Military Review

The Defeat of Leon Trotsky

37
25 January 1928 of the year, under protection of Leo Trotsky, was taken to Alma-Ata. At the end of 1927, the politician, whose name thundered around the world for more than ten years, suffered a crushing defeat and was expelled from the CPSU (b).


So disappointing for Trotsky was the result of the struggle for "Lenin's legacy" that lasted more than five years, which began between him, Joseph Stalin and Grigory Zinoviev, during the life of Vladimir Lenin. Trotsky and Zinoviev, who considered Stalin mediocre, initially clashed primarily with each other. And when they became convinced that they underestimated the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.) And entered into a political union, he was already firmly holding in his hands all the threads of power.

Pre-Congress “discussion”

To beg. 1927, Stalin established tight control over the main levers of power in the Bolshevik Party and in government structures. In 1926, the leaders of the anti-Stalinist alliance, Lev Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev and Lev Kamenev, lost seats in the Politburo of the Central Committee, where Stalinist nominees Vyacheslav Molotov, Klim Voroshilov, Jan Rudzutak, Mikhail Kalinin and Valerian Kuibyshev settled.

The leaders of the Trotsky-Zinoviev opposition did not accept the defeat and still hoped for a rematch. And the very defeat of Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev from the point of view of ordinary communists did not yet look complete and final, since the opposition leaders who were expelled from the Politburo were part of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b).

It is also important that at that time not all the Communists could understand the disputes of the party leaders. Passed in the middle. 1927 of the year, the All-Union Party Census revealed that 63% of the Communists had a lower education, and 26% were self-taught. At the same time, persons with higher education numbered only 0,8%. The average level of cadets of provincial and district sovparts schools was such that schools, before moving on to the implementation of the main program, often had to begin with Russian language and arithmetic classes.

Checks constantly revealed facts of blatant illiteracy. For example, some communists considered the ex-chief of the Moscow security department, Sergei Zubatov, a revolutionary who attempted to attack Alexander II, Stepan Khalturin as the head of the Comintern, and his fellow Vladimir Lenin, Yakov Sverdlov, as a teacher of the Sverdlovsk courses. In the Vladimir party organization, one of the communists counted five internationals. Not all members of the CPSU (b) knew even when the February and October revolutions occurred!

At the same time, even among ordinary communists, there were enough of those who sincerely wished to understand the essence of the discussions, which had been tearing apart the “leaders” of the party for years. For example, Rodionov from the Tver province (party card No. 0201235) directly wrote: “Those opposition materials published by the Central Committee are too insufficient for an ordinary party member to understand and clearly draw themselves to the conclusion about the mistake of the opposition. The Central Committee writes that the opposition to the last ECCI (meeting of the Executive Committee of the Communist International. —O.N.) has released a large “party” of all theses, proposals and other lies and slander against the Central Committee and the party. The ordinary mass of party members knows only those extracts that are printed in the reports of comrades who are speaking about the results of the work of the plenum (comrade Bukharin). By declaring themselves, of course, a supporter of the Central Committee and condemning the attacks of the opposition, the idea still creeps in that we condemn the opposition because it is condemned by the Central Committee. ”

Not one Rodionov did not understand that such a state of affairs was in the hands of Stalin. At the same time, any attempts by Trotsky and Zinoviev to convey their views to the mass party audience were invariably interpreted by the general secretary as a violation of party discipline, which threatened organizational consequences.



A serious threat to the leaders of the Trotsky-Zinoviev opposition hung in August 1927. Then the demand for the withdrawal of Trotsky and Zinoviev from the Central Committee was formulated in an 17 statement by members of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission (CTC), and then filed a plenary session. Apparently, this action was inspired by Stalin. However, having seen that the expulsion of Zinoviev and Trotsky still does not find the unconditional support of the majority of the participants in the plenum, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.) Played the role of a peacemaker. In the end, after a heated discussion, Trotsky and Zinoviev were left in the Central Committee. For this, the opposition leaders had to sign a statement in which they declared their refusal to conduct factional activities. Formally, they had the right during the pre-Congress discussion to defend their views in the party cell and on the pages of the “discussion leaf” that was published during the pre-Congress period.

Why Trotsky was unconvincing

The upcoming events clearly demonstrated that such “inner-party democracy” already seemed excessive to Stalin. And if the supporters of Trotsky and Zinoviev had the right to speak only in their party cells, then their “ideological vacillation” was exposed everywhere. In the pre-Congress period, the Stalinist propaganda machine began to work with tripled energy. Opposition was branded in all meetings and in newspapers.

An important stage in the liquidation of the opposition was the Plenum of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission of the CPSU (b), which took place in late October. “Perhaps I then retooled and made a mistake,” Stalin said meaningfully, recalling the unrealized opportunity in August to exclude Trotsky and Zinoviev from the Central Committee. These words were hardly sincere. About the kindness of the Secretary General did not indicate that September 27 Trotsky was expelled from the Executive Committee of the Comintern.

The October plenum was preceded by the following events. A group of oppositionists attempted to set up an illegal publication of their own literature. OGPU introduced its employee into the environment of the “underground workers”. Historian Georgy Chernyavsky writes: “Stroilov, an agent of the special services, offered services to the opposition members to get paper and technical materials for publishing. Negotiations have not gone beyond probing. But this was enough for the chairman of the OGPU Menzhinsky. He notified of the disclosure of plans for subversive print propaganda of the "Trotskyists." In addition, Stroilov was declared a former Wrangel officer ... ”

The provocation was aimed at finding a reason to exclude the oppositionists from the ranks of the CPSU (b). They were accused of creating a single anti-Soviet front "from Trotsky to Chamberlain" and began to be vilified in the press and at meetings. In turn, opposition leaders accused the Stalinist majority of provocation. Passions ran high to the limit.

The lack of emotion was not observed at the plenum. The historian Dmitry Volkogonov in the book “Triumph and Tragedy” described Trotsky’s speech as the last in his life at the Bolshevik forums: “The speech was chaotic, unconvincing ... Trotsky, having bent over the podium, quickly read the paper ... He was badly listened to and interrupted exclamations: “slander”, “lie”, “talker” ... There were no convincing arguments in his speech ”.

Volkogonov did not deem it necessary to inform the readers that Trotsky’s speech was immediately removed from the transcript of the plenum, and for many years it remained inaccessible to historians. The cited “slander”, “lie”, “talker” remarks suggest that Volkogonov saw the recording of Trotsky’s speech, recorded by stenographers. And it is difficult to draw such conclusions without reading the text. All the more surprising is the fact that, when giving his comments, Volkogonov did not ask himself an absolutely obvious question: why was the speech of the best tribune of the Bolshevik party at such a momentous moment for him to be unconvincing?

To imagine the situation in which Trotsky spoke, let us give the final fragment of his speech. Responding to the allegations that “the opposition is in connection with the Wrangel officer,” he said: “Only to a question posed on the edge of the vol. Zinoviev, Smilgoy and Peterson, who is this Wrangel officer, was he arrested — comrade Menzhinsky said that the Wrangel officer is an agent of the GPU. (VOICES: This is not the order of the day. Enough.) The party was deceived. (Shouts: Enough.) In order to intimidate ... (Shouts: Pretty chatter.) I suggest the Plenum put a question on the order of the day ... (VOICE OF PLACE: You can ask, but not offer) ... about how the Politburo, along with the Presidium TsKK, deceived the party. (Noise, chairman's call. Voices: this is impudence! Libel! Insolent! Lies. Down with him!) Whether there is a lie or not, can only be verified after the Plenum examines the issue with the documents in hand. (Noise. The chairman’s call.) (VOICE: do not slander!) ... that we have before us an attempt in the spirit of Kerensky and Pereverzev. (Chairman's call. Strong noise.) It was an attempt to deceive the party from beginning to end. (LOMOV: insolent! Down with Clemenceau and clemenists. Get him out of this rostrum! Down with this rostrum.) (Continuous noise and the chairman call.) (Kaganovich: Menshevik, counterrevolutionary!) (Voices: remove him from the party! Crawler!) ( The chairman’s call.) (Starlings: Down with the slanderers!) ”.

On this transcript breaks off. The roar in the hall during Trotsky's short speech stood constantly. And if Trotsky was expelled from the party by some supporters of Stalin at the previous plenum, now they were ready to tear him to pieces. From a statement from 24 of October submitted by Trotsky to the Secretariat of the Central Committee, we learn that during his speech they tried to pull him off the podium, Nikolai Shvernik threw a weighty book “Control figures of the national economy of the USSR on 1927 / 1928” into it, and Nikolai Kubyak ran a glass .

Trotsky was interrupted ten times by Nikolai Skrypnik, five times by Klim Voroshilov, four times by Ivan Skvortsov-Stepanov, three times by Grigory Petrovsky and Vlas Chubar, two times by Georgy Lomov and Peter Talberg, and each time by Philip Goloschekin, Emelyan Yaroslavsky and Joseph Unshlicht. And this is only the most vociferous, whose cries caught stenographers. Subsequently, Trotsky compared what happened at the plenum with the events of October 1917: “When I read the declaration in 1927 on behalf of the left opposition at a meeting of the Central Committee, I was answered by the cries, threats and curses that I had heard when the Bolshevik declaration opened on the opening day of the Kerensky Pre-Parliament . I remember Voroshilov shouting: "He keeps himself, as in the Pre-Parliament!" This is much more accurate than the author of the exclamation expected. ”

The comparison made by Trotsky may not seem to all quite convincing. In any case, Volkogonov's accusations against a person who tried to speak in such conditions look strange.

Broom sweeping

At the entire populous plenum, there was only one person who, not being an oppositionist, sincerely indignant at what was happening. He was Gregory Shklovsky. Here is a fragment of his speech: “Comrades, I cannot for a minute forget the testament of Vladimir Ilyich, where he foresaw all this. His letter states quite clearly that elements for a split can be members of the Central Committee, such as Stalin and Trotsky. And now it is played out in front of us with extreme precision, and the game is silent. (VOICE: No, it is not silent.) You know further that Vladimir Ilyich said directly: a split in the party is the death of Soviet power. I recall this to the Plenum of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission at the last, perhaps a minute. Comrades, come to your senses! .. The top is infected to the extreme with group struggle ... I have no words to express my outrage at how preparations are now being made for the party congress. The parties are not even aware of the theses of the Central Committee, and elections at the conference are already running everywhere. (Loud noise ...) Exceptions are increasingly becoming just the threshold of arrests. These measures unheard of aggravate the inner-party situation. They are directly directed against the unity of the party. The exclusion of hundreds of Bolshevik-Leninists from the party (noise) just before the congress is the direct preparation of a split, there is its partial realization. ”

Shklovsky was not allowed to finish quickly speaking to the growing roar of the hall. He was not allowed to announce the statement of the old Bolsheviks, supporters of unity and, having driven from the podium, called him "Christos" and "Baptist". Shklovsky soon paid for his performance. In November, all oppositionists, members and candidates for members of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission were expelled from these leading bodies of the party. Together with them, they excluded Shklovsky, who did not share the views of the opposition and spoke only for reconciliation. However, Stalin did not stop it anymore ...

On November 7, the opposition, many of whom were active participants in the revolution and the Civil War, attempted to hold a demonstration under their own slogans and with portraits of the leaders of the opposition. These attempts were quickly and firmly stopped. A week later, Trotsky and Zinoviev were expelled from the party.

The fate of the remaining oppositionists in December 1927 of the year was to be decided by the 15th Congress of the CPSU (b). The composition of its delegates, as well as their overall belligerent attitude, did not promise anything good for the opposition. So it turned out.

One of the first to the podium allowed Stalingrad metalworker Pankratov. Under the enthusiastic roar of the audience, he took a steel broom out of the case and declared loudly: “Metalworkers of Stalingrad hope that the 15th party congress will sweep away the opposition with this tough broom (applause)”.

The “broom theme” was so fond of the comrades who listened to Pankratov, that it sounded more than once at the congress. Against this background, Lazar Kaganovich, refuting the opposition’s assertions that the workers didn’t understand the discussions, triumphantly said: “These are intellectual, philistine arguments, they are not worth anything. They do not take into account the fact that the workers have their own class criterion, there is a proletarian class flair with which they catch, where the proletarian class line is really being waged. ”

The 15th VKP (b) expelled about a hundred of the most well-known oppositionists from the ranks of the party, while the rank-and-file Trotskyists and Zinovievists took up the field. The most active part in the fight against the opposition took OGPU.

In January, 1928, a non-party Trotsky, was sent to Alma-Ata. However, far from Moscow, he did not break, proving that, having visited the heights of power, he remained a revolutionary. Unlike former colleagues of the united Trotsky-Zinoviev opposition of Kamenev and Zinoviev, who wrote penitential statements and “disarmed before the party”, the former Commissar of Defense did not intend to stop the fight against Stalin.

For a year, Trotsky was under the watchful eye of the OGPU. 10 February 1929 of the year on the decision of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) on the steamship Ilyich of one of the leaders of the October Revolution was sent to Turkey - a country where in November 1920 had left the Red Army defeated troops of Baron Peter Wrangel ...
Author:
Originator:
https://xn--h1aagokeh.xn--p1ai/special_posts/%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5-%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B2%D0%B0-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE/
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 3 February 2018 07: 09
    +4
    Comrade Bronstein received what he sowed ... traditionally a revolution kills his fathers ... not immediately of course ... but when people come from the seeds of the revolution who do not give a damn about the revolution ... the main power ... is unlimited and complete over the souls of people.
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 3 February 2018 10: 31
      +5
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      the ovary Bronstein got that sowed

      He sowed, not alone, but in the large and warm company of the "Leninist Guard", fortunately interrupted and devoured each otherlike spiders in a jar.
      And the squabbles described in the article were only the beginning of the ruthless and merciless mutual destruction of "comrades in the struggle."
      But in fact, just different varieties ....
      An interesting article characterizing the "morals" of comrades ...
      Thank you! hi
      1. dSK
        dSK 3 February 2018 10: 58
        +1
        Quote: Olgovich
        He sowed

        "So in everything what do you want people to do with you, So act and you with themfor this is the law and the prophets. " (Matthew 7:12)
        1. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 3 February 2018 12: 07
          +5
          "So in all that you want people to do with you, so do you with them, for this is the law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12) - dsk

          Again dsk with its psalms. May be enough? This is not a church or a gathering of novices to read the Bible. Leave the Bible for believers, do not defile it by walking, participating in discussions in VO.
          Essentially, the article is an anti-Stalinist article about which I.V. Stalin was treacherous and cruel; he did not follow the Trotskyists, splitting the party, breaking the rhythm of building a socialist state. The state that urgently needed to be prepared for the next war, and not chatter in the Trotskyists imposed - read abroad, debate.
          Suppose Stalin was soft-bodied, they would have chatted until 1941, having met the most powerful industrial Germany with a bast peasant state, without industry and a powerful defense, having been defeated, and having allowed the annihilation of the people of Russia, and even the Russian state itself.
          Thanks I.V. Stalin for the abolition of Trotskyism in the country and the chosen course of development of the socialist state.
          1. jjj
            jjj 3 February 2018 13: 23
            +2
            And one can see attempts to create a halo of a martyr around Bronstein
          2. dSK
            dSK 3 February 2018 17: 07
            0
            Quote: vladimirZ
            psalms

            Not a hymnal, but "New Testament"according to which more than half the planet lives, because it "life program". 2000 years, countries are born and die, not to mention parties, Of Christ lives and wins.
            Quote: vladimirZ
            Thanks I.V. Stalin for the destruction of Trotskyism
            Orthodox, baptized, did not manage to finish the seminary, was preparing to become "priest". Thanks to him for saving Russia from the Zionist Trotsky and others like them for forty years.
  2. Basil50
    Basil50 3 February 2018 07: 16
    +7
    The author has completed the order. Well then, he revealed secret thoughts, it’s good that thoughts didn’t get to the story.
    The question is about the purity of the thoughts * of the opposition * who had a lot of things behind their souls.
    I always had doubts about the excuses that * former * who are ready to sell for the sake of returning to power, but not even to sell, but to pay their compatriots for * sympathy * and the promise of help. The Civil War frankly and without any ... it showed. Questions on the cleanliness of the whites and their owners do not arise. How then to relate to those rrrEvolutionaries who tried to build from RUSSIA a colony of England, France, or the United States? Indeed, in essence, they proposed and demanded, under different slogans and under a different phraseology, the conversion of RUSSIA and the entire RUSSIAN PEOPLE into a world colony. And how many RUSSIAN PEOPLE were sacrificed for this? Until now, the Bolsheviks, led by Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, have been blamed for refusing to plunder RUSSIA and the fact that they rebuilt the SOVIET UNION, dared to repel aggression not only from the countries of the Limitrophs and their masters, but also to destroy Nazi Germany, the main one *.
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 3 February 2018 08: 03
      +7
      In principle, I didn’t learn anything new from the article. I once read the Cyclopedia on this topic before, well, as if from there. Maybe now something new has appeared?
      The Trotskyists, dreaming of a world revolution, assigned Russia the place of a raw material base for Europeans. With the then attitude towards the Slavs, ----- the slave fate was destined for the population of Russia. Trotsky himself has an expression about the Red Terror that it is a "" weapon used against the doomed to the death of a class that does not want to die "" Also Trotsky issued an order
      N ° 18 ---- about the execution of the retreating Red Army. And it was he who revived the death penalty by law. 13.06.18/1927/17.12.17. Also offered to take relatives hostage and torture. In XNUMX, at the Plenum of the TsKVKP / b VOROSHILOV, Trotsky was accused of excessive commitment to executions, including ----- honored communists. Trotsky said on December XNUMX, XNUMX, in an appeal to the cadets: “You should know that no later than a month later the terror will take on very strong forms, following the example of the great French revolutionaries. Our enemies will be awaited by the guillotine, and not just by the prison. "
      The Trotskyists were repressed --- and rightly so.
      1. Cartalon
        Cartalon 3 February 2018 08: 52
        +3
        Yes, of course it’s right, and those who repressed them correctly, and so on
  3. baudolino
    baudolino 3 February 2018 07: 28
    +7
    In general, the leaders of the party and government are a solid viper where there is no decent person to be found. Surprisingly, they stretched out until 1991.
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 3 February 2018 10: 35
      +1
      Quote: baudolino
      In general, party and government leaders - a solid adder, where a decent person can not be found.

      So it is not without reason that after the destruction of the old Leninist guard, which was called bandits, spies and traitors in 1937, the Western press wrote that the VOR, judging by the sentences, committed ... "bandits and traitors" lol
  4. Korsar4
    Korsar4 3 February 2018 08: 10
    +3
    Step on the way to the ice ax. Natural. But if a person can manage his life, then what did the country get for? And for the fact that she was a stranger to such Bronstein.
  5. Vard
    Vard 3 February 2018 08: 19
    +6
    Whoever has read at least one work of Stalin ... By the way, they are very relevant in our time ...
    1. Curious
      Curious 3 February 2018 09: 57
      +2
      By the way, just like no one reads Stalin, no one read Trotsky either. Meanwhile, his work is also relevant at the present time.
      And the article is another sketch, because it does not give anything to understand the essence of the issue.
    2. lwimu1976
      lwimu1976 7 February 2018 12: 28
      0
      Behind 13 volumes.
      Father said: “You can’t throw out a single word from Stalin.” (With veneration!)
      From the newsreels: Stalin's speech. (From memory.)
      “As Lenin taught us!” A flurry of applause. Drinks water. (Etc. only spoke, bequeathed ...)
      You really can’t throw it out!
      He essentially does not write any works; what is it
      works, these are his speeches and speeches made on any
      occasion, and then the secretaries then do something literary (he
      doesn't even look at the result: give the final article or
      book form is a matter (secretarial)
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 7 February 2018 22: 57
        0
        Quote: lwimu1976
        Behind the back of 13 volumes .....
        .... what is his writings is his speeches and speeches ....

        I understand that you did not read anything from Stalin, otherwise you would not have written.
        1. lwimu1976
          lwimu1976 7 February 2018 23: 27
          0
          Almost nothing.
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 3 February 2018 08: 29
    +4
    Trotsky, before the revolution, hesitated for a long time between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks, not completely joining either one or the other, but in fact, he always gravitated to creating his own party and his own teachings.
    1. dSK
      dSK 3 February 2018 11: 38
      +4
      Quote: parusnik
      hesitated for a long time
      Ulyanov-Blank (Lenin) practiced stamps, Bronstein (Trotsky) arrived from the States - bucks.
      Mother (Stalin) - Ekaterina Georgievna - came from a family of serf peasant (gardener) Geladze of Gambareuli village, worked as a day worker. She was a burdened hard worker, a Puritan woman who often pounded her only surviving child, but was infinitely loyal to him. She was disappointed that her son never became a priest. In 1886, Ekaterina Georgievna wanted to appoint Joseph to study at the Gori Orthodox Theological School, however, since he did not know the Russian language at all, he failed to enter. In the years 1886-1888 at the request of his mother, to teach Joseph the Russian language, the children of the priest Christopher Charkviani undertook. As a result, in 1888, Soso did not enter the first preparatory class at the school, but immediately into the second preparatory, in September of next year, enrolling in the first grade of the school, which graduated in June 1894. In September 1894, Joseph passed the entrance exams and was enrolled in the Orthodox Tiflis Theological Seminary. (Wikipedia)
      Orthodox, baptized, I didn’t finish the seminary, I was preparing to become a priest. Thanks to him for saving Russia from the Zionist Trotsky and others like them for forty years.
      1. Hantengri
        Hantengri 3 February 2018 12: 24
        +4
        Quote: dsk
        Ulyanov-Blank (Lenin) worked out stamps

        Do you have the secret materials of the German special services on hand that prove this irrefutably, or is this, simply, based on nothing, your personal opinion?
        Quote: dsk
        Bronstein (Trotsky), who arrived from the United States - bucks.

        Similarly. (with the replacement of "German" by "American")
  7. Horseman without a head
    Horseman without a head 3 February 2018 09: 01
    16
    Still not a defeat
    To be with an ice ax in the bowler)
  8. Mamka pula
    Mamka pula 3 February 2018 11: 05
    19
    I do not like Trotsky
    Labor armies, brutality in civil
    And like a demon!
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. Dashing
    Dashing 3 February 2018 15: 09
    +3
    The argument was judged by history. Stalin created a powerful social state, his name is still in the hearts of millions, but Leva Bronshtein was still intriguing, and peeing worthless little books, preparing terror and aggression against his country of birth.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 3 February 2018 20: 30
      +1
      "Stalin created a powerful social state" ////

      Which did not live very long.
      1. Dashing
        Dashing 4 February 2018 09: 50
        +1
        voyaka uh, which in the USSR was neither powerful nor social. Modern RF lives only by its remnants. By the way, Comrade Stalin also had a hand in the appearance of your state.
      2. CentDo
        CentDo 5 February 2018 11: 13
        +1
        Israel then lived much longer. Just the same state with a long history.
    2. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 6 February 2018 15: 26
      +1
      Quote: DARK
      The argument was judged by history. Stalin created a powerful social state, his name is still in the hearts of millions, but Leva Bronshtein was still intriguing, and peeing worthless little books, preparing terror and aggression against his country of birth.


      Aha - “millions” - here it is a “social state” or submit to either the camp or the grave - the choice is not great.

      Excavation Zolotaya Gora South Ural - burial of the repressed in former gold mines.
      Here are the remnants of those who disagree - all over the country in mines, layers to the top ...
      The apotheosis of the social state according to Stalin.
      1. Dashing
        Dashing 7 February 2018 16: 36
        +3
        DimerVladimer, after excavations in 1989, 350 bodies of bodies that died between 1936-39 were recovered. It is a fact. At the insistence of Memorial activists, a temporary monument was erected to victims of repression. However, according to Western media, in particular, the Times newspaper, 80000 people were buried in the Golden Mountain near Chelyabinsk. According to other "estimates" - from 12000 to 30000 people. However, according to official documents of the NKVD, between 1925 and 1953, 11592 people were buried in various places in the Chelyabinsk Region, not only on the Golden Mountain. In addition, according to the Ministry of Health of the Chelyabinsk Region, on the Golden Mountain, among other cemeteries, they buried those who died from wounds from Chelyabinsk hospitals. In this situation, your example of burials on the Golden Mountain is not thorough, as well as the thesis "here it is a" social state "or submit to either the camp or the grave - the choice is not great." You are like Solzhenitsyn, who claimed that 60 MILLION perished in the camps of the Gulag. Soviet citizens. Do you know that in our humanistic time, more is sitting behind bars than under inhuman Stalin. No need to kick a dead lion, comrade captain, do not be a hyena.
  11. samarin1969
    samarin1969 3 February 2018 20: 13
    0
    The article is brilliant! ... Well, the morals of these "titans of thought", "mind, honor and conscience" ... Only this "brawl" cost the Russian people.
    1. ver_
      ver_ 11 February 2018 11: 02
      0
      ... well, so they are God's chosen ones (85% of the government) ..
  12. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 3 February 2018 20: 27
    +2
    Such decisive ones as Trotsky are needed at critical moments: a military coup in Petrograd,
    rout of Denikin and Kolchak.
    In peacetime, schemers win, not fighters. Therefore, Trotsky was doomed. Stalin prepared the decisions of the congresses quietly, behind the curtains. The congresses themselves were already a farce. Doomed "eaten".
    But in general, both: Stalin and Trotsky - two boots of steam. Both have: victory at all costs, the end justifies the means. The methods were different, but to the ears in the blood - both.
    1. lwimu1976
      lwimu1976 7 February 2018 12: 32
      0
      It is enough to refer to the example of Trotsky, who, as it turns out, is not
      was the central figure of the October Revolution, was not the creator and
      the leader of the Red Army, but simply was a foreign spy.
      1. lwimu1976
        lwimu1976 7 February 2018 12: 35
        0
        It was perfectly clear that Trotsky, like Lenin, was a fanatic
        communist dogma (only less flexible). His sole purpose
        there was also the establishment of communism. About the welfare of the people, a question for him could
        stand only as some kind of abstract norm of the distant future, and indeed
        was it set?
        But then I had to mentally divide the rulers of Russia into three
        different groups: the first - Lenin and Trotsky - fanatics of dogma; they are
        dominated in the years 1917 - 1922, but now they already represented
        past. In power and in the struggle for power there were two other groups, not
        fanatics of dogma, but the practice of communism. One group - Zinoviev and
        Kamenev, the other - Stalin and Molotov. For them, communism was a method.
        Justified method of gaining power and continuing
        to justify oneself by the method of domination. Zinoviev and Kamenev were
        practices of using power; inventing nothing new, they
        tried to continue the Leninist ways. Stalin and Molotov stood in
        the head of the apparatchiks, who gradually seized power, so that by it
        to use; as is now customary to say, groups of "bureaucratic
        rebirth "or" degeneration "of the party.
  13. Streletskos
    Streletskos 3 February 2018 21: 56
    15
    Hit the defeatist
    Poke it
    And rightly so!
  14. captain
    captain 6 February 2018 16: 20
    0
    Thanks to comrade Stalin, I cleaned the CPSU (b) from the Bundists and other executioners of the Russian people
  15. Nukesmoke
    Nukesmoke 6 February 2018 16: 30
    0
    Decisive people - decisive measures.
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Jääkorppi
    Jääkorppi April 29 2020 11: 05
    0
    Without a description of the full factional alignment, and relying only on fakes and on the nonsense of the anti-adviser Volkogonov, nothing good can be written. Moreover, again everything was blamed on one, albeit brilliant one, from the secretaries of the Central Committee of Stalin. The level of kindergarten articles.