Internal affairs of the Soviet Union: fifteen ministers instead of one

Internal affairs of the Soviet Union: fifteen ministers instead of one

Totalitarian nihilism



Acts of Nikita the Wonderworker. On January 13, 1960, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs was abolished. Its main functions (the fight against crime and the maintenance of public order, the execution of sentences, the management of internal troops, the investigation of economic crimes, as well as fire protection) were transferred to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Union republics.

After the infamous “cold summer of 1953”, such a decision, in fact, can be considered quite consistent. But this decision was the second step on the path to the deep penetration of crime into power. Corruption, fundamentally impossible as a comprehensive phenomenon for decades, will soon become the norm in the USSR.


In addition, the rejection of the centralized management of internal affairs immediately inspired the local Ministry of Internal Affairs, once completely controlled by Moscow. But the most terrible consequence turned out to be the revived practice of protecting the local Russophobian groups by the local police.

Cover up and persecute the adherents of Soviet internationalism began to literally everywhere and from top to bottom. If we evaluate the decision made by direct order of the first secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Nikita Khrushchev in a wider context, then we have to recognize it as an integral part of the Khrushchev general line.

But it consisted in leveling, and as a result, consisted in reducing to zero the administrative and regulatory functions of the central apparatus of the Soviet state and the CPSU. Apparently, the "totalitarian regime" was clearly not to the liking of Khrushchev and his inner circle.

Of those who had experience in communication and working with Khrushchev, practically none of the top party leaders dared to speak directly against. Actively objected only to the last Minister under the Khrushchev Union Interior Ministry Nikolai Dudorov. An experienced apparatchik, a graduate of the Mendeleev Institute, who worked for many years in construction and industry, had a good understanding of what this kind of decentralization would lead to.


Nikolay Dudorov could be the last Minister of the Interior if the department had not been restored under Brezhnev

Khrushchev considered Dudorov one of his most devoted associates and did not forgive him for direct resistance. Nikolai Pavlovich was promptly expelled from the party Central Committee, having only been appointed director of the Glavmospromstroymaterialy department under the Moscow City Executive Committee.

Already in 1972, when they began to forget about Khrushchev, the 65-year-old Dudorov was completely fused into pensioners of national importance, and he began preparing for publication of his memoirs: "Fifty Years of Struggle and Labor." There, among other things, it was noted how the growth of separatist sentiments in the departments of the Union republics after 1956, and the fact that in Moscow they preferred not to react to this.

The republican authorities were all the more silent. And Dudorov’s memoirs were never published ...

The abolition of the union law enforcement agency was preceded by the appeal of the heads of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Union republics to Moscow, regarding the expediency of greater autonomy of these bodies from the union center. Such appeals became especially frequent in the late 1950s, after the reprisal against the anti-Party group. Moreover, the rapid growth of influence on the Kremlin of the ruling national elites of the Union republics began a little earlier - in the second half of the 50s, almost immediately after the memorable XX Congress of the CPSU.

In accordance with the line of this congress, the Khrushchev party elite took an accelerated course towards expanding the "autonomy" of the union authorities and their structures. This was almost the main condition for these elites to support the anti-Stalinist, and, in fact, anti-Soviet course of the Khrushchevites.

It is worth recalling that it was on the eve of the XX Congress of the CPSU that the rule that had been in force since the end of the 20s, according to which local leaders of Russian nationality should be the second secretaries of the Central Committee of the Union republics and regional committees of national autonomies, was canceled.

It must be remembered that Khrushchev and his accomplices were clearly, and sometimes even deliberately feared "the ghost of Beria." And above all, a new attempt to overthrow the Khrushchev leadership by law enforcement agencies. Which also predetermined the dissolution of the Union Ministry of Internal Affairs. As a result, the ruling ethnic clans began to “crush” the all-Union structures for themselves.

Who was afraid of the ghost of Beria


The main target of the impact of these elites was primarily the all-Union law enforcement agencies. Apparently, such a course was chosen in order to “be safe” in case of investigations of economic fraud and, all the more, anti-Soviet actions in the same republics. It is characteristic in this connection that in the "anti-party group" under the leadership of Molotov, Malenkov and Kaganovich there was not a single representative from the power structures of the union republics.


Moreover, it was the first secretaries of the Central Committee there who were the first to oppose the decision of the same group on Khrushchev's resignation, which had not happened then. Republican leaders immediately took the visor in front of Khrushchev, and they most harshly criticized the group of “Molotovites” at the famous plenum of the CPSU Central Committee in June 1957.

The consequences were not long in coming. Allied "cops" actively set about building up indicators. In the period from 1960 to 1964, compared with 1956-59, there was an impressive 20 percent increase in the number of people convicted of anti-Soviet activity and agitation in all Union republics, with the exception of the RSFSR.

At the same time, the majority of convicts in that register were Russian and Russian-speaking, with the largest number in the republics of Transcaucasia and the Baltic states. It was impossible to dispute the groundlessness of such indictments in the Union Center because the Union Ministry of Internal Affairs was recently abolished.

After the liquidation of the single union ministry in all union republics, they hastened to adopt new versions of the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes. And this, of course, strengthened not only the legal, but also the administrative-political "remoteness" of national regions from Moscow. Well, the fact that 25 percent more people were convicted of violations in the economic sphere during the same years did not pay any attention.

HSE associate professor Andrei Shcherbak in his study “Fluctuations in Soviet National Politics” (2013) rightly noted that “during the Khrushchev and Brezhnev rule, the“ golden age ”of ethnic institutional development has come. Representatives of ethnic intelligentsia in those periods received the widest possible opportunities for activities in various fields. ”


Andrey Scherbak, Associate Professor, HSE

However, in the same period the first shoots of nationalism were clearly outlined. Most clearly, according to A. Shcherbak, “they were expressed in the desire of local elites to have a greater influence on the policy of the union center and accordingly limit its interference in the internal affairs of national republics. Which happened from the Khrushchev period. ”

Is it worth it now to prove that Khrushchev somehow very internationalistly indulged Russophobia? It officially began with the notorious Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Armed Forces of September 17, 1955 "On the amnesty of Soviet citizens who collaborated with the invaders during the Great Patriotic War in 1941-1945."

It was with this decision that the nationalist sentiments in the localities grew. Then, quite logically, the creation of clandestine anti-Soviet organizations in the Union republics followed. And in parallel, their autonomy expanded, more precisely, independence in domestic politics. Two absolutely synchronous processes “from above” and “from below”, aimed at the systematic destruction of the Soviet state, have practically merged together.

The Union Ministry of Internal Affairs in the status of the Ministry of Public Order Protection (MOOP) of the USSR was recreated only on July 26, 1966, by order of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. The MOOP of the Union republics were immediately subordinate to him.

And on November 25, 1968, all these departments were returned to their former name - the Ministry of Internal Affairs, with the restoration of the functions of the aforementioned union department. However, the "autonomy" of law enforcement bodies and the leading structures of the Union republics as a whole, once sanctioned by Khrushchev, was practically not suppressed during the Brezhnev and subsequent periods.

For many years after Khrushchev, the Union Center still depended to the maximum extent on the loyalty of the leadership of the fraternal republics so far ...
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

92 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 05: 44 New
    • 16
    • 11
    +5
    There, among other things, it was noted how the growth of separatist sentiments in the departments of the Union republics after 1956, and the fact that in Moscow they preferred not to react to this.
    But Lenin laid the “bomb” of separatism, yeah. Plus article !!!
    1. Aerodrome 13 January 2020 06: 05 New
      • 8
      • 8
      0
      Is it worth it now to prove that Khrushchev somehow very internationalistly indulged Russophobia?
      he is not Russian ... why prove it?
      1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 06: 07 New
        • 22
        • 5
        +17
        So the IVS is not Russian, but what difference does it make!
        1. Aerodrome 13 January 2020 06: 08 New
          • 24
          • 4
          +20
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          So the IVS is not Russian, but what difference does it make!

          I agree. Beria, again ... apparently it’s still a matter of consciousness. or you are a statesman, or a skinner.
          1. Olgovich 13 January 2020 10: 28 New
            • 8
            • 23
            -15
            Quote: Aerodrome
            I agree. Beria, again ...

            And Beria, too: this is what the faithful Stalinist comrade declared about him. Molotov 1953:
            For several years, we, the members of the Presidium of the Central Committee, stood close to Beria, often dealt with him. But only now it became clear to us how alien he is to us and how dirty, immoral type. Now it’s clear that he did a lot of harm to our party and the Soviet state, that it big criminal and dangerous adventurer.

            Her one faithful Stalinist Kaganovich about Beria 1953:
            After the death of Comrade Stalin, this vile person who during the life of Stalin showed himself as the first student, faithful and devoted, began to discredit Stalin.
            It impudent, insolent and provocateur,

            1 Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPPS Snechkus, 1953
            : bourgeois-nationalist elements in Lithuania began to unfasten, they began to unravel after the most harmful rush to replace Russian Lithuanians in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. And here is Beria The aim was to show himself the only conductor of national politics, belittling the authority of the Central Committee.

            In fact, Beria came out in order to sow discord between Lithuanians and Russians, to stir up all kinds of nationalist passions.

            What is the nature of these rumors in Lithuania? The Russians will be expelled from Lithuania, the deported fists will return to Lithuania, and the Lithuanian Communists will be expelled after the Russians.

            one retired officer, a veteran of the Patriotic War, a disabled person, spoke at the Plenum of the Sholginik District Committee and said: it’s Beria who is guilty of creating such a situation with the Russians in Lithuania.
            ..
            “It should be noted that Beria expressed great dissatisfaction at the address of the Russian comrades working in party, Soviet and other organizations and institutions. He regarded the presence of Russians in Lithuania as an expression of distrust of local national cadres. ”
            -Kondakov, Minister Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Lithuanian SSR, 1953

            So everything described in the article was in 1953, and began in 1917 and later, when they never came up with the so-called so-called state so-called "Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Turkmenistan", etc.

            author:
            Did Khrushchev indulge Russophobia somehow very internationalistically? It officially began in 1955.

            No, the author, we read the decision of the Beria Central Committee of 1953 of May 26, 1953 on his initiative:
            3. To consider preparation, cultivation and wide promotion of Lithuanian personnel to all the links of the party, Soviet and economic leadership. To abolish the practice of appointing deputy chairmen of the Council of Ministers of the Lithuanian SSR and nominating second secretaries of district and city committees of the party, as well as deputy chairmen of executive committees of deputies of non-Lithuanian workers. Directors of state farms, MTS and other enterprises, as a rule, appoint Lithuanian workers. The nomenclature workers who do not know the Lithuanian language who are being released in connection with this should be withdrawn to the disposal of the Central Committee of the CPSU.

            4. cancel record keeping in all party, state and public organizations of the Lithuanian SSR in non-Lithuanian language

            It was the same in western Ukraine, etc.
            1. Blacksmith 55 13 January 2020 11: 19 New
              • 9
              • 4
              +5
              Olgovich, so these are "weathercocks", they have always been in power, and are. Where the wind will blow ....
              1. Olgovich 13 January 2020 11: 30 New
                • 9
                • 17
                -8
                Quote: smith 55
                Olgovich, so these are "weathercocks", they have always been in power, and are. Where the wind will blow ...

                but where, where did .... unbending Nepluger? belay request
                1. IS-80_RVGK2 13 January 2020 14: 04 New
                  • 7
                  • 7
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  but where, where did .... unbending Nepluger?

                  Their cuckoo went and they went to the monarchists. laughing
                2. maidan.izrailovich 14 January 2020 03: 29 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  but where, where did .... unbending Nepluger?

                  And they never were.
                  See the history of any country. Next to a strong leader there are only one "weathercocks".
                  There are no two lions in the pride.
                  At the stage of moving to power, there can be unions of strong personalities. But as soon as one of them climbs to the very top, he gets rid of all the other "nefluger". And near it "weathercocks" begin to swarm. That is human nature.
                3. Fat
                  Fat 14 January 2020 04: 25 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Quote: smith 55
                  Olgovich, so these are "weathercocks", they have always been in power, and are. Where the wind will blow ...

                  but where, where did .... unbending Nepluger? belay request

                  The most powerful argument against "inflexibility" and "non-turbulence * is Alpenstock, named after Mercader, in the dark ... Where did it go? ... Transferred ...
                4. neri73-r 15 January 2020 12: 41 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Quote: smith 55
                  Olgovich, so these are "weathercocks", they have always been in power, and are. Where the wind will blow ...

                  but where, where did .... unbending Nepluger? belay request

                  They went to prison, for example, Sudoplatov P.A., pulled a tag.
                  1. Olgovich 15 January 2020 12: 54 New
                    • 0
                    • 3
                    -3
                    Quote: neri73-r
                    We went to prison

                    Who?
                    Quote: neri73-r
                    Sudoplatov P.A.

                    Sudoplatov had nothing to do with the leadership of the country
              2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 15: 15 New
                • 11
                • 1
                +10
                Quote: smith 55
                Olgovich, so these are "weathercocks", they have always been in power, and are. Where the wind will blow ....

                It is worth recalling how many congratulatory telegrams were sent to the Provisional Government by those who had previously served the king faithfully.
                1. Pedrodepackes 13 January 2020 17: 34 New
                  • 1
                  • 10
                  -9
                  Quote: Reptiloid
                  It is worth recalling how many congratulatory telegrams were sent to the Provisional Government by those who had previously served the king faithfully.

                  And what is the crime? The king voluntarily renounced, the interim government legally came to power. And then the constitutional monarchy will be finally decided yet or the parliament?
                  1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 19: 27 New
                    • 5
                    • 1
                    +4
                    yes it’s not about crime, but about weathercocks. After all, it was precisely those who were closest to power who had all sorts of benefits, and opportunities ---- turned away from him.
                    Including ----- relatives, also hierarchs of the Church.
                    Quote: Pedrodepackes
                    Quote: Reptiloid
                    It is worth recalling how many congratulatory telegrams were sent to the Provisional Government by those who had previously served the king faithfully.

                    And what is the crime? The king voluntarily renounced, the interim government legally came to power. And then the constitutional monarchy will be finally decided yet or the parliament?
                    1. Pedrodepackes 13 January 2020 20: 51 New
                      • 1
                      • 4
                      -3
                      Quote: Reptiloid
                      turned away from him.

                      What do you mean turned away? Shouldn't they have served the new legitimate government? Moreover, the king himself renounced. Which of the Stalinist circle was against the rise to power, first Malenkov, and then Khrushchev? No one because weathercocks, but because it is a legal change of power. One has gone (to another world), the other has come.
                      1. Reptiloid 14 January 2020 09: 07 New
                        • 3
                        • 1
                        +2
                        You are trying to speak today. And the elective power and the Anointed of God, these are 2 big differences, especially at that time. Especially the position of the Church. For some reason, they now forget at the processions that he renounced himself and became Romanov. With all the consequences ....
                        Quote: Pedrodepackes
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        turned away from him.

                        What do you mean turned away? Shouldn't they have served the new legitimate government? Moreover, the king himself renounced. Which of the Stalinist circle was against the rise to power, first Malenkov, and then Khrushchev? No one because weathercocks, but because it is a legal change of power. One has gone (to another world), the other has come.

                        И
            2. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 15: 11 New
              • 9
              • 2
              +7
              Quote: Olgovich
              So everything described in the article was in 1953, and began in 1917 and later, when they never came up with the so-called so-called state so-called "Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Turkmenistan", etc.
              Olgych does not read my comments, but I’ll still explain: All the possessions listed in the title of Nicky de jure belonged NOT to Russia, but were the personal possessions of the Tsar Emperor and, as can be clearly seen from the names, NATIONAL stood out among them. So the words of Olgych about invented states, as usual nonsense, there were such entities before the Bolsheviks, they were simply called a little differently.
              The full title of the last Tsar of Russia was as follows: “By God's merciful grace Nicholas II, emperor and autocrat of All Russia, Moscow, Kiev, Vladimir, Novgorod; king of Kazan, king of Astrakhan, king of Poland, king of Siberia, king of Tauric Chersonesos, king of Georgia; Sovereign Pskov and Grand Duke Smolensky, Lithuania, Volyn, Podolsky and Finland; Prince of Estland, Livonia, Courland and Semigalsky, Samogitsky, Bialystok, Korelsky, Tver, Ugra, Perm, Vyatka, Bulgaria and others; the sovereign and the Grand Duke of Novgorod of the lower lands, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsky, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Belozersky, Udora, Obdorsky, Kondi, Vitebsk, Mstislavsky and all northern countries; and the sovereign of Iversky, Kartalinsky and Kabardinsky lands and regions of Armenians; Cherkasy and Mountain Princes and other hereditary sovereign and possessor, sovereign of Turkestan; heir to Norwegian, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein, Stormarn, Ditmarsensky and Oldenburg and other, and other, and other "
              1. Dart2027 13 January 2020 20: 08 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                and as can be clearly seen from the names among them NATIONAL

                Have you tried to read yourself?
                Sovereign of Pskov and Grand Duke of Smolensk Sovereign and Grand Duke of Novgorod of Nizovsk, Chernigov, Ryazan, Polotsk, Rostov, Yaroslavl, Belozersky, Udora, Obdorsky, Kondi, Vitebsk, Mstislavsky
                What are these nationalities? The title of the emperor listed all the territories and titles of those who ruled them before unification into one state.
                1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 20: 11 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Quote: Dart2027
                  among them stood out NATIONAL

                  Duplicate: AMONG THEM!
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  king Polish, king of Siberia, king of Tauric Chersonesos, king Georgian; Sovereign Pskov and Grand Duke Smolensky, LithuanianVolyn, Podolsky and Finnish; Prince of Estland, Livonia, Courland
                  1. Dart2027 13 January 2020 20: 40 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    AMONG THEM!
                    Duplicate
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    In the title of emperor all territories and titles of those who ruled them before unification into one state were listed
                    In addition, I would like to inquire where it is said that
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    listed in the title Nicky de jure ownership belonged NOT to Russia
                    I remember something like that with Finland and Poland and that’s it.
                    1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 20: 52 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      And all who lived before joining became Russian after joining?
                    2. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 20: 55 New
                      • 4
                      • 2
                      +2
                      Quote: Dart2027
                      In addition, I would like to inquire where it is said that
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      listed in the title Nicky de jure ownership belonged NOT to Russia

                      I said, where is there a refutation? Where is Russia indicated as the owner of all these possessions at that time? So Russia did not exist then as a state, but there was the Russian Empire, such a perdumonocle.
                      1. Dart2027 13 January 2020 21: 16 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        And all who lived before joining became Russian
                        They were them before the creation of national republics.
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        So Russia was not then, as a state, but was the Russian Empire
                        But is the Russian Empire not a state?
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Where is Russia indicated as the owner of all these possessions at that time?
                        Who?
            3. Pedrodepackes 13 January 2020 17: 35 New
              • 1
              • 4
              -3
              Quote: Olgovich
              4. To abolish record keeping in all party, state and public organizations of the Lithuanian SSR in non-Lithuanian language,

              Quote: Olgovich
              It was the same in western Ukraine, etc.
              the same thing is happening throughout Ukraine
            4. svd-xnumx 13 January 2020 18: 33 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              How did Borka the first president say: “take so much sovereignty as long as you take”, and so Beria and Khrushchev gave the local princes for support a fraction of the power.
              1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 19: 36 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Quote: svd-xnumx
                How is Borka the first president said: "take sovereignty as you take away"
                Both Yeltsin and Gobachev, and Khrushchev, no one said that he wanted to change the system to the opposite, none of these destroyers in words did not abandon socialism. They all said that the people deserve a better life, that this is the beginning of improvements.
            5. EvilLion 11 March 2020 12: 14 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              only now it became clear to us


              What were naive.
        2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 06: 51 New
          • 17
          • 3
          +14
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          So the IVS is not Russian, but what difference does it make!

          Stalin said to himself ---- ""I am not Georgian ---- I am Russian of Georgian origin ""
      2. knn54 13 January 2020 09: 24 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Khrushchev from the Kursk region.
        I will take the liberty of asserting that this act is the MAJOR action of the NSH, which led to the collapse of the USSR, the growth of corruption, crime, nationalism.
        And interestingly, when taking power, they first of all abolish
        they burn the archives of power departments. It was after the revolution (the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the gendarmerie). So it was during the collapse of the USSR-KGB, they will not revive, but will make separate services from departments.
        1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 11: 27 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Is it the main one? Probably all the same, the very fact of the struggle against the “personality cult” made it possible to change the foundations of statehood laid down under Stalin. Criticism of Stalin led to a criticism of socialism, which began to occur constantly. So criticism of socialism led to its replacement by the opposite under the pretext of improvement.
          Also rename the batch ..
          1. Fat
            Fat 14 January 2020 04: 38 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Reptiloid
            Also rename the batch ..

            The party was renamed in October 1952 ... T.E. under Stalin. Khrushchev is not at work here.
    2. Basil50 13 January 2020 06: 12 New
      • 25
      • 4
      +21
      About * bomb * from Vladimir Ilyich Lenin is not worth it.
      Those who overthrew the tsar and then CONSCIOUSLY destroyed the RUSSIAN EMPIRE hastily raised nationalists of all * systems and calibers *. KNOW about this. Temporary boasted of this quite consciously.
      By the time the Bolsheviks took power of the state ALREADY did not exist. The collapse of the state ALREADY happened. The temporary ones even managed to determine the occupation zones of the Entente countries, and this, in addition to recognizing nationalists not only on the outskirts of the former EMPIRE, but also attempts to breed different * varieties of Cossacks *, divide WHITE RUSSIA, SMALL RUSSIA, GREAT RUSSIA.
      This is the Bolsheviks, recreated a single country and then rebuilt.
      In particular, it was necessary to create nations from individual tribes of the North Caucasus, Transcaucasia, Central Asia, the Baltic states so that these nations ceased to be dogged among themselves and realized the complexity of building the STATE.
      Look today, these almost nations are again spreading out into tribes and sliding down to the civil war again.
      1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 06: 17 New
        • 6
        • 10
        -4
        Quote: Vasily50
        About * bomb * from Vladimir Ilyich Lenin is not worth it.

        It’s a pity there is no “irony” badge, I would put it specially for you in my comment. wink
      2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 16: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        What is interesting to me, for example, were the changes in the ministries at the corn farms limited to those listed? Or did he redo something in other ministries? Or maybe in what other higher organizations? It is also interesting, but what were the legislative actions that had negative consequences for the country?
        I am very pleased with the explanations in the article, because I have now found out that, in addition to defaming Stalin, corn pests were at different levels. Not only household and understandable, but also at the highest level. Previously, I most often heard about everyday aspects.
    3. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 06: 46 New
      • 11
      • 4
      +7
      The article is a new continuation of the big cycle. +++++
      Perhaps there were some praises of this Khrushchev's "" act? "" Type, ----- more independence on the ground? I recall Gorbachev’s “more than socialism”. ”
    4. IS-80_RVGK2 13 January 2020 14: 07 New
      • 8
      • 3
      +5
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      But Lenin laid the “bomb” of separatism, yeah. Plus article !!!

      And the chapel of the 12th century is also he. Outstanding historian Putin will not let lie. laughing
      1. Doliva63 13 January 2020 17: 55 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        But Lenin laid the “bomb” of separatism, yeah. Plus article !!!

        And the chapel of the 12th century is also he. Outstanding historian Putin will not let lie. laughing

        This comrade’s irony is as I understand it.
        1. IS-80_RVGK2 13 January 2020 17: 57 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Doliva63
          This comrade’s irony is as I understand it.

          Well, at least one more person was found besides me. laughing
  2. apro 13 January 2020 05: 50 New
    • 7
    • 6
    +1
    The refusal to build communism in the USSR had and has sad consequences ... it didn’t begin to bite ... a little before him. But the authority of IVStalin could resist this. The blackening of the personality and deeds of the LEADER somewhat simplified the task of the degenerates ..
    1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 06: 59 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Quote: apro
      ....... denigrating the personality and affairs of the LEADER somewhat simplified the task of the degenerates ..
      Simplified a little, speak? Yes, in my opinion not a few, but it opened up great opportunities .. Moreover, not only in our country the enemies of socialism have intensified. About what happened in the socialist countries due to slander against Stalin --- there was an article before ..
  3. rocket757 13 January 2020 07: 29 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    After the Leader of the Peoples, many have been redrawn in different ways !!! Until redrawn to a certain end!
    So you think about the significance of the PERSONALITY in the history of states and humanity.
    1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 07: 49 New
      • 10
      • 4
      +6
      hi good morning Victor!
      Quote: rocket757
      ...... redrawn in different ways !!! Until redrawn to a certain end!
      So you think about the significance of the PERSONALITY in the history of states and humanity.
      Many of Stalin's endeavors immediately after his death were canceled. Was canceled, for example, ---- Stalin's Environmental Program. That's because ---- the word "ecology" "was not used, but the program was .. We can observe the results of the refusal now.
      1. rocket757 13 January 2020 08: 10 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Hi Dmitry soldier
        Abrupt throwing back and forth never led to good.
        The ability to make quick, very necessary / useful decisions, because not everyone can do it !!! Again the question of the role of prominent personalities in the history of states.
        Breaking does not build! this is exactly what we had to make sure on our own skin ... it’s bad that they didn’t draw the right conclusions, not all of them!
        Now it is very likely that the current "stability" is by no means "a movement towards success in the future. It does not seem at all.
        1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 08: 18 New
          • 13
          • 3
          +10
          The title of the article says ---15 ministers instead of one .... And now how many ministers? Indeed, now in every region there is a government and ministers, in each republic --- presidents
          There are about 100 domestic representative offices in Moscow ..... And what about this? Follow in the footsteps of corn?
          1. rocket757 13 January 2020 08: 47 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Reptiloid
            Follow in the footsteps of corn?

            Ha, yes, his current in many respects surpassed him ...
            Soviet leaders should not even recall personal modesty and the absence of a thirst for money-grubbing; for the present, this is not about them.
            1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 09: 22 New
              • 7
              • 0
              +7
              Each president, each government has a huge staff, representative offices not only in Moscow but also in different cities of the Russian Federation.
              Now it is worth asking, and what representative offices of the Russian Federation are abroad? But only in the evening I can read ...
              And modesty? Here the unforgettable former Minister of Labor, Employment, Migration of the Saratov region advised eating macaroni at 3500r monthly. However, she herself refused the experiment, "" not by status "" True, Saratov deputies got her with such food repeatedly until then .... before her dismissal, in short. So, having lost her salary ~~~ 100000 per month, she can experiment ....
              1. rocket757 13 January 2020 09: 39 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                Honestly, all this is no longer important. It is and it is a fact.
                Now it is important to begin to educate people, to teach to unite all together and fight for their rights.
                This process is not fast, too people have become fragmented, isolated ....
                1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 11: 00 New
                  • 5
                  • 0
                  +5
                  Quote: rocket757
                  Honestly, all this is no longer important. It is and it is a fact.
                  Now it’s important to start educating people ....
                  It turns out that not everyone sees these facts. But it is necessary that people would know as many of these facts as possible. To make it clear that this is not just one black sheep spoils the whole herd ....
                  1. rocket757 13 January 2020 12: 10 New
                    • 4
                    • 0
                    +4
                    On the next branch there’s just a dispute, an exchange of opinions about ... one sheep of a herd cannot spoil. And at the GOOD SHEPHERD, such a sheep is rejected at a time that would not infect others.
                    1. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 12: 16 New
                      • 5
                      • 0
                      +5
                      Here IOSIF VISSARIONOVICH --- rejected, from power, and even then there are so many of them left that they began to destroy his labors.
                      And now, if everyone has already rebuilt there? How to be request
                      Although ---- I do not mind, if that-this ---- am
                      1. rocket757 13 January 2020 12: 38 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        So how many of these eternal questions do we have - What to do? Where to go? Who to follow? and very often And it would not get worse!
                      2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 15: 10 New
                        • 3
                        • 2
                        +1
                        Quote: rocket757
                        ..... But it would not be worse!
                        And it would be worse if there were no tyrnet wassat Now it’s so good, all the nonsense and muck of the "" servants "" of the people ---- are captured! And before, a long time ago, what happened? Hakamada advised people without a salary to collect mushroom nuts so that families could feed in the 90s, but did not fix it, there was no way! Only in the memory of the people .... And now ---- smartphones, voice recorders, tablets, navigators, no bullshit negative will not be lost
                      3. rocket757 13 January 2020 17: 44 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        And it would have been worse if there hadn’t been tyrnet. Now it’s so good, all the stupidities and filth of the "" servants "" of the people ---- are sealed! And before, a long time ago, what happened?

                        Everything changes over time ... everything is known in comparison!
                        To live, do as before will not work! We must choose what to do now, and then establish ourselves. Not everything depends on us NOW, we must try what would become so.
                      4. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 20: 00 New
                        • 5
                        • 0
                        +5
                        Quote: rocket757
                        ...... Everything changes over time ... everything is known in comparison! .....

                        it is worth remembering and comparing what orders the non-Balts had in Finland before the revolution. Before the revolution, they had milder conditions. Compare at least serfdom in Russia and with them.
                        With regard to the shortcomings --- the creation of windows from them at the expense of the USSR ---- they completely moved their brains from arrogance and anger.
                      5. rocket757 13 January 2020 20: 07 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        The story is interesting, but it's time to emerge back and work on the future. As it was no longer, it is necessary to build a new one.
                      6. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 20: 18 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        Quote: rocket757
                        The story is interesting, but it's time to emerge back and work on the future. As it was no longer, it is necessary to build a new one.

                        Well, yes, Victor, build a new one, remembering the past! The only way.
                        Indeed, during the time after the Second World War, our people 3 times fell into the same attractive future scenario, which later turned out to be a hoax. Corn and tagged me began to become clear from books. And I found EBN. And advertising --- vote or lose --- I remember. And MMM, and vouchers, and Lenya Golubkova, a lot of things --- I remember.
                        There should not be a repetition of this.
                        And the number of governments within our country is a comparison with the topic of the article.
          2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 12: 18 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: rocket757
            On the next branch there is just a dispute, an exchange of views on ...

            It would be nice to get there, but we must go ... no
  • vindigo 13 January 2020 15: 50 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Yes. We have this scanty republic of Adygea, in which 3/4 of the Russians live. It’s ridiculous.
    1. Sergej1972 14 January 2020 00: 28 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      In Khakassia and Karelia, the percentage of Russians is even higher than in Adygea. And in the Tyumen Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug Khanty, Mansi, Nenets are only a few percent of their population. True, unlike Adygea, in Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, Karelia and Khakassia, the Russians have real power. And in Adygea it is divided on a parity basis between the Adyghe people and the Russians and Russian speakers.
  • Sergej1972 14 January 2020 00: 20 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Actually, the republican Ministry of Internal Affairs existed both before the liquidation of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs and after its restoration. The only thing is that after the restoration in 1966 of the Union MOOP (then the Ministry of Internal Affairs), a similar structure in the largest republic, the RSFSR, was abolished. This, it seems to me, was wrong.
  • Aviator_ 13 January 2020 19: 21 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    This is the so-called "Stalinist plan for the transformation of nature", a very reasonable thing. Only cascades of power plants and forest belts remained from it. And it was then that he was going to invest in the Non-Black Earth Region, and not in the Nikitkin disastrous virgin land. Then, in the early 70s, they recalled Non-Chernozemye, but by then it was too late, it began to degrade irreversibly.
    1. Korsar4 13 January 2020 21: 49 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Moreover, China has very successfully picked up the idea of ​​forest belts.
      1. Aviator_ 13 January 2020 22: 39 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Well, if the idea is reasonable, then why not use it?
        1. Korsar4 13 January 2020 22: 51 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Once again, an occasion to think about the scale of the transformation. Then - with us. And in China - now.
  • Plantagenet 13 January 2020 07: 45 New
    • 3
    • 7
    -4
    “At the plenum of the Central Committee after the arrest of Beria, the leaders of the party and state reproached him for ordering him to publish reports on the release of doctors in the newspapers. Well, he would quietly release him, why attract attention and undermine the authority of the party and organs?

    “Take the well-known question about doctors,” secretary of the Central Committee Nikolai Nikolayevich Shatalin openly spoke at the plenum. “They were arrested incorrectly.” As it turned out, they knew in advance that they were arrested incorrectly. It was necessary to correct, but so that it was not to the detriment of our state. No, this treacherous adventurer managed to publish a special communiqué of the Ministry of the Interior, this issue was in every possible way inclined in our press, and so on ... The error was corrected by methods that brought considerable harm to the interests of our state. Feedback abroad was also not in our favor ... "

    Soviet officials had strange ideas about morality. Planting innocent people, trumpeting the whole world about the alleged crimes of doctors is not a shame for the country. But to publicly admit that they are innocent means to commit a crime, to damage the prestige of the state ... "

    Leonid Mlechin “Why did Stalin create Israel?”
    1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 15: 14 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      You would have quoted Goebbels, although Yosia G. was many times more intelligent than Mlechin.
      1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 18: 23 New
        • 1
        • 5
        -4
        1). Have I violated the rules of this site?
        2). Did Mlechin distort the words of N.N. Shatalin, and in fact did he give a completely different speech?
        3). Maybe you won’t give advice to whom to quote to me, and who not?
        1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 18: 25 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: Plantagenet
          Maybe you won’t give advice to whom to quote to me, and who not?

          Well, do not quote Goebbels, Mlechin then this will not become smarter.
          1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 18: 26 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            As I understand it, you are not able to answer my questions (especially the first two)?
            1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 18: 27 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              And why, from this you will stop quoting Mlechin?
              1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 18: 28 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                If it is prohibited by the rules of the site or the laws of the Russian Federation, then of course I will be forced to obey.
                PS although I would not want to, his books are very interesting.
                1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 18: 35 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  Well, read carefully the rules or laws of the Russian Federation, and I will also recommend departmental instructions of the Federal Penitentiary Service to check if it’s forbidden there, and you don’t know.
                  Quote: Plantagenet
                  although I would not want to, his books are very interesting.
                  That case when the author owning a sea of ​​information extremely poorly disposes of it. He sometimes has two paragraphs adjacent to each other, contradict each other
                  1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 18: 43 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Someone likes a watermelon, and someone like a pig cartilage. All people are different. You don't like Mlechin, I like it.
                    Well, since I did not violate the rules of the site and the laws of the Russian Federation, with your permission, I will continue to quote him and other interesting authors.
                    1. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 18: 52 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Plantagenet
                      At the plenum of the Central Committee after the arrest of Beria, party and state leaders vilified him for ordering him to publish reports on the release of doctors in newspapers. Well, I would quietly release, why attract attention, undermine the authority of the party and organs

                      Quote: Plantagenet
                      No, this treacherous adventurer managed to publish a special communiqué of the Ministry of the Interior

                      Quote: Plantagenet
                      Soviet officials had strange ideas about morality. Planting innocent people, trumpeting the whole world about the alleged crimes of doctors is not a shame for the country. But to admit publicly that they are innocent is to commit a crime, to damage the prestige of the state
                      It’s incomprehensible for Mlechin, whether he praises Beria, or scolds, such a writer Mlechin.
                      1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 18: 55 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        He does not praise and do not scold. He simply quoted Comrade Shatalina. But comrade Shatalin comrade Beria is very scolded.
                      2. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 19: 00 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        Well, then he scolds Shatalin
                        Quote: Plantagenet
                        Soviet officials had strange ideas about morality. Planting innocent people, trumpeting the whole world about the alleged crimes of doctors is not a shame for the country.
                        After all, an official with strange ideas about morality is Shatalin, right? By the way, the secret is small, the quotation mark symbol allows you to arrange any fragment as a quote, I recently figured it out.
                      3. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 19: 08 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        I really didn’t understand where the quotation marks were and who made the secret of them. However, we are moving further away from the topic. And the topic, I recall, is the union Ministry of Internal Affairs and what is connected with it, during the reign of N.S. Khrushchev. And avoiding the topic is already a flood, and if my memory serves me, it is already prohibited by the rules of the site.
                      4. Vladimir_2U 13 January 2020 19: 10 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Well, what does the quote about the doctors ’case from Mlechin’s book have to do with the Allied Ministry of Internal Affairs?
                        This rather extensive quotation looks more like a flood
                      5. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 19: 18 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        So the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs then closed the case.
  • Boris55 13 January 2020 08: 41 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    Quote: A. Chichkin
    Who was afraid of the ghost of Beria

    They are still afraid of him because only there are archives of Beria to investigate the failure of the Red Army in the Second World War, which he conducted on behalf of Comrade. Stalin, and their promulgation, many monuments from their pedestals will be overthrown.
    1. Disorder 13 January 2020 10: 39 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: Boris55
      They are still afraid of him because only there are archives of Beria to investigate the failure of the Red Army in the Second World War, which he conducted on behalf of Comrade. Stalin, and their promulgation, many monuments from their pedestals will be overthrown.

      Hardly ... This bald maize probably destroyed them. He not only repressed left a bloody trail, but also in the Second World War.
      1. Boris55 13 January 2020 10: 41 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Trouble
        This bald maize must have destroyed them.

        No. They are still not found. Son Beria was kept in prison for a year so that he would reveal their whereabouts. Rumor has it that they are somewhere in China.

        1. Plantagenet 13 January 2020 11: 20 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          "The son of Beria was kept in prison for a year so that he would reveal their whereabouts."

          During such a time spent in the dungeons (the whole year), the investigators could not knock out a person’s location of the most important documents for the authorities? What kind of “handshakes” are these investigators, sorry for the expression.
      2. Reptiloid 13 January 2020 11: 07 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Trouble
        ..... the bald maize must have destroyed them. He not only repressed left a bloody trail, but also in the Second World War.
        Often I heard that the maize keeper cleaned up state archives.
  • hermit 13 January 2020 16: 06 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Poor Nikita. And he also destroyed the chapel.
  • Catfish 13 January 2020 18: 23 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    "Comrade, believe she will come,
    The same price for vodka!
    And for a snack there will be a discount,
    Nikitka has retired! "(C) wink drinks
  • Kaw
    Kaw 13 January 2020 19: 39 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    For thought.
    Does the US have a home office?
    If I am not mistaken, in the USA all police are subordinate to municipalities. And in general, their regions have much more independence than ever before in Russia. But at the same time, they do not have totalitarianism and political repression, and never have. Why did our whole union rest on Stalin's despotism, and when Steel left and the union began to fall apart?
    Maybe some other methods of bonding alliances are needed? And then with despotism and repression it’s somehow not comfortable to live, doesn’t it seem.
    1. Sergej1972 14 January 2020 00: 42 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      There is a Ministry of Internal Affairs in the United States, but, unlike most countries, it deals with environmental issues, national parks, and Native American reservations. At the federal level, there are powerful intelligence services, both independent, such as the CIA, and as part of the Ministry of Justice (FBI), the Ministry of Defense, the State Department, and the Ministry of Energy. There are several federal police structures. The FBI combines the functions of an investigative body, special services and, to some extent, police officers. There is a ministry of internal security, reminds our Ministry of Emergencies, but only partially. There is a police force in every state. In large states, there may be several parallel police structures. There is municipal police. But nevertheless, its number is most often lower compared to the state police, but much depends on the state.
  • Sergej1972 14 January 2020 00: 49 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The author forgot to mention that after the liquidation of the union Ministry of Internal Affairs, border guards were reassigned to the KGB. And the activities of the republican Ministry of Internal Affairs were controlled by the KGB under the Council of Ministers of the Republics, which were part of a single union-republican KGB under the USSR Council of Ministers. Plus, no one has abolished party line control. By the way, the Ministry of Education appeared for the first time at the Union level only in 1966, which did not prevent it from pursuing a unified policy in the field of school education.
  • Sergej1972 14 January 2020 00: 59 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The republican Ministry of Internal Affairs did not deal with cases of political crimes, it was the prerogative of the KGB. As for the Criminal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Civil Code, the Code of Administrative Offenses, and the CoBiS of the Union republics, the differences between them were small; in any case, they should not contradict the Fundamentals of criminal legislation of the USSR and Union republics, the Fundamentals of legislation in other areas. And the responsibility for treason, anti-Soviet activity, war crimes was the same throughout the USSR.
  • Sergej1972 21 February 2020 13: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "It is worth recalling that it was on the eve of the XX Congress of the CPSU that the rule that had been in force since the end of the 20s, according to which local leaders of Russian nationality should be second secretaries of the Central Committee of the Union republics and regional committees of national autonomies, was canceled." Just after the 20th CPSU Congress, the practice of appointing second secretaries from "non-local" has become more common. By the way, the second secretaries were most often appointed from among comrades who were not from this republic. And they were not always Russian. There, the main principle is not a native of this region. I do not know of cases where the second secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Union Republic in the non-Slavic republics was a local Russian, a native of this republic. Among the second secretaries in the non-Slavic republics, in the regions within the non-Slavic union republics, in the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic both the RSFSR and the other union republics were the most Russian, which is quite natural due to their largest numbers, but there were many Ukrainians and Belarusians . There were representatives of non-Slavic peoples. For example, the Moldovan Luchinsky during the years of perestroika was the second secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Tajikistan.
    At the level of district committees and city committees in the republics, and in Ukraine and Belarus and at the level of regional committees, both local (“titular” and Russian) and immigrants from other republics could be elected second secretaries, there was no longer any strict dependence, everything depended from a specific situation. Here much depended on the region. In particular, in Kazakhstan and the republics of Central Asia, many people from the RSFSR, Ukraine and Belarus worked in the regional, city, and district committees. And in the republics of Transcaucasia this practice was much less common.
    If in the non-Slavic union or autonomous republic of the USSR, the first secretary of the Central Committee or regional committee was elected Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian, then the second secretary in the vast majority of cases and Predsmin in all such cases was appointed local, and always from the “titular” ones. The chairman of the presidium of the Armed Forces of the Union or Autonomous Republic was almost always appointed from the "titular", regardless of the nationalities of the first and second secretaries of the Central Committee or regional committee and chairman of the Council of Ministers.
    There are no rules without exceptions. Under Stalin, the second secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Parties of Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan were most often Georgians, Armenians, and Azerbaijanis. On the other hand, in the Kazakh SSR in the 50s, during the development of virgin lands, there was a period when both the first and second secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan were not from among the Kazakhs. And in Latvia during the perestroika period, the Chairman of the PVA was the Russian Gorbunov, now Gorbunovs.)