Military Review

Russian intelligentsia against the "kingdom of darkness"

135
Intelligentsia


The intelligentsia in Russia, like the main part of the ruling elite and the educated part of the population, was liberal, pro-Western. She was raised on Western ideas. Some admired liberalism and democracy, others - socialism (Marxism). As a result, the mass of the intelligentsia (there were also traditionalists, “soil scientists”, late Slavophiles) played a destructive and at the same time, like other revolutionary troops, suicidal role.

The intelligentsia in Russia was also a kind of “separate people” who, on the one hand, hated tsarism, criticized its vices, on the other hand, “sang for the people” and dreamed of instilling European orders in Russia. It was a kind of social schizophrenia: the intelligentsia believed that it was protecting the interests of the common people and at the same time was terribly far from them. The device of the western countries was considered as an ideal, from there they took political programs, ideology, utopias. This explains why the Russian intelligentsia was present practically in the ranks of all the parties of forces that took part in the revolution. The intelligentsia was the basis of the liberal-bourgeois parties — the Cadets and Octobrists, and the radical revolutionary — the Social Revolutionaries, the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks. Common to these forces was the rejection of the Russian socio-political system (tsarism, autocracy), which was expressed in common for all the slogan "Freedom!" Liberation! ”They wanted to eliminate all the historical“ restrictions ”. It is characteristic that appeared on the political scene at the turn of the XIX — XX centuries. the predecessor movements of both the Bolshevik and constitutional-democratic (Cadet) parties from the very beginning put this slogan at the forefront, calling themselves the "Alliance of the struggle for the liberation of the working class (headed by V.I. Lenin) and the" Union of Liberation "(I.I. Petrunkevich).

The liberals and revolutionaries in every way asserted about the hopeless "backwardness" of Russia, or even the dying of the country, which they explained as "unfit" for the economic, social, and - above all - the political system. Westerners shouted at the whole voice (and they controlled most of the press) that Russia, in comparison with the West, was “a desert and a kingdom of darkness”. True, after the 1917 disaster, some of them came to their senses, but it was too late. Among them, the well-known publicist, philosopher and cultural historian G. P. Fedotov (1886-1951), who joined the RSDLP in 1904, was arrested, was exiled, but then began to "rule". In the post-revolutionary period, he openly “repented”: “We did not want to bow to Russia ... Together with Vladimir Pecherin, we cursed Russia, with Marx hated her ... More recently, we believed that Russia was terribly poor in culture, some wild, virgin field. It was necessary for Tolstoy and Dostoevsky to become the teachers of humanity, for the pilgrims to stretch from the West to study Russian beauty, life, antiquity, music, and only then we looked around us. ”

True, even “having repented”, the former destroyers of “old Russia” believed that they would create “new Russia”. The same Fedotov declared: “We know, we remember. She was. Great Russia. And she will. But the people, in terrible and incomprehensible suffering, lost the memory of Russia - about themselves. Now she lives in us ... The birth of great Russia must be accomplished in us ... We demanded self-denial from Russia ... And Russia is dead. Redeeming sin ... we must reject disgust to the body, to the material state process. We will rebuild this body. ”

Thus, we see an amazing picture and a social disease of the Russian pro-Western intelligentsia. These same "we" (various fevralist-Westerners) destroyed the old Russia, and then after "killing" Russia with their help and support from the West, "looked around" and realized that they had lost a great country. And then they decided, already fleeing to the West, that only they had the knowledge to "resurrect Russia." Although the Russian communists managed without them, creating a new project and the Soviet civilization, which in the Stalin period absorbed all the best that was in imperial and Tsarist Russia. And from this rotten, pro-Western, liberal growth, the current Russian liberals and monarchists were born, such as State Duma deputy N. Poklonskaya, who glorify the orders of “old Russia”, curse the Soviet period and dream of “resurrecting Russia”, that is, “free” the remnants of Soviet heritage .

Only a small part of the intelligentsia belonged to the traditional conservatives, the “Black Hundreds”. True, among the right were the most far-sighted figures who warned the tsarist government about a deep crisis, and the dangers of participating in a big war in Europe and the inevitability of a social revolution with the current course. They are also the only ones to foresee the monstrous results of the revolutionary upheavals. However, the voice of the right was not heard, they remained on the sidelines of the political life of the capital, although in the years of the First Revolution 1905-1907. Black Hundreds had a massive social base. The government did not support the right and did not accept the reform program they had proposed. As a result, in 1917, the right were practically absent in the political field of Russia and could not resist the revolution.

In general, for almost all currents of the intelligentsia (except the traditionalists) was characterized by fascination with the West, its desire to force Russia into a part of the Western world. At the same time, the intelligentsia, even from the times of raznochintsy-populists, tried to "form" the people, instill in them the "right" ones, and eventually turn the Russians into the "right Europeans." Thus, the Russian intelligentsia for the most part was terribly far from the people, and even anti-people, because it wanted to recode the Russians into Europeans. Therefore, the Russian intelligentsia almost entirely supported the February revolution, rejoiced at the fall of the autocracy. Without even realizing that, as a result, the revolutionary chaos will destroy their former life, and a significant part of the intelligentsia will perish in the millstones of revolution or will have to flee the country. The intelligentsia was deeply convinced of its own and general prosperity in the coming new order, but miscalculated, showing its complete blindness.



International and Russian national bourgeoisie

Successful Russian businessmen, bankers and merchants believed that a radical change in the socio-political system would lead them to power, to unlimited possibilities, and financed anti-government parties (including the Bolsheviks).

The international (Petersburg) bourgeoisie, which included Russians, Germans, Jews, etc., like the ruling elite and intellectuals, was pro-Western in its essence. For the most part, it was part of the “elite” of the Russian Empire - financial and industrial, commercial, and also in the masonic lodges. Therefore, the bourgeoisie financed a coup aimed at directing Russia along the western path of development. They wanted to overthrow the king in order to gain real power and rule a new, bourgeois Russia. Following the example of France or the USA, where all real power resides with large owners, capitalists, bankers.

The Russian national bourgeoisie, which was formed on the basis of the Old Believers' world, had other motives. In Russia, the Romanovs, after the split, formed the world of the adherents of the old Russian Orthodoxy, and at the beginning of the 20th century they had a powerful social base - about 30 million people. The elite of the Old Believers were entrepreneurs who created capital not by financial speculation and ties with power, but by hard work, from generation to generation creating and accumulating wealth. The Morozovs, the Ryabushinskys, the Rakhmanovs, the Bakhrushins created their capital by stubborn and long labor, and controlled about half of the total industrial capital of Russia.

At the same time, the Old Believers hated the regime of the Romanovs. For them, they were persecutors of the holy faith, anti-christ, who split the church and the people, actively repressed the Old Believers for a long time, destroyed the patriarchate, made the church part of the state apparatus. Power planted the western abomination. Therefore, the world of Old Believers wanted to destroy the Romanovs Russia. The Old Believers and the Old Believers (the Russian national) bourgeoisie consistently opposed the authorities. Therefore, the Old Believers world supported the revolution. However, the revolution destroyed the huge Old Believers world, the whole parallel Russia.

To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
Smoot 1917 of the year

100 anniversary of the February Revolution
What ruined Tsarist Russia?
Nicholas II had no chance of retaining power.?
How Nicholas II abdicated the throne
"Russia plunged into the swamp of a dirty and bloody revolution"
The war for absolute power on the planet
135 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. avva2012
    avva2012 7 March 2017 06: 16 New
    +9
    However, the revolution also destroyed the huge Old Believer world, a whole parallel to Russia.

    Strongly said! The revolution, as I understand it, destroyed the servants of capital, and how else to explain what is registered in Russia today: the Russian Orthodox Old Believers Church, the Russian Old Orthodox Church, the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church and the Old Orthodox Old Pomeranian Church of Fedoseevsky consent? The ROCC, for example, has 12 dioceses of the ROCC and 7 bishops. According to the Ministry of Justice for the 2015 year, 184 religious organizations are registered and the 1 monastery operates. At the Metropolitanate in Moscow there is a Theological School, as well as a church-historical museum and a public library with a reading room. Outside of Russia, the Moscow Metropolis unites communities in the territory of the CIS countries, and also has dioceses abroad in Ukraine and in Moldova. This, I wonder, where did it all come from? Is the statement about the destroyed "parallel Russia" too loud?
    1. Vend
      Vend 7 March 2017 09: 03 New
      +4
      Liberals and revolutionaries insisted in every way about the hopeless "backwardness" of Russia, or even the dying of the country, which they attributed to the "worthless" economic, social and, above all, political system. Westerners shouted at the top of their voices (and they controlled most of the press) that Russia, in comparison with the West, was "a desert and a kingdom of darkness." True, after the disaster of 1917, some of them came to their senses, but it was too late.

      As I look now, the situation is no different from that. And the pro-Western liberals and the Reds will blow into the same pipe. Give them a revolution. Not ate after 1917? Do you want more blood? Turn on your head. For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.
      1. avva2012
        avva2012 7 March 2017 09: 20 New
        +4
        For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

        belay They that rose from the graves? Ended "white", a long time ago. They sleep peacefully, just like the "red" ones. If, however, you mean, as it’s fashionable to say now, “baklokhrustov”, then it is unclear what they generally advocate. Adherents of the sect, "what would happen if it weren’t, but it would be different."
        1. Vend
          Vend 7 March 2017 09: 37 New
          +4
          Quote: avva2012
          For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

          belay They that rose from the graves? Ended "white", a long time ago. They sleep peacefully, just like the "red" ones. If, however, you mean, as it’s fashionable to say now, “baklokhrustov”, then it is unclear what they generally advocate. Adherents of the sect, "what would happen if it weren’t, but it would be different."


          Well, those people who saw the 1917 year, there are about the same as there are from the red side. I had in mind children and grandchildren raised in the spirit of a white or red movement. What do the white movement do? Restore historical memory. Commemorative plaques, monuments. And the representatives of the red movement stand for revolution. Monuments and plaques are doused with black or red paint. Who engages in destructive activities?
          1. avva2012
            avva2012 7 March 2017 09: 49 New
            +5
            Quote: Wend What do the white movement do? Restore historical memory. Commemorative plaques, monuments. And the representatives of the red movement stand for revolution. Monuments and plaques are doused with black or red paint. Who engages in destructive activities?

            I repeat, there are no “whites,” everyone died, as did those who fought with them. Those whom you call "descendants" have the same relation to the "white" as the Communist Party to the "red" during the Civil War. At the expense of the boards. I am not an extremist, but I think that it’s impossible to ban the earth with all kinds of red, mannerheim and kolchaks. Paint should not be smeared with planks and monuments to these figures, they simply don’t need to be put up, but painted faces with indelible paint for those who advocate their installation so that everyone knows, here comes an accomplice of traitors and murderers. It will be more honest than fighting the dead.
            1. Weyland
              Weyland 7 March 2017 20: 48 New
              +2
              Quote: avva2012
              it’s impossible to ban the earth with all kinds of red, mannerheim and kolchach there.

              A Kolchak hi what did not please? For obvious reasons, he apparently did not cooperate with the Nazis ...
              1. avva2012
                avva2012 8 March 2017 14: 29 New
                +2
                In Siberia, they still remember him. He poured blood, without hesitation. hi
                1. Talgat
                  Talgat 9 March 2017 07: 47 New
                  +1
                  Kolchak was an anti-Russian Western project - it was not for nothing that people sang about it - English uniform, French epaulet, Japanese tobacco, Ruler of Omsk

                  The Bolsheviks at that moment were real representatives of the interests of Eurasia and tsarism - everyone already understands this - although they were against the tsar in words - but later, by the 1939 year, Stalin had defeated the alien and terribly bloody and cruel Trotskyist ideology, in effect, became the tsar and revived tsarist Russia and Golden The horde in a more popular and fair form of the post-war USSR -
                  1. Vend
                    Vend 9 March 2017 11: 22 New
                    0
                    Quote: Talgat
                    Kolchak was an anti-Russian Western project - it was not for nothing that people sang about it - English uniform, French epaulet, Japanese tobacco, Ruler of Omsk
                    The Bolsheviks at that moment were real representatives of the interests of Eurasia and tsarism - everyone already understands this - although they were against the tsar in words - but later, by the 1939 year, Stalin had defeated the alien and terribly bloody and cruel Trotskyist ideology, in effect, became the tsar and revived tsarist Russia and Golden The horde in a more popular and fair form of the post-war USSR -

                    Not the people sang, but the Bolsheviks came up with a ditty.
                    1. murriou
                      murriou 9 March 2017 11: 48 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Wend
                      the Bolsheviks came up with a ditty

                      Whoever invented, but the PEOPLE sang it, therefore such a memory remained.
                      And, by the way, they sang it precisely because it very accurately conveyed the essence of the “Supreme Ruler of Russia” and its short-lived regime.
                      1. Vend
                        Vend 13 March 2017 10: 30 New
                        0
                        Quote: murriou
                        Quote: Wend
                        the Bolsheviks came up with a ditty

                        Whoever invented, but the PEOPLE sang it, therefore such a memory remained.
                        And, by the way, they sang it precisely because it very accurately conveyed the essence of the “Supreme Ruler of Russia” and its short-lived regime.

                        Her people did not sing. This ditty was printed in a history school textbook. These images created the impression of nationality.
                2. Weyland
                  Weyland 9 March 2017 18: 26 New
                  0
                  Quote: avva2012
                  He poured blood, without hesitation

                  Really more than Trotsky? stop
                  For that matter, the Czechs who betrayed him am remember there even better!
                  1. avva2012
                    avva2012 10 March 2017 07: 18 New
                    0
                    Quote: Weyland Really more than Trotsky?
                    For that matter, the Czechs who betrayed him are remembered there even better!

                    Trotsky was exposed as a man giving orders for the destruction of civilians? Did not read, discard the link. You may ask, but Kolchak, did he give such orders? I will answer, there is criminal caseMost likely the network has, if not all, something you will find about a cocainist.
                    As for the Czechs. And let's begin to compare who was bloodier, Hitler, Koch, Goering or SS division "Galicia"? Forget about Hitler, and we will condemn only those who burned with the inhabitants of the village of the RSFSR and the BSSR, eh? Kolchak, a female dog, was called the Supreme Ruler of Russia and the Supreme Commander of the Russian Army! And, therefore, he is responsible for the actions of the Czechs, and for many other actions / crimes.
          2. ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH
            ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH 7 March 2017 10: 11 New
            +5
            Quote: Wend
            Who engages in destructive activities?

            In socialism, Shafarevich noted thanatophilia - an unconscious desire for death. Revolution is destruction, as the revolutionaries themselves claimed.
            1. V.ic
              V.ic 7 March 2017 11: 06 New
              +1
              Quote: ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH
              Shafarevich noted in socialism thanatophilia, an unconscious desire for death.

              ... sorry! But was Nekrasov a socialist? “Poet and citizen” “Go, and perish perfectly. You will die not for nothing, it’s solid, When the blood flows under it ...”
              1. Igor V
                Igor V 7 March 2017 14: 22 New
                +1
                Quote: V.ic
                Quote: ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH
                Shafarevich noted in socialism thanatophilia, an unconscious desire for death.

                ... sorry! But was Nekrasov a socialist? “Poet and citizen” “Go, and perish perfectly. You will die not for nothing, it’s solid, When the blood flows under it ...”

                You very much remembered N.A. Nekrasov. His work was the pillar on which all the revolutionary movements of Russia were built.
                1. Rastas
                  Rastas 7 March 2017 15: 35 New
                  +4
                  Not only Nekrasov, also Saltykov-Shchedrin, G. Uspensky, Reshetnikov, Korolenko also wrote quite revolutionary works. This can also be attributed to the late L. Tolstoy, who denied the right of private ownership of land, stood for the common ownership of land.
                  1. V.ic
                    V.ic 7 March 2017 15: 46 New
                    0
                    Quote: Rastas
                    denied private ownership of land, stood for common ownership of land

                    ... and if it is intelligible to formulate the ratio of "particular" / "general" in the works of L.N.T. you have indicated?
                2. V.ic
                  V.ic 7 March 2017 15: 43 New
                  0
                  Quote: Igor V
                  You very much remembered N.A. Nekrasov.

                  ... dear, and you, by the case of N.A. Nekrasov and N.G. Chernyshevsky, did not confuse you because of the incomplete completion of the course "Soviet literature"?
                  1. Igor V
                    Igor V 7 March 2017 22: 08 New
                    0
                    Here are those times! They could have blamed me for what, but not for "incomplete completion of the course .." By the way, how do both of these writers relate to Soviet literature?
                    Not everyone read Chernyshevsky (in the XNUMXth century, I mean), and Nekrasov was a folk poet who sowed a grain of doubt in young souls. And there are many examples of this, from Gorky to Gilyarovsky. "It would have to be more careful .."
          3. murriou
            murriou 8 March 2017 17: 44 New
            +3
            Quote: Wend
            What do the white movement do? Restore historical memory. Commemorative plaques, monuments.

            Moreover, all their memorial plaques are exclusively to traitors and executioners. Mannerheim, Kolchak, Wrangel, Krasnov ...
            1. Vend
              Vend 9 March 2017 11: 23 New
              0
              Quote: murriou
              Quote: Wend
              What do the white movement do? Restore historical memory. Commemorative plaques, monuments.

              Moreover, all their memorial plaques are exclusively to traitors and executioners. Mannerheim, Kolchak, Wrangel, Krasnov ...

              And whom did they betray? They fought for Russia, which was important and important to them.
              1. murriou
                murriou 9 March 2017 11: 46 New
                +1
                Quote: Wend
                They fought for Russia, which was important and important to them.

                Especially Mannerheim, which exterminated all Russians, both red and white.
                Especially Kolchak, who in the first rows changed his oath to the monarch, a subject of the British crown and the executioner of the Siberians.
                Especially Wrangel, who traded Russia with the British and French.
                Especially Krasnov, who served Hitler against Russia: "May the Lord help German weapons and Hitler!"

                The bakery "patriots" are all as one such patriots ... laughing laughing laughing
                1. Weyland
                  Weyland 9 March 2017 18: 29 New
                  0
                  Quote: murriou
                  Especially Wrangel, who traded Russia with the British and French.

                  And what did he sell them? Evidence in the studio!
      2. Boris55
        Boris55 7 March 2017 09: 37 New
        +2
        Quote: Wend
        For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

        They are already in power, and bees against honey do not like revolutions.
        1. Vend
          Vend 7 March 2017 09: 38 New
          +3
          Quote: Boris55
          Quote: Wend
          For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

          They are already in power, and bees against honey do not like revolutions.

          Yes you? Remember the February revolution.
          1. Boris55
            Boris55 7 March 2017 10: 00 New
            +4
            Quote: Wend
            Yes you? Remember the February revolution.

            Bulgakov wrote well about libiroids of that time and is displayed in the film:

            The Libergoids, represented by Professor Priobrazhenskog, decided to make a man out of the dark people, Sharikov, but giving the Sharikov only negative information, they received a senseless and merciless rebellion that they themselves fell into the rink of.
            See how they happily clap their hands at the beginning and how they froze in mournful silence at the end ...
            Liberoids are not able to give people the fullness of information since for them it is like death - they will lose the ability to parasitize on the people.
            1. Vend
              Vend 7 March 2017 10: 08 New
              +3
              Quote: Boris55
              Quote: Wend
              Yes you? Remember the February revolution.

              Bulgakov wrote well about libiroids of that time and is displayed in the film:
              The Libergoids, represented by Professor Priobrazhenskog, decided to make a man out of the dark people, Sharikov, but giving the Sharikov only negative information, they received a senseless and merciless rebellion that they themselves fell into the rink of.
              See how they happily clap their hands at the beginning and how they froze in mournful silence at the end ...
              Liberoids are not able to give people the fullness of information since for them it is like death - they will lose the ability to parasitize on the people.

              And you look from the other side. There is a side of Schwonder and DOMCOM singing hymns.
              "The devastation is not in closets, but in the heads."
              Do not blame everything on the intelligentsia.
              1. Boris55
                Boris55 7 March 2017 10: 10 New
                +2
                Quote: Wend
                "The devastation is not in closets, but in the heads."

                And who were the populists who went to the people and stuffed this disruption into Sharikov’s heads?
                Quote: Wend
                Do not blame everything on the intelligentsia.

                Oh how! How to give a steer - it’s easy, but how to answer - so I'm not me and not my hut.
                The provision obliges, if the provision does not oblige, then it kills, first morally, and then physically.
                1. Vend
                  Vend 7 March 2017 10: 26 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Boris55
                  Quote: Wend
                  "The devastation is not in closets, but in the heads."

                  And who were the populists who went to the people and stuffed this disruption into Sharikov’s heads?
                  Quote: Wend
                  Do not blame everything on the intelligentsia.

                  Oh how! How to give a steer - it’s easy, but how to answer - so I'm not me and not my hut.
                  The provision obliges, if the provision does not oblige, then it kills, first morally, and then physically.

                  And where does the steering? No need to juggle. Not one intelligentsia is to blame. Without the common people of workers, peasants, no revolution would have been possible. Only a palace coup, and even that without the military can not be done. So the fault on all classes from the king to the last beggar. And as for the rule, the "Cook cannot manage the state", as if this would not be desirable. Qualification is not enough.
                  1. Boris55
                    Boris55 7 March 2017 10: 34 New
                    +7
                    Quote: Wend
                    Not one intelligentsia is to blame.

                    The intelligentsia is all those who rule the state, and if something happens in the state, then those who rule are to blame. The people of the state do not govern so that it is not necessary to blame it on the healthy.


                    Quote: Wend
                    "A cook cannot rule the state," as much as this is not wanted.

                    1. Vend
                      Vend 7 March 2017 10: 40 New
                      +4
                      Quote: Boris55
                      Quote: Wend
                      Not one intelligentsia is to blame.

                      The intelligentsia is all those who rule the state, and if something happens in the state, then those who rule are to blame. The people of the state do not govern in such a way that it is not necessary to blame it on the healthy.

                      Once again, once not heard. It is impossible to make a revolution without the support of the people. Maximum palace coup, and even then it needs the support of the military. Take any revolution in any country and in any century. Speaking of a sore head.
                      1. Boris55
                        Boris55 7 March 2017 10: 52 New
                        +3
                        Quote: Wend
                        It is impossible to make a revolution without the support of the people

                        "Until the idea has mastered the masses - it is dead"
                        All revolutions take place in the capitals. The outskirts take it for granted. Dissenters - are suppressed by force. Before the revolution takes place, it is being prepared in the minds, incl. and the heads of the people. This intelligentsia is leading this training, and how can it be considered that it has nothing to do with it? See Ukraine as a good example.
                        The slave-holding pyramid of power, by the principle of which all states are organized, initially implies the discontent of the exploited towards the exploiters.
              2. avva2012
                avva2012 7 March 2017 10: 36 New
                +3
                Quote: Wend There is a side of Schwonder and DOMCOM singing hymns.

                laughing For all that, while the house is warm, the sewage system works.
                And the professor is a typical intellectual. Re-read the book or watch the movie again. He speaks great. Good and sincere person. Well, only who can believe that an abortion is a minor, is that right? I'm not even talking about his arrogant attitude to the lives of ordinary people. The work is quite controversial, but not in vain so beloved by a certain circle of persons. Intellectuals (not intellectuals!), All are good in the kitchen for a glass of tea, the power to criticize. And, as it comes to business, they suddenly become champions of concentration camps, executions, and other delights / KOMUCH, the Provisional All-Russian Government in Omsk /. The fascist from Philip Filippovich smells a mile away. And, it’s Shvondery and DOMKOMs who just broke the ridge and broke the fascists.
                1. Vend
                  Vend 7 March 2017 10: 45 New
                  +3
                  Quote: avva2012
                  Quote: Wend There is a side of Schwonder and DOMCOM singing hymns.

                  laughing For all that, while the house is warm, the sewage system works.
                  And the professor is a typical intellectual. Re-read the book or watch the movie again. He speaks great. Good and sincere person. Well, only who can believe that an abortion is a minor, is that right? I'm not even talking about his arrogant attitude to the lives of ordinary people. The work is quite controversial, but not in vain so beloved by a certain circle of persons. Intellectuals (not intellectuals!), All are good in the kitchen for a glass of tea, the power to criticize. And, as it comes to business, they suddenly become champions of concentration camps, executions, and other delights / KOMUCH, the Provisional All-Russian Government in Omsk /. The fascist from Philip Filippovich smells a mile away. And, it’s Shvondery and DOMKOMs who just broke the ridge and broke the fascists.

                  You are a FANTASER. Shvonder just shot. And the intelligentsia fought no less on the fronts. Read about the intellectual blockade.
                  1. avva2012
                    avva2012 7 March 2017 11: 18 New
                    +3
                    Quote: Wend You are a FANTASER. Shvonder just shot. And the intelligentsia fought no less on the fronts. Read about the intellectual blockade.

                    They shot, that is, carried out the highest measure of social protection, the employees of the same NKVD by the decision of the Court, and not the chairmen of the DOMKOMs. The same employees of the NKVD, valiantly fought on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War. An intellectual is fundamentally different from an intellectual, although the words are similar. So, about those blockades that you are talking about, these are intellectuals, and intellectuals, these are those about whom Lev Gumilyov spoke.
                    1. Rivares
                      Rivares 7 March 2017 15: 56 New
                      +3
                      Quote: avva2012
                      Shot, i.e., enforced the highest measure of social protection, the employees of the same NKVD by decision of the Court

                      Forgot to mention in what time, what "court"))) Executions by the decision of triples and mass executions without trial, you are modestly silent.
                      1. avva2012
                        avva2012 7 March 2017 17: 48 New
                        +2
                        Rivares. Mass, is it 100 million? Outside judicial triplets were legal at that time. And what kind of mass are you talking about? You know, it feels like you, apart from the Light of the end of 80x, have not read anything. Inet, to help you. Read.
                2. Dart2027
                  Dart2027 7 March 2017 12: 14 New
                  +2
                  Quote: avva2012
                  Well, only who can believe that an abortion is a minor, is that right?

                  There is a detailed analysis of this topic.
                  http://nuk18.livejournal.com/98770.html
                3. Rivares
                  Rivares 7 March 2017 15: 52 New
                  +3
                  Quote: avva2012
                  Good and sincere person. Well, only someone can think that an abortion is done to a minor, that's right

                  And you ignored the second non-non-native part of the truth) How do you forgive me for a bullet to fly in, will you ask Schwonder to operate on you? All are good in their place, and mind you, the professor didn’t go headlong into power, he was doing his job.
                  1. avva2012
                    avva2012 7 March 2017 17: 54 New
                    +2
                    Rivares. I'm talking about abortion of a minor, ay, is the connection normal? It is also the concealment of a pedophile. That is, a criminal. Children are not at least if abstraction is not available? Or maybe your interest is only in that place in which you think the bullet flies?
                4. Rt-xnumx
                  Rt-xnumx 8 March 2017 12: 28 New
                  +2
                  avva2012
                  And, it’s Shvondery and DOMKOMs who just broke the ridge and broke the fascists.

                  Shvondery and DomKomi would commit somewhere.
                  "Breaking the ridge" to the Nazis from a secure rear somewhere in the headquarters of the political department.
                  1. avva2012
                    avva2012 8 March 2017 15: 22 New
                    +2
                    And Commissioner Klochkov in which rear was? And the order of the Nazis on the execution of commissars on the spot, why? I understand that it’s easier to think with cliches, but try to move away from them at least once, what’s new?
                    1. Rt-xnumx
                      Rt-xnumx 9 March 2017 19: 43 New
                      0
                      And Commissioner Klochkov was not in the rear, but in Russian. (by the way, he and I are from the same city).
                      I also understand that it is easier to think with red stamps.
                      But if you move away from the Sovetsky patterns, then the schwonders and the like did not break into the attack, preferring to heroize at a safe distance from the front line.
                      And Shvonder and the “revolutionaries” from DomCom 1937 of the year would not have survived, I suspect.
                      1. avva2012
                        avva2012 10 March 2017 07: 31 New
                        0
                        Quote: Rt-12 I also understand that it is easier to think with red stamps.

                        You, too, dug in from the grave belay ? Because, if, you are "white", then, apparently, you have returned from the next world. I repeat, no now, neither white nor red. Everyone died. For some reason, you do not want to admit the obvious that there would be no Bolsheviks, then we would not speak with you now. The end of Russia would come. Well oh well, this is pointless.
                        And Commissioner Klochkov was not in the rear, but in Russian.

                        That is, like you? Nude, Nude. Are you hinting at Goebels propaganda that the commissars are Jews? And, do you know that Hitlerism / Fascism was convicted in a town named Nuremberg? And what did those who professed the theory of racial superiority end up with?
                        then schwonders and the like didn’t break into the attack ......
                        And Shvonder and the “revolutionaries” from DomCom 1937 of the year would not have survived ....

                        Do not you think that these two sentences are mutually exclusive on the semantic load? Or comrade Is Schwonder an opportunist and sits far in the rear, or is he a Trotskyite dodger and he was spanked in 37? laughing
              3. Grenader
                Grenader 7 March 2017 13: 12 New
                +3
                Quote: Wend
                And you look from the other side. There is a side of Schwonder and DOMCOM singing hymns.

                Here is food for thought:
              4. Seamaster
                Seamaster 7 November 2017 19: 21 New
                0
                Excuse me, uncle, did Preobrazhensky himself maintain purity in his own closet?
                It seems there was a maid there?
                Yes, and he himself does not cause me something of sympathy. He is what. at that terrible time worked in a rash hut?
                Or sick "Spanish" nursed?
                No, he worked as a surgeon-cosmetologist for the authorities. And the commies and the maid kept for the fees from the damned, and he had a strong feed base.
                In my opinion - the most terrible character in this work.
                Bloody ghoul, stuck to power and condemning the same power and ready to betray.
      3. Pancer
        Pancer 7 March 2017 09: 38 New
        +7
        Quote: Wend
        And the pro-Western liberals and the Reds will blow into the same pipe. Give them a revolution. Not ate after 1917? Do you want more blood? Turn on your head. For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

        Why are you here mixed in a bunch of everything and everything?
        Recently, at the expense of the so-called revolution, moans, cries and howls have been heard exclusively by liberals, nationalists and Trotskyists of varying degrees of radicalism, while the Reds include the Trotskyists ... this must be so fantasized ..
        Just all the liberals want blood, there are plenty of examples of this, even here in VO, when you read the comments of the frantic. Representatives of the so-called "white movement". Are they for peace and harmony ???
        Completeness, why put a shadow on the wattle fence when the unworthy fuss with the "applicants" from the Hohenzollerns and attempts to build an estate society on their basis?
        So at the expense of the head ... do not shout so loudly that someone’s heads do not work if you yourself do not understand what you are writing.
        Here in VO, in topics about the events of 100 years ago, users of your "white color", or rather non-white, monarchists, nationalists, carry such an unimaginable ... "truth" that yes, we "believe" you ... you do not want blood ...
        1. Vend
          Vend 7 March 2017 09: 56 New
          +2
          Quote: Pancer
          Quote: Wend
          And the pro-Western liberals and the Reds will blow into the same pipe. Give them a revolution. Not ate after 1917? Do you want more blood? Turn on your head. For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

          Why are you here mixed in a bunch of everything and everything?
          Recently, at the expense of the so-called revolution, moans, cries and howls have been heard exclusively by liberals, nationalists and Trotskyists of varying degrees of radicalism, while the Reds include the Trotskyists ... this must be so fantasized ..
          My dear, this is your fantasy. Where did the Trotskyists mention it? And do vandals paint monuments, representatives of liberals or another direction?
          1. Pancer
            Pancer 7 March 2017 10: 40 New
            +6
            Quote: Wend
            Where did the Trotskyists mention it?

            You wrote that the Reds and so on and so forth ... you indicated that the Trotskyists should not be attached to the Reds, why are you so alarmed?
            Monuments demolished and vandals. Recently, exclusively liberal and nationalist colors.
            And if you listen to these representatives in the media .... then it simply takes surprise, as they still have not melted from hatred, Gozmans. Kohs, bulk different.
            Now we take the so-called nationalists, you listen to Kholmogorov ... you are a diva, the late Shafarevich didn’t understand how gray-haired he was. He himself felled his own country with his own hands.
            Let’s take Girkin, either a monarchist, or a nationalist, but essentially a banal provocateur together with Maltsev, another extreme right-wing nationalist who was not prevented by his nationalist convictions from coming into close contact with Gozman and his accomplices ..
      4. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 7 March 2017 20: 20 New
        +3
        Quote: Wend
        And the pro-Western liberals and the Reds will blow into the same pipe. Give them a revolution. Not ate after 1917? Do you want more blood? Turn on your head. For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.


        But the red, simple workers and peasants just do not want blood. They simply demand justice, they want to return their public property, which the "bourgeois" neo-bourgeoisie in the 90 years. If she gives her in an amicable way, then everything will cost peacefully. But, after all, she will not give her back and will call for intervention again, and again will unleash a civil war ...
        1. Vend
          Vend 9 March 2017 11: 25 New
          0
          Quote: Alexander Green
          Quote: Wend
          And the pro-Western liberals and the Reds will blow into the same pipe. Give them a revolution. Not ate after 1917? Do you want more blood? Turn on your head. For some reason, representatives of the white movement are not advocating a revolution.

          But the red, simple workers and peasants just do not want blood. They simply demand justice, they want to return their public property, which the "bourgeois" neo-bourgeoisie in the 90 years. If she gives her in an amicable way, then everything will cost peacefully. But, after all, she will not give her back and will call for intervention again, and again will unleash a civil war ...

          They demanded justice in 1927 year. It ended in blood.
          1. Alexander Greene
            Alexander Greene 9 March 2017 19: 50 New
            +2
            Quote: Wend
            They demanded justice in 1927 year. It ended in blood.

            If the kulaks did not try to stifle Soviet power and arrange a grain crisis in the country, and also did not start anti-collective farm propaganda with the killing of collective farm activists, there would be no blood.
  2. Basil50
    Basil50 7 March 2017 06: 43 New
    +1
    * Tiligents * for a long time, for centuries, brought up in the awareness of their own * secondary * in relation to the West. Moreover, this work was carried out purposefully. Moreover, a career could be built only in the light of the proposed worldview. Orders for scientific papers with evidence of insolvency RUSSIAN were from the king himself. And so there was a * natural selection * for the title of * tiligent * of those who sincerely and enthusiastically sought to serve the interests of Europe. Dostoevsky described such Smerdyakov, the true * tiligent *, and even provided a sample of his reasoning. From modern reasoning * of tiligents * the difference is not big, the argument is only slightly changed, and it is very similar to Smerdyakov’s reasoning ..
  3. Olgovich
    Olgovich 7 March 2017 06: 49 New
    +5
    "They wanted the best, but it turned out, HOW ALWAYS!" request
    1. V.ic
      V.ic 7 March 2017 09: 12 New
      +6
      Quote: Olgovich
      They wanted the best, but it turned out HOW ALWAYS! "

      ... not surprisingly, the baker always gets "HOW ALWAYS" ... lol
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 7 March 2017 12: 20 New
        +3
        Quote: V.ic
        it always turns out for HUNTERBAKERS "AS ALWAYS" ...


        The sandcrusts, frozen 30 years ago, did not do anything at all. yes
        1. V.ic
          V.ic 7 March 2017 12: 38 New
          +5
          Quote: Olgovich
          The sandcrusts, frozen 30 years ago, did not work at all

          ... those sand-crunches of the 1987 model did a great deal: Korotich moved closer to the "oblast" (the true Fashington), marked with a cain seal became the "best German" "From a speech by MS Gorbachev at a seminar at the American University in Turkey: "The purpose of my whole life was the destruction of communism, the unbearable dictatorship of people. I was fully supported by my wife, who realized the need for this even earlier than I did. It was to achieve this goal that I used my position in the party and country. That is why my wife kept pushing me to consistently occupy an increasingly higher position in the country. When I personally became acquainted with the West, I realized that I could not retreat from my goal. And to achieve it, I had to replace the entire leadership of the CPSU and the USSR, as well as the leadership in all socialist countries. I managed to find associates in the implementation of these goals. Among them, a special place is occupied by A.N. Yakovlev and E.A. Shevardnadze, whose merits in our common business are simply invaluable. "[4]"
        2. RUSS
          RUSS 7 March 2017 13: 25 New
          +1
          Quote: Olgovich
          At the sand pies,

          Rather crackers laughing they like camp rusks.
          1. V.ic
            V.ic 7 March 2017 15: 53 New
            +3
            Quote: RUSS
            Rather crackers

            ... liberals, you would have decided on the terms!
            1. RUSS
              RUSS 7 March 2017 17: 06 New
              +1
              Quote: V.ic
              ... liberals,

              Strange, where did you see this on the forum of liberals?
              1. V.ic
                V.ic 7 March 2017 19: 54 New
                +4
                Quote: RUSS
                Strange, where did you see this on the forum of liberals?

                ... how can you call a scoundrel dog not scoundrel? Only a dog with a hack, not otherwise! Hula is not here, only a diagnosis! / For the dog, naturally! /
  4. EvgNik
    EvgNik 7 March 2017 07: 05 New
    +6
    However, the revolution also destroyed the huge Old Believer world.

    I disagree with this postulate, which I have encountered several times already. My mother is from an Old Believer family. In the Urals, and even in Siberia, the Old Believers exist in parallel with modern Orthodoxy.
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 7 March 2017 09: 12 New
      +5
      Quote: EvgNik
      However, the revolution also destroyed the huge Old Believer world.

      I disagree with this postulate, which I have encountered several times already. My mother is from an Old Believer family. In the Urals, and even in Siberia, the Old Believers exist in parallel with modern Orthodoxy.

      The state demonstrates the course of constructive interaction with the Old Believers. In support of this, on February 22, 2013, in the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin awarded the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church, Metropolitan Korniliy, with a state award - the Order of Friendship.
  5. Dart2027
    Dart2027 7 March 2017 07: 13 New
    10
    Liberalism is not a sin; it is a necessary component of the whole, which without it will decay or freeze. Liberalism has the same right to exist as the most well-disposed conservatism; but I attack Russian liberalism, and again I repeat that for that, in fact, I attack him that the Russian liberal is not a Russian liberal, but is not a Russian liberal. Give me a Russian liberal, and I will kiss him right away with you ...

    Moderate liberalism: the dog needs freedom, but still it needs to be kept on the chain.

    The present intelligentsia is such a spiritual sect. What is characteristic is that they don’t know anything, they don’t know anything, but they judge everything and completely disagree with dissent ...

    The intelligentsia is rather reminiscent of a monastic order or religious sect, with its own special morality, very intolerant, with its obligatory worldview, with its own special morals and customs ... For the intelligentsia is characterized by groundlessness, a break with all class life and traditions ... the intelligentsia was divorced from real social affairs, and this greatly contributed to the development of social dreaming in it ...

    The Russian press and society, if they didn’t stand across the throat of the “government”, would tear Russia to shreds and distribute these shreds to their neighbors, not even for money, but simply for a “shot glass” of praise. And so, without decisiveness and hesitation, one must directly take the side of the "mediocre government", which nevertheless only protects and preserves everything.

    Having fully enjoyed the magnificent spectacle of the revolution, our intelligentsia prepared to put on their fur-lined fur coats and return to their cozy mansions, but the fur coats were stolen and the mansions were burned.

    The Russian liberal theoretically does not recognize any power. He wants to obey only the law that he likes. The most necessary activity of the state seems to him oppression. He ... He envies a police officer or soldier on the street, and indignation is boiling in him. The Russian liberal leaves with a few big words - freedom, publicity, public opinion ... merging with the people and the like, which he knows no boundaries, and which therefore remain common places, devoid of any essential content. Therefore, the most elementary concepts — obedience to the law, the need for the police, the need for officials — seem to him to be the result of outrageous despotism ...
    1. Moor
      Moor 7 March 2017 09: 51 New
      +1
      Bravo! Very concise and accurate in essence hi hi
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 7 March 2017 12: 08 New
        +1
        These are quotes. There is more
        http://ruxpert.ru/%D0%A6%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%
        D1%8B_%D0%BE_%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0
        %D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%85
  6. Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 7 March 2017 07: 23 New
    +4
    About the Old Believers is certainly cool. Well, if the author is talking about the fact that the Old Believers did not see the Romanovs for their persecution, then it would be nice to tell how it started and why. About Western abomination also puzzled! I wanted to know what was under this. And the better or worse it is, well, like the Greek abomination, or the eastern abomination.
    I also hope that if we are talking about Old Believers, the author should pay attention to their cooperation with the Germans during the Second World War in the destruction of our partisans (at least a little bit)
    And as for the intellectuals, I will say in the words of an intelligent person: intellectuals are not the elite, this is r ... but the nation.
    1. avva2012
      avva2012 7 March 2017 07: 44 New
      +2
      I also hope that if we are talking about the Old Believers author, pay attention to their cooperation with the Germans during the Second World War in the destruction of our partisans

      It is the Old Believers, not individual traitors, but a whole religious movement? Do not give a source?
    2. Cat man null
      Cat man null 7 March 2017 07: 53 New
      +8
      Quote: Kostya Andreev
      And as for intellectuals, I will say in the words of an intelligent person: intellectuals are not the elite, this is r ... but the nation

      - do not read online forums, read the source:

      The intellectual forces of the workers and peasants are growing and gaining strength in the struggle for the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and its accomplices, intellectuals, lackeys of capital, imagining themselves to be the brains of the nation. In fact, this is not the brain, but g.

      - and further:

      To “intellectual forces” who want to carry science to the people (and not to serve the capital), we pay a salary above the average. It is a fact. We protect them.
      It is a fact. Tens of thousands of officers serve the Red Army and win despite hundreds of traitors. It is a fact

      - in a bad word, therefore, it was not called the intelligentsia as such, but its "counter-revolutionary" part, if simplified
      - but the Internet military made of this what now (with a clever look) “quotes” Kostya Andreev and others like him. Another "no money, but ..." (also, by the way, fake)

      Once again - do not read ... on the fences, read the source. Fortunately, everything is easily accessible:

      1. Uncle Murzik
        Uncle Murzik 7 March 2017 09: 39 New
        +3
        Cat Man Null your education shines wassat "but Internet warriors," and Internet warriors will be right!
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 7 March 2017 10: 19 New
          +6
          Quote: Uncle Murzik
          "but Internet warriors," and Internet warriors will be right!

          In this case, it will be the distorted form - the "military" that will be correct. For these “wrestlers” are not drawn.
      2. Rivares
        Rivares 7 March 2017 16: 02 New
        +2
        Quote: Cat Man Null
        Once again - do not read ... on the fences, read the source. Fortunately, everything is easily accessible:

        The words of the red leader are the whole word. But their hands to the elbow in the blood of the Russian people-this is the real deal. And when words disagree with deeds, then one must believe in deeds.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 7 March 2017 16: 37 New
          +2
          Quote: Rivares
          Quote: Cat Man Null
          Once again - do not read ... on the fences, read the source. Fortunately, everything is easily accessible:

          The words of the red leader are the whole word ...

          - speak to yourself?
          - I answered this:
          Quote: Kostya Andreev
          And about the intellectuals I will say the words of an intelligent person: intellectuals are not the elite, this is r ... but the nation

          - And why did you say that? I don’t understand ... though:

          Quote: Rivares
          And here is their hands to the elbow in the blood Russian people - these are real things

          - Russian, say ... an adherent of the sect, that is.
          - Got it. Be your own doctor, I'm not interested in it request
          1. avva2012
            avva2012 7 March 2017 18: 12 New
            0
            Cat Man Null What this citizen writes is already beyond. This is not a sect, this is a symptom complex.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 7 March 2017 17: 27 New
          +5
          Quote: Rivares
          The words of the red leader are the whole word. But their hands to the elbow in the blood of the Russian people-this is the real deal. And when words disagree with deeds, then one must believe in deeds.

          And in Russia, no matter how successful the ruler is, his hands are always up to his elbow in blood. Who will begin to chop heads in Moscow and build a "city on bones", who will let the gallows along the Volga, who will generally remain in the history of "Palkin" or "Grozny".
          We even managed to execute by the “Silent” in thousands.
          1. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 7 March 2017 19: 55 New
            +2
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And in Russia, no matter how successful the ruler is, his hands are always up to his elbow in blood. Who will begin to chop heads in Moscow and build a "city on bones", who will let the gallows along the Volga, who will generally remain in the history of "Palkin" or "Grozny".
            We even managed to execute by the “Silent” in thousands.

            Yeah, according to the logic of our zombie monarchists, they were all communists as one. laughing
          2. Weyland
            Weyland 7 March 2017 20: 55 New
            +2
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And in Russia, no matter how successful a ruler, always hands to the elbow in blood


            Only in Russia? Yes, almost everywhere!
            "If they say about the ruler that he is kind, then his rule has failed!" (Napoleon)
  7. Cartalon
    Cartalon 7 March 2017 07: 27 New
    +3
    There are no civilizations for 70 years
    1. murriou
      murriou 9 March 2017 12: 00 New
      +1
      The great empire of A. Macedon existed for 14 years, 5 times less than the USSR laughing
  8. avva2012
    avva2012 7 March 2017 07: 34 New
    +1
    The elite of the Old Believers were entrepreneurs who created capital not by financial speculation and relations with the government, but by hard work, creating and accumulating wealth from generation to generation. The Morozovs, Ryabushinsky, Rakhmanovs, Bakhrushins created their capital by hard and long work

    The next episode, “Russia We Lost”? In Christianity, in general, money-grubbing and entrepreneurship are not particularly welcome. How true are the works of Melnikov-Pechersky, “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains,” where the life and customs of that time are perfectly described, I do not know. But he, as an official on special assignments for the Old Believers, knew the subject. Who cares, you can read fascinating books, in fact.
  9. Cat man null
    Cat man null 7 March 2017 07: 41 New
    +3
    Liberals and revolutionaries in every way they said about the hopeless "backwardness" of Russia, or even the dying of the country, which they attributed to the “worthless” economic, social and, above all, political system

    - funny, huh?
    - and now exactly the same individuals singing, positioning themselves as "patriots"

    What could it mean, interesting? what
    1. avva2012
      avva2012 7 March 2017 07: 51 New
      0
      and now exactly the same thing is sung by individuals who position themselves as "patriots"

      You mean, by the word patriots, Navalny, or what else wound up? laughing
      1. Cat man null
        Cat man null 7 March 2017 07: 54 New
        +3
        Quote: avva2012
        You mean, by the word patriots, Navalny, or what else wound up?

        - Yes, what examples to go far ... Do you list local nicknames, or guess yourself? wink
        - there is a bunch of people in Tucheva, whom you don’t feed with bread, but let "change the system"; tuners, damn it, grand pianos ...
        - that’s exactly them and “I have” laughing
        1. avva2012
          avva2012 7 March 2017 09: 35 New
          +3
          Quote: Cat Man Null there is a bunch of people to Tucheva, whom you don’t feed with bread, but let "change the order"; tuners, damn it, grand pianos ...

          Ahhh, that's who you mean! laughing And, I thought, I missed someone in the outside world. lol No, we will not change the system, I do not agree at all. Although I don’t like everything in the current one, the Stalinist five-year plans cannot be returned even under socialism, in the near future, alas, we will not. I have a suspicion that some “tuners”, Libya and Syria did not teach anything. Like, "it's not about us." You are mistaken, I think it will be worse. Such, if they sincerely believe that revolution is good, one must undergo haloperidolotherapy. Sorry, punitive psychiatry was canceled, oh, what a pity! Well, and those who deliberately crave the destruction of the state, it would be useful for them to make a tour without a return ticket, to the place where everything is now "beautiful and amazing."
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 7 March 2017 10: 27 New
        +5
        Quote: avva2012
        You mean, by the word patriots, Navalny, or what else wound up?

        Extremes meet - the ultra-liberals, who advocated "dismantling the existing regime," joined in with the ultra-patriots, demanding the same.
        Just look at the discussions on the same Ukraine:
        - We are crushing sprouts of young Ukrainian democracy! It is unacceptable! An urgent need to change the leadership and the whole system!
        - We do not help our brothers in New Russia! It is unacceptable! An urgent need to change the leadership and the whole system!
        1. avva2012
          avva2012 7 March 2017 10: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA Extremes meet

          I have a suspicion that both sources are fed from one source.
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 7 March 2017 14: 56 New
            +2
            Not urgently changing everything, but carefully and thoughtfully, without stopping to work in the right direction.
            Evidence from the contrary: the fate of the USSR. Enemies painstakingly, in various ways on different fronts, secretly worked on this for decades.
            1. IS-80_RVGK2
              IS-80_RVGK2 7 March 2017 20: 04 New
              0
              Quote: Reptiloid
              Evidence from the contrary: the fate of the USSR. Enemies painstakingly, in various ways on different fronts, secretly worked on this for decades.

              Few stupid monarchists stuck with their brains in the 19th century have a maximum, and Communists of the same kind are also in addition. Ah, centuries pass, but the problems are the same. Will I wait for smart people to ride on smooth roads? It seems unlikely.sad
  10. Curious
    Curious 7 March 2017 09: 08 New
    +2
    Interestingly, the author himself comes up with stories, or writes off somewhere? How big is the source of this “historical soap” and how soon will it dry out? Or will the author reach the finish line by publishing the final article of this megacycle on November 7, 2017?
    1. RUSS
      RUSS 7 March 2017 09: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: Curious
      Interestingly, the author himself comes up with stories, or writes off somewhere?

      Amusing science fiction by Samsonov? Is not it? laughing
      1. Curious
        Curious 7 March 2017 10: 35 New
        +1
        One of my friends, a professor, described such literary creations as follows: "I have a thought and I think it."
  11. baudolino
    baudolino 7 March 2017 09: 17 New
    0
    "Social schizophrenia" is an excellent definition for the "creative class" of what then is now.
  12. bober1982
    bober1982 7 March 2017 09: 36 New
    +2
    The intelligentsia always had the so-called inner Christianity, that is, live as you like, or by their standards, free from superstition. Hence the hostility and even hatred of the Church, their whole style of thinking is contempt for Orthodoxy. The whole so-called culture is theater, literature , cinema united to cause hostility towards the Church.
    The intelligentsia completely lacks discipline, including religious.
  13. Boris55
    Boris55 7 March 2017 09: 41 New
    0
    Facets of the Russian split. The secret role of the Old Believers from the 17 century to the 17 year, Pyzhikov A.V.

    Few people know that in the middle of the 19th century, Russia was essentially already split in half. When the government sent several study groups around the country at the end of the 1840, a terrifying picture emerged: millions of Russian people did not consider themselves adherents of the official church and were extremely hostile to the current government.
    Entire provinces were seized by a schismatic frond. There were countless villages controlled by representatives of the Old Believer movement, where the houses had double walls and roofs to hide the fugitive schismatics. In the hands of highly successful merchants, the Old Believers concentrated enormous financial and industrial resources. In fact, a second, parallel Russia was built.
    The young Slavophile Ivan Aksakov, a member of one of the state commissions, wrote doomed then: “Right, Russia will soon be divided into two halves: Orthodoxy will be on the side of the Treasury, the Government ... and all others will turn to schism ... It seems we are only destined to understand the disease and behold how it devours gradually not yet completely infected members. " Actually, this happened later in the form of two Russian revolutions, for which the Old Believers prepared a generous ground.
    This book shows for the first time a complete picture of the consequences of the spiritual division of Russian society and the true role of the Old Believers in the history of Russia.

    https://konzeptual.ru/grani-russkogo-raskola-tajn
    aja-rol-staroobrjadchestva-ot-17-veka-do-17-goda
  14. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 7 March 2017 11: 23 New
    +2
    Curious: all over the world, the intelligentsia is respected.
    Dear and necessary class. Like the working class.
    As liberalism is fully respected .. This is quite
    efficient effective flow. Liberalism alternating with
    conservatism (both useful and complementary),
    together pushing countries forward.
    In Russia, at the words: "intelligentsia, liberalism" - some kind of howl ... sad
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 7 March 2017 12: 12 New
      +4
      No intelligentsia worldwide it doesn’t exist, it has long degenerated, just like the working class. In our country, all kinds of thinkers and intellectuals are immortal, under any social order.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 7 March 2017 13: 50 New
        +2
        "No intelligentsia exists all over the world, have long degenerated" ////

        No one has disappeared or degenerated: in all countries there are writers, directors,
        public figures. As a rule, all of them are critical of their
        governments, whatever they are. This is normal. Without it any
        the country is rotting. Sometimes they go too far, but their existence is necessary.
        Otherwise, the country turns into a barracks.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 7 March 2017 13: 59 New
          +2
          The intelligentsia is when something epoch-making, for example, “The Past and Thoughts” and so on, or the kitchen “I Can't Silence” is a purely domestic occupation.
        2. Weyland
          Weyland 7 March 2017 21: 00 New
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          As a rule, all of them are critical of their governments, whatever they may be. This is normal

          But when they try to physically destroy it, like the Russian so-called intelligentsia, this is not normal! Incidentally, the poll is provocative: what is the percentage of techies (who bring undoubted and real benefit) and which - humanities (the benefits of which are highly controversial)? Except Sakharov, I will not name anyone from memory ...
      2. RUSS
        RUSS 7 March 2017 19: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: bober1982
        No intelligentsia exists around the world

        35 years ago, on March 7, 1982, film director Andrei Tarkovsky left the USSR forever - he went to Italy to shoot Nostalgia and never returned.
        "I envy everyone who is capable of doing their work independently of the state. [...] What boorish power! Does she need literature, poetry, music, painting, cinema? No, on the contrary. I want work, nothing more. Work! Is it Isn’t it wild, is it not a crime that the director, who was called brilliant in the press in Italy, sits without work? And to me, frankly, it seems that this is just a revenge on mediocrity, which has made its way to the leadership. out of mediocrity "
        - from the diaries of Andrei Tarkovsky, January 27, 1973
        In addition to making films, Tarkovsky dreamed of arranging life - to get his own apartment and build a house in the suburbs. He drew drawings of his future study, nursery, terrace, fantasized how he would receive there all friends who could not accommodate a cramped temporary apartment. But they didn’t allot his own corner in Moscow, and he had to build a house “a teaspoon a year”. There was not enough money to complete the work all the time. Tarkovsky counted every penny, borrowed all the time, and almost every birthday he didn’t celebrate - there was nothing to it. He periodically handed over all the valuables in the house to a pawnshop. It happened that for travel in public transport he lacked trifles. Even the cash "Solaris" in 1972 did not save the situation.

        "The money I got for Solaris wasn’t even enough to give out debts"
        - Andrey Tarkovsky.
        Tarkovsky was, if not a pacifist, then at least never admired the war. And although his first big picture, “Ivan Childhood,” was completely devoted to the Great Patriotic War, the authorities took it precisely as alien to its ideology. Tarkovsky said in an interview with the Munich magazine Forum in 1985 that he felt that his rejection by the authorities had begun with this dissonance.

        - I remember, after my painting, made in 1962, “Ivan Childhood,” was released, I remember that it was already evaluated by the leadership, cinema officials, as a pacifist picture, that is, with a negative sign, because, as you know, by our concepts of war are fair and unjust. That is, Raskolnikov’s concept that it’s possible to kill, if this is true. At a distance it becomes especially clear how hypocritical and fake the point of view is. Therefore, I quickly felt this cooling after the "thaw," Tarkovsky said. It was this stigma of the pacifist, according to the director himself, that prevented him from working normally in the USSR in the future. He felt this when he presented his second film, Andrei Rublev. In order to “put it on the shelf”, another excuse was found - unhistoricalness.
        - She was called antihistorical. Although this is a complete lie - we tried to be extremely accurate in relation to historical facts: the rector of Moscow University wanted to purchase two copies of the film for the history department of Moscow State University.
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 7 March 2017 12: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: voyaka uh
      In Russia, at the words: “intelligentsia, liberalism” - some sort of howl

      Because in Russia the notorious intelligentsia is more a party of anarchists than a term denoting people of intellectual labor.
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 7 March 2017 14: 15 New
      +8
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Curious: all over the world, the intelligentsia is respected.
      Dear and necessary class. Like the working class.
      In Russia, at the words: "intelligentsia, liberalism" - some kind of howl ...

      And this is another terminological confusion. Because in Russia and in the West, the term "intelligentsia" means two different things.
      We have an "intellectual" - this is a person who knows everything about everything, but it is small and inaccurate. Teaching everyone around how to equip their lives, but at the same time unable to equip their own. Recognizing no opinion other than his own. Hating the state and demanding its destruction, but at the same time demanding protection and prosperity from it. Publicly loving ordinary people, but not having an idea of ​​his life.
      In short, here is what is usually understood by the term "Russian intellectual":
      Lokhankin brushed away crumbs from the beard, threw a wary, slanting glance at his wife, and fell silent on his couch. He really did not want to part with Barbara. Along with many flaws, Barbara had two significant achievements: a large white chest and service. Vasisuali himself never served anywhere. The service would prevent him from thinking about the significance of the Russian intelligentsia, to which social stratum he included himself. So the lengthy thoughts of Lokhankin came down to a pleasant and close topic: “Vasisualy Lokhankin and its significance”, “Lokhankin and the tragedy of Russian liberalism” and “Lokhankin and his role in the Russian revolution”. It was easy and quiet to think about all this, walking around the room in felt boots bought for barbarian money, and glancing at your favorite cupboard, where the roots of the Brockhaus encyclopedic dictionary flickered with church gold. Vasisualii stood for a long time in front of the purchased wardrobe, moving his eyes from the spine to the spine. There were marvelous examples of bookbinding art in the ranking: Bram’s big medical encyclopedia, Animal Life, Gredichev’s Art History, pound volume Man and Woman, and Earth and People by Elise Reclus.
      “Next to this treasury of thought,” Vasisuali thought slowly, “you become cleaner, somehow grow spiritually.”
      Having come to this conclusion, he sighed joyfully, pulled the Rodina out from under the closet for 18 in a sea-blue cover with foam and spray, examined pictures of the Boer War, an unknown lady’s ad titled: “This is how I increased my six-inch bust ”and other interesting things.
      With the departure of Barbara, the material base on which the well-being of the most worthy representative of thinking humanity rested would also disappear.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 7 March 2017 15: 58 New
        +3
        "We have an" intellectual "- this is a person who knows everything about everything, but little and inaccurate.
        Teaching everyone around how to equip their lives, but at the same time unable to equip their own.
        Recognizing no opinion other than his own. Hate state
        and requiring its destruction, but at the same time requiring protection and well-being from it.
        Publicly loving ordinary people, but not having an idea of ​​his life "////

        And in the West - absolutely the same thing. Next, everything, as I wrote. Such people are needed,
        thanks to them, the country is developing. Without sharp criticism, stagnation and degradation occur.
        society. This does not mean that such people need to become presidents. But certain
        - and quite important - they have a role in society.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 7 March 2017 17: 04 New
          +4
          There is stagnation without sharp criticism
          Our intelligentsia’s side is not criticism, but criticism. All the same - blood kings, bloody Stalin, bloody gebnya, the main thing is to have a large writing desk + a large bookcase. And they don’t forget about God, but somewhere inside, in the heart (say so)
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 7 March 2017 17: 58 New
            +3
            Acute criticism and criticism are synonyms.
            Only with positive and negative shades.
            Those who get criticized usually call her criticism wink .
            And they begin to denounce its author. To divert public attention (and prosecutors belay )
            from the essence of criticism.
            1. Weyland
              Weyland 7 March 2017 21: 09 New
              +2
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Acute criticism and criticism are synonyms.


              Nonsense! Criticism is criticism above all unconstructive. As Stalin, so unloved by intellectuals, said: “I disagree - criticize, criticize - offer, offer - do, do it - answer! "
              1. Cat man null
                Cat man null 7 March 2017 21: 13 New
                +1
                Quote: Weyland
                As he said ... Stalin: "I do not agree - criticize, criticize - offer, offer - do, do, do - answer!"

                - yah? belay
                - And did this exactly Stalin say? wink
                1. Weyland
                  Weyland 8 March 2017 00: 49 New
                  0
                  Attributed to him. Although, perhaps, this is the so-called. "quote-bastard"
                  1. Cat man null
                    Cat man null 8 March 2017 09: 01 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Weyland
                    Quote: Cat Man Null
                    But did Stalin say that?

                    Attributed to him. Although, perhaps, this is the so-called. "quote-bastard"

                    - "attributed", in fact, to S.P. Korolev ... basically laughing
              2. Dart2027
                Dart2027 7 March 2017 23: 04 New
                +2
                Quote: Weyland
                Criticism is primarily criticism unconstructive

                Rather, it is criticism in order to criticize and through this amuse your ego. You can always find some flaws, such is life and this is normal. But it’s one thing when things really worthy of attention are criticized, and besides criticism, there is also recognition that something and something has been done well, and the principle “the pig will find dirt everywhere” is completely different, even if this dirt really is. The one and only undetected baby found in the apartment just cleaned is not a reason to shout that nothing has been cleaned, there is a pigsty everywhere, etc.
              3. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 8 March 2017 00: 55 New
                +1
                "Nonsense! Criticism is primarily criticism unconstructive." ///

                Is it so? One doctor makes a diagnosis ("critic"). And the other - on the basis of this diagnosis ("criticism") conducts treatment (or surgery).
                Do you think the diagnostic doctor has no right to make a diagnosis? After all, he does not know how to "constructively" operate? smile
                1. Weyland
                  Weyland 8 March 2017 11: 57 New
                  +2
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  Do you think the diagnostic doctor has no right to make a diagnosis?


                  Do not confuse criticism with diagnostics! It is said above: "criticize - offer!"
                  Let the diagnostician himself not operate, but gives out reasonable recommendations on what to do - and it essentially works in one team with the surgeon, so "suggest - do it!" to this case also applies 100%
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 7 March 2017 17: 45 New
          +4
          Quote: voyaka uh
          And in the West - absolutely the same thing. Next, everything, as I wrote. Such people are needed,
          thanks to them, the country is developing. Without sharp criticism, stagnation and degradation occur.
          of society.

          The problem is that a domestic intellectual criticizes for the sake of criticism. He either does not offer anything in return, or his proposal is so far from domestic realities that, when put into practice, it will only make it worse.
          And intellectuals love to put a cart in front of a horse. They stubbornly declare that political freedoms are needed first, and then economic prosperity will be there. And just as stubbornly they do not notice that in all countries they first raised the economy in harsh conditions, and then, having an economic basis and a law-abiding population, they began to introduce political freedoms. Free American Society stands on the economy, laid down by the sweatshop conveyor of Ford and his own shootings demanding those very freedoms (EMNIP, it was the Ford PSC from parole that opened fire from the Tommy Ghans to demonstrate workers).
          It is especially pleasing when liberal intellectuals cite as an example successful economic development in conditions of freedom and democracy Singapore. Or South Korea. smile
        3. avva2012
          avva2012 7 March 2017 18: 19 New
          +2
          -and quite important- the role in society is /
          Well, the intestinal microflora also has an important role in the body. That's just, they do not consider themselves the conscience of the body.
        4. Weyland
          Weyland 7 March 2017 21: 04 New
          +2
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Such people are needed, thanks to them the country is developing


          Thanks to the helmet, "knowing everything about everything, but little and inaccurate"? Do not tell my slippers! The country is developing in the first place thanks to intellectuals who know, though not about everything, but about much - and a lot and for sure!
  15. Vend
    Vend 7 March 2017 13: 29 New
    +2
    Quote: Boris55
    Quote: Wend
    It is impossible to make a revolution without the support of the people

    "Until the idea has mastered the masses - it is dead"
    All revolutions take place in the capitals. The outskirts take it for granted. Dissenters - are suppressed by force. Before the revolution takes place, it is being prepared in the minds, incl. and the heads of the people. This intelligentsia is leading this training, and how can it be considered that it has nothing to do with it? See Ukraine as a good example.
    The slave-holding pyramid of power, by the principle of which all states are organized, initially implies the discontent of the exploited towards the exploiters.

    Thats exactly what I mean. It is impossible to blame one of the estates. To whitewash peasants, referring to their illiteracy, is not an option. Peasants were not so illiterate in Russia, a very large number of agricultural scientific journals were written out in Russia.
    1. murriou
      murriou 8 March 2017 17: 48 New
      +3
      Quote: Wend
      Not so illiterate were the peasants in Russia, in Russia a very large number of agricultural scientific journals were written out.

      And how many PEASANTS read them? laughing
      And how could the recommendations of these smart magazines be followed by a typical low-land Russian peasant in tsarist Russia? lol
      1. Vend
        Vend 9 March 2017 11: 27 New
        0
        Quote: murriou
        Quote: Wend
        Not so illiterate were the peasants in Russia, in Russia a very large number of agricultural scientific journals were written out.

        And how many PEASANTS read them? laughing
        And how could the recommendations of these smart magazines be followed by a typical low-land Russian peasant in tsarist Russia? lol

        And you take and look at the data of that time. And then you will laugh.
        1. murriou
          murriou 9 March 2017 11: 56 New
          +2
          What data?
          The fact that in 1897. Only 1% of the population of Russia possessed literacy at least from the 21st grade of central vocational schools, but was not enough to understand agricultural scientific journals of the central vocational school?
          The fact that the peasant allotment averaged 3,3 tithes or 3,6 hectares, i.e. is equal to a square with a side of less than 200m, on which the tractor and other equipment cannot be turned around, and from which you can’t swing at the use of advanced agricultural technologies?
          Or what other data did you mean? laughing
  16. Vend
    Vend 7 March 2017 13: 56 New
    +2
    Quote: avva2012
    Quote: Wend You are a FANTASER. Shvonder just shot. And the intelligentsia fought no less on the fronts. Read about the intellectual blockade.

    They shot, that is, carried out the highest measure of social protection, the employees of the same NKVD by the decision of the Court, and not the chairmen of the DOMKOMs. The same employees of the NKVD, valiantly fought on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War. An intellectual is fundamentally different from an intellectual, although the words are similar. So, about those blockades that you are talking about, these are intellectuals, and intellectuals, these are those about whom Lev Gumilyov spoke.

    And the NKVD officers appear by budding. laughing Amiable staff of the NKVD, these were representatives of the people., The same persons as in DOMKOMs.
    Intellectuals are 28 employees of the All-Union Institute of Plant Production in besieged Leningrad who died of starvation at boxes of food. But they kept a unique collection of cultivated plants and their wild relatives. Unparalleled in the world, assembled by gigantic efforts, the collection totaled more than 200 000 precious samples
    Rice keeper Dmitry Sergeevich Ivanov died of hunger. Thousands of bags of grain remained in his office.
    At his desk, the custodian of peanuts and oilseeds Alexander Gavrilovich Schukin died.
    Oat-keeper Lidia Mikhailovna Rodina died of hunger ....
    But Shostakovich and musicians from the orchestra?
    You have no idea who a real intellectual is, and you don’t have a rich idea about the Russian people ..
    1. avva2012
      avva2012 7 March 2017 14: 30 New
      +2
      Dear Wend. Read carefully what is written. Well, warrior wow, he doesn’t understand the difference between intellectual and intellectual. You should see the difference.
      1. Vend
        Vend 9 March 2017 11: 48 New
        0
        Quote: avva2012
        Dear Wend. Read carefully what is written. Well, warrior wow, he doesn’t understand the difference between intellectual and intellectual. You should see the difference.

        And what does it have to do with it? An intellectual can be a simple worker from the factory. An intellectual is a way of thinking, living, doing things. It was in Soviet times that the image of an intellectual was perverted.
  17. Mar.Tirah
    Mar.Tirah 7 March 2017 14: 01 New
    +2
    Quote: avva2012
    They that rose from the graves?

    Yes, it seems so. German Sadulayev spoke well about the intelligentsia. At first I was surprised that few of the Murmansk residents want to move to the south, and then I was surprised that it surprised me. After all, I myself, for example, have been living since I was 16 in Leningrad Petersburg. We have sun for five days a year, and the rest of the time it rains. Of course, we whine. And we drink (more than in Teriberka, by the way). But tell us to exchange your gloomy Peter for warm and sunny Krasnodar - no one will agree. Why Krasnodar? Which Krasnodar? No, really. Here I am, and mine, and all that I love. I’m not going anywhere.

    Such is a simple man: he loves his homeland.

    And the intelligentsia is not easy. The Russian intelligentsia, having an artificial origin that was not connected with the large classes of Russian society, always felt a little alien. It is not her fault, but trouble. The intelligentsia cannot identify their interests with those of large groups of the population of their country, and therefore it begins to seem to her that she does not belong to her own country, but to some other. And implicitly begins to look at himself with the eyes of others. And there, on the other side, they notice and greet it. As said a !!!!!!!!!!
  18. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 7 March 2017 19: 46 New
    +2
    Not the intelligentsia, not the bourgeoisie, not the proletariat killed the monarchy, but the monarch himself.
  19. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 7 March 2017 20: 31 New
    +5
    Minus to the author, because the article has many superficial statements, generalizations, and comparisons.
    For example, putting the Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class (V.I. Lenin) and the Union of Emancipation (I. I. Petrunkevich) on one board, regardless of the difference in goals, objectives and slogans of these organizations, is the height of indecency .

    Further, I quote:
    “Successful Russian entrepreneurs, bankers and merchants believed that a radical change in the socio-political system would lead them to power, to limitless possibilities, and they financed anti-government parties (including the Bolsheviks)”[/ I]
    "Therefore, the bourgeoisie financed the coup in order to direct Russia along the Western path of development."[I]


    Firstly. Who among them financed the Bolshevik party? If you mean Savva Morozov, then he did this not for the sake of the revolution, but for the actress Andreeva, whom he became interested in, and who turned out to be a member of the RSDLP.

    Secondly. It is not clear about financing, what kind of coup (revolution) is it about: the February or October revolution? Moreover, it would be worth clarifying, what is it about financing the parties of the State Duma, such as Rodzianko, or the Bolsheviks?

    Thirdly. This is what the representative of the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee of the Bolsheviks A.G. Shlyapnikov writes in this book in his book “The Eve of the Seventeenth Year. Seventeenth Year ”, which coordinated the speeches of the proletariat of Petrograd in February 1917.

    “During the period from December 1 (1916) to February 1 (1917), we had revenues of only 1117 rubles. 50 kopecks For the maintenance of “professionals”, which were all three members of the Bureau of the Central Committee, no more than 100 rubles were spent per month. per person, despite the enormous high cost. ... The transportation of literature from the Finnish borders to St. Petersburg appearances required large expenses. In Finland, all expenses were borne by the Finnish Social Democracy.

    To begin with, it was necessary from 5 to 10 thousand. It was difficult to organize fees for the plants. I went to Gorky for advice on how and where to get money, Gorky promised and in a couple of days I received him 3 thousand rubles. Another 1000 rubles. I received for my material about the Jewish pogroms in 1916. Thus, by the beginning of February we already had 4000 rubles. Further financial operations were hindered by the impending events of the beginning of February.

    That's all funded by the Bolsheviks during the February Revolution.

    I quote further:
    The Morozovs, Ryabushinsky, Rakhmanovs, Bakhrushins created their capital by hard and long work, and controlled about half of Russia's total industrial capital.

    First, let me ask, what kind of hard work is this with the capitalist? Squeeze the last forces out of the workers and pay a penny. Secondly, how could they control half of the industrial capital of Russia, if all foreign capital owned 47% of all investments.

    Moreover, in the hands of the British, French and Belgians were such key industries as metallurgy and fuel. Almost 90% of investments in the coal industry of Donbass and about 93% of investments in the southern metallurgy belonged to France and Belgium. France also owned the Society of Russian-Baltic Shipbuilding Plants (capital of 15 million rubles) and the Russian Society for the production of artillery shells and military supplies. England owned non-ferrous metallurgy (56% of Russian copper and more than 70% of gold and platinum mining). German capitalists financed the chemical industry and a large number of military industry enterprises (for example, the Nevsky Shipbuilding and Mechanical Plant, Becker Plant, Lange Plant) plus the Phoenix Plant, metal processing and machine-building plants of Hartmann, Klomensky Machine-Building Plant and so on.
  20. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 7 March 2017 20: 39 New
    +3
    And a little about the intelligentsia itself.[i] [/ i]

    The intelligentsia during the time of tsarism sighed for intellectual conversations: how hard it is for a Russian peasant to live and stood for revolution, but when the working people took power into their own hands, she yelled that the Kuharkins were children, the black people seized power, and turned away from the Russian peasant.

    But if the entire Russian intelligentsia supported the Soviet regime, then how many mistakes the young workers' state could have avoided. But she preferred to talk in tongue and in one way or another to harm the Soviet regime so that in 1922 they had to send many of them by boat to the West. They usually write about this event as an ominous crime of the Soviet regime, but in fact they thereby saved their lives, otherwise in the class struggle, they would simply have been destroyed.
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null 7 March 2017 21: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Green
      ... when the working people took power into their own hands, she (the intelligentsia) screamed that the Cooks were children, the mob took power, and turned away from the Russian peasant

      - You would, dear, paint pictures ... oil, wide strokes
      - So, all-all Russian intelligentsia - in a single formation, with a single impulse - took, and "turned away"? A lie, right?

      Quote: Alexander Green
      But if the whole Russian intelligentsia supported the Soviet regime, then how many mistakes the young workers' state could have avoided. But she chose to chat with her tongue and in one way or another harm the Soviet regime.

      - and again, because a lie ...
      - someone supported, someone harmed ...
      - Some of the workers and peasants fought for the Reds, some for the Whites, and some at all ... for the Greens belay

      In short: you managed to lie a lot, on a flat, and, moreover, place. But why did you do this, well, I don’t understand request
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 7 March 2017 23: 47 New
        +3
        Quote: Cat Man Null
        - So, all-all Russian intelligentsia - in a single formation, with a single impulse - took, and "turned away"? A lie, right?


        From the very beginning, the intelligentsia was in no hurry to recognize the goals and methods of the new government. In November 1917, only ... six people responded to the call of the Bolsheviks for cooperation.
        http://www.intelligentia.ru/inteligencija-poteri-
        i-priobretenija.html

        Quote: Cat Man Null
        Quote: Alexander Green
        But if the whole Russian intelligentsia supported the Soviet regime, then how many mistakes the young workers' state could have avoided. But she chose to chat with her tongue and in one way or another harm the Soviet regime.
        - and again, because a lie ...
        - someone supported, someone harmed


        The Russian intelligentsia resisted openly, with arms in their hands, and in disguise, sabotaging the orders of the government, which they considered illegal. Therefore, in the summer of 1918, Lenin wrote, “I must say that bulk the intelligentsia of old Russia is a direct adversary of the Soviet regime, and there is no doubt that it will not be easy to overcome the difficulties created by this ”(vol. 36, p. 420).

        At the beginning of 1918, according to the article “Intelligentsia” in the Encyclopedia “Civil War and Military Intervention in the USSR”, there were about 1 million intelligentsia. In total, over 2,5 million people emigrated. About a quarter are the remains of a white army. The rest: patrimonial nobility, state and other servants, petty and big bourgeoisie, clergy, intelligentsia. Intelligentsia about 900 thousand

        I have given the figures for emigration to a minimum, but in general the total number of emigrants from Russia is estimated in the years 1918-1924 to be no less than 5 million people.
        http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2006/0251/analit01.php

        Quote: Cat Man Null
        In short: you managed to lie a lot, on a flat, and, moreover, place. But why did you do this, well, I don’t understand


        Before blaming others, read the text carefully. I made the assumption: “If the entire Russian intelligentsia supported the Soviet regime, then how many mistakes the young workers' state could have avoided.” Dear, if you think normally, then tell me, where is the lie?
    2. Weyland
      Weyland 7 March 2017 21: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: Alexander Green
      The intelligentsia during the time of tsarism sighed for intellectual conversations: how hard it is for a Russian peasant to live and stood for revolution, but when the working people took power into their own hands, she yelled that the Kuharkins were children, the black people seized power, and turned away from the Russian peasant.

      Your Mayakovsky ( am, but hi ) said much shorter and more accurate:
      An intellectual does not like risk.
      And red to the best of how radish! laughing
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 7 March 2017 23: 49 New
        +3
        Quote: Weyland
        An intellectual does not like risk.
        And red in moderation like a radish!


        So it is: red on top and white inside.
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 8 March 2017 11: 59 New
          0
          Quote: Alexander Green
          red on top and white inside.


          What Mayakovsky hints at very thickly: what is red "in moderation" laughing
          1. Alexander Greene
            Alexander Greene 8 March 2017 12: 57 New
            +2
            Quote: Weyland
            What Mayakovsky hints at very thickly: what is red "in moderation

            No, red is not in moderation. Only the shell is red so that it is not immediately exposed, but everything inside is white. Form and content. Form does not always reflect content - dialectics.
      2. Cat man null
        Cat man null 8 March 2017 13: 19 New
        +2
        Quote: Weyland
        An intellectual does not like risk.
        And red in moderation like a radish!

        It’s dark above, red inside,
        How to shove it - so beautiful.

        It's about galoshes, if anyone doesn’t know laughing
  21. murriou
    murriou 13 March 2017 10: 34 New
    0
    Vend, well, tell, tell. And the partisan movement that demolished the Kolchak regime even before the comparable forces of the regular Red forces arrived was also invented by the Bolsheviks in history books, right? laughing laughing laughing