Military Review

Zakhar Prilepin: 12 points about the Revolution and the Civil War

121
Zakhar Prilepin: 12 points about the Revolution and the Civil War



Arguing about the revolution, its opponents walk in the same circle, carefully reproducing the same, in our opinion, erroneous arguments.

1. Even if you are very fond of the monarchy, you must somehow accept the simple fact that the Bolsheviks did not overthrow the tsar. The Bolsheviks overthrew the liberal-zapadnicheskoe Provisional Government.

2. The fight against the Bolsheviks was not started by the people who fought for “Faith, Tsar and Fatherland,” but rather Lavr Kornilov, the general who announced the arrest of the empress and the royal family.

Among his closest associates was Boris Savinkov - Social Revolutionary, a revolutionary, a terrorist who did everything to overthrow the monarchy. Savinkov tried to save the Provisional Government in the Winter. He served as commissar of the Provisional Government in the detachment of General Peter Krasnov. Engaged in the formation of the Volunteer Army.

Another prominent figure in the White movement, General Mikhail Alekseev, was also involved in the removal of Nicholas II from power; in addition, like many leaders of the Provisional Government, Alekseev entered the Masonic Lodge.

The question is, in fact, one. People who oppose the Bolsheviks and Lenin really believe that Russia would be better if it were ruled by liberals, revolutionaries who practiced terrorist methods, and generals who had changed their oath during the entire XX century?

3. All supporters of the idea that the revolution was committed with German and British money should somehow explain to themselves for the beginning whether the first and the second got the desired benefit, for what purpose both the first and the second participated in the intervention against Soviet Russia, if the Bolsheviks were their agents, and what kind of agents are they who throw their curators, so to speak, and then fight with them not for life, but for death?

4. Bearing in mind that part of the aristocracy, was expelled from Russia, instead of which came, as others like to say, “cooks and bandits”, you should be aware that Lenin was also a nobleman, as well as many prominent Bolshevik leaders and leaders party. Krestinsky N.N. - from noblemen, Kuibyshev V. V. - hereditary nobleman, Ordzhonikidze G. K. - nobleman, Dzerzhinsky F. E. - son of a small local nobleman, one of the most prominent figures of the NKVD - Boky G. I. - from an old noble family, real son State Councilor; and so on. It does not prevent us from remembering that noble blood flowed in the veins of not only the writers who left Russia in the person of Merezhkovsky, Berdyaev, Boris Zaitsev. The bloc and the Bryusov who adopted the revolution in Russia were the same nobles. Furious revolutionary poets Mayakovsky and Anatoly Mariengof - do not believe it, also from the nobility. Alexey Nikolaevich Tolstoy was a nobleman, and Valentin Petrovich Kataev was also a nobleman.

In this place, it is worth mentioning that there was one (1) Jew in the first Soviet government. Trotsky.

5. In the Red Army, 75 thousand former officers served (of which 62 thousand were of noble origin), while in the White Army about 35 thousand of the 150 thousandth corps of officers of the Russian Empire. The habit of the newest Russian cinema (however, borrowed from the directors of the Soviet era) to portray the Red Guards as people from the people, and the White Guards as “white bone” is vulgar and even unnatural with historical points of view.

Returning to Trotsky and a number of revolutionaries from the Pale, it is worth noting the following. All those who claim that revolution is the work of ethnically colored groups that manipulated the Russian people are, in fact, in the role of Russophobes. In particular, for the elementary reason that tens of thousands of Russian noblemen, and officers, are considered, are objects of manipulation of several hundred descendants of artisans and shopkeepers.

Recall that the post of Commander-in-Chief of all the Armed Forces of the Soviet Republic was held by Sergey Sergeyevich Kamenev - a career officer, graduated from the General Staff Academy in 1907, the colonel of the Imperial Army. From July 1919 of the year to the end of the Civil War, he held the post that Stalin would occupy during the years of the Great Patriotic War.

The chief of the Red Army Field Headquarters, Pavel Pavlovich Lebedev, was also a hereditary nobleman, promoted to major general of the Imperial Army. He replaced Bonch-Bruyevich (who was, incidentally, from the gentry) as Chief of the Field Headquarters, and from 1919 to 1921, the Field Headquarters headed. From 1921, he is the Chief of Staff of the Red Army.

Subsequently, many royal officers and participants in the Civil War — Colonel B.M. Shaposhnikov, A.M. Vasilevsky and F.I. Tolbukhin, Second Lieutenant L.A. Govorov - became marshals of the Soviet Union.

Do you still want to talk about how the cooks and gray-eyed gangsters defeated the white-faced and beautiful Russian noblemen, who did not change their oath and loyal to the emperor, by deceit and cheek?

6. The Bolsheviks did not arrange the Civil War and did not need this war. It did not begin immediately after the Revolution, as it is sometimes believed, but only in the 1918 year, and the Bolsheviks had nothing to do with unleashing it. The initiators of the Civil War were military leaders who overthrew the king. As a result, millions of people participated in the Civil War - representatives of various ethnic groups, political groups, forces; In addition, it must be remembered that fourteen (14!) countries intervened - and in such a situation, blame the victims of the Civil War on the Bolsheviks alone - utter game and outright manipulation.

In fact: the civil war was staged - white.

7. The first laws that were adopted by the Bolsheviks who came to power were not repressive in nature. November 2 The 1917 of the Year adopted a declaration on the rights of the peoples of Russia, abolishing all national and national-religious privileges. November 11 adopted a decree on the abolition of estates, ranks and the establishment of a single citizenship. December 18 adopted a decree on the equality of women in a civil marriage. The Bolsheviks came to power as unprecedented idealists, liberators of the people and in the best sense of the word, democrats.

8. Faced with the possibility of the collapse of the empire and the separatist movements in the national suburbs, the Bolsheviks immediately changed tactics and rapidly assembled the empire, ultimately losing only Finland and Poland, which are still irrelevant and excessive in Russia. With all their desire, the Bolsheviks could not be called "destroyers of the empire" - they just called their offensive campaigns "international", but the result of these campaigns was the traditional Russian "increment of land."

A number of preferences that were received by national subjects from the Bolsheviks should be perceived in the context of the situation (First World, Civil, arranged, I repeat, not by the Bolsheviks, parade of sovereignties, intervention, etc.). To consider these things outside the historical context is not constructive.

Nothing but disgust can cause the behavior of the current liberal public, in fact, disbanded the Russian empire in the Soviet charm - and accusing the Bolsheviks of this disintegration. Those Bolsheviks who fought in the most heroic way for the national outskirts that were lost in the 90-ies as a result of the liberal-bourgeois revolution without a single shot.

9. One of the most frequently reproduced by both liberals and nationalists is the argument that the Bolsheviks “planted a bomb” under the empire, dividing Russia into republics, takes the historical conversation to some airless space: an absolutely meaningless picture turns out - the empire lies for itself, the Bolsheviks and put a bomb, then to blow up their own state.

Meanwhile, imperial Russia was no longer there, the emperor left power, and the Provisional Government came to power. Question one: would it be better if the February generals won the Civil War?

No, they all knew about the Anglo-French agreement from 23 December 1917 of the year - about the division of zones of influence in Russia: Great Britain received the North Caucasus, France - Ukraine, Crimea and Bessarabia, the United States and Japan divided Siberia and the Far East.

Let's lay out the cards again. No king - this time. There are white generals who were generally ready for the above-mentioned alignment and cutting the country — these are two. And there are Bolsheviks who opposed this alignment and sawing.

"Were the bomb planted?"

The processes of disintegration began in the Russian Empire under the Provisional Government - in Poland, Finland, in the Ukraine, in the Baltic territories - was the Russian empire divided into Soviet republics?

Those empires that fell apart before the Russian and after it - were divided into Soviet republics? Why did they break up then? Who put the bomb under them?

The Democrats in the 90s were very fond of talking about this “bomb”, the message of these statements is obvious: they didn’t want to be guilty of decay, they wanted to blame others.

Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich Romanov said: “The position of the leaders of the White movement has become impossible. On the one hand, pretending that they did not notice the intrigues of the allies, they called ... for a holy struggle against the Soviets, on the other hand, the guardian of Russian national interests was none other than the internationalist Lenin, who in his regular speeches did not spare the forces to protest the partition of the former Russian empire. "

Who do you trust more? Grand Duke Romanov or Democrats 90's?

10. Patriarch Tikhon betrayed the Bolsheviks anathema, we are told. Therefore, the Bolsheviks cannot be supported.

But after all, Patriarch Tikhon and the White movement did not bless, did not accept.

And who support? There is no king, he has otrёksya. The white movement shares Russia with the Japanese and the French.

Let us proceed from this point and operate with reality, and not with Manilov's ideas about how it would be better if there were no Bolsheviks at all.

11. The main conflict of the Civil War is not the battle of the “cooks and bandits” with the aristocrats of the spirit. The Bolsheviks nationalized the industry — most of all they infringed upon the interests of big capital, preferring the interests of the working people. Most of all, the Russian Forbes list, and those foreign financial players that had their interests in Russia, were interested in the Civil War, figuratively speaking. It was a conflict of socialism and capitalism, to put it simply.

Nowadays, this simplest essence is constantly being tried to be replaced by songs about Lieutenant Golitsyn and walking with a portrait of the last emperor.

12. In the Civil War, first of all, the Russian people won. The Russian revolution that happened on 7 on November 1917 of the year is both a merit, a victory, and a tragedy of the Russian people. He bears full responsibility for her, and he has the right to be proud of this great accomplishment that has changed the fate of humanity.
Author:
Originator:
https://izborsk-club.ru/14280
121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. dSK
    dSK 11 November 2017 07: 26 New
    +9
    The October Revolution of 1917 - the first successful experience of modern "color" revolutions. Now the same thing, one to one, the foreign partners are howling at all the voices - remove Putin and everything will be "good" ... Social revolution always chaos, destruction, national woes. Need social evolution - development of positive qualities and the elimination of negative ones. Breaking does not build.
    1. dSK
      dSK 11 November 2017 07: 33 New
      +4
      Every day publication: revolution - the mummy of Lenin, the mummy of Lenin - revolution;
      Where is the article mausoleum? hi
      1. Stas157
        Stas157 11 November 2017 11: 44 New
        30
        Quote: dsk
        The October Revolution of 1917 is the first successful experience of modern color revolutions.

        The Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 is not the October Revolution, as you want to portray, and not a “color revolution”, it is just a full-fledged revolution. A revolution from a coup differs in that there is a radical, qualitative change, a change in the formation of the state.
        For example, if we take the so-called revolution of Dignity in Ukraine, then this is a real armed coup, a decorative, “color revolution”. Because no qualitative, radical change in society has occurred. All oligarchs remained in their places! Only figures in the government have changed. Only.
        Now the same thing, one to one, the foreign partners are howling at all the voices - remove Putin and everything will be "good"
        These partners (Putin's by the way!) Want a coup so that nothing changes in Russia, and only the figure of a leader disloyal to the West changes. But so that the oligarchs remain in their warm places. But the Russian people want another! For Putin to remove the oligarchs, but Putin does not want this. Therefore, there is a danger that Putin himself will be removed.
        Quote: dsk
        Social revolution is always chaos, destruction, popular woes.
        Those who are in power are trying to instill this viral thought in us. But, as we see, according to the effective results of the October Revolution, this is not always the case. By the way, we must remember how the existing power itself came to power. None of them were afraid of any revolution! And EBNa remember firing from tanks of the people elected parliament?
        1. Antianglosax
          Antianglosax 13 November 2017 20: 59 New
          +4
          Quote: Stas157
          By the way, we must remember how the existing power itself came to power. None of them were afraid of any revolution! And EBNa remember firing from tanks of the people elected parliament?

          Absolutely right! To the very point. With a competent approach, a reverse maneuver to socialism can be practically bloodless and not one liberal one will pick it up. But a leader and a personality are needed, and not these miserable semblance that have settled in the Kremlin.
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 11 November 2017 08: 03 New
      28
      Quote: dsk
      . Need social evolution - development of positive qualities and the elimination of negative ones. Breaking does not build.

      Yeah, nowhere has evolved further ----- in the hands of 1% of the population is concentrated most of the country's wealth. Now, is there any hope that this 1% will want to evolve and return the loot? I liked the article, thank you very much for all the figures and data.
      In addition to the Bolsheviks ----- other successful projects from the realm of science fiction! Tales!
      1. captain
        captain 11 November 2017 10: 24 New
        +6
        Quote: Reptiloid
        Quote: dsk
        . Need social evolution - development of positive qualities and the elimination of negative ones. Breaking does not build.

        Yeah, nowhere has evolved further ----- in the hands of 1% of the population is concentrated most of the country's wealth. Now, is there any hope that this 1% will want to evolve and return the loot? I liked the article, thank you very much for all the figures and data.
        In addition to the Bolsheviks ----- other successful projects from the realm of science fiction! Tales!

        I am not a nationalist, but I want to know from you sir, the national composition of this one percent. And most importantly; the author of the article is disingenuous in the article and very often.
        1. Nicholas C.
          Nicholas C. 11 November 2017 10: 59 New
          +5
          I respect the apologists of Bolshevism for their faith. But you can’t defend your faith with lies and jokes like Zakhar Prilepin.
          An example of a lie. The Bolsheviks did not overthrow the tsar. Yes. Nicholas II to abdication. forced conspirators, among whom was, obviously, even a member of the imperial family Cyril. But. In these days, the Bolsheviks were already part of the self-proclaimed Petrosovit that usurped the highest power. How did this happen? Did they know something?
          Further. Since the current Leninists did not study the history of the CPSU. They do not need a hike. And we bullied her (like "Our Father"), I remind you. Already 17 (30) July 1903. II Congress of the RSDLP. The minimum program: the overthrow of the autocracy, a democratic republic, the right of nations to self-determination ... The maximum program: the socialist revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat ... Funny - even then they assumed a certain interval between the minimum and maximum. This was followed by a consistent policy, the most consistent among all revolutionary parties, to overthrow the autocracy, up to the slogans about the defeat of their government in the imperialist war in order to overthrow the tsar and seize power, and about turning the imperialist war into a civil war.
          An example of a joke. Lenin is a nobleman. Lenin's paternal grandfather is a peasant. Attention: the peasant is free, not serf. In propaganda, we only hear about the latter. The son of a peasant graduated from Kazan University. Aw, propaganda, how was this possible in tsarist Russia? Working in the educational system, Lenin’s father received regular ranks and orders. After being awarded the Order of St. Vladimir III degree, Lenin’s father received the right to hereditary nobility in the 1882 year. This year, Lenin was already 12 years old. But such laws were in the empire - in 12 years, Lenin too was nobleman, not by birth, but thanks to the merits of his father.
          Lenin’s maternal grandfather Blank also served himself a hereditary nobility.

          I understand that faith is blind, but at least someone should know their story.
          In detail, all twelve points of Prilepin were exposed by Yegor Kholmogorov: https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 11: 10 New
            18
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            Egor Kholmogorov exposed:

            As always, Yegorushka woke up. All the works of this ideologist of National Democrats down the drain, who needs him, this fabulist and dreamer about the return of the times of Tsar Gorokh?
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            In these days, the Bolsheviks were already part of the self-proclaimed Petrosovit that usurped the highest power. How did this happen? Did they know something?

            And how many of them were there and how did they influence the decisions made by the Februaryists, conspirators from the retinue of the king? Do not LIE.
            And then you have just no one needs and has long been refuted chatter, launched in due time by Shaginyan and K.
            This is how responsible historians assess the situation in the country at that time
            https://cont.ws/@lapsha71/765087
            And the talk of the Kholmogorovs, the lot of the marginal part of the intelligentsia, no matter how surprisingly this sounds.
            1. Nicholas C.
              Nicholas C. 11 November 2017 12: 15 New
              +4
              Quote: badens1111
              И how many were there and how did they influence the decisions made by the Februaryists, conspirators from the retinue of the king? Do not LIE.
              And then you have just no one needs and long ago refuted chatter,

              I laughed because you answered in style: I saw that Taganrog, so-so, a small town.
              The Bolsheviks in the Petrosoviet at the time of the abdication of the king were - thereby they participated in the overthrow of the king. And Order No. 1, the Petrosovit immediately issued. I’ll add, after that the Petrosoviet, i.e. and the Bolsheviks, too, with some others at the meeting, about which all educated people know, agreed to create an Interim Government. And about the obligations to them that were hung on the Provisional Government even before its creation, thanks to which the EaP-wu failed to cancel Order No. 1 and much more.

              Further, I cited information from "History of the CPSU (b). A short course. Edited by the commission of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b). Approved by the Central Committee of the CPSU (b), 1938, OGIZ, Gospolitizdat, 1946, 38-43. That is what you called: "idle talk that has long been disproved by anyone." How is it that, for the sake of a red word, did you not regret the Father? This is even more fun than about Taganrog.
              1. badens1111
                badens1111 11 November 2017 13: 42 New
                +5
                Quote: Nikolai S.
                The Bolsheviks in the Petrosoviet at the time of the abdication of the king were

                You will laugh with speculation.
                Kholomogorushka has not yet devoured all grants?
                Well, where are your fantasies?
                http://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/98379/21/St
                alin _-_ Kratkiii_kurs_istorii_VKP% 28b% 29__izdanie_
                1938_.html
            2. hhhhhhh
              hhhhhhh 13 November 2017 12: 04 New
              +2
              Kukharkins children who received Soviet free education from the Bolsheviks bite their hand again and again, which made it possible not to feed the geese.
          2. iouris
            iouris 11 November 2017 14: 14 New
            +2
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            In detail, all twelve points of Prilepin were exposed by Yegor Kholmogorov

            But should a person with an Internet connection have his convictions?
          3. Stas157
            Stas157 11 November 2017 15: 28 New
            15
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            An example of a lie. The Bolsheviks did not overthrow the tsar.

            Overthrown or something ??
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            In these days, the Bolsheviks were already part of the self-proclaimed Petrosovit that usurped the highest power.

            And what from this? Does this mean that they overthrew?
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            I remind you. Already on July 17 (30), 1903. II Congress of the RSDLP. Minimum Program: Overthrow of the Autocracy

            But who knows what program! The result is important. And the result is that not the Bolsheviks overthrew the tsar. Navalny also has a program! overthrow Putin. So now, will Navalny be judged for what he did not?
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            An example of a joke. Lenin is a nobleman.

            Quote: Nikolai S.
            at 12, Lenin also became a nobleman, not by birth, but thanks to the merits of his father.

            So Lenin is a nobleman all the same or not?
            Who cares how Lenin became a nobleman? The fact of this is important. The first man on earth Adam was not a nobleman either, and all people descended from him. So now let us doubt the very existence of the nobility because of this?
            You are a strange person! You are trying to blame everything for lying, while carefully pulling the owl on the globe.
            1. badens1111
              badens1111 11 November 2017 16: 29 New
              +5
              Quote: Stas157
              You are trying to blame everything for lying, while carefully pulling the owl on the globe.

              Globe and stretch of an owl on it. The main work .. laughing
          4. Awaz
            Awaz 11 November 2017 18: 48 New
            +2
            if you hadn’t read the corrected Bolshevik writings, but really what they themselves wrote immediately after the end of the civil war, then you would have understood the essence of what was happening.
            I also read what they wrote and studied in the 30s the history of the CPSU of the modern flood, if I may say so. Completely different ratings. Along the way, after Stalin, the Bolshevik ideologists began to rewrite history, fencing themselves and ascribing to themselves what they did not. As a result, you are fed pure propaganda.
            The Bolsheviks, although they took some part in the work of the SOvet, were, however, at the very meager level, without affecting their work in any way. And they won just from the same ... They did not light up in any squabbles and showdowns and generally in all the crap that happened in the last years of the tsar’s reign and for half a year of temporary workers.
            Grades "Zaharka" are quite adequate and sober. Leninists, having received leadership posts at the October Congress of Soviets, however, did not have all the fullness of power, since there formed a too sophisticated coalition, which again began to engage in chatter and not work. That is why the Bolsheviks began to suppress this outrageously and to attract old specialists to their side, who for the most part met them.
            The only thing I would add: the officers were divided honestly, but in three parts. One part for the whites, about the same part for the reds and the same third rushed over the hill.
            1. badens1111
              badens1111 11 November 2017 19: 44 New
              +6
              Quote: AwaZ
              Leninists, having received leadership posts at the October Congress of Soviets, however, did not have all the fullness of power, since there formed a too sophisticated coalition, which again began to engage in chatter and not work. That is why the Bolsheviks began to suppress this outrageously and to attract old specialists to their side, who for the most part met them.

              Then why are you buzzing against what was written by Z. Prilepin ??
          5. captain
            captain 12 November 2017 16: 23 New
            +2
            Quote: Nikolay S.
            I respect the apologists of Bolshevism for their faith. But you can’t defend your faith with lies and jokes like Zakhar Prilepin.
            An example of a lie. The Bolsheviks did not overthrow the tsar. Yes. Nicholas II to abdication. forced conspirators, among whom was, obviously, even a member of the imperial family Cyril. But. In these days, the Bolsheviks were already part of the self-proclaimed Petrosovit that usurped the highest power. How did this happen? Did they know something?
            Further. Since the current Leninists did not study the history of the CPSU. They do not need a hike. And we bullied her (like "Our Father"), I remind you. Already 17 (30) July 1903. II Congress of the RSDLP. The minimum program: the overthrow of the autocracy, a democratic republic, the right of nations to self-determination ... The maximum program: the socialist revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat ... Funny - even then they assumed a certain interval between the minimum and maximum. This was followed by a consistent policy, the most consistent among all revolutionary parties, to overthrow the autocracy, up to the slogans about the defeat of their government in the imperialist war in order to overthrow the tsar and seize power, and about turning the imperialist war into a civil war.
            An example of a joke. Lenin is a nobleman. Lenin's paternal grandfather is a peasant. Attention: the peasant is free, not serf. In propaganda, we only hear about the latter. The son of a peasant graduated from Kazan University. Aw, propaganda, how was this possible in tsarist Russia? Working in the educational system, Lenin’s father received regular ranks and orders. After being awarded the Order of St. Vladimir III degree, Lenin’s father received the right to hereditary nobility in the 1882 year. This year, Lenin was already 12 years old. But such laws were in the empire - in 12 years, Lenin too was nobleman, not by birth, but thanks to the merits of his father.
            Lenin’s maternal grandfather Blank also served himself a hereditary nobility.

            I understand that faith is blind, but at least someone should know their story.
            In detail, all twelve points of Prilepin were exposed by Yegor Kholmogorov: https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html

            Everything is very simple. Today's true Leninists have never studied the history of the party, much less the history of the state. Sometimes I talk on political issues with my peers, fanatics of Lenin. So all of them, answering the question of what the White Army fought for ?, are responsible for the return of the Romanovs to the throne. And among these people, the majority received higher education in the USSR. They claim that Lenin lived in Switzerland on party contributions. I don’t even laugh. Here (in VO) several years ago I came across the assertion of one lady that Lenin was Russian. When I asked her how she knew this, I received an answer; it was written in his passport. My attempts to explain to her that religion was written in Tsarist Russia’s passport rather than nationality caused a flurry of accusations against me from anti-Soviet to bastard ... chi ... And calls to shoot me. They didn’t read 1 and 2 Lenin’s constitutions, it’s for them not interesting, they study the history of feature films, such as "Wedding in the Robin."
          6. Antianglosax
            Antianglosax 13 November 2017 21: 10 New
            +2
            Quote: Nikolai S.
            In detail, Yegor Kholmogorov exposed all twelve points of Prilepin: https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html

            These "disclosures" do not stand up to criticism, Egor made himself mentally wretched, and you, judging by the attempts of the "argument" and the style of the notebook’s arguments, to distort facts, cling to irrelevant details, withdraw from the main thing, switching from fluffy to green ... In short, the brightest hutspa, a lie and a joke. And, apparently, in your case, this is not stupidity, but intentional misinformation.
    3. Gardamir
      Gardamir 11 November 2017 08: 17 New
      17
      The October Revolution of 1917 is the first successful experience of modern color revolutions.
      the first sentence begins with a global lie. color revolution is February, re-read the article above or you do not need the truth?
      1. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 11 November 2017 10: 29 New
        +1
        GUARDAMIR !!!! I thought this was not a lie, but a type of sarcasm, as is the case for Putin.
        Quote: Gardamir
        The October Revolution of 1917 is the first successful experience of modern color revolutions.
        the first sentence begins with a global lie. color revolution is February?

        How was it without Putin that everyone remembers that returning to this is good? Really at it, at this dsk, so everything is started?
    4. antivirus
      antivirus 11 November 2017 10: 49 New
      +2
      father studied at Yves Energy Inst and "lived, 3 students in an apartment in 52-55 years, on the Worker Village", it is nearby. "The owner of the house was Konnik-Chapaevite, came with Furmanov, Ivanovo weavers"
      There were 2 rooms in the house, in one of the owners (I remember by association that Gorky’s grandfather and grandmother are small. Puny (?) As it should be for a jockey rider — it’s easier for a horse, a grandmother is a large, tall, high-born), 2 sons grew up and lived separately already, their room was rented out. in 55 g, dormitories were built on the Paris Commune, and resettled there.
      I didn’t write it down and, after several years, I forgot the names of the owners of the square.
      "He said," they did everything right. so now we live like that. "I understand how --- I was pleased with my life in the 50s and my life.

      father showed
      GESTURE (ALL YOUR (them) HATE AND ALL RUSSIAN 20 CENTURY) ------

      !!! fist from chest level vertically down, like a saber from a saddle on foot !!!

      It is necessary to look at the living conditions in the center of Russia which supported the Bolsheviks.
      They fought for the lives of their children (each), saved from hunger and disease.
      The north, the less likely it is to survive the winter without Tambov bread.
      there was no single nation, the process of creating a Russian-Russian nation has not been completed yet
    5. iouris
      iouris 11 November 2017 13: 45 New
      +7
      The coup takes place in one night, the revolution is a systemic process. The revolution is carried out “from above” or “from outside” (“from below”, “from the side”). Power has all the resources, including scientific, for improving and developing the system. She decides what to break and what to preserve in order to avoid chaos. But, if power does not change anything, the system will be broken, to the ground, to chaos.
    6. Wagr2017
      Wagr2017 14 November 2017 19: 32 New
      +1
      Interesting, but what about the events of 1993?
      And in continuation of the topic, how much legitimate is the existing government?
  2. Masya masya
    Masya masya 11 November 2017 07: 49 New
    14
    In fact ... the tops cannot, the lower classes do not want ....
    1. Sotskiy
      Sotskiy 11 November 2017 09: 08 New
      +3
      Quote: Masya Masya
      In fact ... the tops cannot, the lower classes do not want ....

      I would change the arrangement: the "top" do not want (Putin to prevent a repeat of the revolution) and the "lower classes" can not ("Lenin" and the will ended).
      1. Masya masya
        Masya masya 11 November 2017 09: 16 New
        +9
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        and the lower classes cannot

        Here I would argue ... want? Go ahead to the barricades ... the bottoms can just ... just heat up ... or feed the cookies ...
        1. Sotskiy
          Sotskiy 12 November 2017 00: 58 New
          +1
          Quote: Masya Masya
          bottoms just can ... you just have to warm up ... or feed the cookies ...

          Definitely!))) In your opinion, there is nothing to rally in Russia for the people, only "Tse Europe and cookies", there simply is no other alternative to Putin’s liberal policy!)))
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 11 November 2017 10: 37 New
      +3
      Quote: Masya Masya
      . the tops cannot ....

      impotence, however.
      Quote: Masya Masya
      , the lower classes do not want ....
      unwillingness of blood, mind + hope.
  3. Ingvar 72
    Ingvar 72 11 November 2017 07: 58 New
    +6
    I respect Prilepin with respect, but I do not agree on everything.
    that the Bolsheviks did not overthrow the tsar. The Bolsheviks overthrew the liberal-Westernist Provisional Government.
    I want to ask Zakhar - did he teach history well? What did the Bolsheviks do in pre-revolutionary Russia, he knows? According to the modern Criminal Code, this is terrorism and extremism. Subversive activities in a warring country. Saying that they have nothing to do with it, it’s the same as whitewashing the current government of Ukraine, and putting the “right sector” on all the blame for the coup in Ukraine. hi
    1. gavrila2984
      gavrila2984 11 November 2017 09: 21 New
      +7
      What did the Bolsheviks do in pre-revolutionary Russia, he knows? Basically, they played hide and seek and chased with secret police. Someone in Switzerland or in Great Britain will hide, some closer - in Siberia. Well, the Bolsheviks were not a serious party until February. By and large, they began to listen to them after the April theses. And before that, they were popular only among workers in large cities, Yes, among that part of the army that consisted of those same workers. For example, look at the composition of the interim government or the first composition of the RiSD councils - and how many Bolsheviks are there?
      1. mat-vey
        mat-vey 11 November 2017 11: 26 New
        +6
        Quote: Ingvar 72
        What did the Bolsheviks do in pre-revolutionary Russia, he knows?

        yes, these one and a half people did a lot of work ... even in the events of 1905 they weren’t actually noticed since there was no one to notice ... did you even learn history? Or did you read The Twinkle in the 90s?
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 11 November 2017 19: 47 New
          0
          Quote: mat-vey
          .they even in the events of 1905 were essentially not seen since there was no one to notice

          Oh really??? belay study the composition of the Bolshevik party for the 1917th, and look at the surname who did what in 1905. hi
          1. mat-vey
            mat-vey 12 November 2017 10: 01 New
            +1
            And if the "composition" in 1924 to study?
            1. Ingvar 72
              Ingvar 72 12 November 2017 14: 20 New
              0
              Quote: mat-vey
              And if the "composition" in 1924 to study?

              Authorized Cheka on the ground? wink
              1. mat-vey
                mat-vey 12 November 2017 15: 04 New
                +1
                Yes, from Parvus and start ..
    2. Sotskiy
      Sotskiy 12 November 2017 01: 22 New
      +3
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      According to the modern Criminal Code, this is terrorism and extremism

      But according to the modern Criminal Code, what is the name of certain regions to free from serfdom (the Baltic States) and the whole of the rest of Russia to spread slavery for 50 years? This is not terrorism with extremism to the ethnic people ?!
      Crank, can you, for the comprehension of history, throw you a time machine in 1917? So you turn, arrange!)))
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 12 November 2017 07: 57 New
        0
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        Crank, can you, for the comprehension of history, throw you a time machine in 1917? So you turn, arrange!)))
        Throw yourself in 1918, on a visit to Rosalia Zalkind. Crank with another first letter. wink
  4. Nonna
    Nonna 11 November 2017 08: 00 New
    21
    Clever Zakhar Prilepin. I wrote directly about 2017. The same comprador Gref-Kudrino-Chubais ....... liberal rot, dreaming of a Russian woman for 30 pieces of silver to sell. Fattened deputies are bedbugs, corrupt law enforcement agencies and impoverished people day after day dying en masse from optimization of health care.
    1. Just a man
      Just a man 11 November 2017 08: 49 New
      12
      Approximately in this format for presenting history, comics should be issued for liberals and youth (they do not perceive otherwise). And then from their lips it sounds that the NATO bloc appeared in response to the organization of the Warsaw Pact (a professor at a leading Moscow university said on the central channel
      TV "State"), or that Stalin killed tens of millions of people.
    2. Sotskiy
      Sotskiy 11 November 2017 09: 17 New
      +4
      Quote: Nonna
      The same comprador Gref-Kudrino-Chubais ....... liberal rot, dreaming of a Russian woman for 30 silverware to sell. Fattened deputies are bedbugs, corrupt law enforcement agencies and impoverished people day after day dying en masse from optimization of health care.

      Some kind of cognitive dissonance.
      Everyone votes for Putin, while everyone spits on his liberal policy, which he pursues with enviable tenacity. How can you decide what the people want?)
      In a word, the Russian soul is dark!
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 11 November 2017 09: 23 New
        11
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        Everyone votes for Putin, while everyone spits ...

        The word "all" is a harmful word. Using it in place and out of place, it is easy to goof off and / or get into trouble wink
        Quote: Sovetskiy
        The cognitive dissonance...

        ABOUT! Monsieur understands a lot about perversions (c) a joke.
        1. Sotskiy
          Sotskiy 11 November 2017 23: 52 New
          +3
          Quote: Golovan Jack
          Quote: Sovetskiy
          Everyone votes for Putin, while everyone spits ...

          The word "all" is a harmful word. Using it in place and out of place, it is easy to goof off and / or get into trouble wink
          Quote: Sovetskiy
          The cognitive dissonance...

          ABOUT! Monsieur understands a lot about perversions (c) a joke.

          Is there a plug in every hole? Otherwise, how would it be without you?)
          1. Golovan Jack
            Golovan Jack 11 November 2017 23: 58 New
            +9
            Quote: Sovetskiy
            Is there a plug in every hole?

            No. I just don’t like it when a certain Internet entity speaks ... and for me, including.
            I did not give you consent to this, as did many, many others.
            "Gag", by the way, is "in a barrel", if you remember carefully. And the holes are for you yes
      2. Nonna
        Nonna 11 November 2017 09: 29 New
        +7
        Here you are wrong. The people, like the left socialists, now understand that there are no alternatives to this segment of the history of countries. The receiver is not visible. There is no consolidation of patriotic and nationalist left forces.
    3. iouris
      iouris 12 November 2017 13: 26 New
      0
      Quote: Nonna
      dreaming Russian for 30 silver coins sold

      You have given hope. I thought that they had already done this and the silver pieces skipped.
  5. Sergey-svs
    Sergey-svs 11 November 2017 08: 13 New
    13
    In the Red Army, 75 thousand former officers served (of which 62 thousand were of noble origin), while in the White Army there were about 35 thousand of the 150 thousandth corps of officers of the Russian Empire ... The chief of the Red Army Field Headquarters - Pavel Pavlovich Lebedev, was also hereditary nobleman, rose to the rank of major general of the Imperial Army ... Subsequently, many tsarist officers and participants in the Civil War, Colonel B.M. Shaposhnikov, captains A.M. Vasilevsky and F.I. Tolbukhin, second lieutenant L.A. Govorov, - became the marshals of the Soviet Union ...

    Thank you very nice article! good From myself I’ll add to this list of officers - General A. Brusilov, who made the famous “Brusilovsky breakthrough” in 1916. Since 1920, Brusilov served in the Red Army as an inspector of the Red Army cavalry, in 1924 he left his post due to an illness from which he died in Moscow in 1926.yes
    1. San Sanych
      San Sanych 11 November 2017 09: 23 New
      10
      General Karbyshev Dmitry Mikhailovich can also be added to this list.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 11 November 2017 13: 33 New
        +3
        Dmitry Mikhailovich became a general only in the Red Army, his last rank in the Russian is lieutenant colonel (1915 g)
        1. San Sanych
          San Sanych 11 November 2017 17: 51 New
          +3
          to be more precise, in the Red Army Dmitry Mikhailovich was a lieutenant general.
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 17: 53 New
            +8
            Quote: San Sanych
            Dmitry Mikhailovich was a lieutenant general.

            The fortified districts created by him in ZabVO, even in recent times, are unrivaled things.
            From application to the terrain, to quality. Unlike new ones, there is no water in those structures .. Scrap on concrete is flattened ..
      2. creak
        creak 11 November 2017 15: 20 New
        +4
        Quote: San Sanych
        General Karbyshev Dmitry Mikhailovich can also be added to this list.

        And to another son of a simple Cossack General Kornilov ... The founder of the Volunteer Army, General Alekseev, was also from a soldier's family, for the merits he had made as an officer ...
        As we see, far from everything was unequivocal - such as, for example, Izhevsk and Votkinsk units in the Kolchak army, formed from workers of the same plants.
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 11 November 2017 22: 52 New
          +1
          Well, you never know who fought at Kolchak, here lieutenant L. A. Govorov was the commander of the artillery battery there, and when he went to the Reds (November 1919), he rose to the rank of Marshal.
    2. iouris
      iouris 11 November 2017 13: 51 New
      +1
      The version that the General Staff participated in the 1917 revolution has a place to be.
  6. Boris55
    Boris55 11 November 2017 09: 02 New
    +1
    In this place, it is worth mentioning that there was one (1) Jew in the first Soviet government. Trotsky.

    Who ruled Soviet Russia in 1918 - 1919 years. New York document. 1920 g. A complete list of the government of Lenin: klin.forum-top.ru/viewtopic.php?id=388#p1625
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 09: 09 New
      10
      Quote: Boris55
      klin.forum-top.ru/viewtopic.php?id=388#p1625

      You are this nonsense, and even with a reference to the Americans, why did you expose, in order to show off, I say, or out of ignorance? You brought scribbling -... "As a white-emigrant writer claims in the work of" Jews in Russia and the USSR Andrei Dikiy (real name - Zankevich) "Well, a very reliable source ..

      There is a myth that the first Bolshevik government consisted of only Jews, because of which the words "Bolshevik" and "Jew" became almost synonymous ... How much truth is there, and what really was the national composition of the first Council of People's Commissars?
      So, who were all these people by nationality? Eight people - Rykov, Milyutin, Shlyapnikov, Nogin, Lunacharsky, Skvortsov (Stepanov), Oppokov (Lomov), Avilov (Glebov) were Russian. Three - Ovseenko, Krylenko and Dybenko - were Little Russians (Ukrainians). Dzhugashvili (Stalin) was Georgian, I. Teodorovich was a Pole. The only Jew in the first government of the Soviets was Trotsky, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs, whose real name was Bronstein ...



      Source: What was the national composition of the first Bolshevik government
      http://russian7.ru/post/kakim-byl-nacionalnyy-sos
      tav-pervog /
      1. gavrila2984
        gavrila2984 11 November 2017 09: 42 New
        +3
        Interestingly, a man professing Judaism was considered a Jew in the Russian Empire. Those who converted to Orthodoxy lost their Jewish status and could even get out of the Pale of Settlement. Trotsky clearly did not read Torah and did not observe the Sabbath. Question: Was Trotsky a Jew in terms of TOGO time?
      2. Boris55
        Boris55 11 November 2017 10: 08 New
        +1
        Quote: badens1111
        Source: What was the national composition of the first Bolshevik government

        And do you think this is the source? Putin - 80-85 percent of the first Soviet government was Jews.
        1. badens1111
          badens1111 11 November 2017 10: 09 New
          +1
          Quote: Boris55
          And do you think this is the source?

          No.
          Read for development ...
          https://cont.ws/@lapsha71/765087
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Boris55
            Boris55 11 November 2017 10: 13 New
            +1
            Quote: badens1111
            Read for development ...

            Do you think this is an official document? laughing
            1. badens1111
              badens1111 11 November 2017 10: 21 New
              +1
              Quote: Boris55
              Do you think this is an official document?

              And your vidos, is this a document?
              1. Boris55
                Boris55 11 November 2017 10: 24 New
                +3
                Quote: badens1111
                And your vidos, is this a document?

                At the very least, this is a direct speech by a statesman who was much more informed of us all taken together, and none of the Jews present that, then, that later, did not refute his words.
                Choosing between your words and Putin's words - I choose Putin's words.
                1. badens1111
                  badens1111 11 November 2017 11: 48 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Boris55
                  Choosing between your words and Putin's words - I choose Putin's words.

                  Yeah .. you and Katyn choose?
                  1. Ingvar 72
                    Ingvar 72 11 November 2017 19: 59 New
                    +1
                    Quote: badens1111
                    Yeah .. you and Katyn choose

                    And what, let’s go for Katyn - did the Poles slap in vain? No matter who. Hand on heart? wink
                    And if you accuse A. Dikogo of lying, then the answer is - who did the Wild describe surname then? Fictional people? lol
                    And in order not to invent myths yourself, read the compositions of the Central Committee of the parties of the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, both wings of the Socialist Revolutionaries and Anarchists — the majority of Jews. It was these people who made the revolution in a warring country with the money of Western "philanthropists". again the same non-titular nationality. hi
                    1. badens1111
                      badens1111 11 November 2017 22: 19 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      And what, let’s go for Katyn - did the Poles slap in vain?

                      Well, let’s. Who brought flowers to us and pecked his forehead against the wall. Telling fairy tales, in the likeness of Goebbels, that this NKVD executed these?
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      And if you accuse A. Dikogo of lying, then the answer is - who did the Wild describe surname then? Fictional people?

                      Yes.
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      And in order not to invent myths yourself, read the compositions of the Central Committee of the parties of the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, both wings of the Socialist Revolutionaries and Anarchists — the majority of Jews.

                      And what does the Bolsheviks really have to do with it, before your Socialist Revolutionaries, Anarchists, Mensheviks and other Cadets?
                      1. Ingvar 72
                        Ingvar 72 12 November 2017 08: 12 New
                        +1
                        Quote: badens1111
                        .who brought flowers with us and pecked his forehead against the wall.
                        I don’t know. (Probably asleep at this time laughing ) Yes, and all the same to me to pshek - globally share it. It doesn’t matter with whose hands. Historical justice. They did other evil in the Smolensk land, and so the otvetka flew in. The law of retribution works. With the plane of Pan Kaczynski the same garbage.
                        Quote: badens1111
                        Yes.

                        Sverdlov, Uritsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev invented people? Well then read the compositions of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the 4th and 5th congresses. wink
                        Quote: badens1111
                        And what does the Bolsheviks really have to do with it, before your Socialist Revolutionaries, Anarchists, Mensheviks and other Cadets?

                        Moreover? belay This is one of several revolutionary parties whose program aimed at overthrowing the king. And by "strange" chance, the main composition of the Central Committee All parties were Jews. This will not be dismissed.
          3. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 10: 28 New
            +5
            In order to avoid the repetition of historically false myths on the subject of Jewish Bolsheviks, I ask you not to confuse the government and the party activist. And do not make gross historical mistakes.

            Of the 15 people who were members of the First Soviet Government, there were 6 Russians (Avilov-Glebov, Lenin, Milyutin, Nogin, Oppokov-Lomov, Rykov, Skvortsov-Stepanov, Shlyapnikov), 4 Ukrainians (Dybenko, Lunacharsky, Krylenko, Ovseenko), 1 Pole (Theodorovich), 1 Georgian and 1 Jew (Trotsky). During the entire existence of the Council of People's Commissars during the life of Lenin, only 5 out of 58 people's commissars were Jews, two of them (I. Steinberg and I. Gukovsky) were not even Bolsheviks. Only once and very briefly (1917-19) was the chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee, the highest legislative authority in Soviet Russia (the equivalent of parliament), a Jew (Y. Sverdlov). SUCH FACTS AND THEY ARE COMPLETE.

            Many more Jews were in the leadership of the Bolshevik party. So, at the 6th Congress (July 6 - August 3, 1917 in Petrograd), five Jews were elected to the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party of 21 people: G. Zinoviev, L. Trotsky, Ya. Sverdlov, M. Uritsky and G. Sokolnikov. L. Kamenev was a Jew only by his father, who was also baptized into Orthodoxy. In 1919, out of 19 members of the Central Committee, there were “three and a half” Jews: Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and K. Radek. Five of the seven above-mentioned persons were destroyed by Stalin. Uritsky, having spent 5 months as chairman of the Petrograd Cheka, was killed in 1918 by a friend of the poet S. Yesenin, the Russian poet Leonid Kannegisser, who said immediately after the arrest that he did this to atone for the guilt of his nation for what the Bolshevik Jews did: “I Jew. I killed a Jewish vampire, drop by drop the Russian people who drank the blood. I tried to show the Russian people that for us, Uritsky is not a Jew. He is a renegade. I killed him in the hope of restoring the good name of the Russian Jews. ”

            The Jewish parties were part of S. Petliura’s government, the Directory government solemnly proclaimed a policy of national autonomy and the granting of all national and political rights to Jews, and created the Ministry of Jewish Affairs, headed by the leader of the Jewish People’s Party, Jacob Zeev Wolf Lack-Bertholdi, and after him Moses Zilberfarb, leader of the United Jewish Socialist Workers Party and in which Abram Revutsky, a representative of the Poalei Zion party, worked.

            Nestor Makhno severely punished for anti-Semitism in the ranks of his army. This is a historical fact. The headquarters of N. Makhno included the famous anarchist Jude Solomonovich Grossman, his counterintelligence was led by the Jew Lev Zadov (Zinkovsky), a prominent anarchist Vsevolod Volin (Eichenbaum) collaborated with him, another prominent Jewish anarchist Aron Davidovich Baron was a member of the Council of revolutionary rebels under the Makhnovist army .

            Both Petlyura and Makhno can hardly be held responsible for the pogroms, since both of them did not have sufficient power over the undisciplined units of the armies nominally subordinate to them. Later, the leaders of the Jewish movement, such as V. Zhabotinsky, A. Margolin, S. Goldelman, I. Dobkovsky, came out in defense of the late Petlyura from charges of pogroms.

            At the same time, a considerable number of Jews, who turned out to be among the Bolshevik leadership, all together constituted an insignificant minority from the multimillion-dollar Russian Jewry. Most Jewish revolutionaries, religious and less religious, were concentrated in the parties of the Cadets, Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries. All Jewish Bolsheviks were active opponents of Judaism. “Most Russian Jewry was as far from the Communists as most of all other peoples of Russia. In provinces where Jews were a significant part of the population, in November 1917 they voted either for democratic socialists (Socialist-Revolutionaries and Mensheviks), or for Zionists. Intelligent Jewry preferred the Cadets ”[cit. on "History of Russia. XX century: 1894-1938 ", M .: Astrel, 2009, p. 646]. .
            So for whom, in the absolute majority, were the very same ones, sworn by all sorts of G. Klimov and Boris55 Jews?
            Boris55 .you remind me of a certain Antokha Blagin, completely crazy already from conspiracy theories, on the basis of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy.
            One must openly hate the Russian people in order to assert that October 17 and the USSR are something Jewish.
            1. Antianglosax
              Antianglosax 13 November 2017 21: 38 New
              +2
              The Pale of Settlement did not have to be canceled and there would be no problems.
        2. iouris
          iouris 11 November 2017 13: 56 New
          0
          This means that the successors must have good relations with Israel and the United States.
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 19: 46 New
            +2
            Quote: iouris
            This means that the successors must have good relations with Israel and the United States.

            Yeltsin and his relatives showed this. Do you agree with them?
            1. mat-vey
              mat-vey 12 November 2017 10: 07 New
              0
              Gudachev-Gorbachev began to demonstrate more ... he opened this drawer wide and wide ...
    2. Seraphimamur
      Seraphimamur 11 November 2017 09: 19 New
      +3
      It is foolish to refer to documents located in the United States and written under the dictation of the State Department and the CIA. It is necessary to refer to the Martian Chronicles there will be more agile.
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 11 November 2017 10: 21 New
        0
        Quote: Seraphimamur
        It's stupid to refer to documents located in the USA and written under the dictation of the State Department and the CIA

        In the 20's, we had love with the United States.
        1. badens1111
          badens1111 11 November 2017 11: 49 New
          +3
          Quote: Boris55
          In the 20's, we had love with the United States.

          Blah blah blah. Well, why lie then?
          The crisis in the West was used, and not the notorious "love"
      2. mat-vey
        mat-vey 11 November 2017 12: 01 New
        +2
        "Martian Chronicles" Bradbury is a super thing and has nothing to do with lying tales ..
  7. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur 11 November 2017 09: 15 New
    13
    To the question "How did the revolution turn out and why did the Bolsheviks win?" Prilepin answered correctly and succinctly: the people followed the Bolsheviks. If the people did not support what would several thousand Bolsheviks do?
    1. dSK
      dSK 11 November 2017 10: 46 New
      +4
      Hello Stepan!
      Quote: Seraphimamur
      What would several thousand Bolsheviks do?

      Good question. US puppeteers (where did Trotsky come from?) German finance (where did Lenin come from and how and with what? Take off three sealed cars?) A steamer in the Black Sea with rifles is a present from Japan? A regiment of Finnish rangers, they are in the winter, at the post office, telegraph - did you come for an excursion? And the people that - the peasants were still waiting for the land - lost theirs, some lost everything and went to the Kazakh steppes and the Siberian taiga; the workers received factories and plants, where for 15 minutes of being late for work or an "extra phrase" sent to the taiga for logging.
      The chocolate king, when he was eager for power, promised his fellow countrymen that everyone would be "in chocolate." As the saying goes, "they have been waiting for the promised three years, they are forgetting for the fourth." hi
      1. badens1111
        badens1111 11 November 2017 10: 52 New
        +4
        Quote: dsk
        forget. "

        Well, you did not forget to reproduce all the myths. Why?
        For the greatest "veracity", especially about the regiment of "Finnish rangers".
        Now, attention, that's how myths are born.
        http://yroslav1985.livejournal.com/66735.html
        In general, everything is completely different. But it hits you, in general, read and learn at least something, except for studying yellow newspapers ..
        https://svpressa.ru/post/article/142141/
        1. dSK
          dSK 11 November 2017 11: 31 New
          +4
          Quote: badens1111
          lost everything and went to the Kazakh steppes

          Quote: badens1111
          "extra phrase"
          my ancestors — the Tambov peasants and the Moscow railway master — did not study from the archives, they studied their fractured fates.
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 11: 51 New
            +4
            Quote: dsk
            my ancestors — the Tambov peasants and the Moscow railway master — did not study from the archives, they studied their fractured fates.

            Oh well, then ... right, the Finnish gamekeepers broke their bones? What were they doing among the cadets in Zimny?
            It seems that only you had ancestors, and everyone else fell directly from Mars into the country and did not know anything at all.
            1. dSK
              dSK 11 November 2017 16: 43 New
              +3
              Hello Vlad! They were born after a coup, plowed the land, built roads, gave birth to children, many children. They believed in God. They were not involved in politics.
        2. mat-vey
          mat-vey 11 November 2017 12: 04 New
          +2
          One myth is missing - the Bolsheviks overthrew the king ...
  8. Seamaster
    Seamaster 11 November 2017 10: 09 New
    +6
    After the collapse of the USSR, Gorbachev in his speeches abroad repeatedly stated that, having come to power, he did everything to destroy the communist system in the USSR.
    And, the court on his cases and the results of these cases, everything is so.
    Nicholas II, having come to power, also did everything to undermine and destroy the monarchy in Russia: the gold standard, the bondage of foreign loans, adventures in Korea and China, which led to the Russo-Japanese war, idiotic domestic politics, membership in the Entente, provoking World War II (bulling about Serbia, mobilization, etc.).
    Odnozgachno - Nikolai 2nd - Putin's agent ....... pah - Lenin's agent!
    It was not without reason that contemporaries believed that the Order of the Red Banner No. 1 was to be issued to him (posthumously) - for preparing the revolution.
  9. Eurodav
    Eurodav 11 November 2017 10: 57 New
    +4
    Somehow ... with all due respect to Zahar ...
    "..the Bolsheviks did not overthrow the king ..."
    Why then do they need the slogan "Down with the Autocracy"?

    "... that it would be better for Russia if the liberals, revolutionaries who practiced terrorist methods, and generals who changed their oath would govern it throughout the XNUMXth century? ..."
    The question was somehow radically raised ... But what if we assume that the tsar found strength and will in himself, uprooted all revolutionaries, dispersed the Duma, Russia won the war and everyone lived happily ever after, and the Jews, like the Balamutes, were expelled from the territory of the Republic of Ingushetia?
    "... The Bolsheviks did not arrange the Civil War and did not need this war ..."
    But what about Lenin's thesis, “Let us turn the imperialist war into the Civil War”?

    "... Alekseev entered the Masonic lodge ..."
    Whoever didn’t enter there ... Even on the other side of the barricade: "... Many Leninist cadres went through the anti-Russian Masonic training at the beginning of the century: G.I. Bokiy, G.I. Petrovsky, N.I. Bukharin, Lenin himself, G.E. Zinoviev, L.B.Kamenev, Ya.M. Sverdlov, Kh.G. Rakovsky, M.M. Litvinov, K. Radek, A.V. Lunacharsky and many others.
    in particular, the Yugoslav historian Z. Nenevich reports the fact of a visit to the Italian Masonic lodge in Rome by a prominent Soviet military commander, deputy people's commissar of defense M.N. Tukhachevsky.
    But, thanks to Stalin, from the second half of the 20 years, Masons are struck by a real plague. So during 1926-1928 Krasin, Skvortsov-Stepanov, Sokolov, Kozlovsky die, in 1929 von Meck and Manuilov were shot, and in 1933-1934 - Sereda and Lunacharsky ... "

    "... that the revolution was committed with German and British money ..."
    There is nothing to say at all - documents confirming this have been preserved, they have been declassified, a lot of materials have been written about this from people who are involved in this issue and have access to archives (E. Sutton, for example)

    "... however, the result of these campaigns was the traditional Russian" land increment "..."
    Zakhar confuses the actions of the Bolsheviks under Lenin and the Bolshevik Communists of Stalin, and this is not the same ... Under Lenin, for example, like this:
    ".. According to American sources, in 1920 Lenin was ready by secret agreement to transfer all of Kamchatka to America" ​​for economic utilization ". But this was prevented by the Japanese who claimed it, who supported the anti-Bolshevik protests that broke out there.
    It’s not for nothing that Metropolitan Anthony of the Russian Church Abroad wrote in 1932: “All the principles, all the methods that the Bolsheviks use to destroy Russia are very close to the Masons ...”

    "... The first laws adopted by the Bolsheviks who came to power were not of any repressive nature ..."
    Well, then they got sick:
    "... The terror unleashed by him and his inner circle was not an answer to the terror of the whites, as the Bolsheviks propagated deceitfully. Even before the assassination of the executioner Uritsky and the attempt on Lenin, the Pravda newspaper on 4.08.1918 called:" Workers and poor people! Take up arms, learn to shoot, get ready against the uprising of the fists and the White Guards. Revolt against all who are against the Soviet power - agitate. Ten bullets against everyone who raises a hand against her. The dominance of capital can be put to an end when the last capitalists, landowners, priests and officers stop breathing. "And the Petrograd Krasnaya Gazeta did not lag behind Pravda:" All persons who disagree with the Bolsheviks are considered, without exception, "bourgeois", "White Guards ", in connection with which he demands:" Let us give the bourgeoisie a bloody lesson ... Comrades
    sailors, workers and soldiers, destroy the remnants of the bourgeoisie and the White Guard so that nothing is left of them. The slogan of the day reads: "Death to the bourgeoisie!"
    After a preliminary newspaper campaign calling for terror and the destruction of the remnants of the bourgeoisie, on August 9, 1918, Lenin signed a decree of the Council of People's Commissars on "the creation of special units of faithful and devoted people to deploy merciless terror against the kulaks, clergy, and White Guards. All suspects should be sent to concentration camps."

    "... Faced with the possibility of the collapse of the empire and separatist movements on the national outskirts, the Bolsheviks immediately changed tactics ..."
    Of course they would have changed, if they hadn’t changed, a people that hadn’t yet sipped terror, not yet been plundered, would have dared this power ...

    "... the Bolsheviks" planted a bomb under the empire ", dividing Russia into republics ..."
    Damn, Zakhar, well, you yourself went to the DPR, and if there hadn’t been a Ukrainian SSR as part of the USSR, and if, for example, Kyiv oblast had been / oblast, then when the USSR collapsed, no one would have separated, there would have been no Maidan, no LDNR and you yourself would be sitting in Moscow and not twitching anywhere! Submitted !!! Yes, and what ... Laughter and only the Republic of Tatarstan, for example, as part of Russia, which is also a republic!

    "... there was one (1) Jew in the first Soviet government. Trotsky ..."
    Yeah ... only he and a little more Jews ...

    After the October reversal:
    in the Council of People's Commissars of 22 members - 19 were Jews;
    in the military commissariat led by Trotsky - only 1 Latvian, and the rest are all Jews;
    in the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs - the future of the Cheka, the NKVD - all Jews;
    in the People’s Commissariat of Finance - out of 30 people - 26 Jews;
    in the People’s Commissariat of Justice - all Jews ... etc.
    Jews seized power in Russia.

    Even Winston Churchill, while still a young politician, a maternal Jew and far from a friend of Russia, in 1920, returning to the Jewish question, wrote:
    "... Starting from Spartak, Weishaupt to Karl Marx, up to Trotsky in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Rosa Luxemburg in Germany, Emma Goldman in the USA, this is a worldwide conspiracy to overthrow culture and remake society on the basis of stopping progress, envious malice and the unthinkable equality continued to grow continuously ... It was the main spring of all the subversive movements of the XNUMXth century, and finally this gang of unusual personalities, scum of the big cities of Europe and America grabbed the hair and holds the Russian people in their hands, in fact becoming the undivided master of a vast empire. "these international and mostly godless Jews in creating Bolshevism and in conducting the Russian revolution. Their role is undoubtedly very large."

    "... In the Civil War, first of all, the Russian people won ..."
    Well, yes, yes ... But why did our people snatch that? And if it weren’t for JV Stalin, it’s scary to think what would happen to us, and even considering the subsequent war!

    Something is wrong ... Maybe not touch this topic until everything is reliably known?
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 11: 56 New
      +6
      Quote: Evrodav
      Can not touch this topic until everything is reliably known?

      Maybe just not lying on this topic?
      So how, for example, does Yegorka Kholmogorov, the ideoluch of the national democrats?
      https://alexandr-rogers.livejournal.com/790755.ht
      ml
      The current slogans and programs of “Russian National Democracy” are one to one programs and chants of “Democratic Russia” in 1990, and “democrats” - destroyers of the USSR. Only with the addition of Russian nationalism. Recall that we were then sucked in by all kinds of dogs, priests, starovoitovs, gaydars and others. Like, we will establish Western-style democracy, we will privatize everything, we will destroy the USSR (the “prison of peoples”) - and everything will be in openwork. Already by spring we will build abundant capitalism. For 500 days. How did it end? The fact that the talkers who called us to fight the ridiculously scaled corruption and privileges of the communist elite of the country came to power - and sawed a huge power, giving it to the oligarchs in pieces. Arranged such corruption that even the rotten CPSU could not dream of. They established a completely deadlock economy and structure of society.
      Now we are lured by "Russian National Democracy", pushing the collapse of the Russian Federation. Before us is the current attempt to renew a completely rotten product (Western liberalism) by making a genetically modified product (national democracy, Belkovsky’s crossing with Navalny) - and again vaparize all this to the evil electorate. Having beaten the people like in the beginning of the 90s. The fact that the USSR and the CPSU were replaced by the Russian Federation and United Russia does not change the essence. Even political technologies have come into play as primitive as they were 30 years ago.
    2. mat-vey
      mat-vey 11 November 2017 12: 08 New
      +3
      Eurodav
      And you basically do not read the previous comments?
      1. badens1111
        badens1111 11 November 2017 13: 44 New
        +1
        Quote: mat-vey
        previous comments basically do not read?

        Cocks ...
    3. dSK
      dSK 11 November 2017 14: 02 New
      +3
      Quote: Evrodav
      "...Alekseev entered the Masonic lodge ..."
      Who just didn’t go in there ... Even on the other side of the barricade: "... Many Leninist cadres passed the anti-Russian Masonic hardening at the beginning of the century: G.I. Bokiy, G.I. Petrovsky, N.I. Bukharin, Lenin himself, G.E. Zinoviev, L.B.Kamenev, Ya.M Sverdlov, H.G. Rakovsky, M.M. Litvinov, K. Radek, A.V. Lunacharsky and many others.

      Same standard Masonic strategy. "Divide and Conquer. "The boxes are different and the puppeteer is the only customer. He rubs his hands and refills the gas tank.
      The history of Freemasonry began 2000 years ago. Not all Jews are Jews, Christ was also a Jew. After the crucifixion of Christ, the Pharisees Jews exterminated his followers for 300 years, crucified them, burned them alive, poisoned them with lions, stripped their skin ... What defenseless people could oppose was only an unbending faith. The apostles, on which on the fiftieth day after the resurrection of Christ the "Holy Spirit" came down (the Orthodox celebrate the Trinity on this day) "fermented" as a result of half the world. (In the Gospel, faith is compared to sourdough.) After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, Jews scattered throughout the world. The wealthy Jews, the Pharisees, moved to Italy and France, England and further North. America With the growing number of followers of Christ, the Jews - Pharisees, very smart and cunning people, radically changed the strategy of struggle. They went underground and began to destroy Christianity from within, crushing and setting Christians against each other. Christianity was divided into Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Lutherans, etc. Sects are not counted in general. Leaders of the Jews - Pharisees (they still believe that Christ was correctly crucified by their ancestors as a heretic) in France they organized the first Masonic lodges, at first they were called hospitals, then the Illuminati, free masons, and now they change their names. The same story in the Islamic world: Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites are biting with each other. Israel realizes its “over the task” - to restore the temple of Solomon in its former place (they are preparing the coming of the Messiah). To do this, "remove" the Muslim mosque. It has long been proposed to carefully "cut" and transfer to another place. Muslims do not agree yet, and the region is blazing ...
      1. badens1111
        badens1111 11 November 2017 14: 07 New
        +3
        Quote: dsk
        The main goal is the restoration of Great Israel

        What an enchanting hallucination from a person who clearly confused what Orthodoxy in general and its role in society in particular are.
        Remember, and understand, all your fuss, an attempt to disavow not the USSR, but today's Russia.
        In 1991, the Russian Federation officially declared itself the successor of the USSR and took the place of the Soviet Union in the UN Security Council. The so-called “continuity” arose - the principle of legal continuity of the state of the Russian Federation came into force from the moment the USSR was created.

        The Soviet Union, as is known, was established on December 30, 1922. However, this state entity, at least formally legal, was a confederal type association. The RSFSR was part of it as one of the union republics. And since modern Russia is a legal successor not only of the USSR (upon international recognition), but also of the RSFSR (based on the sequence of legal succession), the search for the date of the emergence of modern Russian statehood must be sought from the moment of the emergence of Soviet Russia.
        RELIGION and the Church in the country, SEPARATED from the state.
        Rumors, myths and other dirt are spread, it is not the business of those who believe, if they are sincere children of the Church, but if they misunderstand the Church and religion, then we get a demon bobbing with dirty paws in wounds.
        1. dSK
          dSK 11 November 2017 16: 28 New
          +3
          Hello Vlad!
          Quote: badens1111
          Quote: dsk
          The main goal is the restoration of Great Israel

          Where did you dig it? Who has glitches?
          Luke 8:17 "For there is nothing secret that would not become manifest, nor secret that would not be known and would not be revealed."
          Sooner or later, we will all appear before our creator and creator, Lord God. It is impossible to deceive. Someone understands this just before they die. "Better late than never".
          "God bless the soul of your deceased servant Michael and forgive him all sins, free and involuntary, and grant him the kingdom of heaven."
          “Today, at the request of relatives and friends, he chained Mikhail Nikolayevich Zadornov. Two months ago Mikhail Nikolaevich brought God repentance in the sacrament of Confession in the Kazan Cathedral in Moscow. He goes through this difficult period of his life as an Orthodox Christian who reconciled with the Holy Church. I ask for prayers for the servant of God Michael“including, may the Forgiving Lord forgive him the years of shocking flirting with paganism,” wrote father Andrey. The rector of the temple noted that he places this information in agreement with the closest relatives of Mikhail Zadornov. Previously, Mikhail Zadornov repeatedly gave interviews and actively publicly gave lectures on neopaganism and ambiguously spoke out about the Orthodox faith... http://www.pravmir.ru/mihail-zadornov-prines-poka
          yanie-i-primirilsya-s-tserkovyu /? utm_referrer = htt
          ps% 3A% 2F% 2Fzen.yandex.com
          1. badens1111
            badens1111 11 November 2017 17: 34 New
            +4
            Speculation on the topic of human death .. why?
            Who knows how and how death accepted and to what or how it accepted?
            Paganism .. okay, you sing songs .. for thousands of years lived with him, so what?
            Are you sending all your ancestors on the grounds that they did not believe in Christ to hell? No? Well, and do not impose your faith on speculation.
            It is the same for me, an atheist, that a pagan, a Christian, if only he were a man, and not his likeness ...
            The choice of monotheism, this is the choice of the STATE, and not at once everyone believed, it was necessary in those days to those who built the ONE state, and to lead to humility is to have one religion.
            1. dSK
              dSK 11 November 2017 23: 59 New
              +2
              As the holy fathers say: " Free will, and saved paradise" hi
              1. badens1111
                badens1111 12 November 2017 00: 48 New
                +3
                Quote: dsk
                Free will, and saved paradise

                That is, you did not find a counterargument against mine?
                1. dSK
                  dSK 12 November 2017 01: 54 New
                  +2
                  To understand the meaning of this phrase - read all four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles.http: //days.pravoslavie.ru/Bible/Index.
                  htm
                  1. mat-vey
                    mat-vey 12 November 2017 10: 09 New
                    +1
                    And what should Muslims read?
            2. Antianglosax
              Antianglosax 13 November 2017 21: 52 New
              +2
              Not so long ago, by historical standards, it was paganism called Orthodoxy. Due to the vigorous activity of the nitsch Nikon there was a substitution of concepts.
      2. dSK
        dSK 11 November 2017 15: 38 New
        +2
        Vorobevsky, Yuri Yuryevich. History of Freemasons. http://www.vorobievsky.ru/angel.html
    4. lance
      lance 15 November 2017 06: 07 New
      0
      between the word they wanted and made a huge difference, everything is in a heap, you want to overthrow the idea, overthrow the action. in February 17, not one Bolsheviks wanted to overthrow the autocracy, and they did not overthrow, although their support in this is undeniable.
  10. SCHWERIN
    SCHWERIN 11 November 2017 12: 45 New
    0
    All these searches today are "Who is to blame" from the evil one. What was, was. How it was? Yes, as well as everything in our (human) life. How does a dam break? First oozing water, then a trickle ..... And then you can no longer stop. So does it make sense to look for the root cause?
    In Russia, for 17 years, the Bolsheviks seized power - as the most trained democrats in the 90s. Everyone had their own vision of how to get the country out of the crisis. The goals were good in theory, but in practice ....
  11. wax
    wax 11 November 2017 13: 23 New
    +8
    Well done, Zahar! Without saliva and to the point, and most importantly - right.
  12. Cop
    Cop 11 November 2017 13: 46 New
    +1
    The question is, in fact, one. People who oppose the Bolsheviks and Lenin really believe that Russia would be better if it were ruled by liberals, revolutionaries who practiced terrorist methods, and generals who had changed their oath during the entire XX century?

    Good question. Only the answer to it has already been given. Remember October 1993. Here is Zakhar, what would happen if the "Second Great October Socialist Revolution", as Comrade Ulyanov-Lenin once said, were accomplished? How would we live now ......?
  13. Sedoy
    Sedoy 11 November 2017 13: 57 New
    +1
    Egor Kholmogorov: 12 responses to Zakhar Prilepin about the Revolution and the Civil War

    https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 17: 36 New
      +4
      Quote: Sedoy
      Yegor Kholmogorov

      He should be silent, Egorushka then .. a sort of gentleman with a cane, against a man in a war .. well, it must be, it gives answers ..
      The very appearance of this barchuk is disgusting and the more so are its essentially natsdemovsky howls.
  14. FenrirXnumx
    FenrirXnumx 11 November 2017 15: 21 New
    0
    Rare bullshit
  15. Doliva63
    Doliva63 11 November 2017 15: 34 New
    11
    No matter what the crazy opponents of the Bolsheviks say, the numbers speak for themselves: 35 thousand personnel officers are on the white side and 75 thousand are on the red side! In the tsarist army, most were idiots? belay My grandfather was from a family of the top ten landowners of the Russian Empire - he not only did not fight the Reds, he even married the “Komsomol” of the Kotovsky brigade! That is, then the revolution, the Reds, the Civil War were viewed differently than any idle chimes are looking today. The opinion of my grandfather, in particular, is significant for me. And there were a majority like him. And against whom are these “enemies” shaking us?
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 17: 38 New
      +9
      Quote: Doliva63
      And against whom are these “enemies” shaking us?

      As always .. against us.
      The best served the country, and for them, Red Russia was their own, the worst fought against, relying on the interventionists, then as part of the Wehrmacht, then under the Anglo-Saxons .. that’s where their heirs muddied the water, in the end, no matter how bad they were and the outcome one activity
      Quote: Doliva63
      enemies
  16. a.sirin
    a.sirin 11 November 2017 17: 40 New
    +3
    A more "surprising" article on revolution and citizenship. It’s hard to imagine war. In fact - a rare misery, juggling on juggling.
    The most complete answer to this case is https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html
    By the way, my ancestors fought with the Reds for a long time and hard, real royal officers. About them, by the way, allegedly "in the majority" fought for the Reds, in exile
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 19: 49 New
      +6
      Quote: a.sirin
      By the way, my ancestors fought with the Reds

      Proprietary Enemy?
      1. a.sirin
        a.sirin 11 November 2017 21: 42 New
        +2
        Whose? Your? I think you "caliber" did not go out to be my enemy.
        And - yes, my ancestors were on the other side of the barricades.
        As history has shown, you won, nevertheless, not you
        1. badens1111
          badens1111 11 November 2017 22: 15 New
          +2
          Quote: a.sirin
          You "caliber" did not come out to be enemies to me.

          Caliber, more precisely Shpakovsky, yours.
          Quote: a.sirin
          As history has shown, you won, nevertheless, not you

          Showed ... yeah, it is doubtful that in favor of white, it is clear that it is not entirely in your favor, and so.
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 11 November 2017 21: 54 New
      10
      However, then, as I understand it, the descendants of the "real tsarist officers" then actively used the fruits of the Reds victory? Funny, right. Holy fools.
    3. Antianglosax
      Antianglosax 13 November 2017 21: 57 New
      +1
      Quote: a.sirin
      The most complete answer to this case is https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html
      -
      Quote: a.sirin
      In fact - a rare misery, juggling on juggling.
      .
      So it’s more correct. Indeed, your link is squalor and juggling!
    4. Alex_59
      Alex_59 14 November 2017 14: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: a.sirin
      The most complete answer to this case is https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html

      The level of the author of this answer is such that he considers the ensigns as officers. The author is a balabol.
  17. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 11 November 2017 19: 44 New
    0
    Some bring foreign robbers and indulge local princes, while others, to achieve their goals, carry out subversive activities in the army and conclude shameful treaties. Color change has not.
    1. badens1111
      badens1111 11 November 2017 22: 21 New
      +2
      The stupidity of some .. has no limits.
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      Color change has not.
  18. Shurale
    Shurale 12 November 2017 07: 14 New
    +2
    Thanks so much for the article.
  19. bk316
    bk316 13 November 2017 20: 29 New
    +3
    I consider this argument pointless.

    Were the Bolsheviks monsters behind the communist idea to be judged?
    What are the claims? They almost all of them Stalin put to the wall, members of the CEC, the heroes of the civil war and revolution, executed with shame. Personal justice triumphed.

    The Bolshevik Party of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks hindered the development of Russia for 100 years. Yes, even if so, and so what? Is it necessary that the party be removed from governing the country? So she herself pulled away, and the mockery, which is now called the Communist Party, will never stand at the helm.

    Is the communist idea flawed? Can you indicate a better idea? No, then shut up.

    Turn the page and get down to business. History has already passed its verdict, the train left ....
  20. All the details
    All the details 14 November 2017 00: 25 New
    0
    Here are Zakharov’s points: 3. All supporters of the idea that the revolution was carried out with German and British money should somehow explain to themselves, to begin with, whether the first and second ones received the desired benefits, for which purpose the first and second participated in the intervention against Soviet Russia, if the Bolsheviks were their agents, and what kind of agents are those who abandon their so-called curators and then fight with them not for life but for death? I answer Zakhar: Ulyanov was a genius why? Because with associates clearly went to the goal. He was a German agent exactly as long as he needed to. And Zakhar is wrong, believing that the first (Germans) did not receive profit. Received by withdrawing Russia from the 1st World War. And the British simultaneously benefited. For a long time, they opposed the British Lion to the Russian Bear. And the Russian bear was gaining tremendous power in all economic indicators. And here is Razz, and there is no Bear for many years ... And then there is sheer nonsense about Trotsky, white officers, and so on. For instance. Trotsky Lenin personally proposed to head the government. To which Leva democratically declared: "It is not good for the Russian state to have a Jewish government." And he was right. But this does not mean that the ABSOLUTELY most of the well-known revolutionaries who by all means sought the collapse of Russia were NOT Jews. Kamenev, Zinoviev, etc. And the party "surnames" are all Russian. Zakhar licked the Bolsheviks so much about the workers and peasants that he forgot about the deception they were bought for. The peasants were dispossessed, the workers did not get the factories. Or does someone think that the Stakhanov miners did not live in slums? And finally, about the tale that “The Russian people won in the Civil War. The Russian revolution that happened on November 7, 1917 is a merit, victory, and the tragedy of the Russian people. He bears full responsibility for it, and he has the right to be proud of this great achievement that has changed the fate of mankind. " Before the collapse of the USSR, the Russian people did not have their own Government. The Russian people Pahal on Tselin, built and restored Alma-Ata to the Kazakhs, fought against the Japanese in Mongolia, mastered the North, built dams across the globe. Kirgizov taught to write and read. And he made the Baltic states from Mr. VITRINA's socialist life (and factories, and roads, and agriculture, and ports). The latest peep is the Novotallinsky port for billions of dollars. But in Russia, the Pskov’s huts were crumbling ... And the question is: Zakhar, what do you think, would the Russian be better if the Bolsheviks made the Great November Revolution in Britain? And Russia without shocks?
  21. Alex_59
    Alex_59 14 November 2017 13: 14 New
    +1
    Quote: Nikolai S.
    In detail, Yegor Kholmogorov exposed all twelve points of Prilepin: https://vz.ru/columns/2017/11/8/894324.html

    After Mr. Kholmogorov called the ensigns officers, officers not too different from the mass of soldiers, I realized that Zakhar categorically defeated Kholmogorov and did not read the last one anymore)))))))))))))))))
  22. Wagr2017
    Wagr2017 14 November 2017 20: 12 New
    +2
    100 years have passed. Four to five generations have changed since then. And the wildest thing is that so far no one knows the truth. Some speculation, rumors, false documents, rewriting several times of history.
    Most of all, it infuriates everyone that Jews appeared in the revolution. And Latvians, Chinese, Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, and even hell knows who? Was it possible for them? Or is the Jews such self-promotion?
    Spit - who overthrew the king. It is a pity that they did not kill him in Japan.
    And do not care about all the white and gray-brown-raspberry. Nobles! Aristocrats!
    And they didn’t think about it - on which beds would they stick their asses up while working out corvee, if not for the Revolution?
    Or is it all blue blood?
    The Bolsheviks-Mensheviks-Socialist-Revolutionaries-anarchists-horseradish ... all of them later became communists. What the hell is the difference?
    Are we really such a stupid nation - at the graves of our ancestors.
    The Germans also overthrew Kaiser. Something they do not fight from this in hysterics.
    Did Russia go up? What is this place? In the production of condoms?
    For me, the result of the Revolution is the USSR.
    But Judas is not Lenin, - Judas Gorbach.
  23. Babalaykin
    Babalaykin 14 November 2017 20: 47 New
    0
    nationalized industry - most of all they infringed upon the interests of big capital, giving preference to the interests of workers


    it is in this scenario that the revolution with the civil war and special bitterness are obtained
  24. Pacifist
    Pacifist 15 November 2017 09: 24 New
    0
    I’m ready to subscribe to each line of the article. There is nothing to add to it at all, everything is stated accurately and correctly emphasized.