided to declare this entire era "criminal", and, accordingly, their "accomplices".
Of course, they will immediately remind you of repressions. Yes, they were, and there were innocent ones too. But let me remind you the conclusion made by Viktor Zemskov: “97.5% of the population of the USSR under Stalin was not subjected to political repression in any form.” At the same time, the scientist considered a broad interpretation of the concept of "repressed", including in it the deported, dispossessed, subjected to "purges" for social reasons, etc. That is, the dispossessed Yeltsin family is included in these statistics, although its head later was a petty boss, and his son entered the Polytechnic Institute. Instead of twisting the tails of their own cows.
I already wrote that many people believe that their ancestors were "dispossessed" only because they voluntarily or not really had to join the collective farm. Although, what has changed from this in their lives? At first they both worked and continued to engage in peasant labor. (More details - ABOUT ZULEIKHA, DEKULAKIZATION AND THREE COWS).
Thanks to collectivization, many millions of Russian people abandoned the hard and hopeless village life. It is a pity that there are no statistics at hand on how many people from the people, from workers and peasants, having received a secondary and higher education, have become engineers, doctors, teachers, technicians, professors, officers, officials, scientists. Yes, and in the countryside, young people became mechanics, agronomists, worked in clubs, medical centers, machine and tractor stations. The new life was much more interesting than the old one.
My family in the early 1920s was a family of poor Karelian peasants. In 1953, the social status of its members was described by the words: electrical technician, officer, teacher, accountant. By the way, there were two teachers.
But if an order of magnitude more people won, then why should we look at the history of the Stalin era solely from the point of view of a few percent of the population? And most importantly, why is this point of view being imposed on us with totalitarian persistence?
True, it turned out that many children of these people who took place under Stalin looked at the world with different eyes, they had different criteria. They wanted to become "their nobility". Therefore, in the late 80s, contempt for the "ball" was imposed on many of them. But the “Sharikovs” or “Lenin's cooks” were for the most part their own grandparents. (More details: HAPPY BIRTHDAY COOK! WHAT? LENINSKAYA!). However, anti-Stalinist propaganda went further. In the book about Sandarmokh, I wrote that in many discussions about the events of the 1920s and 30s, the simple idea is put into the minds of people that in those years the very “best” were repressed. Consequently, the “worst” remained to live. An excellent example of this approach is the popular, in a certain environment, rhyme of a certain citizen Kokhanovsky:
First they beat the most well-born,
Then the most hard-working people were shot,
Then the rows of senselessly killed
rose from the thousands of the most silent ones.
Among the latter are all intellectuals,
Guardians of dignity and honor...
Maybe someone does not understand, but it is directly stated here that all your ancestors, grandfathers and great-grandfathers, if they were not shot under Stalin, are not hard-working intellectuals, but simply silent lazy, in addition, without dignity and honor. Of course - not well-born, just some kind of cattle.
And these miserable verses that offend the vast majority of our people are gaining thousands of likes on social networks! Approximately the same is stated by the writer Lyudmila Ulitskaya: “The white army left Russia in the twentieth year ... The most educated, most honest, unwilling to compromise with the Bolshevik government ... People leave and take their genes with them. They are withdrawn from the gene pool ... And what qualities contributed to survival? Caution. Stealth. The capacity for hypocrisy. moral flexibility. Lack of self-esteem. In general, any bright quality made a person noticeable and immediately put him under attack. The gray, average, three-year-old, so to speak, found himself in an advantageous position ... And now, taking into account all these factors, it is possible to build a map of the gene pool of the Soviet people that have a place to be.
But there are enough such comments about the “spoiled gene pool”! Although the use of the words "gene pool" in relation to society, the explanation of everything by some "genes" is a fairly accurate marker of fascist views. Since the Enlightenment, normal people have a different view of the essence of man. After all, no one can change their genes. And what to do with the people whose "genes are spoiled"? The answer is known. That is, here, in the face of anti-Stalinism, we are dealing with ordinary fascism. liberal fascism.
Therefore, for me, to be a "Stalinist" is to be against fascism in any form. To be a "Stalinist" is to respect the history of one's country and its great achievements. To be a "Stalinist" is to honor the memory of your ancestors and not betray it. Something like that.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8202995.html
Google Translator