Who stood behind Andropov and Gorbachev


November 1982 No matter how "unexpectedly" winter usually comes in our country, just as "unexpectedly" the death of Leonid Brezhnev, Secretary General of the CPSU Central Committee, took place. The party elites, who “dragged” a convenient person to the end, were faced with a situation where a convenient person left, and it was necessary to quickly share the party’s inheritance. In order not to create a political vacuum.


But, as the late Soviet says история, this vacuum eventually formed, despite the fact that the secretaries general came to their posts stably. But they also left too somehow “stably”.

The Day TV channel presents an interview with the writer Fedor Razzakov, who continued a series of lectures on the last decade of the Soviet Union, as well as on those leaders of the country who made the most important decisions. The fact that many of these decisions were controversial and probably influenced the fate of the Land of Soviets can now be attributed to the facts.

The writer Fyodor Razzakov in his lecture will talk about Yuri Andropov and Mikhail Gorbachev, give arguments about who was behind these large political figures, and how the probable shadow government ended in the end.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 05: 56 New
    • 14
    • 6
    +8
    [quote] Writer Fedor Razzakov in his lecture will tell [/ quote]
    I read it and got sick of watching
    The writer should write, not lectures
    I went to the "wiki" and that I saw
    [quote] Fyodor Ibatovich Razzakov (born February 7, 1962, Moscow, USSR) is a Russian writer, biographer and journalist. Famous as the author of books about Soviet and Russian cinema, television, pop, sports. [/ Quote]
    Decided on a politics on a PR?
    [quote] Born on February 7, 1962 in Moscow in an international family. Father - Razzakov Ibat (1936-2001) - an Uzbek, a native of the village of Denau, Bukhara region, Shafirkan region, mother - Razzakova (Tuktarova) Najiya (1935-2011) - a Tatar, a native of the village of Petryaksa, Gorky region, Pilninsky district. [/ Quote]
    And then even better
    [quote] Razzakov’s concepts, developed when writing biographies of famous people, are perceived critically by many other researchers. Some authors of negative reviews [what?] Call them “anti-ZHZL”. In addition, a whole term arose among them - “razzakovism” [1], as an example of a biased approach to the work of the universal idol. Razzakov is called a "yellow" journalist, a lover of "fried" facts, rumors and gossip.[/ Quote]
    And will he give me lectures?
    1. Alexey Sommer April 10 2020 06: 13 New
      • 10
      • 6
      +4
      Quote: Lipchanin
      I read it and got sick of watching

      I have not read a book, but I condemn (C)
      And you listen. And then comment all the masters.
      The lecture raises the topic of traitors to the Soviet Union. It's about Gorbachev and his patron Andropov. But this is certainly not all who betrayed the country and people.
      1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 06: 33 New
        • 11
        • 5
        +6
        Quote: Alexey Sommer
        I have not read a book, but I condemn (C)

        Well, firstly, the quote is incorrect. Use unverified gossip

        The phrase "I have not read Pasternak, but condemn" has become a proverb. According to popular belief, was pronounced during a popular condemnation of Boris Pasternak, who published the novel "Doctor Zhivago" abroad and received the Nobel Prize for it.
        The phrase became a symbol of the stupidity of the Soviet "denunciation of dissidents" and a meme from the series "I am a witness, what happened?".

        In this capacity, it is still actively used. So, no more than in April 2019, political analyst Dmitry Oreshkin, condemning the Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov for calling for the demolition of the Yeltsin Center, wrote:
        About "not how it really was, but how profitable it is to present" - this is what Oreshkin said to the place.

        Because in fact, the phrase "I have not read, but condemn" during the condemnation of Pasternak is not recorded anywhere.

        I have already said that it is up to writers to write, not lecture. And on the site I read, but do not listen to, the lectures of a specialist in "Russian cinema, television, pop, sports" who, for the sake of PR, entered politics
        The lecture raises the topic of traitors to the Soviet Union.

        Well, if you don’t know them, then listen to what will tell you
        Razzakov is called a "yellow" journalist, a lover of "fried" facts, rumors and gossip.

        It's about Gorbachev and his patron Andropov. But this is certainly not all who betrayed the country and people.

        So let him tell you. I lived at that time, I was no longer a boy and I know perfectly well who betrayed
        1. Alexey Sommer April 10 2020 06: 34 New
          • 6
          • 4
          +2
          Quote: Lipchanin
          Well, firstly, the quote is incorrect. Use unverified gossip

          Well, did you get the point?)
          1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 06: 36 New
            • 9
            • 4
            +5
            I have already answered. Read everything I wrote, not just one phrase
        2. DMB 75 April 10 2020 06: 37 New
          • 18
          • 2
          +16
          What is the dispute, men? That labeled Judas? So it is.
          1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 06: 39 New
            • 14
            • 3
            +11
            Quote: DMB 75
            What is the dispute, men? That labeled Judas? So it is.

            Here I am about that. I still have some kind of "special" on gossip will be lecturing about him.
            I don’t know without him
            It is strange that he ebn did not remember
        3. knn54 April 10 2020 08: 43 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Sergey, I also lived at that time. The conversation is not about who betrayed, but who stood.
          I think that really we will never know.
          I can (I did not watch the proposed interview) just assume that Trotskyism was not finished off.
          There was one quite powerful, including with intelligence functions. The office is KOMINTERN,
          They closed the shop, but many got into the future international department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, and not only. Taking into account the ideology of "chicks of the Zinoviev’s nest" in the Central Committee and other departments, a time bomb was planted.
          1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 08: 57 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Quote: knn54
            The conversation is not about who betrayed, but who stood

            You are mistaken. The main thing who betrayed. And who paid him absolutely nothing to me
            I think that really we will never know.

            But I don’t need it. It makes no difference to me Germans, French, Americans, Nigerians, Somalis, etc. it sold out
            Gd
            The main thing is the fact of betrayal
    2. ccsr April 10 2020 12: 10 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Lipchanin
      I went to the "wiki" and that I saw

      This is the right approach, because in order to analyze information, you must first make sure that it is obtained from a reliable source. And although the wiki is not the most reliable source, but according to the biography and life path of any author, you can quite accurately determine how much it is worth believing in his works and his conclusions, and there are a ton of examples.
    3. iouris April 11 2020 19: 15 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Lipchanin
      And will he give me lectures?

      Are you able to listen to the lecture?
  2. Van 16 April 10 2020 06: 37 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    At one time, I honestly tried to read several books of Razzakov, including about Vladimir Vysotsky, a KGB super agent, the impression of the writer, to put it mildly, not very.
  3. Old partisan April 10 2020 07: 10 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Yes, actually, what's the difference who stood behind them? What they wanted, achieved. Socialism is destroyed, the country is in ruins, liberals are in power, a population of 80 percent of the townspeople.
    1. Ros 56 April 10 2020 07: 31 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Now you have to restore, but in a modified version. So get ready. Only one question: who will be responsible for the collapse of the USSR?
      1. Gene84 April 10 2020 18: 06 New
        • 15
        • 0
        +15
        Quote: Ros 56
        who is responsible for the collapse of the USSR?

        Alas, but no one ...
        1. Ros 56 April 11 2020 07: 31 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Well, for some reason, Shushkevich and Kravchuk, the redhead and his gopkompak, are still alive, and there are many more direct participants, such as the current "star" on the television screen of the liberal demagogue Stankevich, who demolished the monument to Dzerzhinsky and others, and others, and others.
      2. If u c p e m and still be alive, the guy, to the letter, g, then he will not go anywhere from retribution for betrayal and the intentional collapse of the Union! A serious state will return to the territory of Russia (and it will MANDATORYly return) - and the demand from the villains will be serious. ,, You have to pay for everything. What's wrong? For centuries, Russians have known - “not all cats are a Shrovetide”
  4. nikvic46 April 10 2020 07: 52 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    That any leader is primarily beneficial to his environment? So these are common truths. Now anti local spill advisers are discussing the panic in Davos. A threat to capitalism? They are trying to lower all the merits of the USSR into the everyday plane. "When Soviet people bought a TV, a refrigerator, it was a holiday for them. They stood in line for years for cars." If now someone is indifferent to the purchase of these goods, then he has hens of money don't peck. How long does it take to save up for a car? You can, of course, and on credit. But if you choose a good car, then the down payment will be capacious.
  5. seacap April 10 2020 13: 03 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It seems to me that it no longer matters to people who stood behind these personalities, who, by the will of fate, fell to the leadership of the power, this should be of interest to historians, law enforcement and judicial authorities, who should draw their conclusions and condemn all those involved in this crime of the century. And in the eyes of the people, they, regardless of the court’s decision, if it is, of course, someday, will forever remain despised and hated outcasts along with Godunov, false Dmitrys and Shuysky, as well as “figures” from the 90s to today time, which is still in power, continue to sleep softly and eat sweetly.
    1. Lipchanin April 10 2020 13: 46 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: seacap
      It seems to me that people no longer care who stood behind these personalities,

      Aha. As if there is a difference to whom it was sold. Like if this is a bad traitor, if to others, then not really bad
      So you can reach the "moderate opposition" which is not really terrorists
    2. bober1982 April 10 2020 16: 07 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: seacap
      And in the eyes of the people, they, regardless of the court’s decision, if, of course, one day, will forever remain despised and hated outcasts along with

      But, after all, the people themselves are to blame - the crowd is ordinary, they screeched in delight, look at the chronicle, everything will become clear, the usual herd of sheep was, is and will be, which we are now observing.
      Quote: seacap
      along with Godunov

      By the way, the Sovereign was very intelligent, but they lied, the crowd picked up, but this is so, by the way.
  6. seacap April 10 2020 15: 51 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Lipchanin
    Aha. As if there is a difference to whom it was sold.

    Of course, I understand that Russian may not be your native language and you may not understand the meaning of Russian words and the meaning of sentences composed of them. But then before you write something, you need to understand that in this section the article is discussed and commented on, and not the comment of the person who expressed his opinion. And with his "Aha", etc. please, on teenage sites according to your level, and here people are more serious, do not know how to communicate on the merits of the issue, dismiss meaningless comments. I consider further communication pointless, and therefore good luck.
  7. Gene84 April 10 2020 18: 08 New
    • 18
    • 0
    +18
    The culprits in the collapse of the USSR Yakovlev and Gorbachev. Everything else is no longer important.
    1. iouris April 11 2020 19: 16 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      You tortured them and they confessed to you?
  8. seacap April 10 2020 19: 40 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: bober1982
    By the way, a very intelligent Sovereign

    There is, especially from a historical perspective, a very specific type of assessment of one or another leader (head of state) - the result of his reign, and for this person the results are very sad and deplorable both for himself and for the state, it is not necessary to form an opinion about the historical person by x / f or literature, t.b. based on modern realities, it seems to me.
    1. seacap April 10 2020 19: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      why? The site administrator was forbidden to leave comments on this site
  9. iouris April 11 2020 18: 57 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    I absolutely agree with the conclusions of Razzakov. It is clear why he unravels this matter: this is the key moment of "perestroika". The country is run by the "Bodies", the seizure of power is led by the "Bodies", the appointment of "cadres" is led by the "Bodies", the decision of the issue of who is the corrupt official is led by the "Bodies".
    The painful question is not solved: who runs the "Organs": the Rothschilds or the Rockefellers? Jesuits led by the pope? Together?
  10. Guazdilla April 12 2020 12: 36 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Who stood behind Andropov and Gorbachev


    On August 3, 1980, the military tribunal of the Turkestan military district sentenced Alisher Usmanov, the son of a Tashkent prosecutor, to 8 years in prison for fraud and complicity in receiving a bribe. Together with Usmanov, his friends were convicted - Bahadyr Nasymov, son of the deputy chairman of the KGB of Uzbekistan, and Ilham Shaikov, son of the Minister of Agriculture.
    True, it later turned out that it was only a “trifle” for the pocket expenses of the future tycoon, and in general, everything was untrue, “invented”.
  11. Asan Ata April 13 2020 01: 28 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In 1984, Andrei Gromyko signed the Act of Surrender on behalf of the USSR. This document can be found in the library of His Majesty in London. Gorbachev, but rather his wife, was / was an agent of the West. "Perestroika" - was the only way to destroy the USSR, which would not lead to rebellion.
    Of course, the collapse of the USSR began much earlier. It turned out to be impossible to build socialism in a single country, just as it is impossible to keep a wife in a cotton dressing gown from nonsense when a professional prostitute changes clothes, cars and gentlemen every day in the apartment next door.
    The West is still afraid of the USSR, even its mention, therefore its experience has not been studied and its great past has been covered with dust of lies.