Military Review

Why did the Soviet Union die?

148
The era of “great stagnation” in the USSR began when the party elite was frightened of the future, frightened of its people, their passionarity, enthusiasm and creativity. Instead of development, the post-Stalinist leadership chose stability, existence. Instead of change, immutability. The Soviet elite no longer needed a new reality, a "bright future" for everyone.




Now in Moscow they were solving the problem of how to come to terms with the old world, the capitalist (western) system, and agree with the masters of the West about coexistence. In fact, it was surrender - reconciliation and coexistence meant giving up the struggle with an unjust concept of life, with the gradual surrender of positions and involvement in the Western system. Moreover, when abandoning its development project, the great Russia (USSR) was bound to become a cultural, technological semi-colonial, raw material periphery of the West. What we have seen in 1990 — 2000-s are seen today. No other is given. Either original, own, Russian development project, based on Russian civilization, national code, or slaveryperhaps first in the illusions of "freedom" and consumer paradise. But to pay for this "paradise" will have the future of entire generations and the faithful past of a great power.

After the removal of Stalin, the Soviet elite began to degenerate, and each of its generation was weaker and more painful than the previous one. Which led to the disaster in 1991. Moreover, the disaster has not yet ended and continues. Its development was only frozen in the 2000s. But the process of decay continues. The core of great Russia (USSR) - the Russian Federation, still exists. The West is still waging a war of annihilation, which will be decided by the liquidation of the “Russian question” - Russian civilization and people. A terrible and bloody tragedy takes place right before our eyes. Even the hassle of information technology and the digital world can no longer cover the obvious. The Russians are dying, and if there is no radical change, they will not survive the 1990st century. They will leave miserable fragments of the once great people, "ethnographic material", which will be absorbed by the global South, North and China. The situation has already reached the point where in the 2000s and even XNUMXs it would have seemed crazy nonsense - before the fratricidal war in the Donbass, the Russians against the Russians, two Russian states, the Russian Federation and Little Russia (Ukraine), pitted against each other. The masters of the West raised an aggressive, oligarchic, gangster-Nazi regime in small Russia that hates everything Russian and wipes out the dying fragment of the Russian world, it historical cradle. The situation is catastrophic, and most people do not even see what is happening.

Thus, the Soviet elite abandoned its own development project and began to look for opportunities for rapprochement with the West. They bet on material needs, personal, clan and group interests. Matter defeated the spirit. The heirs of Stalin at one point devalued all the exploits, heroism, and many-million losses of the people. They dealt a fatal blow to the Soviet civilization, the project and the new society of the future. They betrayed the project of Russian (Soviet) globalization on the principles of co-flourishing.

It is clear that, by inertia, the country was still going forward, under Khrushchev and Brezhnev there were still great victories and achievements, discoveries and breakthroughs. Schools and institutes were built, roads and bridges, space and military technologies showed amazing possibilities of future reality. But it was already inertia, not a conscious movement. Why did this happen? Obviously, because of the psychology, moral qualities of the then party elite. Party nobility was based on material, selfish interests. She wanted power for personal, clan, group interests. These people easily became the ranks of the "fifth column", "enemies of the people." They wanted to “live beautifully”, as representatives of the western elite lived abroad. As soon as the process of “stripping” and updating the elite ceased, its rotting began.

These people clung to power with all their strength, since power provided wide material possibilities. Hence the rapid corruption of power, the rapid fouling of the "elite" with bonds, capital, property, luxury goods, and deliberate overconsumption. "Elite" falls away from civilizational, national development tasks and turns into looters, thieves, mafia. Losing support among the people and looking for contacts with the same mafia abroad. All this we have perfectly observed and are now observing in the vast expanses of the former USSR. It is clear that the percentage of active “rats” was initially small. The bulk of the party and bureaucracy of the USSR were ordinary people, passive and driven. But a small part did the job - passionate (with a minus sign), energetic, cunning and cynical. All sorts of Khrushchev, Gorbachev, Wisdom, Yakovlev, Chubais and Gaidars. So the people closed the door to the future.

Moreover, the 1960 — 1970 years are considered the “golden age” of the USSR. There was still hope for a brighter future. New generations were born and raised who either partially affected or did not see the horrors of the Civil War, the subsequent devastation, labor, blood and sweat of industrialization and collectivization, the terrible Great Patriotic War. For the first time in the history of Russia-Russia, the country lived in safety, having the most powerful armed forces on the planet. The constant threat of war is a thing of the past. People saw how life is improving literally before our eyes. Reforms of Kosygin, a Stalinist nominee, a brilliant business executive and the cleverest man, continued the work of Stalin. Kosygin tried to spur production, improve the lives of the best workers, those who work better than loafers. At the same time, public funds developed, from which medical care, pensions, sanatorium treatment, trips, etc. were paid. As a result, positive structural changes occurred in the Soviet economy.

The country made a new breakthrough. So, the Soviet Union made a breakthrough in radio electronics and aircraft. In the Union, they are creating the first communications satellites and deploying ground-based space communications complexes. The automotive industry is entering a new level. Soviet cars were then sold abroad and valued. The USSR then did not lag behind America in the creation of large computers. And he went on his course. Housing construction proceeded at an increasing rate. Families received apartments for free! Large masses produced their own household appliances, electronics, almost not inferior to Western models. Developed culture, art. The country was the most reading in the world. Nowhere in the world have young people had such opportunities to develop their intellect and creative abilities. Millions of pensioners have received, albeit a poor, but secure, calm old age.

The chemical industry, oil production and refining are developing. Kosygin's government is investing in exploration, discovering vast deposits of oil and gas. New mining methods are being mastered. It is worth noting that most of the refineries were built back in 1930 — 1960-s. In 1970, oil factories were not built, since Brezhnev began to sell (with high oil prices) oil abroad.

Thus, the development potential of the USSR economy was enormous! The problem was that the party elite had already abandoned their own project-concept of development and lost the “keys to the sky” (the influx of creative energy necessary for a breakthrough into the future). All the attention of the nomenclature was focused on the struggle for power. The bargaining began with the masters of the West for favorable terms of “rapprochement” and coexistence (in fact, absorption by the West of the social camp and the USSR). The party elite dreamed of becoming part of a global "elite". Therefore, any novelty, violation of stability scared power. And reforms Kosygin turned.

Under Brezhnev, the nomenklatura began to look for a more peaceful way of preserving the status quo. And found it. Oil. Huge reserves of "black gold", necessary for the global economy. In 1967, Moscow received ample oil from Western Siberia. In addition, another Arab-Israeli war began, and oil prices jumped sharply. At the end of the 1960-s, the Union begins a massive export of oil. During the Arab-Israeli war 1973, the price of "black gold" rose sharply again. It seemed that in Moscow they found "Eldorado" - a golden country. Currency gushed into the USSR. As a result, the economy was placed on the sale of raw materials abroad. The transformation of the Soviet economy into the economy of the "pipe" began. It came to the point that they even stopped the development of oil refining. It should be remembered that the USSR kept its production to the last, despite the development of negative trends. Yeltsin, Gaidar and Chubais destroyed their production in 1990-s and then their successors, the tandem of Putin and Medvedev, in 2000-s. At the same time, a stratum of capitalist oligarchs and the comprador bourgeoisie, thriving on the sale of raw materials and devouring their own country, was created.

The economic, social, political and psychological consequences of the “oil miracle” in the USSR were monstrous. In fact, the people and the authorities under Brezhnev made a “big deal”. The working people lived better and lower than their means, raising their standard of living apart from the increase in production efficiency, labor productivity and production growth. Additional consumer goods were purchased for the currency. The “golden age” of the Soviet inhabitant began. In exchange, the Soviet elite received an "indulgence", the tacit approval of the majority, the opportunity to blather the problem of abandoning development, to rot the swamp of stability. A gradual privatization of the national wealth of the nomenklatura begins, the cultivation of national clans of marauders, future khans-bais-presidents in the Transcaucasus, Central Asia, etc.

There is nothing surprising in this process. Usually a person tries to live in conditions of conservation of resources, energy. Oil "freebie" corrupted the power and the people. Labor criteria were perverted. Why work as a “Stakhanovite” if the country is rich in resources, oil. The standard of living broke away from the real performance. It does not matter how to work, if a lot of resources. In such a system, there is no need to develop, as a person, a product. Why maintain a high level of engineering corps and its high status, if so come down? Most bought a "freebie." They began to build "oil communism", which literally in a decade and a half killed the great Soviet empire.

In fact, under Putin, this “big deal” was repeated. Oil was expensive. Petrodollars flowed like a river. The population lived beyond their means. With the collapse, robbery and sale of the heritage of the past and the capital of future generations. In the conditions of the death of its own production, the country was filled up with consumer goods (as it turned out later, often these goods, for example, food, are much worse quality than the Soviet ones). The "elite" lived in luxury, but crumbs fell off the master's table. In exchange, the people, further deceived by the taint of TV and other media that suggested that the country "rises from its knees" and soon we will live as in Portugal, turned a blind eye to the terrible growth of corruption and theft. The fact that the future of the country is sold. To the fact that the top of the country, from deputies and officials to the creative intelligentsia, is trying with all its might to become part of the West, it transfers capital, families and children. That the country and the people do not have a goal, a project and a development program. That conscience and truth are replaced by the ideology of the "golden calf." What is the extinction of the Russian superethnos. And there is almost no time left to save civilization, the country and the people.
Author:
Articles from this series:
On the essence of Brezhnev's "stagnation"
148 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Hole puncher
    Hole puncher 4 December 2018 05: 50
    +8
    After the removal of Stalin, the Soviet elite began to degenerate, and each of its generation was weaker and more painful than the previous one.

    If the system is so dependent on one person, then it is not viable initially. The Soviet elite didn’t fly from another planet, they were Stalin’s comrades-in-arms, PERSONALLY HIS SELECTION. If he gathered such people around him, then he was to blame.
    1. IGOR GORDEEV
      IGOR GORDEEV 4 December 2018 07: 31
      -2

      Hole puncher
      If the system is so dependent on one person, then it is not viable initially.

      How in a country like Russia to make it independent of one ruler? For centuries, we have developed such a way. The party and parliament with a strong ruler you yourself know in what position.
      1. Hole puncher
        Hole puncher 4 December 2018 07: 49
        +5
        Quote: IGOR GORDEEV
        How in a country like Russia to make it independent of one ruler?

        Do we have such a hopeless people living like in Zimbabwe?
        History knows many examples when centuries-old ways broke, for example Japan, that's where centuries the dependence on the master was cultivated.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 4 December 2018 10: 35
          +4
          Quote: Puncher
          and Japan, for example, where for centuries dependence on the master was cultivated.

          In this regard, nothing has changed there.
        2. Alber
          Alber 8 December 2018 21: 35
          -1
          Quote: Puncher
          Quote: IGOR GORDEEV
          How in a country like Russia to make it independent of one ruler?

          Do we have such a hopeless people living like in Zimbabwe?
          History knows many examples when centuries-old ways broke, for example Japan, that's where centuries the dependence on the master was cultivated.

          Zionofascism is to blame for everything including the death of the country
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 4 December 2018 07: 32
      -6
      Quote: Puncher
      If the system is so dependent on one person, then it is not viable initially. The Soviet elite didn’t fly from another planet, they were Stalin’s comrades-in-arms, PERSONALLY HIS SELECTION. If he gathered such people around him, then he was to blame.

      It turned out to be unviable because it lived due to the wild overstrain of the forces of the people, for which it barbarously used the most priceless, irreplaceable and unique resource -human.

      As this supposedly cheap and endless resource ended, the system ended. It turned out that it was by no means cheap, but the most expensive. The flow of youth in early 80s of dying In the Russian countryside, the system collapsed in the late 80s: such is the "random" pattern.

      Tore off people: only for the first five year plan the number of births has decreased almost twice- an unprecedented event in the history of peoples. They even banned abortion, but the situation never returned, it only worsened, until after a short time, it did not even die out (since 1964).
      It turned out that it is IMPOSSIBLE to live all the time in a state of emergency and "we will not stand the price" (which, by the way, Khrushchev and Brezhnev understood, but could not change anything)).

      Yes, and abortion culture, which FIRST in the world introduced by the Bolsheviks in 1920, 50 years earlier France, USA, etc. , has already taken its deep destructive roots, killing tens of millions of Russian citizens.

      That's the result ....

      1. invisibility
        invisibility 4 December 2018 08: 37
        +12
        Olgovich, are you tired of lying?

        1913 (Russian Empire without Finland) ↗163 700 000 [10]
        1920 (January) ↘137 727 000 [11]
        1926 (December) ↗147 027 915 [11]
        1927 (December) ↗150 478 000 [12]
        1929 (January) ↗154 226 000 [13]
        1937 (January) ↗164 500 000 [11]
        1939 (January) ↗170 557 000 [11]
        1941 (June) ↗195 392 000 [11]
        1945 (December) ↘172 013 000 [11]
        1950 (January) ↗179 229 000
        1951 (January) ↗182 321 000
        1953 (January) ↗188 700 000
        1959 (January) ↗208 808 000
        1970 (January) ↗241 720 000
        1979 (January) ↗262 436 227
        1985 (January) ↗276 300 000
        1989 (January) ↗286 700 000
        1991 (December) ↗294 008 571

        From Wikipedia ...
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 4 December 2018 09: 18
          -4
          Quote: invisible
          Olgovich, are you tired of lying?

          Invisibility, do not you think and study, not tired?
          Chop on the nose-nodule:
          not a single generation of Russians, born after 1910 and those who entered an active reproductive age, starting from the era of the “great turning point”, from the late 1920s to the beginning of the 1930s, did not reproduce itself. While there were few such generations in the population and the overall birth rate in the country was determined by older cohorts, it remained relatively high. But already in the first post-war decade, all cohorts of women with higher birth rates gradually fell outside the reproductive age, they were almost completely replaced by younger cohorts, the birth rate of which also continued to decline.
          http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2010/0417/tema02.php

          Since 1964, the reproduction rate is LESS than 1, this is depopulation, i.e. extinction. In the USSR rapid aging of the population and fewer births. And the USSR - the FIRST in Europe came to depopulation, although before the Thief, the Russians were almost the fastest growing people The world.These are documentary FACTS.

          They drew out the "bottomless" free Russian village to the bottom and all-collapse.


          If it doesn’t, it’s easier: in a family of two people, only one child was born and this, as it were, increases the family by 33%, but it is dying out.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 December 2018 09: 40
            +21
            Quote: Olgovich
            If it doesn’t, it’s easier: in a family of two people, only one child was born and this, as it were, increases the family by 33%, but it is dying out.

            Olgovich, well, don’t you write this, please :)))))) For the population, the 2 indicator is important - mortality and fertility. Throughout the USSR, fertility exceeded mortality. And if this nonsense
            Quote: Olgovich
            not a single generation of Russians born after the 1910 year and having entered an active reproductive age, starting from the era of the “great turning point”, the end of the 1920's and the beginning of the 1930's, did not reproduce itself.

            If it were true, then a country from the same 20-30 years would have sat in a demographic hole. And this was not even close, so the source you cite is a lie
            1. Foul skeptic
              Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 10: 30
              -6
              Olgovich, well, you don’t write this, please :)))))) For the population, 2 indicators are important - mortality and fertility. Throughout the USSR, fertility exceeded mortality.

              Olgovich is right in this sentence
              in a family of two people only one child was born and this, as it were, an increase in the family by 33%, but she is dying out

              His conclusions are, as always, ridiculous, and the premises for these conclusions are also divorced from reality. But it is in this sentence that he is right.
              1. Olgovich
                Olgovich 4 December 2018 11: 12
                -10
                Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                His conclusions are, as always, ridiculous, and the premises for these conclusions are also divorced from reality.

                1. What are absurd? This, by the way, is not my conclusions, but scientists
                2. Refute the learned demographers, including and Soviet, recorded depopulation from 1964-1970
                1. syndicalist
                  syndicalist 5 December 2018 06: 58
                  +6
                  How can you deny the obvious at all? The Russian nation is dying out and arguing with this is the same as proving that the Earth is not round. By the way, there are a lot of people who prove, using "scientific" arguments, that the Earth is flat. Those who wish can Google dozens of videos with similar reasoning. When I was in school (in the 60s) in our class (43 people) there was not a single family with 3 or more children. Here and statistics are not needed. A family with 3 children was looked at either with admiration or with bewilderment. Now the situation, if it has changed, is for the worse. The son graduated from school 12 years ago and among his classmates there is not a single one who has given birth to a child. Whether this process can be deployed is another question. Whether it is necessary to do this is the third question.
              2. NordUral
                NordUral 9 December 2018 13: 14
                +4
                Timur! В This he is right in the proposal (as in the particular case). But his birthrate statistics in the USSR refute his. I’ll tell you about mine. Mother and father had two of us, cousins ​​and second cousins ​​of two or three. And we were all urban. In the Vologda hinterland - the homeland of my mother - almost all had more than three children. One child was a rarity in the USSR.
            2. Olgovich
              Olgovich 4 December 2018 10: 38
              -12
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Olgovich, well, do not write this, please :))))))

              Andrey from Chelyabinsk, well, do not write this, please:
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              For the population, 2 indicators are important - mortality and fertility.

              if you understand a little about it. In the science of demography, there are much more such indicators.
              And then you had everything, it turns out, beautifully and well,
              and suddenly, once !!, overnight, and everything is bad. And it is more than once! and it didn’t suddenly happen.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Throughout the USSR, fertility exceeded mortality.

              1. Lies-33 years old to you as an example.
              2. And such a common "blissful" picture ended ... with the Russian Cross. The fact that the number of old and incapable of giving birth in percentage terms became more and more in the USSR than those capable of childbearing, and these capable, in turn, gave birth less and less, is it a secret for you? And to WHAT did this lead, also a mystery? And the fact that the catastrophe began in the 1930s (carefully hidden) is also a secret? In the Soviet statistical editions of the 1920s. all demographics, including details of abortions, suicides and homicides, were freely published. From the next decade to the era of publicity, they became subject to strict prohibitive censorship and manipulation.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And if this nonsense
              Quote: Olgovich
              not a single generation of Russians born after the 1910 year and having entered an active reproductive age, starting from the era of the “great turning point”, the end of the 1920's and the beginning of the 1930's, did not reproduce itself.

              if it were true, then the country from the same 20-30 years would have sat in a demographic hole.

              What kind of nonsense? request It’s clearly written to you:
              So far, such generations in the population have been slightly and overall birth rate in the country determined by senior cohortshe remained relatively high

              But after the war they left the reproductive age, and new ones gave birth less and less.
              With 1964 r reproduction rate LESS than 1, this is depopulation.
              PS You do not argue with me, but with demographic scientists, even SOVIET scientists and data.
              For example, Perevedentsev "Population of the USSR yesterday, today, tomorrow", M. 1972
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 December 2018 13: 23
                +10
                Quote: Olgovich
                In the science of demography, there are much more such indicators.

                Of course. And the main ones are fertility and mortality :))))
                Quote: Olgovich
                From the next decade to the era of glasnost, they have become the object of strict prohibitive censorship and manipulation.

                but at least be manipulated, there is a fact - the population of the USSR is ROSLO, which means that there was no depopulation.
                Quote: Olgovich
                With 1964 r reproduction rate LESS than 1, this is depopulation.

                And the population is growing ... How can this be, Olgovich? :)))))) Well, think for yourself. What, they lied to us about the population growth of the USSR or what? :)))))
                Quote: Olgovich
                With 1964 r reproduction rate LESS than 1, this is depopulation.
                PS You do not argue with me, but with demographic scientists, even SOVIET scientists and data.

                No, I’m arguing with you and claiming that you completely mistakenly interpret Soviet scientists’ demographers
                For example, we have not even reached the specifics yet, and yours
                Quote: Olgovich
                not a single generation of Russians born after the 1910 year and having entered an active reproductive age, starting from the era of the “great turning point”, the end of the 1920's and the beginning of the 1930's, did not reproduce itself.

                already turned into
                Quote: Olgovich
                With 1964 g reproduction rate LESS 1

                That is, the "catostrophe" - then suddenly shifted as much as 30-40 years ahead :))))) And I'll go into the statistics - and I'll probably find out that after 1964 we are not talking about the entire population of the USSR, but only about Russians (past Ukrainians and Belarusians, that is, Slavic peoples), etc.
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 4 December 2018 13: 51
                  -11
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  Of course. And the main ones are fertility and mortality :))))

                  Age pyramid, migrations, marriages, divorces and a bunch more.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  but at least be manipulated, there is a fact - the population of the USSR is ROSLO, which means that there was no depopulation. And the population is growing ... How can this be, Olgovich? :)))))) Well, think for yourself. What, they lied to us about the population growth of the USSR or what? :)))))

                  1. Finally, learn what depopulation is in demography.
                  2. Grew up, I repeat in the THIRD time, due to senior cohorts of the population, due to previous accumulated potential. Generations of themselves in the USSR have NOT been reproduced and every next generation has aggravated the situation.
                  One child in the family is extinction, although today, at his birth, this is an increase. Is this also incomprehensible?
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  No, I argue with you and affirm that you completely mistakenly interpret Soviet scientist demographers

                  Your statements are GOALS. I DO NOT interpret, I repeat their CONCLUSIONS. Based on conscientious statistics, and largely embellished.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  That is, the "catostrophe" has suddenly shifted as much as 30-40 years ahead :)))))

                  To make it easier for you, disasters (for example, Kiev boiler 41 g) begin much earlier than the event.
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  But I’ll climb into statistics - and I’ll probably find out that even after 1964 we are not talking about the entire population of the USSR, but only about Russians (past Ukrainians and Belarusians, that is, Slavic peoples), etc.

                  Sources are given: challenge their findings.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 December 2018 14: 47
                    +10
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Grew up, I repeat in the THIRD time due to older cohorts of the population, due to the previous accumulated potential.

                    Which suggests that you absolutely do not own demographics.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    One child in the family is extinction, although today, at his birth, this is an increase. Is this also incomprehensible?

                    Olgovich, if you are unable to add two and two, then I will do it for you
                    A decrease in the birth rate (when there is one child in the family) represents a FALL OF FERTILITY from the very moment the generation that has allowed such an action enters childbearing age. That is, for example, at some point we had a small height (for example) there were 100 children per 205 women, and then, for example, in 1930, a generation of women was born who began to give birth to 150 children per 100 women, then the fertility curve will fall from about 1948 (at age 18). Because women began to give birth Rarer than before, which means that the birth rate is falling, and not "sometime later," but right now, when they are not giving birth.
                    You are not even able to understand that "one child in a family" is a drop in fertility, and not an increase. And that a generation that gives birth to little is HERE squandering down the birth rate statistics, driving it below the mortality rate, and no "previous generations" decide anything here - they give birth as well as their ancestors, but the new one "falls short"
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Sources are given: challenge their findings.

                    Quote them verbatim. As I said, they have certain conclusions that are correct, your interpretations of these conclusions are erroneous
                    1. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 15: 23
                      +3
                      You are not even able to understand that "one child in a family" is a drop in fertility, and not an increase.

                      He simply did not construct the phrase correctly. This is not about "birth rate growth" - there is simply no such thing, we are talking about population growth. With one child in a family, population growth can be observed for some time, while it is compensated by a decrease in the mortality rate of previous generations. And it will backfire in the future. What you wrote yourself
                      in 1930, a generation of women was born who began to give birth to 150 children per 100 women, then the birth rate curve will fall from about 1948 (after reaching 18 years).

                      Simple misunderstanding.
                    2. Olgovich
                      Olgovich 5 December 2018 09: 16
                      -2
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Which suggests that you are absolutely not own demographics.

                      how can you own ... demography? lol
                      "Own demography" The demographic institutes you argue with.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Olgovich, if you are incapable fold two and twothen I will do it for you

                      You 4 didn’t work out, yes
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      You are not even able to understand that "one child in a family" is a drop in fertility, and not an increase.

                      You, alas, are not even able to understand that the three are more than two. Their family has become three against two. If this is not an increase, then WHAT is it?
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      And that a generation that gives birth to little is HERE squandering down the birth rate statistics, driving it below the mortality rate, and no "previous generations" decide anything here - they give birth as well as their ancestors, but the new one "falls short"

                      It doesn’t reach that the previous multiparous gave birth so much that their low-cost generations giving birth even to 1-2 children, anyway some time provided growth mechanically? But at the same time, aging and extinction proceeded inevitably.
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      Quote them verbatim.

                      ALREADY quoted above. belay
                      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                      As I said, they have certain conclusions that are correct, your interpretations of these conclusions are erroneous

                      Once again I repeat that I do not interpret ANYTHING, but bring their conclusions.

                      PS dear Andrey, in love with your series of articles on VO about Sevastopol.
                      But here, I don’t understand you: after all, the Russian Cross was not born in a YEAR, it was the Decade!
                      1. Zoer
                        Zoer 26 February 2019 08: 45
                        0
                        Olgovich, maybe I agreed with your calculations, in particular about the backlog of past generations and temporary growth, if this growth had not occurred from 1926 to 1991, and this is more than two generations. So your theory does not work.
                  2. Beringovsky
                    Beringovsky 5 December 2018 01: 00
                    +3
                    Olgovich
                    Finally, learn what depopulation is in demography.

                    Depopulation is a stable (that is, not caused by one-time emergency) reduction in the population of a settlement, region, country.
                    https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/892725
                    Well, where was this in the USSR? Stable, not caused one-off emergency population decline?
                    Lying.
                    1. Olgovich
                      Olgovich 5 December 2018 10: 23
                      -3
                      Quote: Beringovsky
                      Depopulation is a stable (that is, not caused by one-time emergency) reduction in the population of a settlement, region, country.
                      https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/892725
                      Well, where was this in the USSR? Stable population decline not caused by one-time emergency?
                      Lying.

                      NON-REPRODUCTION by the population itself — since 1964, reproduction coefficient — less than one, hidden depopulation, which led to open by 1992. Or did it happen suddenly?
              2. NordUral
                NordUral 9 December 2018 13: 16
                +2
                You have heavy bread Olgovich!
          2. invisibility
            invisibility 4 December 2018 15: 53
            +8
            Olgovich, before reproaching someone for not wanting to learn, master basic skills, arithmetic for example.
            And after that, consider whose quote to insert as evidence ...
            Is this the site that Mr. Vishnevsky lives on foreign grants?
            Isn't this the comrade who rejoiced at the extinction of the Russians in 90?
            Like him !!!
            Authority!
            You, with the bundle, once again goofed ..
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 5 December 2018 10: 26
              -2
              Quote: invisible
              proof of...
              Is this the site that Mr. Vishnevsky lives on foreign grants?
              Isn't this the comrade who rejoiced at the extinction of the Russians in 90?
              Like him !!!
              Authority!
              You, with the bundle, once again goofed ..

              You are BUT Institute of Demographywho released the article.
              And at the same time, the SOVIET demographer Perevedentsev, who claimed то же самое back in the 1970s: Perevedentsev "The population of the USSR yesterday, today, tomorrow", M. 1972
          3. Petrograd
            Petrograd 6 December 2018 00: 07
            +5
            Quote: Olgovich
            Since 1964, the reproduction rate is LESS than 1, this is depopulation, i.e. extinction. The USSR was rapidly aging population and fewer births. And the USSR, the FIRST in Europe, came to depopulation, although before the VOR, Russians were almost the fastest growing people in the world. These are documentary FACTS.

            They drew out the "bottomless" free Russian village to the bottom and all-collapse.


            If it doesn’t, it’s easier: in a family of two people, only one child was born and this, as it were, increases the family by 33%, but it is dying out.

            Respected hi , you also forgot to add (for the invisible person (Dmitry) that his numbers with an increase in the birth rate took place, mainly in the union republics (where cotton was harvested annually in millions of tons, as an example), receiving super profits at the expense of the RSFSR. The union collapsed, and that ... but everything has become shitty in the European Baltic states, in / in the Ukraine, in the Kyrgyz ..tana (and other countries). So we are now experiencing population growth at the expense of migrants (to whom, unscrupulous employees give out (apparently from An overabundance of greed) passports with Russian citizenship. And these camps and capital receive, and mortgage, and the birth rate. Only now, in the villages oblivion, in the cities there are few "palefaces", but the steam locomotive-skating rink rushes forward, no one knows where and for what.
        2. Vend
          Vend 4 December 2018 15: 31
          +3
          Quote: invisible

          From Wikipedia ...

          Wikipedia is trash
        3. seacap
          seacap 11 December 2018 15: 35
          +1
          invisible (Dmitry)
          And this is a "sent Cossack", from where he and no one works, was not interested, and I do not want to get dirty about such crap. I noticed that he has been on this and similar sites for a long time, without missing a single similar article, surreptitiously throwing up a provocative material claiming to be a historical fact. Not everyone will notice the lies, and for many, especially the young, it will be postponed; this method of provocation is as old as the world was used by both Goebbels and our current liberal propaganda, especially when it concerned the glorious history of the Russian state and its heroic people.
      2. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 4 December 2018 09: 32
        -7
        Under Stalin, abortion was prohibited.
        Quote: Olgovich
        Quote: Puncher
        If the system is so dependent on one person, then it is not viable initially. The Soviet elite didn’t fly from another planet, they were Stalin’s comrades-in-arms, PERSONALLY HIS SELECTION. If he gathered such people around him, then he was to blame.

        It turned out to be unviable because it lived due to the wild overstrain of the forces of the people, for which it barbarously used the most priceless, irreplaceable and unique resource -human.

        As this supposedly cheap and endless resource ended, the system ended. It turned out that it was by no means cheap, but the most expensive. The flow of youth in early 80s of dying In the Russian countryside, the system collapsed in the late 80s: such is the "random" pattern.

        Tore off people: only for the first five year plan the number of births has decreased almost twice- an unprecedented event in the history of peoples. They even banned abortion, but the situation never returned, it only worsened, until after a short time, it did not even die out (since 1964).
        It turned out that it is IMPOSSIBLE to live all the time in a state of emergency and "we will not stand the price" (which, by the way, Khrushchev and Brezhnev understood, but could not change anything)).

        Yes, and abortion culture, which FIRST in the world introduced by the Bolsheviks in 1920, 50 years earlier France, USA, etc. , has already taken its deep destructive roots, killing tens of millions of Russian citizens.

        That's the result ....
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 4 December 2018 10: 47
          -5
          Quote: Krasnodar
          Under Stalin, abortion was prohibited.

          Still, after the demographic catastrophe of the early 1930s, they tried to play back, but little came of it.
          Abortion culture has been deeply rooted in 14 years of cultivation since 1920, and abortion has already been carried out for medical reasons.
          The USSR firmly occupied the first place in the world in abortion, far ahead of the hopelessly lagging capitalist countries.
          1. Krasnodar
            Krasnodar 4 December 2018 11: 03
            +2
            In the textbook of Medical Universities 1946, "Obstetrics and Gynecology" was written in black and white - Abortion in the USSR is prohibited. )))
            I stole this textbook at the age of 12, saving me from waste paper. laughing
          2. Beringovsky
            Beringovsky 4 December 2018 21: 22
            +1
            Olgovich
            Abortion culture has been deeply rooted in 14 years of cultivation since 1920.

            Olgovich, what nonsense do you often carry. It comes out in a country with a thousand-year history, traditions, culture, etc. a decade and a half is enough to radically change family foundations and traditions, abandon morality ?!
            What is the price of such foundations? The imperial machine built them for centuries, and they fell like a rotten creature?
            And did the "scoop" manage to surpass the centuries of imperial propaganda in ten years, "deeply introducing abortion culture"? How so?
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 6 December 2018 11: 34
              -1
              Quote: Beringovsky
              Olgovich, what nonsense do you often carry. It comes out in a country with a thousand-year history, traditions, culture, etc. a decade and a half is enough to radically change family foundations and traditions, abandon morality ?!
              What is the price of such foundations? The imperial machine built them for centuries, and they fell like a rotten creature?
              And did the "scoop" manage to surpass the centuries of imperial propaganda in ten years, "deeply introducing abortion culture"? How so?

              Tempting EVIL narcotics do terrible things with beautiful people in much less time
      3. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 10: 37
        +1
        And the abortion culture, which was introduced by the FIRST in the world by the Bolsheviks in 1920, 50 years earlier than France, the USA, etc. , has already taken its deep destructive roots, killing tens of millions of Russian citizens.


        Read. Maybe the eyes will open.
        Since 1964, the reproduction rate is LESS than 1, this is depopulation, i.e. extinction. And the USSR - FIRST in Europe came to depopulation

        Please give a link to the information provided. I hope this will not be, as always, Livejournal.
        Reproduction declined in the 60s - this is undeniable. And explainable. And not social politics, ideology, economics. In the 60s, the generation of the 40s entered active reproductive age. In our forties nothing was there in the country? Wars, for example? But only after the 60s, the reproduction rate began to grow again. And you forgot to mention it.
        although before the VOR, Russians were almost the fastest growing people in the world

        You understand that this is not always good? And under certain conditions - not at all good.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 4 December 2018 11: 29
          -7
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          Read. Maybe the eyes will open.

          For what? On the official permission to kill tens of millions of children in Russia? Introduced 50 years earlier than France and the United States because of the "difficult economic situation" of women? And still prohibited in Germany and England? It has long been known
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          Please give a link to the information provided. I hope this will not be, as always, Livejournal.

          See the link above. Which one, always? lol zhorn
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          Reproduction declined in the 60s - this is undeniable. And explainable. And not social politics, ideology, economics. In the 60s, the generation of the 40s entered active reproductive age. U onwith in the forties there was nothing there in the country? Wars, for example?

          В 30s was demographic disaster. Remember poor Stalin: how he got out, secret, forbade, shot, but everything got out.
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          But only after the 60s, the reproduction rate began to grow again. And you forgot to mention it.

          Why should I replicate your FALSE? The playback t-count fell, and exceeded 1 in a brief period of the anti-alcohol campaign.
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          You understand that this is not always good? And under certain conditions - not at all good.

          With our territory, it is ALWAYS beautiful.
          Only there was no need to interfere with people and there was no need to "lead" them. The "leaders" were "led" before the extinction of the guided. And this is in our vastness! fool .
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 14: 15
            +4
            For what? On official permission

            Well, you still read, but how can we talk about the contents of the book when you did not read it. And for some reason you say what has been done, but don’t say why it is done (because the power of hell is the wrong answer). And by the way, you’ll stop comparing with other countries.
            If you did not find the book, write in a personal post, I will send you.
            Link see above.

            Above is a link to the Demoscope with journalism from Vishnevsky, where an attempt is made to explain why now in Russia, this is the situation with demography based on the events of half a century ago. In isolation from the fact that at the time of the separation of indicators from global indicators (falling into the pit in the 90s) in the country with demographic indicators, everything was in order, the consequences of the shocks of the 20th century leveled. (again compared to global).
            In the 30s there was a demographic catastrophe. Remember poor Stalin: how he got out, secret, forbade, shot, but everything got out.

            There was no demographic disaster in the 30s. Increased mortality during hunger is a disaster from the point of view of human morality, but it has nothing to do with the science of demography. In demography, a crisis is considered a situation when the birth rate falls not only below the mortality rate, but also below the level of population reproduction. And at least in the five-year period. Everything is simply explained - if as a result of negative influences (famine, epidemic, war, etc.) mortality for a short period increased sharply, then for the survival of the population it is not fatal - the level of reproduction of the generation will cover this negative surge through the generation.
            Here are the data from E. M. Andreev, L. E. Darsky, T. L. Kharkova, these authors you brought to me in one of the disputes, which means you trust them, therefore I will use them

            As you can see, even in the 33rd year, despite the excess of mortality over the birth rate, the total birth rate was higher than 2,1 - therefore there is no talk of any demographic crisis - this famine did not threaten the nation.
            Why should I replicate your FALSE? The playback t-count fell, and exceeded 1 in a brief period of the anti-alcohol campaign.

            Well, only yesterday they called for tolerance in an article on how to behave in disputes on the site, and here they themselves so peremptorily call people. They told you on the same demoscope that "only once, in 1986-1988, apparently under the influence of the anti-alcohol campaign" and you, without analyzing, without comparing with other sources, take this for what you can appeal to others.
            It is not in vain that in the answer I mentioned above the indicator of the total fertility rate, that is, the average number of children born by a woman in her life. Do you know that it is this indicator that appears in world statistics as an estimate of the presence-absence of demographic problems? He, and not the reproduction rate of the population (although the demographers still calculated). Do you know why? And because in 1965, Henry in France showed that the reproduction rate of the population does not take into account the fact that in the conditions of rapidly decreasing mortality, the total time spent by each subsequent generation increases. And therefore it does not reflect the current demographic processes. And he introduced the index of the average life expectancy of daughters. And subsequently, this coefficient was generally replaced by an indicator of the reproduction of years lived.
            But even if the reproduction rate of the population is convenient for your picture of the world, then let's look at the countries of Europe of the 60-90s - you always nod to them. Below is a tablet. I took the data from the World Data Atlas website (knoema.com, knoema.ru) - there, for individual countries, I simply put it in a comparative plate, everyone can go in and check my numbers. Since the 60-90th interval, the USSR wrote in the table instead of the Russian Federation.

            The last lines with percentages: 1- the value of the loss for the entire period; 2 - dynamics of change at control points.
            Well, where should I see something terrible in the USSR during this period. This picture of any industrial country, the era of the traditional archetype of reproduction has passed and has become the hallmark of underdeveloped countries. Moreover, the situation in the USSR was less harmful than in other countries.
            With our territory, it is ALWAYS beautiful.

            No.
            Read books: 1) Ostrovsky A.V. Grain production in European Russia in the late XIX - early XX centuries. St. Petersburg, 2013;
            2) Volkov V.V. Russia: interregnum. The historical experience of modernization of Russia (the second half of the XIX - the beginning of the XX century. Part 2. St. Petersburg, 2011.
            I’ll send another book later, I need to find it. It is not modern, since the last years of the empire. This is not even a book, but the conclusions of a commission that analyzed the agrarian situation. Including population.
            Analyze. Understand what the country would expect while maintaining that demographic model.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 5 December 2018 10: 08
              -4
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              And for some reason you say what has been done, but don’t say why it is done (because the power of hell is the wrong answer)

              I don't care what the criminal justifies - he is always "innocent." There is a result of the crime and the assessment of the act-as a crime-all over the world was DIFFERENT.
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              everything was in order in the country with demographic indicators, the consequences of the shocks of the 20th century were leveled. (again compared to global).

              Nonsense: the rapid aging of the population and the declining birth rate in the USSR is "order2? belay See the USSR age pyramid 91 g, is a disaster
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              There was no demographic disaster in the 30s. Increased mortality during hunger is a disaster from the point of view of human morality, but it has nothing to do with the science of demography. In demography, a crisis is considered a situation when the birth rate falls not only below the mortality rate, but also below the level of population reproduction. And at least in the five-year period.

              There was a wild one: almost two times less births in 6 years by 1933

              Stalin, 1934, a population of 168 million
              Stalin 1935 population increases to Finland, by 3 million annually.
              Census 37 g: 162 million (according to Stalin, there should be 177 million
              Census 39 g -167 million (3 million were added purely fraudulently to 170), should be 183 million
              WHERE 16 million people?
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              period; 2 - dynamics of change at control points.
              Well, where should I see something terrible in the USSR during this period. This picture of any industrial country, the era of the traditional archetype of reproduction, has passed and become the hallmark of underdeveloped countries.

              O, after all, caught up with the damned capitalists, even here!
              You write nonsense:
              1. France a hundred years ago almost died out, in Russia, an increase of order was higher, much higher even than German and English.
              But the depopulation of 1964 came FIRST in Europe to the USSR.
              2, one hundred years ago, the population density of Belgium is 289 people / km2, in Russia-9,8 people. They had nowhere to grow, but Russia was. And she-grew so that no one knew WHERE to put on three million annual growth (and he-everything grew). And without your grief-leaders there was industrialization and the DEVELOPMENT of the lands of Siberia and Asia.
              Your "coped" with this: by 1985, the Non-Black Earth Region had turned into a ragged desert, where the land was already no one needs it.: 500 000 empty residential buildings, millions of hectares of abandoned arable land ... We are silent about the almost empty Siberia.
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              No.

              Yes.
              Quote: Nefarious skeptic
              Understand what the country would expect while maintaining that demographic model.

              It would be expected that today the Ivanovs, Petrovs, Sidorovs would be MANDATELY more in the expanses that were mastered and populated by them, not only of the European part, but also of Siberia and the Far East.
              And it wouldn’t be the Jamsuts who would build Russia today, because there were no Ivanovs left because of your leaderships, but Russians.
      4. lucul
        lucul 4 December 2018 12: 35
        -3
        And the abortion culture, which was introduced by the FIRST in the world by the Bolsheviks in 1920, 50 years earlier than France, the USA, etc. , has already taken its deep destructive roots, killing tens of millions of Russian citizens.

        The Zionists introduced - they set up experiments on the country as they wanted. Trotsky, for example, wanted to eliminate the institution of marriage altogether and to make all women "common."
        They didn’t give a damn about the Russian people, the main thing was to make their own gesheft. Here you are spreading about the consequences of this gesheft here - by pulling a universal mask on the criminals - the Bolsheviks.
    3. BAI
      BAI 4 December 2018 09: 44
      +9
      There is such a law - each leader selects employees who can never compete with him and take his place. Hence degradation, each generation of bosses is worse than the previous one.
      Exit - as, for example, in China - full rotation, after a certain period of time.
    4. Tutejszy
      Tutejszy 4 December 2018 12: 02
      -3
      Quote: Puncher
      If he gathered such people around him, then he was to blame.

      The system was not viable initially because built on anti-Christian principles. Stalin was well versed in people - and if I gathered such people around me, it means that there simply weren’t others! Remember his famous: “I have no other writers for comrade Polikarpov, and we will find another Polikarpov for writers”
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 4 December 2018 13: 31
        +4
        The era of “big stagnation” in the USSR began when the party elite was frightened by the future, its people, its passionarity, enthusiasm and creativity. Instead of development, the post-Stalin leadership chose stability, existence. Instead of change, immutability. The Soviet leadership no longer needed a new reality, a “bright future” for everyone.
        and this is not written about today?
    5. Detective
      Detective 4 December 2018 15: 54
      -4
      Excuse me, excuse me ... so is Marxism a Russian national code? It seems that Samsonov wrote about the degeneration of the communist elite each new generation of which was weaker than the previous one, while looking at a biological reference book - the accumulation of lethal and sublethal mutations that cause a marked decrease in the viability of individuals and their death upon transition to a homozygous state. And finally, about Little Russia (Ukraine) ... There were never Samsons in the history of mankind of the second and third, just in case, the Russian state. It was not necessary to climb in 1917 on armored cars, so that now it is crafty sobbing about the extinction of the Russian people. It was not necessary to divide this Russian people according to the principle of divide and rule. It was not necessary for your adored leader to pursue a policy of indigenousization and replace the ancient Russian language with often simply fictitious local ones. To invent Ukrainian and Belarusian cultures separate from the Russian one and to create some kind of artificial state formations on the native Russian lands. Now we wouldn’t spread my tears with my fist! Everything is simple and there is no need to invent a fabulously - abstruse philosophy in justification!
    6. Arkady Gaidar
      Arkady Gaidar 4 December 2018 21: 30
      -4
      Hole puncher! Your arguments about the dependence on one and the non-viability of the system could be considered worthy if we did not have an example when a system that depends on the communist community collapses. Remember the USSR. And references to the treason of the top will not go. For who brought up those traitors and by whose example did they learn?
      And besides, you ask modern communists: "Why don't you prove by deeds that what you are proposing is better ?! Leave aside the struggle for power and create communist economies that will defeat capitalist economies in the competitive struggle!" And in response: "No! We need power! Without power, we cannot do this!" And now we come to the most important question: "So you are fighting for a bright future, or for power ?!" And silence, and the dead stand with braids))))
  2. Pax tecum
    Pax tecum 4 December 2018 05: 55
    +13
    ... Moreover, when abandoning its development project, the great Russia (USSR) inevitably had to become the cultural, technological semi-colonial, raw material periphery of the West. As we saw in the 1990 — 2000 years, and we see it now. No other given. Either an original, your own, Russian development project, based on the Russian civilizational, national code, or slavery ...

    Here, neither add nor decrease ...
    1. Claymore
      Claymore 4 December 2018 06: 58
      +2
      Quote: Pax tecum
      Here, neither add nor decrease ...
      But I will add.

      "... It's another matter when the revolution wins in Germany or France, or in both countries together, when socialist construction starts there on a higher technical basis. Then we will move from the policy of turning our country into an independent economic unit to the policy of including our country into the general channel of socialist development. ... "

      T.7 p. 299
  3. gunnerminer
    gunnerminer 4 December 2018 05: 57
    -1
    Incomplete article turned out. There is nothing about the upcoming technological breakthrough.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 4 December 2018 13: 32
      +5
      Quote: gunnerminer
      Incomplete article turned out. There is nothing about the upcoming technological breakthrough.

      where will we "rush"? to pull a new pipe? something new "magnetka", "katek" and other things are not visible ... the country trades and taxes ...
  4. lucul
    lucul 4 December 2018 06: 00
    -2
    An important fact of the collapse - Former director of Nativ (we google what it is) (from 1999 to 2006) Zvi Magen wrote the book "The Secret War of the USSR against the State of Israel."
    https://m.aftershock.news/?q=node/685204&page=1

    Zvi clearly stated that EVERYTHING the Jewish movement in the Union was under control and in contact with the West.
    And now we recall what important government posts the Jews held in the state.))
    1. IGOR GORDEEV
      IGOR GORDEEV 4 December 2018 07: 21
      +5
      Quote: lucul
      And now we recall what important government posts the Jews held in the state.))

      Jews again? It may be enough to shift responsibility on the basis of someone's belonging to any nation.
    2. Krasnodar
      Krasnodar 4 December 2018 09: 37
      0
      Dymshits was a supply manager. And that’s all))
      This is if we are about the 70s. If about earlier years, then the situation was exactly the opposite - the spouses Cohen and Rosenberg - a contribution to the creation of the Soviet atomic bomb, Armand Hammer - a contribution to Soviet industry, etc.
      1. Wizzzard
        Wizzzard 4 December 2018 15: 34
        -1
        Armand Hammer - a contribution to the Soviet industry

        Can you tell me what was the contribution of this great friend of comrade Lenin? In addition to pencils, of course (this is not an anecdote, not for joke - pencils). Here, from the wiki (but a wiki article with links to sources):

        "On October 27, 1921, the People's Commissariat of Foreign Trade of the RSFSR and the Hammer Allied Drug and Chemical Corporation signed an agreement on the supply of 1 million bushels of American wheat to Soviet Russia in exchange for furs, black caviar and jewels expropriated by the Bolsheviks, kept in Gokhran. Soon Hammer was considered the "official friend" of the USSR. (Note. Even then, a huge amount of unique and inconceivably expensive jeweler products, antique icons, etc.) was taken out.

        In 1926, he proposed to create in the USSR the first pencil concession, which in 1932 was redeemed by the state. Subsequently, this company was known as the Moscow Plant writing accessories to them. Sacco and Vanzetti.

        I bought at the end of 1920-x - the beginning of 1930-x antiquities, paintings, sculptures from the Leningrad Hermitage, thus collecting a large collection of art objects. In particular, at bargain prices exported from the USSR and resold Faberge eggs in the West."

        With such "official" friends - what kind of enemies were needed?
        1. Krasnodar
          Krasnodar 4 December 2018 16: 19
          +1
          As I understand it, nobody but him was in a hurry to stir up matters with the USSR. And the country needed a currency.
          1. Wizzzard
            Wizzzard 4 December 2018 17: 19
            -2
            And the country needed a currency.

            Right. Only Mr. Hammer paid with pencils. And for the icons, and for the pebbles, and for Faberge.
            1. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 4 December 2018 17: 57
              0
              Was there a shortage of pencils? Or, thanks to the rollback, was it paid specifically for stationery?
            2. Alexander Greene
              Alexander Greene 4 December 2018 23: 39
              +3
              Quote: Wizzzard
              Right. Only Mr. Hammer paid with pencils. And for the icons, and for the pebbles, and for Faberge.


              Stop lying already. In the 70s, for example, with the help of Hammer’s money, the Odessa port plant was built, where ammonia was synthesized, which America then bought. The freight of one vessel transporting ammonia (75 thousand cubic meters) from Odessa to the United States cost 1 am. dale
              1. Wizzzard
                Wizzzard 5 December 2018 14: 20
                -1
                Alexnadr Green:
                Stop lying already. In 70, for example, with Hammer’s money, the Odessa Port Plant was built, where ammonia was synthesized

                Does the difference between 1920 and 70 in consciousness somehow exist? And further, even IF in 70's, Hummer built (for what shishi? He already sailed from scam to scam) to a plant in Odessa, then for sure of the most noble motives (as a knight of the Order of Lenin).
                That you shouldn't lie, Mr. Green. Give me a link to the studio, so it will clear up, Hu is from Hu.
                1. Alexander Greene
                  Alexander Greene 5 December 2018 23: 17
                  +1
                  Quote: Wizzzard
                  That you shouldn't lie, Mr. Green. Give me a link to the studio, so it will clear up, Hu is from Hu.

                  What a link, I am a witness myself, since had a relationship with him for almost six years. If you want, type in a search engine, there you will read how the oligarchs are now ripping off this plant, which is still "laying the golden eggs."
          2. Wizzzard
            Wizzzard 4 December 2018 17: 44
            0
            Country no currency was needed, but food. Here, the young Hummer and warning in advance.
            Follow the link to the site scams, read at your leisure:
            https://proafery.ru/fakers/kh/khammer-armand.html
            “Realizing that the young Soviet state needed food most of all, he started supplying grain, receiving fur and caviar in return. became the owner of the first in the history of the country of the Soviets of private concession - received permission to mine Ural asbestos. And in 1926 in Moscow, Hammer built a pencil factory - a very profitable enterprise that brought the owner over a million dollars in the first year alone. "
            Who would have thought that it was possible to take out the half of the Hermitage for pencils, and with gratitude from hermitage distributors? (Question on backfill: why did the Hammer need the hated icons for the Jew? Correctly, the ancient precious images for Russia were easily converted into the same millions.) Now, it remains to think, for what did Comrade Lenin get the trouble?
            1. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 4 December 2018 17: 58
              -1
              Two versions:
              1) Nobody but him wanted to have business with Soviet Russia
              2) Rollback management
  5. Hole puncher
    Hole puncher 4 December 2018 06: 02
    -6
    Why did the Soviet Union die?

    The author wrote down the party nomenclature to be responsible for the death of the country. This is a purely Russian approach, "It's not my fault, it's all done by the enemies." The author relieves the responsibility of the ordinary citizens of the USSR, who practically all spoke in favor of keeping the country in the referendum. This is despite the fact that the obligation to defend the USSR from ALL enemies was prescribed in the military oath, but millions of those who took the oath treated it like an empty piece of paper. The author, the USSR died because ALL citizens wanted it and no matter who was in power there.
    1. IGOR GORDEEV
      IGOR GORDEEV 4 December 2018 07: 00
      +2
      Quote: Puncher
      The author, the USSR, died because ALL citizens wanted this and it does not matter who was in power there.

      And yet, party nomenclature bears great responsibility.
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 4 December 2018 08: 54
      +4
      Quote: Puncher
      This is despite the fact that the military oath prescribed the duty to protect the USSR from ALL enemies

      You’ll swear the oath, at least find and read on the Internet.

      "...perform unquestioningly all military manuals and orders of commanders and bosses ..
      ...I'm always ready by order of the Soviet government to defend my homeland - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ...
      ...If I break this my solemn oath, then let me suffer the harsh punishment of Soviet law, general hatred and contempt of workers. "

      The army is not a collective farm for you, where someone is in the forest, and who is for firewood.
      1. Hole puncher
        Hole puncher 4 December 2018 09: 24
        -2
        Quote: Boris55
        I am always ready, by order of the Soviet government, to defend my homeland - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

        The government of the USSR in August 1991 called on citizens to fulfill their duty, but no one remembered these oaths. Including those who at that time were in the ranks of the USSR Armed Forces and for which, as you say
        Quote: Boris55
        The army is not a collective farm for you, where someone is in the forest, and who is for firewood.
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 4 December 2018 09: 47
          +1
          Quote: Puncher
          The government of the USSR in August 1991 called on citizens to fulfill their duty,

          Even I did not observe the queues at the military registration and enlistment offices wishing to fulfill their duty, rather the opposite:

          Defense Minister Marshal Yazov refused to reel in a crowd of armored vehicles. The order was to sit in the barracks and watch TV.
          1. Looking for
            Looking for 4 December 2018 16: 29
            +3
            Perhaps in vain refused.
        2. Olgovich
          Olgovich 4 December 2018 10: 49
          -1
          Quote: Puncher
          The government of the USSR in August 1991 called on citizens to fulfill their duty, but no one remembered these words of oath.

          Remind this "call".
          Nobody knows him except you.
          1. Hole puncher
            Hole puncher 4 December 2018 13: 15
            -1
            Quote: Olgovich
            Remind this "call".
            Nobody knows him except you.

            You probably don’t know this; in 1991, you walked under the table.
            Treatment
            to the Soviet people
            State Committee for the State of Emergency in the USSR
            18 1991 of August


            Compatriots!
            Citizens of the Soviet Union!

            In a difficult, critical time for the fate of the Fatherland and our peoples, we turn to you!

            Mortal danger looms over our great Motherland!
            ...
            Taking advantage of the freedoms granted, flouting the sprouts of democracy that had just appeared, extremist forces arose that took a course towards the liquidation of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the state, and the seizure of power at all costs.

            Resolution No. 1
            State Committee for the State of Emergency in the USSR

            In order to protect the vital interests of the peoples and citizens of the USSR, independence and territorial integrity of the country

            Further in the text. I inform you that the GKChP included the Soviet Government represented by the Vice President, Prime Minister, Minister of Defense, Minister of the Interior and therefore the requirements for the protection of the country correspond to the words of the military oath
            I am always ready, by order of the Soviet Government, to defend my homeland - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
            1. Beringovsky
              Beringovsky 4 December 2018 22: 20
              +4
              Hole puncher
              You probably don’t know this; in 1991, you walked under the table.

              I remember. He was read from the screen by one of the members of the Emergency Committee during the breaks of the ballet.
              Only:
              1) Gorbachev was also the lawfully elected president.
              2) A significant part of society was zombified by the Interlocutors, Views and so on, so on, so on ... their name is legion, all the handshake-non-Polzhivtsy, who fouled the brains of the people from every iron they could reach. People didn't really understand what was really going on. And what, a possible civil war is a way out? But if those who were against the "reforms" also took to the streets, this could become a reality.
              3) And finally, where did you see the call to "come to the military registration and enlistment office" and "take the oath"? Have you lied? They lied.
              1. Hole puncher
                Hole puncher 5 December 2018 05: 47
                -4
                Quote: Beringovsky
                And finally, where did you see the call to "come to the military registration and enlistment office" and "take the oath"? Have you lied? They lied.

                Ah, you are one of those ... Of those who love their homeland only by order, such as a German attacked, but no order, so the rifle in the swamp and legs up. Clear.
            2. Olgovich
              Olgovich 5 December 2018 10: 15
              -3
              Quote: Puncher
              You probably don’t know this; in 1991, you walked under the table.
              Treatment
              to the Soviet people
              State Committee for the State of Emergency in the USSR
              18 1991 of August

              In 91 g, the thirty has long been exchanged.
              And UNKONSTITUTIONAL some GKChP-only for you was an authority, a miserable and ridiculous sight.
              He HAD NO RIGHT to neither do nor call. The government could call itself only in the yellow house
    3. Glory1974
      Glory1974 4 December 2018 08: 58
      +3
      The USSR died because ALL citizens wanted this and it does not matter who was in power there.

      You yourself write that you voted for the preservation of the country. They wanted to ruin, but voted for the preservation? Serious analytics.
    4. Beringovsky
      Beringovsky 4 December 2018 21: 38
      +2
      They didn’t want to, but they could not prevent it.
      And then you can, using your logic, say - RI died because ALL citizens wanted it.
      1. Hole puncher
        Hole puncher 5 December 2018 05: 48
        -3
        Quote: Beringovsky
        RI died because ALL citizens wanted it

        If everyone wanted this, then there would be no bloody civil war.
  6. lucul
    lucul 4 December 2018 06: 05
    0
    Quote: Puncher
    The author, to blame for the death of the country, recorded the party nomenclature. This is a purely Russian approach. The author removes responsibility from ordinary citizens of the USSR,

    The author blames nomenclature for allowing enemy propaganda
    to deceive the people - under Stalin this was not conceivable.
    And then the zombie people did not resist the collapse. )))
    1. Hole puncher
      Hole puncher 4 December 2018 07: 00
      +3
      Quote: lucul
      The author blames nomenclature for allowing enemy propaganda
      to deceive the people - under Stalin this was not conceivable.

      Since 1919, the US Communist Party has tried to "cheat" the American people, but it has failed, despite the support of the USSR.
      I wonder why?
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 4 December 2018 09: 53
        -2
        Quote: Puncher
        I wonder why?

        Because the United States was originally created by thieves, and among thieves, equality and fraternity are for suckers.
        1. Hole puncher
          Hole puncher 4 December 2018 18: 07
          -3
          Quote: Boris55
          Because the United States was originally created by thieves, and among thieves, equality and fraternity are for suckers.

          What does it matter. Answer the question why the USSR was unable to "open the eyes" of the American proletariat using the CPUSA for this? For example, I don’t remember that in the USSR there was a branch of the US Republican or Democratic Party that would promote the American way of life.
      2. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 10: 27
        +2
        I wonder why?

        Maybe the matter is in the selected methods? Well, for example, when the FBI gives union activity to the mafia. The mafia presses union activists and takes control of union activity, the state seems to be doing nothing, but the loosening of the boat stops. All is well. Well, or when troops are brought into the village and all those who are dissatisfied are made satisfied. Or for membership in the party you get ten. And do not care that the judges themselves call their own decisions unconstitutional.
        1. Hole puncher
          Hole puncher 4 December 2018 18: 09
          -3
          Quote: Nefarious skeptic
          Maybe the matter is in the selected methods?

          Still don't care about the methods, the question is why, having enormous opportunities for communist propaganda, the USSR could not "seduce" the American people.
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic 5 December 2018 09: 07
            +1
            why, having enormous opportunities for communist propaganda, the USSR could not "seduce" the American people

            What are these possibilities, please.
            It seems to me that they are only in your head.
      3. Hantengri
        Hantengri 4 December 2018 11: 10
        +3
        Quote: Puncher
        Quote: lucul
        The author blames nomenclature for allowing enemy propaganda
        to deceive the people - under Stalin this was not conceivable.

        Since 1919, the US Communist Party has tried to "cheat" the American people, but it has failed, despite the support of the USSR.
        I wonder why?

        Maybe it did not work out, in the SGA, some of the three parts of the puzzle, called: "revolutionary situation"?
        The revolutionary situation, as Lenin pointed out, is characterized by the following main features:

        1) The inability for the ruling classes to maintain their dominance unchanged. For the onset of the revolution, it is usually not enough that the "lower classes did not want", but it is also required that the "upper circles could not" live in the old way. In other words, a revolution is impossible without a nationwide (and the exploited and exploiters affecting) crisis.
        2) The aggravation, above normal, of the needs and calamities of the oppressed classes. This aggravation can be caused by the deterioration of the economic situation of the general population, social powerlessness and deprivation of the masses, and a sharp deepening of social antagonisms. The explosion of mass discontent can also be caused by a sharp discrepancy between the real possibilities of economic, social, cultural progress and the practical results that the broad masses of the people get from it.
        3) A significant increase in the activity of the masses, in the “peaceful” era, who allow themselves to be robbed calmly, and in turbulent times, attracted both by the entire crisis situation and by the “tops” to an independent historical performance. The fighting mood is growing rapidly, the masses are literally eager for politics.

        It is, after all, only in the minds of young de'Bills revolutions occur from the fact that someone sent money "to the orchestra." In the real world, things are more complicated.
        1. lucul
          lucul 4 December 2018 12: 42
          0
          It is, after all, only in the minds of young de'Bills revolutions occur from the fact that someone sent money "to the orchestra." In the real world, things are more complicated.

          Come on - take Ukraine for example - the revolutionary component is simply overflowing, but there is still no revolution. And it won't - until other states "help"))
          1. Hantengri
            Hantengri 4 December 2018 12: 54
            +3
            Quote: lucul
            Come on - take Ukraine, for example - the revolutionary component is simply overflowing

            In which place? I mean, is there a combination of all three necessary conditions?
            1. lucul
              lucul 4 December 2018 14: 26
              +1
              In which place? I mean, is there a combination of all three necessary conditions?

              And what - in / in Ukraine, isn’t all three of the conditions you listed above right now?)) But there is still no revolution))
              1. Hantengri
                Hantengri 4 December 2018 14: 59
                +4
                Only the second point. The first, maybe slightly. There is no third.
                1. lucul
                  lucul 4 December 2018 17: 03
                  -2
                  Only the second point. The first, maybe slightly. There is no third.

                  Dooooh ......
                  See Clause .1
                  The inability for the ruling classes to maintain their dominance unchanged.

                  Mass demonstrations of the people in many cities of Ukraine - from not turning on the heating to "Euroblackers" - even had to introduce martial law.
                  P.2
                  Aggravation, above normal, the need and calamity of the oppressed classes. This aggravation can be caused by the deterioration of the economic situation of the general population, social powerlessness and deprivation of the masses, and a sharp deepening of social antagonisms.

                  There are generally no comments .... facts on the face.
                  P.3
                  A significant increase in the activity of the masses, in the “peaceful” era, who allow themselves to be robbed calmly, and in stormy times, attracted both by the entire crisis situation and by the “tops” to an independent historical performance

                  The mass protests of the people reached the point that Poroshenko urgently had to invent the Kerch scam in order to introduce martial law (and in martial law, any actions of the people are prohibited)
                  The facts are so eloquent that to deny them is the same as not to see trees in the forest.
                  Revolutions take place only with the help "from outside" the country.
                  So it was in the English bourgeois revolution (moneylenders came to power),
                  the same thing happened in the French bourgeois revolution (also moneylenders came to power, then Napoleon took power away from them for a while), and our February / October revolution.
                  Tales of revolution from within - akin to tales of the invisible hand of the market.
                  1. Hantengri
                    Hantengri 4 December 2018 22: 20
                    +2
                    Quote: lucul
                    Mass demonstrations of the people in many cities of Ukraine - from not turning on the heating to "euroblackers"

                    Quote: lucul
                    The mass protests of the people reached the point that Poroshenko urgently had to invent the Kerch scam in order to introduce martial law (and in martial law, any actions of the people are prohibited)

                    This is all n2. Those. the people are sick and trying to fight for their economic rights. No more.
                    With n3, the people will no longer care whether they die on the barricades, now quickly, or die slowly in that shit that is difficult to call life (at least in the subjective perception of the current moment.).
                    According to paragraph 1: If the lower classes of the on / off are already almost, a little tired of living in the old way, then the tops can still manage almost the old way. Well, get another Pandu. For the first time, or what? (V / this seems to be one of the management tools.) The bottoms will calm down and go habitually to eat popcorn in front of the TV, until the next opportunity.
        2. Hole puncher
          Hole puncher 4 December 2018 18: 19
          -2
          Quote: HanTengri
          Maybe it did not work out, in the SGA, some of the three parts of the puzzle, called: "revolutionary situation"?

          Maybe because it cannot take shape there? What is the likelihood of a revolution in Canada or Sweden for example?
          Quote: HanTengri
          It is, after all, only in the minds of young de'Bills revolutions occur from the fact that someone sent money "to the orchestra."

          I don’t know how many youngsters in Norway or Belgium need to be sent to arrange a revolution, for me this is a meaningless task ...
          1. Hantengri
            Hantengri 4 December 2018 19: 59
            +2
            Quote: Puncher
            I don’t know how many youngsters in Norway or Belgium need to be sent to arrange a revolution, for me this is a meaningless task ...

            "Juvenile de'Bill is not the age in the passport. This is a state of the brain." (C) Otherwise, everything is so. While the okhlos is full (in a broad sense), no revolution is possible. He just doesn't need her.
            Quote: Puncher
            What is the likelihood of a revolution in Canada or Sweden for example?

            Nonzero, let’s say, as in any other country. lol
    2. IGOR GORDEEV
      IGOR GORDEEV 4 December 2018 07: 20
      0
      Quote: lucul
      The author blames the nomenclature for allowing the enemy propaganda to flatter the people - under Stalin this was not conceivable.

      Well, there is no Stalin today and there may not be until the next war or upheaval. I'm not sure that under Stalin you would be fine.
  7. Baloo
    Baloo 4 December 2018 06: 11
    -1
    Moscow solved the problem of how to reconcile with the old world, the capitalist (western) system, and agree with the masters of the West on coexistence.

    Everything is simpler, as they wrote in the brave newspapers of that time, the shop workers have a lot of ideas and money, but they cannot implement them. This wave of justifying "those who do not want to live honestly" began after Andropov's death, when the "cotton business" and similar lesser-known cases were ruined. And then everything is correct, a betrayal of the communist comprador neobourgeoisie. The work of the Western special services was carried out actively, it was felt at the everyday level: anecdotes, rumors, shmatier, magazines, speculation on the topic of repression, etc.
  8. lucul
    lucul 4 December 2018 06: 13
    -1
    Quote: Balu
    The work of Western intelligence agencies was carried out actively, this was felt at the household level: jokes, rumors, shamtya, magazines, speculation on the topic of repression, etc.

    Not only
    https://m.aftershock.news/?q=node/637689&full
  9. BISMARCK94
    BISMARCK94 4 December 2018 06: 38
    +9
    The article looks more like agitation. A person is prone to consumption and nothing can be done about it. About some kind of "Russian code" in a country with republics, where Russians do not even smell. Well, in general, I didn't like the article.
  10. The comment was deleted.
  11. IGOR GORDEEV
    IGOR GORDEEV 4 December 2018 07: 08
    -1
    Their production was destroyed already in the 1990s, Yeltsin, Gaidar and Chubais, and then in the 2000s, their heirs - the tandem of Putin and Medvedev. Then a layer of capitalist oligarchs and a comprador bourgeoisie was created, thriving on the sale of raw materials and devouring their own country.

    The processes started before the collapse of the USSR and after, in my opinion, Putin could have stopped the bloodletting, which could have demolished him. It’s fashionable to assess Putin’s activities one-sidedly. If we are trying to analyze, then let us give the main pros and cons, and not give out stamped phrases.
  12. akunin
    akunin 4 December 2018 08: 18
    +9
    the elite sold, and the masses were silent - the main reasons for the fall of the Soviet Union. look at how France is tearing up due to higher gas prices, but how much we don’t raise, how much shit you don’t do to the people - we are silent.
  13. Glory1974
    Glory1974 4 December 2018 09: 08
    -2
    The main reason for the collapse of the USSR is that it was impossible to legally live well and richly. Well lived only party nomenclature and crime. And then it was impossible to allow many things: to build a mansion (a cottage could be 3 for 5 meters), a yacht or boat could not be bought, and much more. Therefore, when the collapse of the country began, they did not go to protect it. And what was to protect? Sausage for 2.20 in line or imported sneakers? Bet engineer on 120 rub and a stable future, but the same gray?
    Gorbachev started correctly, organized a cooperative movement, people began to earn millions, but the ideology has not changed and a conflict has begun between the masses. Glory to the god of civil war did not happen between the people and the new rich; although on the periphery it nevertheless passed.
  14. rumpelshtilskin
    rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 09: 09
    -1
    Author, your hypothesis is wrong.
    If it were true, then we would have seen the wreckage of the United States and others for a long time, where the elites are even more "rotten" than in that USSR.
    But what do we see?
    The United States is still intact, and the USSR has already rested for 30 years ...
    The economy must be dealt with. And for this, before an independent court and education.
    Otherwise, Russia is waiting for the same as the USSR :(
    And her patriots (for whom "patriotism is the last refuge"!) Everything: "Crimeanash!" ...
    1. Andrey VOV
      Andrey VOV 4 December 2018 10: 09
      0
      Tell me at least one country, in your opinion, the so-called civilized, where there is a completely, completely independent court that does not allow errors?
      1. Tutejszy
        Tutejszy 4 December 2018 12: 07
        0
        Quote: Andrey VOV
        Tell me at least one country, in your opinion, the so-called civilized, where there is a completely, completely independent court that does not allow errors?

        Iran. Will you deny that a country with an ancient civilization? Or is the court independent?
        1. Foul skeptic
          Foul skeptic 4 December 2018 12: 46
          0
          Will you deny that a country with an ancient civilization? Or is the court independent?

          Have you been asked for something else?
          error free

          Does that fit too?
          1. Tutejszy
            Tutejszy 4 December 2018 16: 16
            0
            Quote: Nefarious skeptic
            Does that fit too?

            only God's judgment does not make mistakes. People are not perfect.
            1. BAI
              BAI 4 December 2018 17: 48
              0
              only God's judgment makes no mistakes

              Here I immediately recall:
              How will we share? Honestly or divine?
              Better on an equal footing.
              1. Tutejszy
                Tutejszy 5 December 2018 13: 27
                0
                Quote: BAI
                How will we share? Honestly or divine?
                Better on an equal footing.

                The canonical version was: "Well, let's divide like brothers?"
      2. rumpelshtilskin
        rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 12: 09
        +1
        There is no absolute in nature.
        If we talk about who is closer to him than others, then it is worth mentioning Australia (English law), England, USA (English law).
        Kazakhstan plans to switch to English law. By the way.
        In Russia, for the time being, one can speak of the "inner conviction of a judge," alas. The result of which is not equality before the law, but its arbitrary application. In other words, arbitrariness :(
        1. Andrey VOV
          Andrey VOV 4 December 2018 13: 25
          +1
          Can't you see the selectivity of the courts of England, the USA, the Stockholm arbitration and others in relation to the citizens of the Russian Federation and, for example, the citizens of their countries and more than the United States? Are all equal, but can someone be more equal?
          1. rumpelshtilskin
            rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 15: 36
            -3
            Do you know what justice is?
            This is when such rules are developed in the country when parents do not know in advance what place their children will take in society.
            And now decide which society is fairer.
            And this justice is largely the merit of an independent court.
            1. Andrey VOV
              Andrey VOV 4 December 2018 16: 01
              +3
              What are you saying! Children of the so-called elite will never be workers at the factory, let alone THEM .... remember the most famous surnames, but there the fate of the children is decided from the moment of their birth ... stop naivete pouring ears
              1. rumpelshtilskin
                rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 17: 44
                0
                Quote: Andrey VOV
                What are you saying! Children of the so-called elite will never be factory workers ...

                Do you like someone’s dissent?
                And did not try to consider the "rise".
                Where do social elevators work better?
            2. Hantengri
              Hantengri 4 December 2018 16: 02
              +4
              Quote: rumpelshtilskin
              Do you know what justice is?
              This is when such rules are developed in the country when parents do not know in advance what place their children will take in society.

              Straight, I see Rockefeller's daughter working as a prostitute on the highway !!! No, but what? Everyone wants to eat! laughing
              1. rumpelshtilskin
                rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 17: 35
                -1
                A prostitute on the highway? Is the topic so close?
        2. Tutejszy
          Tutejszy 4 December 2018 16: 20
          +2
          Quote: rumpelshtilskin
          English law

          use case? Moreover, the initial precedent is sometimes based on an arbitrary decision of a judge!
          From the point of view of jurisprudence, English law - the so-called. "barbaric truth ", but civilized people still use Roman law!
          By the way, the USA has the most idiotic legal system in the world: in the "former English" states - English law, in the "former Spanish" - Roman, and in the "former French" - the code of Napoleon! wassat
          1. rumpelshtilskin
            rumpelshtilskin 4 December 2018 17: 40
            0
            Maybe the British and the "barbarians" who use the "barbaric truth", but they do not borrow money from Russia. And it is for the "barbarians" that Russia fights so hard to sell its gas.
            Don't you find it strange?
            1. Tutejszy
              Tutejszy 5 December 2018 13: 25
              0
              Quote: rumpelshtilskin
              Don't you find it strange?

              I don’t find it. Take an interest in the trade balance of the Roman Empire with the "barbarians" of Asia: one to one, and the Romans exported gold, imported steel, silk and porcelain - the then high-tech!
              1. rumpelshtilskin
                rumpelshtilskin 6 December 2018 22: 52
                0
                I took an interest.
                Gold was not exported on an "industrial" scale (in bars). Money circulation mainly consisted of silver coinage.
                So do not mislead me and others.
                In China, by the way, by that time paper money was already in circulation. Than not high tech.
                The supply of gas (in contrast to the products of its redistribution) is ...
                One enemy of Russia said correctly - "Nigeria in the snow." And there is nothing to be proud of.
                Theft and corruption. With the export of capital, which can not be stopped.
    2. Alexander Ra
      Alexander Ra 4 December 2018 23: 17
      +1
      Quote: rumpelshtilskin
      Author, your hypothesis is wrong.

      Where did you find the hypothesis? The initial statement of facts: “there was a change”, “rejection of my development project”, “the Soviet elite began to degenerate” ... The main idea of ​​the article; “...Either original, own, Russian development project, based on Russian civilization, national code, or slavery"- absolutely true.

      Quote: rumpelshtilskin
      USA and others, where the elites are even more "rotten"

      It’s not true: the US elite has not abandoned its image of a superpredator, our “elite” has abandoned its national, copying everything “directly from the west” - it is rotten.
      Do not drag the garbage of cynics and Russophobia (about patriots).
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 December 2018 09: 35
    +2
    Samsonov is a deuce in economics. And five with a plus for writing fantasy in a historical setting laughing
  17. Andrey VOV
    Andrey VOV 4 December 2018 10: 03
    +2
    Mr. Samsonov apparently wrote an article while in a terrible mood .... but he didn’t change himself .... the super-ethnos has not gone anywhere and, as usual, the flight of thoughts-shifted to a bunch of horses-nuclei-people
  18. alebor
    alebor 4 December 2018 10: 09
    +4
    There is a well-known phrase: "they have not forgotten anything and have not learned anything."
    If A. Samsonov sincerely believes that the collapse of the USSR was the "rotten top", and not other, much more objective circumstances that led to the rotting of the top along with everything else, then A. Samsonov clearly did not learn anything, although he remembers everything perfectly.
  19. Silhouette
    Silhouette 4 December 2018 10: 21
    +2
    Unfortunately, the conclusion suggests itself that Russia awaits the fate of the USSR during our lifetime. Everything is repeated with an obvious regularity. War - the collapse of the Russian Empire-civil war, war-collapse of the USSR-civil war, war-collapse of Russia-civil war.
  20. DimerVladimer
    DimerVladimer 4 December 2018 10: 40
    +3
    The article is an endless repetition of Soviet cliches and cliches.

    The problem of the USSR is the organization of labor and the lack of an incentive to development.
    Equalization in wages, led to the fact that the incentive was lost to work better.
    Even with money, many goods could not be bought — for example, apartments, cars — they were distributed by party committees and trade union committees. It was necessary to stand in line (father stood in line for an apartment for more than 20 years and never improved).

    "Soviet directors" worried exclusively about the "plan" and not about the quality, they opposed the adoption of new products in production, since this made life difficult for production - for them it did not matter what to produce - just not to change anything. The institutes developed new products on orders from above - if something worthy of attention appeared behind the "hillock". Or they might not have bothered, a huge number of people created only the appearance of work.
    Not the ability to work flexibly led to the collapse of the Soviet economy.

    Not the absence of petrodollars directly affected the death of the USSR, the inability to purchase grain on the foreign market - the inability to feed their own population, caused by the degradation and decline of agriculture of the USSR, the fiasco of the command and distribution management system.

    Party workers and the Soviet nomenklatura were supplied with food and manufactured goods from a parallel distribution system (a relative worked in such a regional system) - there was no shortage, and what was going on in ordinary stores for ordinary citizens, the "stratum of the Soviet elite" did not care much.

    The problem of the USSR is either you are in the nomenclature and use the benefits of the distribution system for the elite, or you are an ordinary citizen and go shopping in search of the elementary: sausages, meat, sugar, clothes, soap, etc. - so under Brezhnev.
    Under Gorbachev - all this is also inaccessible to you, but now according to the coupon and distribution system. In fact, it turned out that with coupons it is impossible to realize elementary needs.
    Sausage, meat, etc. deficit, tended to end halfway through, which caused a massive outrage in people who stood 2-3-4-6 hours.
    I remember how angry citizens cursed the communists.
    The end of the social system is logical - in which they tried to resolve the contradictions with loud but empty slogans.
  21. lucul
    lucul 4 December 2018 10: 48
    +3
    Quote: alebor
    and not other, much more objective circumstances that led to the decay of the top, along with everything else,

    Voice the entire list please)) and we will see.
    Quote: DimerVladimer
    The problem of the USSR is the organization of labor and the lack of an incentive to development.
    Equalization in wages, led to the fact that the incentive was lost to work better.

    What are you talking about))
    There is capitalism in 100% of countries, for example Africa. So what ? Do they live better? No - only 7 countries live well (G7), and the remaining 200 countries (with a tail) in the world live much worse than these 7 countries. How so? After all, there and there capitalism? Where does the difference come from? Have you ever asked such questions? )))
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer 4 December 2018 14: 33
      -2
      Quote: lucul
      There is capitalism in 100% of countries, for example Africa. So what ? Do they live better? No - only 7 countries live well (G7), and the remaining 200 countries (with a tail) in the world live much worse than these 7 countries. How so? After all, there and there capitalism? Where does the difference come from? Have you ever asked such questions? )))


      And what is the incentive for human development, without changing the seasons?
      In a warm climate, you do not need to be puzzled by worries about heating the house, warm clothes, and 2-3 crops per year ripen.
      You didn’t wonder why our great-ancestors left Africa, developed and spread across the planet, and the majority of the indigenous population of Africa practically didn’t move in their development until the 20th century, although genetically we come from the same branch of humanity.
      Why is the Caribbean not developing industry?

      The answer is simple - an incentive.
      Our ancestors left Africa, filled with rival great-tribes, and moved north. In order to survive, the great-ancestors were forced to insulate themselves with skins and together hunt large and dangerous animals, overcome rivers and endure cruel winters, glaciation in Europe.
      This made them resourceful and allowed to successfully spread around the world.

      In the USSR, the population was deprived of the stimulus - trying to replace it with abstract and utopian concepts, was not enough for a long time.
      While enthusiasts moved the USSR to communism, the bulk of the people were looking for something to eat.
  22. wooja
    wooja 4 December 2018 11: 16
    -5
    Leave Stalin alone .... he is not as scary as he is painted, the real horror is his environment and associates with whom he was forced to deal, or not forced --- criminals, killer thieves, agents of the Western special services and the financial oligarchy , the corrupt Cheka, the corrupt Comintern, the Zionist lobby in the party, the Polish-Baltic organized crime group led by Dzerzhinsky, and these people ruled the country, it is not surprising that the USSR fell apart
  23. Radikal
    Radikal 4 December 2018 12: 14
    -1
    Great article! Respect to the author! hi
  24. Radikal
    Radikal 4 December 2018 12: 25
    -1
    Quote: Boris55
    Quote: Puncher
    This is despite the fact that the military oath prescribed the duty to protect the USSR from ALL enemies

    You’ll swear the oath, at least find and read on the Internet.

    "...perform unquestioningly all military manuals and orders of commanders and bosses ..
    ...I'm always ready by order of the Soviet government to defend my homeland - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ...
    ...If I break this my solemn oath, then let me suffer the harsh punishment of Soviet law, general hatred and contempt of workers. "

    The army is not a collective farm for you, where someone is in the forest, and who is for firewood.

    Yes, there was no order from the Soviet government .... sad
    1. The comment was deleted.
  25. Lord_Raven
    Lord_Raven 4 December 2018 12: 39
    +2
    I'm wondering what a post like this does in the History section? Considering its content - the author's personal opinion about the reasons for the collapse of the USSR, and for this there is a corresponding section on VO. In addition, if the author undertakes to consider such a complex and multifaceted problem, then, in my opinion, he should not mix up horses and people, but highlight specific reasons: the economy, social sphere, "betrayal of the elites", etc. And, at the same time, do not forget to indicate the literature and documents used, confirming certain arguments, theses, etc.
  26. Wened
    Wened 4 December 2018 12: 52
    -2
    Thus, the Soviet elite abandoned its own development project and began to look for opportunities for rapprochement with the West. The stake was made on material needs, personal, clan and group interests. Matter defeated the spirit. The heirs of Stalin at one moment devalued all the exploits, heroism, hardships and multimillion-dollar losses of the people. They dealt a mortal blow to Soviet civilization, the project and the new society of the future. They betrayed the project of Russian (Soviet) globalization on the principles of co-prosperity.


    During the war, the USSR saved Stalin's organizational talent, and this is not just one person, this is a team, and this team laid the foundation for the future, something that they themselves defended, because they blindly believed in Marxism, without developing their own direction.
    Matter defeated the spirit.

    You can pour a lot of water, but you need to briefly and in essence, matter did not conquer spirit, the point is that the upbringing of future generations from which the top of the collapsed USSR grew up was not correctly built.

    These are:
    Stalin gave the elite of the USSR everything, cottages, cars, awards, fame, honor, but completely banned the money.
    The elite was on full state support, and the Stalin team in the place with him believed that this was enough.
    But all the same, the elite began to reign, and why?

    Alas, the servants corrupted the elite of the USSR, personal drivers, personal cooks, cleaners, even gardeners.
    This was a mistake, as the children raised in such conditions began to desire more, and they saw more in the West. As a result, the envy of wives, children, and a large part of the elite itself did its job.

    But it was necessary to do just the opposite, once the landowners and nobles were kicked out, it was necessary to categorically forbid any servant, generally any, but give a lot of money.
    Further in the description of thought it is better to apply a little humor. laughing

    In the end, those same envious wives (naturally, not all of them were), sometimes adult children of party bureaucrats, would have forced the secretaries of regional and city committees, red directors, to first start producing everything that is in the west of washing machines and other dryers, and then household robotics.

    Plus, without the maids, any wife of the partartist would have to clean the house herself, cook it herself, wash it herself, if there was a huge amount of money for which no one could be hired, for the USSR was not capitalism.

    Children of the elite would be fiction and they would eat their dads together with their mothers alive, but they would force them to start producing robots for cleaning apartments, coffee makers, washing machines, automatic machines, etc.

    Matter defeated the spirit.


    So, the Spirit is quite capable of being adjacent to matter, that is, to people sharpened exclusively on the material, and can skillfully direct them using even their shortcomings.

    In the USSR, motivation for social justice and rationality,
    and not the motivation for communist morality, which was brought up in pioneers and Komsomol members.
  27. Ivan Tartugai
    Ivan Tartugai 4 December 2018 13: 04
    +5
    Quote from the article:
    The Soviet elite no longer needed a new reality, a "bright future" for everyone.

    Building, building a bright future for everyone demands from officials, namely from people in power at all levels of hard, persistent, consistent work, honest and responsible attitude to their official duties.
    Moreover, it is at all levels of government from the Chairman of the government to the head of the workshop, site.
    From the Secretary General of the CPSU Central Committee to the Secretary of the Party Bureau of the workshop.

    But the new post-Stalinist Soviet, or rather pseudo-Soviet, top, headed by Khrushchev, Zhukov, Serov, Rudenko, wanted to maintain the benefits for themselves as top officials and not just save, but maximize them, but not bother with hard, stubborn, consistent labor and honest responsible attitude to their duties. They sought to become parasites.
    And they achieved this.
    And as a result, the collapse in all areas of the country's life. The collapse in industrial production, and agriculture, and in the army, and in the social sphere, collapse everywhere.
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 5 December 2018 03: 40
      0
      Serov and Rudenko did not belong to the political elite.
  28. Sleeping
    Sleeping 4 December 2018 15: 55
    -2
    I read Samsonov and other cheers, and it comes to understand that it is they who exalt the West by showing its strength and omnipotence, because it is from the West that we have all the problems from the Middle Ages to today, it’s interesting, but because of whom Of the West?
  29. evgeniy.105
    evgeniy.105 4 December 2018 17: 55
    -1
    https://www.kramola.info/video/vlast/kto-v-realnosti-pravit-rossiey
  30. bandabas
    bandabas 4 December 2018 20: 47
    +1
    So the top and now declares - "there is no money, but you hold on", "macaroshkas are the same everywhere", "people lived in the blockade" and so on. Only these "bodies" live differently. and there is money, and if macaroshkas are present on the table, then they are definitely not bought at discounts.
  31. LeonidL
    LeonidL 4 December 2018 20: 56
    +2
    The party elite of the USSR in the late 80s sniffed a completely different air during trips to the West - they were tired of living in palaces with invernt tags, getting fatter rations and meager currency, being "servants" of the people, sincerely and firmly despised by it, but .. .. had to serve this people even from under the stick, even formally. And they wanted to own the people! As well as all national property. Which they did during Perestroika and after. Another thing is that many of the little hands turned out to be weak, and the minds did not go further "grab a million green rubles and run away" ... And another "elite" crushed most of them for themselves ...
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 5 December 2018 03: 42
      0
      He will give at least one last name of the fugitive. All former party apparatchiks live on the territory of the former Union.
      1. LeonidL
        LeonidL 6 December 2018 04: 10
        0
        Well, where do they live and where do they get the money? The example of the leader of the gang, Mishka Gorbaty, clearly shows. And why didn’t many people get lucky beyond the borders of their homeland with the dough that was welded - it’s so simple - they are armless and headless, mediocre political workers. The mouth closed - the workplace passed.
  32. Arkady Gaidar
    Arkady Gaidar 4 December 2018 21: 18
    +1
    Dear comrades! To begin with, be so kind and tell me, when on Earth was the concept of life fair? And if not, what are you writing about at the beginning of the article? Next, name the list that defines our distinctive, cultural "Russian national code", about which you write, and on the basis of which our strong "Russian civilization" can be built ?!
    Or maybe what you are writing about next is nothing more than just a struggle for survival and prosperity? And you also write "the Soviet elite .... The stake was made on material needs ...." Just let me ask you, what should the ruling elite stake on, which does not believe in God or the devil? Maybe they should have bet on UFOs and aliens? And when was this project of the Soviet system Russian? Comrades, you have apparently forgotten that communist ideas are initially international and any one nation is not considered at the head of the socialist movement!
    I can continue to ask questions for a long time, which will give out that this article is pompous vomit. Another fantasy that they want to feed the people. But I'd better ask briefly: "When will you communist comrades begin to present real arguments, and not nonsense ?!"))
  33. KTM
    KTM 4 December 2018 21: 45
    0
    There is no article in which Samsonov would not squeeze the “Russian superethnos” and “elimination of Stalin.” I actually have to do with medicine and just get lost - what kind of poison is it that can give a typical picture of a hemorrhagic stroke? Heart failure - as much as you like but stroke hasn’t been invented yet. But Samsonov won’t be stunned by his principles. If science considers it stupid, so much the worse for science.
  34. The Siberian barber
    The Siberian barber 4 December 2018 23: 22
    0
    [/ quote] Matter defeated the spirit. [quote]

    For me, a very succinct phrase. The bottom line is that a person's CONSCIOUSNESS defeated the concept of harmony, albeit in its "utilitarian" understanding.
  35. Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 4 December 2018 23: 53
    +1
    The constant threat of war is a thing of the past. People saw how life improves literally before our eyes. Reforms of Kosygin, a Stalinist nominee, a brilliant business executive and the cleverest man, continued the work of Stalin.


    Here the author is wrong, Kosygin was not the continuer of the Stalin case, but his grave digger. Under the leadership of Kosygin in the USSR in the 60s. a new economic reform took place, which finally buried the real socialist economy that was under Stalin.

    It all began with Khrushchev, who, along with water (criticism of the personality cult), threw out a child, namely, the current socialist system of the USSR economy that had developed by that time.

    In the last years of Stalin's life, there was a discussion on the problems of socialism, and while Stalin was alive, our economy developed on the principle of reducing production costs, but after his death the marketers prevailed and transferred the economy to profit.

    This led to a dissonance in the socialist economy. As a result, the restoration of capitalist relations began. And this was done by Kosygin’s hands at the suggestion of the economist Liberman. Unfortunately, Kosygin was not a competent Marxist, and therefore did not understand the ideas of Stalin.

    You can read about it through the links.
    http://pkbu.ucoz.ru/publ/6-1-0-86
    http://pkbu.ucoz.ru/publ/6-1-0-85
  36. samarin1969
    samarin1969 5 December 2018 00: 06
    +2
    A little unexpected from Samsonov ... Especially - the harsh assessment of the rulers 1953-2018. About the role of the "pipe" - rather an exaggeration. It is impossible to accept the general pessimism of the author, but objectively - he is right. Russia is being “finished off” and “eaten up”. The only burst of patriotism was the Russian Spring. But she was defiantly brutally crushed from all sides. It remains for everyone to prepare for the new Troubles.
  37. wooja
    wooja 5 December 2018 00: 15
    -3
    The collapse of the USSR is still logical, as well as the degradation of the Soviet leadership, unfortunately dogmatism and shortsightedness grew into incompetence, but this is only the tip of the iceberg, a systemic crisis occurred in the USSR, society became class, and one class became dominant and accordingly appropriated the property of another ... . The authorities officially passed to the Bureaucracy, or rather the collapse of the USSR formalized this transition formally --- such a revolution and no betrayal ....,
  38. skeptic31
    skeptic31 5 December 2018 02: 08
    +3
    One solid heresy. Those. everything seems to be correct, but only in general terms, and when it comes to specifics, then everything is not so. Kosygin’s reforms are actually very doubtful, and praises began to be sung to them in the 80s in many ways in order to justify their, again very dubious reforms. And in any case, they had nothing to do with the continuation of the Stalin case. Currency really poured into the USSR, but basically it did not go to purchase consumer goods, but to purchase gas and oil equipment, large diameter pipes, grain for livestock feed (we produced a lot of meat and milk, but we have problems with the climate , therefore, feed for livestock has always been scarce), machinery and equipment. Money for the purchase of consumer goods was allocated according to the residual principle, so there were few such goods in retail and they were expensive. The main imported consumer goods came from the countries of the socialist camp, and the currency was not wasted on them, they were supplied on a contractual basis. Our nomenclature lived better than the rest of the people, but not because they had any big incomes, but mainly due to the provision of some kind of free services, which, in general, did not differ much from that had ordinary citizens. Moreover, the salaries of many hard workers were higher than those of the nomenclature. That was what infuriated her the most. Having power, they could not dispose of it as they wanted. And most importantly, here the author is right, they have not thought about socialism and the more so the building of communism for a long time. It remained to crank up the operation of fogging the brains of the townsfolk, and they successfully completed it, starting on the 91st and ending in the 93rd.
  39. M. Michelson
    M. Michelson 5 December 2018 04: 48
    +1
    What are you talking about?
    If about why it fell apart the USSR, then you really need to ask why he lasted so many decades. The kings grabbed everything at hand, and then we had to hold it. And only the exceptional privileges of the Bolsheviks on the national question allowed this decay to be delayed.
    And if the author writes about why it collapsed Soviet authority, socialism, then it was necessary to put the question so directly. But he seems to be cowardly for that; even such words are not found in his philippics. What for? It is more convenient to hide behind the "USSR" ...
  40. looker-on
    looker-on 6 December 2018 00: 26
    -1
    The author firmly believes that if he writes the same thing 1000 times, the world will change and return 40 years ago. USSR and Russian superethnos. Everything would be alright but just fantastic
  41. CommanderDIVA
    CommanderDIVA 7 December 2018 11: 29
    0
    All empires sooner or later die, the time has come and the USSR, there will be a time when the end and the United States we live in a rapidly changing world, I believe that Russia has a great future that was said if there is no Russia in the world, why then this world
  42. Katyusha
    Katyusha 8 December 2018 20: 06
    0
    Quote: lucul

    There is capitalism in 100% of countries, for example Africa. So what ? Do they live better? No - only 7 countries live well (G7), and the remaining 200 countries (with a tail) in the world live much worse than these 7 countries. How so? After all, there and there capitalism? Where does the difference come from? Have you ever asked such questions? )))

    Have you heard about tribalism? And what about the division of labor between the capitalist metropolises and colonies in 100% capitalism? wink
  43. Zoer
    Zoer 26 February 2019 08: 59
    0
    Quote: Olgovich
    For what? Official permission to kill tens of millions of Russian children? Introduced 50 years earlier than France and the United States because of the "difficult economic situation" of women? And still prohibited in Germany and England? It has long been known

    It would not be bad to give the statistics of these abortions for those years. And then I, as I strongly doubt that in the 20-40s of the year, the medical supply of the population was universal and comprehensive. In large cities, they probably practiced, but this is not even 10% of the total population. And there were no trains to the city from the regions then. Yes, and in the families of my grandfathers, both had at least 4 SURVIVING children, and this is 50-60 years. And that was the norm in those years. So, somewhere you are mistaken.
  44. The comment was deleted.
  45. The comment was deleted.
  46. Fuckstyle
    Fuckstyle 1 January 2020 17: 56
    0
    What a pity that the Soviet Union collapsed soldier