Stalinist industrialization of the USSR

36
Stalinist industrialization of the USSR








After the civil war, the Russian economy, to put it in the modern “Obamovsky” language, “was torn to shreds”. Really torn and collapsed. And the NEP only somewhat stabilized the problem of providing the population with food and consumer goods, but it caused a sharp increase in class contradictions in the countryside due to the growing number of kulaks and exacerbated the class struggle in the countryside from open kulak uprisings.

Therefore, the party of the CPSU (b) has embarked on the development of the country's industrial production in order to obtain the possibility for an independent solution of the national economic problems facing Russia, destroyed by a long-term war. Moreover, an accelerated decision. That is, the party headed for the industrialization of the country.

Stalin said:

“We fell behind the advanced countries by 50-100 years. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or they crush us. This is what our obligations to the workers and peasants of the USSR dictate to us. ”

Industrialization is the socio-economic policy of the Bolshevik Party in the USSR, starting with 1927 and until the end of 30, whose main objectives were the following:

1. Elimination of technical and economic backwardness of the country;

2. Achieving economic independence;

3. Creating a powerful defense industry;
4. The priority development of the complex of basic industries: defense, fuel, energy, metallurgy, machine-building.

What ways of industrialization existed by that time and which were chosen by the Bolsheviks?

From Stalin's comments on industrialization:

1. "History knows various ways of industrialization.

England industrialized thanks to the fact that it plundered dozens and hundreds of years of the colony, collected additional capital there, invested them in its industry and accelerated the pace of its industrialization. This is one way of industrialization.

Germany accelerated its industrialization as a result of the victorious war with France in the 70-ies of the last century, when, taking five billion francs of contributions from the French, it poured them into its industry. This is the second method of industrialization.

Both of these methods are closed to us, for we are the country of the Soviets, for colonial plunder and military seizures for the purpose of plunder are incompatible with the nature of Soviet power.

Russia, the old Russia, was giving in indentured concessions and getting indentured loans, trying in this way to gradually get out on the path of industrialization. This is the third way. But this is the way of bondage or semi-slabs, the way of turning Russia into a semi-colony. This path is also closed to us, because it was not for this that we fought a three-year civil war, repelling all and every interventionist, so that later, after defeating the interventionists, voluntarily go into bondage to the imperialists.

There remains the fourth path of industrialization, the path of own savings for the cause of industry, the path of socialist accumulation, to which Comrade has repeatedly pointed. Lenin, as the only way of industrialization of our country.

("On the economic situation and the policy of the party", t.8 page.123.)

2. “What does it mean to industrialize our country? This means turning an agrarian country into an industrial country. This means to deliver and develop our industry on a new technical basis.

Nowhere else in the world has a huge, backward agrarian country turned into an industrial country without robbing colonies, without robbing foreign countries or without large loans and long-term loans from outside. Remember the history of the industrial development of England, Germany, America, and you will understand that this is exactly so. Even America, the most powerful of all capitalist countries, was forced to spend the entire 30-40 years after the civil war in order to put its industry at the expense of loans and long-term loans from the outside and plunder of the adjacent states and islands.

Can we take this “tested” path? No, we cannot, because the nature of the Soviet government does not tolerate colonial robberies, and there are no grounds for counting on large loans and long-term loans.

Old Russia, tsarist Russia, went towards industrialization in a different way - by entering into enslaving loans and returning enslaving concessions to the main branches of our industry. You know that almost the entire Donbass, more than half of St. Petersburg industry, Baku oil and a number of railways, not to mention the electrical industry, were in the hands of foreign capitalists. This was the path of industrialization at the expense of the peoples of the USSR and against the interests of the working class. It is clear that we cannot take this path: not for this we fought the yoke of capitalism, not for that we overthrew capitalism in order to go afterwards voluntarily to the yoke of capitalism.

Only one path remains, the path of own savings, the path of economy, the path of prudent farming in order to accumulate the necessary funds for the industrialization of our country. No words, this task is difficult. But, despite the difficulties, we are already resolving it. Yes, comrades, four years after the civil war we are already solving this task.

(“Speech at the meeting of workers of the Stalinist railway stations of the October road”, t.9, page.172.)

3. “There are a number of accumulation channels, of which at least the main ones should be mentioned.

First of all. It is necessary that the surplus of savings in the country is not scattered, and collected in our credit institutions, cooperative and state, as well as in the form of domestic loans, in order to use them for the needs of primarily industry. It is clear that investors should receive a known percentage for this. It cannot be said that in this area the situation is somewhat satisfactory. But the task of improving our credit network, the task of raising the credibility of credit institutions in the eyes of the population, the task of organizing the business of domestic loans is undoubtedly facing us as one of the next tasks, and we must resolve it by all means.

Secondly. It is necessary to carefully close all the paths and slots along which a part of the surplus accumulation in the country flows into the pockets of private capital to the detriment of socialist accumulation. To do this, it is necessary to pursue a policy of prices that would not create a failure between wholesale prices and retail prices. It is necessary to take all measures to reduce the retail prices for industrial products and agricultural products in order to suspend, or at least minimize the leakage of surplus accumulation in the private sector’s pockets. This is one of the most important issues of our economic policy. From here comes one of the serious dangers both for the business of our accumulation and for the chervonets.

Thirdly. It is necessary that within the industry itself, in each of its industries, the known reserves should be postponed for depreciation of enterprises, for their expansion, for their further development. This business is necessary, absolutely necessary, it must be moved forward at all costs.

Fourth. It is necessary that in the hands of the state accumulated known reserves necessary for insuring the country against all sorts of accidents (crop failure), for feeding industry, for maintaining agriculture, for developing culture, etc. It is impossible to live and work now without reserves. Even the peasant with his small farm can not now do without known stocks. Moreover, the state of a great country cannot do without reserves.

("On the economic situation and the policy of the party", t.8 page.126.)

Means for industrialization:
Where did the Bolsheviks get the money for industrialization?

1. The funds were withdrawn from agriculture and light industry;

2. Funds came from the sale of raw materials (oil, gold, timber, grain, etc.);

3. Some treasures of museums and churches were sold;

4. Taxed private sector until the complete confiscation of property.
5. By reducing the standard of living of the population, due to rising prices, the introduction of a card-based distribution system, individual government loans, etc.

6. By the enthusiasm of the workers, building for themselves a new world without the exploitation of man by man.

7. Through the most powerful propaganda and agitation of new forms and new collectivistic methods of labor organization.

8. By organizing the advanced Stakhanov movement both in industrial production and in agriculture.

9. By introducing state awards for labor achievements.

10. By developing the system of free social benefits and state guarantees for human labor: free education and free medicine for all groups of the population, free nurseries, kindergartens, summer camps, sanatoriums, and so on and so forth.
And again, the words of Stalin about the foundations of industrialization in the USSR:

“So, is the industrialization of our country possible on the basis of socialist accumulation?”

Do we have sources of such accumulation sufficient to ensure industrialization?

Yes, it is possible. Yes, we have such sources.

I could refer to such a fact as the expropriation of landlords and capitalists in our country as a result of the October Revolution, the destruction of private ownership of land, factories, factories, etc., and their transfer into public ownership. It is hardly necessary to prove that this fact represents a fairly substantial source of accumulation.

I could refer, further, to such a fact as the annulment of the tsar's debts, which removed billions of rubles of debts from the shoulders of our national economy. We should not forget that when leaving these debts we had to pay annually several hundred million percent alone, to the detriment of industry, to the detriment of our entire national economy. Needless to say, this circumstance brought great relief to the cause of our accumulation.

I could point to our nationalized industry, which has been restored, which is developing and which gives some of the profits necessary for the further development of the industry. This is also a source of accumulation.

I could point to our nationalized foreign trade, which gives some profit and represents, therefore, a certain source of accumulation.

One could refer to our more or less organized state internal trade, which also gives a certain profit and represents, therefore, a certain source of accumulation.

One could point to such a lever of accumulation as our nationalized banking system, which gives a certain profit and feeds our industry as much as we can.

Finally, we have this weaponas a state power that manages the state budget and which collects a small amount of money for the further development of the national economy in general, our industry in particular.

These are mainly the main sources of our internal accumulation.

They are interesting in that they give us the opportunity to create those necessary reserves, without which the industrialization of our country is impossible. ”

("On the economic situation and the policy of the party", t.8 page.124.)

For, according to Stalin, the fast pace of development of industry in general and the production of means of production in particular represents the main beginning and key of the country's industrial development, the main beginning and key of the transformation of our entire national economy on the basis of advanced socialist development.

At the same time, we cannot and must not curb heavy industry for the sake of the full development of light industry. And light industry cannot be developed sufficiently without the accelerated development of heavy industry.

("XV Congress of the CPSU (b)" t.10 page.310.)

The result of industrialization was:

1. Creating a powerful industry in the country;
From 1927 to 1937, over the 7 of thousands of large industrial enterprises were built in the USSR in the USSR;
2. The USSR came out on 2 place in the world in terms of industrial production after the United States.

3. The USSR created its powerful defense industry, new to Russia.

4. In the USSR, branch science also began to develop powerfully on the basis of powerful industrial production, determining the technical level of technologies developed and used in industrial production.

5. The USSR became the birthplace of technical cosmonautics, having created a new space industry in the country, a space industry, having significantly outstripped the United States in this direction.

The results of the industrialization of the USSR turned out to be stunning not only for the inhabitants of the USSR, but also for the whole world. After all, the former tsarist Russia in an unusually short period became a powerful, industrially and scientifically developed country, a world power of world importance.

As you see, Stalin turned out to be right, making out of Russia that had collapsed, from Russia, plows and sandals, an advanced industrial power with the shortest working day in the world, the best free education in the world, advanced science, free medicine, national culture and the most powerful social guarantee of workers' rights country

However, in today's Russia everything is not done the way Stalin did in the USSR, and we have Russia with barely warm industrial production, utterly collapsed agriculture, dead science, a beggar, barely making ends to the population, but with an infinite number of its own billionaires.

So who was right in choosing the ways of development of Russia, the Bolsheviks or the current democrats? In my opinion, the Bolsheviks! After all, not a single word of Stalin about the industrialization of Russia is still not outdated.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

36 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +22
    25 September 2017 15: 18
    However, in today's Russia, everything is done differently from what Stalin did in the USSR, and we have Russia with barely warming industrial production, completely ruined agriculture, a dead science, a poor, barely making ends meet, but with countless many of our own billionaires.
    So who was right in choosing the ways of development of Russia, the Bolsheviks or the current democrats? In my opinion, the Bolsheviks! After all, not a single word of Stalin about the industrialization of Russia is still not outdated.

    I agree with the author, the Bolsheviks were right in choosing the development paths of Russia! Yes And EBN with liberals is everything - they just ruined and plundered!
    1. +3
      25 September 2017 18: 07
      Quote: Sergey-svs
      I agree with the author, the Bolsheviks were right in choosing the development paths of Russia!

      And this item is relevant for us now as ever:
      Secondly. It is necessary to carefully close all the paths and slots along which a part of the surplus accumulation in the country flows into the pockets of private capital to the detriment of socialist accumulation. To do this, it is necessary to pursue a policy of prices that would not create a failure between wholesale prices and retail prices. It is necessary to take all measures to reduce the retail prices for industrial products and agricultural products in order to suspend, or at least minimize the leakage of surplus accumulation in the private sector’s pockets. This is one of the most important issues of our economic policy. From here comes one of the serious dangers both for the business of our accumulation and for the chervonets.

      However, everything is exactly the opposite ... what
  2. +24
    25 September 2017 15: 40
    For the five-year period they created a reserve for centuries!
    Super
  3. +19
    25 September 2017 15: 44
    That's right, only at the very end in the phrase "choosing the development path of Russia, the Bolsheviks or the current democrats" is a mistake in the definition.
    People who finally came to power as a result of the execution of the 1993 Supreme Council cannot be called "democrats" (even in the bourgeois sense of the word).
    And all the more so, it cannot be said that these "democrats" were engaged in the selection of development paths. They were engaged in the selection of plundering paths, which, unfortunately, succeeded.
    1. +14
      25 September 2017 16: 13
      Indeed, under Yeltsin, the sun was shot from tanks, he was a "democrat", under Khrushchev unarmed people were shot in Novocherkassk, he is also "soft and fluffy" because the "thaw" started under him, and under Stalin there was neither one nor the other but for some reason he is in the view of the "liberals" "tyrant"
      1. +2
        25 September 2017 22: 21
        That is why now the words liberal and democrat are obscene by the majority of the population
  4. +19
    25 September 2017 16: 16
    If they like to say that the Bolsheviks robbed the people, for the sake of industrialization .. So they created so much that they still cannot plunder ... moreover, on the territory of the entire USSR ...
    1. +12
      25 September 2017 21: 19
      Stalin did not rob people. People themselves gave him, or rather the country, the future, absolutely everything that they had. The Russian people at that time did not have any noticeable savings. "Fat" was no longer there, something was taken out, the rest was simply eaten so as not to die.
      Stalin (not Lenin. Do not confuse) told people - we will build something unprecedented. We show the way to the whole earth. Come with me, we will build the future for all! Not Beyond me, but WITH me, this is fundamental. And the people went. They gave the country, and in fact the future of the whole planet, their hellish, on the verge of survival, work, which was practically not paid. They gave only so much that enough with grief was enough for food and some clothes. All this for a split second was not a "robbery"!
      Russian people went to all of this completely voluntarily. For the future. For kids. For the liberation and growth of all people of all this mired in hunger and longing for the earth! And Stalin, with his last breath, was with these people, with us. He chopped the path together, pressed his shoulder with all his strength, just as he was torn into a thread, like any miner or plowman.
      Well, then ... Then those who left the people (and absolutely did not want to return there. To the people. Despising and looking from high ...) again took up theirs. Eh, we failed ...
      1. +2
        26 September 2017 02: 18
        Quote: Mikhail3
        Stalin (not Lenin. Do not confuse) told people - we will build something unprecedented. We show the way to the whole earth. Come with me, we will build the future for all! Not Beyond me, but WITH me, this is fundamental. And the people went. They gave the country, and in fact the future of the whole planet, their hellish, on the verge of survival, work, which was practically not paid. They gave only so much that enough with grief was enough for food and some clothes. All this for a split second was not a "robbery"!

        Nice. And the main thing is true! It is brilliantly said. You have expressed the very essence.
  5. +7
    25 September 2017 16: 19
    Then - in the 1st Five-Year Plan - technologies were bought from America. All-all-all. And a bit - in Germany.
    The Americans built on a turnkey basis in the USSR more than 500 large (and largest) factories,
    including almost all defense, all air, motor, tractor, etc.
    Together with licenses for their products, the latest at that time, of course.
    1. +5
      25 September 2017 17: 06
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Then - in the 1st Five-Year Plan - technologies were bought from America. All-all-all. And a bit - in Germany.

      In the article about the 1st Five-Year Plan and about industrialization in the USSR.
      American business (do not forget from October 1929 - The Great Depression) not agents of the OGPUNKVDMGBKGB with machine guns "dragged" into the USSR
    2. +6
      25 September 2017 17: 39
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Then - in the 1st Five-Year Plan - technologies were bought from America. All-all-all. And a bit - in Germany.
      The Americans built on a turnkey basis in the USSR more than 500 large (and largest) factories,
      including almost all defense, all air, motor, tractor, etc.
      Together with licenses for their products, the latest at that time, of course.

      Bought, and what is criminal? Main factories were built, and folk remedies were not squandered. The then leadership did not open personal accounts abroad, and did not buy locks with yachts in other countries for personal use. Isn't Israel buying technology abroad? Remember at least the story with Kfir.
      1. +5
        25 September 2017 18: 09
        Did I write that this is bad?
        This man - Albert Kahn - must be remembered as a father
        Soviet industrialization.

        The difference is that it is impossible for Russia to repeat a similar thing now.
        1. +3
          25 September 2017 18: 35
          To call this person the father of Soviet industrialization, this may be too loudly said, but his merits in this matter are really considerable
        2. +1
          25 September 2017 19: 48
          Quote: voyaka uh
          it is impossible to repeat a similar thing for Russia

          - steal ... (c)
        3. +1
          26 September 2017 10: 05
          This comrade worked for the good of the USSR, and his co-religionists in modern Russia are working on stuffing their moshny. Aven, Birch, Gusinsky, Khodor, Chubais, Fridman,
          Abramovich ....
      2. +1
        25 September 2017 19: 32
        Factories were built. ... but not horse feed. Just as in the early thirties a lorry and a half (Ford) were launched at the factory bought from the Americans, they were released until the end of the war! And from GAZ-51 for a mile Studebaker brings! Aircraft engines were so low-powered that sometimes for the sake of weight saving even fighter radios didn’t put them on fighters ...
        1. MrK
          +5
          25 September 2017 19: 59
          Quote: Aspid 57
          for the sake of weight saving, sometimes even radio stations didn’t put fighters on fighters ...

          Well, if not by B.E.E.A.T.T. to the USSR.
        2. +3
          25 September 2017 20: 10
          Quote: Aspid 57
          And from GAZ-51 for a mile Studebaker carries!

          What about Victory?
        3. +5
          25 September 2017 20: 21
          Quote: Aspid 57
          Factories were built. ... but not horse feed. Just as in the early thirties a lorry and a half (Ford) were launched at the factory bought from the Americans, they were released until the end of the war! And from GAZ-51 for a mile Studebaker brings! Aircraft engines were so low-powered that sometimes for the sake of weight saving even fighter radios didn’t put them on fighters ...

          If industrialization had not been carried out at that time, then perhaps you would not have knocked on the “clave” now, and would not have invented all sorts of fables. As for the GAZ-51, the prototypes were built in front of the Second World War, and the Studebakers in the USSR weren’t mentioned at that time, but about radio stations, so this is all kind of crazy
        4. +3
          26 September 2017 08: 16
          Quote: Aspid 57
          Just as in the early thirties a lorry and a half (Ford) were launched at the factory bought from the Americans, they were released until the end of the war!

          Right! Well, just idiots! No, that would produce Mercedes !!! Not crazy, not fantasy !!!
          Quote: Aspid 57
          And from GAZ-51 for a mile Studebaker carries!

          GAS 51 ??? Not ZIS 151? Nah? By the way 157 "Marmont" is a smart rogue laughing
          Quote: Aspid 57
          Aircraft engines were so low-powered that sometimes for the sake of weight saving even fighter radios didn’t put them on fighters ...

          crying Everything in this world is repeating itself! So the Americans you loved at one time slammed the blueprints of the 141, transferred the Cyrillic alphabet to their letters and launched it under the name Ф 35, only in the last sheet of the drawings they didn’t notice “Modify with a rasp” in the small print, so “Lightning II” can’t get up what
      3. 0
        26 September 2017 09: 54
        A very bad story, praise to Israeli intelligence in Switzerland!
    3. MrK
      +1
      25 September 2017 19: 55
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Then - in the 1 5th Year - technology bought from America


      What can’t they buy today? And currencies like in bulk.
    4. 0
      26 September 2017 07: 53
      And what’s wrong with that, business is business, and the Bolsheviks used it! No one understates the fact of acquiring licenses or factories, for example, the 1st and 2nd Moscow watch factories were completely bought and transported from the USA during the Great Depression.
  6. +6
    25 September 2017 16: 36
    About the role of "Western" loans in industrialization, the author somehow modestly ignored. Meanwhile:
    1. "... Until the year 1934, the USA did not provide the USSR with state loans, although USSR expressed willingness to take a loan of up to $ 1 billionand the People’s Commissariat of Finance even made a detailed development of a loan scheme. Mostly, loans to the USSR were provided by private companies, in addition to that, before its official recognition by Washington in 1933, the USSR attempted to place its bond loans in North America. In the second half of the 30s, such loans were regularly placed by Vneshtorgbank and Amtorg. Since 1934, more than two-thirds of Soviet purchases in the United States were credited by the American state Export-Import Bank ... Given that early 1929 Soviet debt to the United States amounted to 350 million dollars, and the foreign trade deficit in 1929-1931 amounted to 285,6 million dollars, then we can roughly estimate Soviet debt to the USA by the beginning of 1932, at least $ 635 million.
    2. "... In 1925, Germany provided the USSR with a short-term loan of 100 million marks, in April 1926 Germany opened a credit line for the USSR in the amount of 300 million marks for a period of 4 years. In 1931, Germany granted the USSR another loan (tied credit) in the amount of 300 million marks for a period of 21 months. In 1935, a consortium of German banks granted a Soviet credit to the Soviet trade mission in Berlin in the amount of 200 million marks.Thus, officially for 9 years the USSR received loans from Germany for 900 million marks, which is about 300-320 million US dollars. The annual percentage of these loans was 6% (for a 1935 loan - 5%). "
    3. "Great Britain (annually lending in the late 20s - first half of the 30s) Soviet purchases in the amount of up to 20-25 million pounds. In 1936, England provided the USSR a loan of 10 million pounds."
    4. "Czechoslovakia provided the USSR in 1935 with a loan of 250 million kroons (6% per annum)."
    5. "Italy - a loan of 200 million lire for Soviet purchases in 1930 and 350 million lire in 1931."
    "The total debt of the USSR only to the USA and Germany at the beginning of 1932 mestimated at approximately $ 1 billion. Subject to borrowing from other countries, the amount could change upwards. "
    And keep in mind that the dollar in 1920-30 xx he, you know, was "a little" more full-bodied.
    About the help of the United States in building industry (from engineers to natural workers), the author also somehow keeps silent))
    1. +4
      25 September 2017 17: 14
      Quote: Ryazanets87
      About the role of “Western” loans in industrialization, the author somehow modestly kept silent
      - Then it’s more correct to create an article "The role of financial commissars of the USSR in industrialization"
      So this is CREDIT. Find a bank that does not like to do this. )))). Especially for purchases.

      Quote: Ryazanets87
      Since 1934, more than two-thirds Soviet procurement in the USA was credited by the American state Export-Import Bank ..

      Quote: Ryazanets87
      UK (lending annually in the late 20s - first half of the 30s) Soviet purchases in the amount of up to 20-25 million pounds.

      Quote: Ryazanets87
      Italy - a loan of 200 million lire under Soviet purchases in 1930 and 350 million lire in 1931 "
    2. MrK
      +3
      26 September 2017 00: 08
      Quote: Ryazanets87
      Also, the author somehow keeps silent)


      He not only keeps silent about it. The author does not even mention the general, Count Ignatiev, who transferred 220 million gold rubles to the Bolsheviks from France. This is from the money that the tsarist government transferred to France to supply weapons, but not supplied. The sibling shot him after that.
      1. +2
        26 September 2017 06: 22
        This is all right, and they took loans and received free help, everything was, but where did they go? on the industrialization of the country and not in the pockets of the people's commissars
    3. -1
      26 September 2017 21: 04
      And what kind of geek are you? dancing on a western pipe
  7. The comment was deleted.
    1. +1
      25 September 2017 17: 24
      Unfortunately, this is the opinion of units ...
  8. +1
    25 September 2017 18: 11
    And the NEP only somewhat stabilized the problem of providing the country's population with food and consumer goods, but it caused a sharp increase in class contradictions in the village due to the growing number of kulaks and exacerbated the class struggle in the village from open kulak uprisings

    Only the NEP has nothing to do with it. The largest uprising (West Siberian) occurred in 1921. It was attracted not only by the fists. Somehow accepting the walkers, Lenin asked: "what drives the rebels"? The answer somewhat discouraged him. They say: "we did not then fight for the revolution so that we would later starve to death." March 14, 1921 at the congress of the RCP (b), a new economic policy was adopted.
    1. +1
      25 September 2017 19: 26
      Quote: TOR2
      Only NEP has nothing to do with it .... etc ...

      For those who live in a black and white world, everything is exclusively true! laughing
      Bread wars in the USSR: http://expert.ru/2012/05/2/hlebnyie-vojnyi-v-sove
      stskoj-rossii / Check out for general development.
      1. 0
        25 September 2017 20: 26
        Have you been following this link for a long time?
        I can roughly imagine what they are talking about. After 1926 when speculative sentiment began to increase, causing the market to skew. Unfortunately, the author of the NEP was no longer alive.
        1. +1
          25 September 2017 22: 53
          Quote: TOR2
          Have you been following this link for a long time?

          Before you insert it. I will try again. Well, yes, the link copied from VO leads to 404. Cho for crap? Try this: http://expert.ru -> search -> Bread Wars in the USSR
  9. 0
    26 September 2017 07: 58
    Here are the commentators who write: The author didn’t finish that, he didn’t finish it, and thanks to your additions, the picture of Industrialization turned out to be more complete, thanks!
  10. 0
    26 September 2017 08: 00
    And Medvedev, in his studies of Roman law at the institute, apparently skipped the history of the USSR, because he turned out to be so objectionable to the economy, she is afraid of him, and he does not want to caress her. She is a woman, requires care and affection. And Medvedev from this point of view is an uncouth man. He needs men, such as buy-sell and the like. Disasters happen in our country, but this case is unique!

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"