Khrushchev’s displacement: obvious and secret reasons


On October 14, 1964, Nikita Khrushchev, First Secretary of this body and part-time head of state, was dismissed at an extraordinary Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Someone calls this a palace coup, but rather this event can be described as a triumph of justice. What were the true incentives of the top-ranking party members who ousted the leader of the Kremlin from Olympus and the reasons that their actions were successful?


Actually, there are several fairly common versions regarding the reasons that led to the fall of this odious ruler. Let us briefly consider the main ones.

So, in accordance with the first, the whole point was that Leonid Brezhnev, who was tearing to power, and his associates, with the support of the then leadership of the State Security Committee, started a conspiracy. Taking advantage of the lack of a relaxed Khrushchev, who decided not to take his time in his beloved Pitsunda for himself, silently held the plenum mentioned above, at which, having voiced the accusations prepared in advance for the First, he was forced to resign.

This option is, to put it mildly, extremely simplified. In addition, the overthrow of Khrushchev for the two most active participants in this case, the chairman of the KGB of the USSR Vladimir Semichastny and the secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Alexander Shelepin, ended, in fact, not with a take-off, but with the subsequent (if not immediately) disgrace and removal from any real power as such. The rumors that subsequently spread that Brezhnev allegedly directly proposed to Semichastny to physically eliminate Khrushchev seemed to be completely lies. To something, and even to excessive bloodthirstiness, as his subsequent very long reign showed, “dear Leonid Ilyich” was definitely not inclined.

The explanation, based on the fact that Khrushchev was allegedly preparing a global purge of leading personnel, does not seem too realistic. Well, the apparatchiks from the Central Committee and special services, frightened for their own future, decided to encroach on the First Secretary, before it was too late, to remove. It should be noted that the personnel policy of Khrushchev throughout his leadership of the USSR was, to put it mildly, confused, careless and completely unpredictable. And these are the mildest and most decent expressions with which it can be characterized.

The stability of the position in the state or party hierarchy was not guaranteed by personal devotion to Nikita Sergeyevich and his merits. The most striking example is the fate of Georgy Zhukov, with whose help Khrushchev first came to power, and then at least once managed to hold it in 1957. So what? The Marshal of Victory was an ungrateful protege first pushed to humiliating posts, and then completely dismissed. So to the various twists and turns of the First, which subsequently received the derogatory characteristic of “voluntarism,” the party-Soviet elite was accustomed to and tolerated them - to a certain extent. This is most likely not the case.

Another interpretation of events seems much more plausible, according to which those who sent Khrushchev into political nonexistence were guided by the absolutely correct and not only timely, but rather belated consideration: “The country must be saved urgently!” And not only the country ... Khrushchev put on a dubious track in the USSR literally everything that he could reach: the army, the police, agriculture, architecture, science. After the Great Patriotic War, the Soviet Union, which had canceled the card system before Britain, was threatened with real hunger. Sometimes in the shops there was even no bread, not to mention other products. If it were not for the 860 tons of gold spent on the purchase of grain, more than 20 years after the Victory in the USSR, cards would have to be introduced again, and this would hardly have saved the situation. It has already reached the point of popular riots - for the first time in Soviet stories fire on an unarmed crowd in Novocherkassk ordered Khrushchev to open.

In international politics, things were no less bad.

Two serious crises, Berlin and the Caribbean, almost ended in a new world war. A quarrel with China, the emerging split of the "socialist camp" into three groups hostile to each other. All these were the “merits” of Khrushchev, who imagined himself to be a great world-class politician. Well, not only the highest state orders of the USSR, executive cars and even airplanes distributed to them by foreign princes, but also billions in gold and currency in the form of “aid for building socialism”, generated bad debts that neither the USSR nor Russia did were able to recover.

There is evidence of a voluminous secret report that, if Khrushov refused to voluntarily resign at the next plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, would be openly announced by a member of his presidium Dmitry Polyansky. This document was filled out, created primarily by the efforts of KGB officers, so "killer" compromising evidence that, having flipped its first few pages, Khrushchev gave up. Moreover, there really was no one to lean on him: he had betrayed all that he could by that moment and pushed him away. I personally am very sorry that the case ended with this, and not with a public trial of the one who, defaming the name of Stalin, derailed all the achievements of his era and took the first steps to the subsequent death of the USSR.
Author:
Photos used:
Wikipedia / Nikita Khrushchev
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Far B 3 June 2020 13: 25 New
    • 46
    • 6
    +40
    Well, I agree with the author - Khrushchev had already done so many tricks by the time of the displacement that all sorts of patience were full. Further, leaving him in high office would be simply suicidal.
    1. Civil 3 June 2020 13: 37 New
      • 8
      • 69
      -61
      Quote: Far In
      Well, I agree with the author - Khrushchev had already done so many tricks by the time of the displacement that all sorts of patience were full. Further, leaving him in high office would be simply suicidal.

      This is not a reason to change power. It was the highest Maidan. The ruler in Russia must change and is changing mainly with the death of the current king.
      1. qQQQ 3 June 2020 14: 49 New
        • 33
        • 3
        +30
        Quote: Civil
        It was the highest Maidan.

        There was no smell of Maidan there, an extraordinary Plenum was convened, at which everything was decided. Everything was done according to the law. Well, Maidan is a power and illegal seizure of power.
        1. Doctor 3 June 2020 15: 15 New
          • 4
          • 22
          -18
          was convened by an extraordinary Plenum



          They just saw in him a new Stalin.
          1. ser56 3 June 2020 20: 38 New
            • 8
            • 19
            -11
            Quote: Arzt
            They just saw in him a new Stalin.

            yet the IVS was smarter in the struggle for power and more bloodthirsty ... request
            1. sevryuk 4 June 2020 18: 31 New
              • 0
              • 5
              -5
              Asia Minor origin.
          2. qQQQ 4 June 2020 09: 30 New
            • 5
            • 0
            +5
            Quote: Arzt
            They just saw in him a new Stalin.

            What difference does it make whom they saw in him, the main thing in this is the legality of the removal procedure.
      2. Kronos 3 June 2020 15: 58 New
        • 8
        • 4
        +4
        Fortunately, there are no kings
      3. NF68 3 June 2020 17: 22 New
        • 19
        • 3
        +16
        Quote: Civil
        This is not a reason to change power.


        May he continue to be so weird? If he hadn’t been stopped, albeit belatedly, then who knows how much harm he has done to the country, this maize.
        1. Vend 3 June 2020 19: 26 New
          • 4
          • 27
          -23
          Quote: NF68
          Quote: Civil
          This is not a reason to change power.


          May he continue to be so weird? If he hadn’t been stopped, albeit belatedly, then who knows how much harm he has done to the country, this maize.

          The case of the maize continued the order bearer laughing changed the awl for soap laughing
      4. Maki Avellevich 12 June 2020 09: 36 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Civil
        This is not a reason to change power. It was the highest Maidan. The ruler in Russia must change and changes mainly with the death of the current king.

        it could have been so.
    2. Crowe 3 June 2020 13: 42 New
      • 41
      • 2
      +39
      Quote: Far In
      Khrushchev by the time of the displacement had already done so much that all sorts of patience were full

      That's for sure, the corn-bearer got everyone. After Stalin, we weren’t lucky with the rulers, except that we lived calmly under Brezhnev, and then I still have a full tryndets ... Andropov can’t be remembered, it was he who pulled the Jewish woman tagged into power.
      1. Nitochkin 3 June 2020 16: 21 New
        • 18
        • 3
        +15
        Quote: Crowe
        Quote: Far In
        Khrushchev by the time of the displacement had already done so much that all sorts of patience were full

        That's for sure, the corn-bearer got everyone. After Stalin, we weren’t lucky with the rulers, except that we lived calmly under Brezhnev, and then I still have a full tryndets ... Andropov can’t be remembered, it was he who pulled the Jewish woman tagged into power.

        Tagged is only a small part. All this liberal Kodla, led by Alkash, who rose in the 90s and seized power - this is all the work of Andropov. Therefore, Andropov is even worse than Tagged.
        1. Pavel57 3 June 2020 18: 33 New
          • 7
          • 3
          +4
          Andropov’s career went uphill under Khrushchev. He offered Khrushchev to become president of the USSR.
      2. Seal 4 June 2020 16: 59 New
        • 10
        • 1
        +9
        Quote: Crowe
        After Stalin, we were not lucky with the rulers at all,
        Just after the death of Stalin, we were lucky. Malenkov was a good ruler. Especially during the period when he was with Lavrenty Pavlovich.
        Grant, an American specialist in the field of agriculture, said in his report: “In Russia in the twentieth century, only three times the peasant was well done, and therefore, the land is Stolypin’s reform, NEP and Malenkov’s reforms ...”

        Malenkov abolished taxes on all personal peasant property - gardens, cattle, poultry, etc. He allowed to increase personal plots five times, which meant the transfer of 15% of the land to the personal property of the peasants. In a year and a half, their incomes tripled, the number of livestock increased, and agricultural production began to grow. Hence the proverb “Malenkov came - ate pancakes”.
        But Nikita first ate Beria, then Malenkov.
        1. Sergey Sfiedu 7 June 2020 02: 23 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Yes - father very warmly recalled the days of Malenkov, although he was not a peasant.
          1. Mordvin 3 7 June 2020 02: 35 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Quote: Sergey Sfyedu
            Yes - father very warmly recalled the days of Malenkov, although he was not a peasant.

            Maybe because of Malenkov’s glass? laughing
  2. polpot 3 June 2020 13: 26 New
    • 28
    • 1
    +27
    I agree with you, this character has done a lot of evil to our Motherland, he has done 100% for the highest measure.
  3. rocket757 3 June 2020 13: 26 New
    • 18
    • 2
    +16
    The USSR, the Great Power, this did not save ..... but now it is already in the past.
    We will make new mistakes, or rather, we live in new mistakes, and the future generation will have to make our own.
    In general, like everywhere else.
    1. Samara 3 June 2020 13: 31 New
      • 24
      • 7
      +17
      Quote: rocket757
      The USSR, the Great Power, this did not save ..... but now it is already in the past.
      We will make new mistakes, or rather, we live in new mistakes, and the future generation will have to make our own.
      In general, like everywhere else.

      There were big mistakes .. But the main thing was that they allowed the USSR to collapse! And now we are “enjoying” ..And it's already hard to get everything back, too bugs have seized the belly of Russia .. You can’t pick it out without a scalpel!
      Soeti people deceived us nobly .. The market economy, etc. .. In slaves we have turned and suck ALL that remains of the USSR and nothing new ..
      1. rocket757 3 June 2020 14: 02 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        Quote: Samara
        The Soviet people deceived us, nobly ..

        unfortunately, the rulers of the late period of the country were not those who were able to assess the danger of the processes that originated and developed in the country ... who generated these processes may never be known, but this was at the very top. they, by the way, were well prepared and successfully, for them, they turned everything up.
        And the people did not understand, they deceived him ... obvious / not understandable, but the people themselves did not want to defend their power ... it seems that not everyone considered it their own, by then ...
        in general, you can talk a lot, but this will not change anything. We live in ... different ways, we need to build our own ... so we need to unite and .....
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 16: 31 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Although not much time has passed, in historical terms, the processes of the 90s are still not completely known. And for that, those who want to hide, and the youth are not very deeply interested, sees what is on the surface. And therein lies the danger of stepping on the same rake.
          Good afternoon Victor hi
          1. rocket757 3 June 2020 18: 27 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Hi Dmitry soldier
            We already have a lot of new rakes, although they are "new", they are essentially the same.
            1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 18: 58 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              our people --- The People-Winner of fascism. There is no other like this all over the world.
              It's sad --- stepping on a rake
              1. rocket757 3 June 2020 19: 24 New
                • 5
                • 0
                +5
                The winners were torn more than once or twice by the vanquished, to the bottom ... so this is an indicator of much but not everything that is necessary in everyday life or politics.
                Do not flaunt victories if in everyday life everything is far from victorious.
                But, after all, we have much to be proud of in our labor achievements, economics and other things, and it was from this that we had to jump! But honey mushrooms and defeats had to teach a lot! Unfortunately did not teach.
                In general, we are building the “game” in a new way, with the buy-in that we now have. soldier
                1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 20: 29 New
                  • 4
                  • 1
                  +3
                  But didn’t they quickly restore the parody economy after the Second World War? This is more significant than the Chinese miracle.
                  15 years after graduation --- flight into space.
                  He got all the Khrushchev by his experiments.
                  1. rocket757 3 June 2020 20: 48 New
                    • 4
                    • 2
                    +2
                    The power system, when from the "eccentricities" of one, the top "weirdo", shakes the whole country, and a significant part of the world, the same !!! Do not eat rational and sustainable! Moreover, we had more than one!
                    This system is SICK! At its core.
                    1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 22: 21 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Yes, Victor, everyone wrote it and showed it in the 90s. And confirmation of this disease continues
                      Quote: rocket757
                      The power system, when from the "eccentricities" of one, the top "weirdo", shakes the whole country, and a significant part of the world, the same !!! Do not eat rational and sustainable! Moreover, we had more than one!
                      This system is SICK! At its core.
                  2. Normal ok 3 June 2020 21: 31 New
                    • 2
                    • 8
                    -6
                    Quote: Reptiloid
                    But didn’t they quickly restore the parody economy after the Second World War? This is more significant than the “Chinese miracle”.

                    Have you personally participated in the Great Patriotic War? Did you personally restore the "economy after the Second World War"? In general: we plowed. Me and the tractor. But how did you protect the USSR from collapse? After all, it was already during your life ?!
                    1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 21: 54 New
                      • 3
                      • 1
                      +2
                      Honestly, when this happened, I did not immediately find out. Continued to watch Atlas of the USSR. Atlas of the Russian Federation did not immediately publish, or what. The most interesting thing is that somehow many parents were in no hurry for the small schoolboy to report this. Well, of course, who, after 10 years, probably understood everything. After all, there were pioneers, and then he died, all of a sudden? Although their parents probably did not want to load politics.
                      Grandfather --- fought from 16 years old,
                      Grandma ---- Digging Trenches
                      Other relatives are also for Victory.
                      And I am glad that I was born in Leningrad and before school I lived in the USSR.
                      And you, how what? Tell me please! How did you protect from collapse?
                      Quote: Normal ok
                      Quote: Reptiloid
                      But didn’t they quickly restore the parody economy after the Second World War? This is more significant than the “Chinese miracle”.

                      Have you personally participated in the Great Patriotic War? Did you personally restore the "economy after the Second World War"? In general: we plowed. Me and the tractor. But how did you protect the USSR from collapse? After all, it was already during your life ?!
                      1. Mordvin 3 4 June 2020 12: 38 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        And you, how what? Tell me please! How did you protect from collapse?

                        Personally, I was a student. They showed "Swan Lake" on the box, my sister's husband was sent a summons to the draft board, which he tore and threw away. The mood was - all fuck.
                      2. Reptiloid 4 June 2020 13: 53 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Greetings, Vladimir! You were a little older than me. It seems to me that not everyone understood what was happening, because there were promises of improvements.
                        Quote: mordvin xnumx
                        ...........
                        Personally, I was a student. They showed "Swan Lake" on the box, my sister's husband was sent a summons to the draft board, which he tore and threw away. The mood was - all fuck.
                      3. Mordvin 3 4 June 2020 14: 02 New
                        • 1
                        • 0
                        +1
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        It seems to me that not everyone understood what was happening

                        In general, no one understood anything.
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        After all, there were promises of improvements.

                        Well yes. Starodubtsev promised 15 acres to everyone.
                      4. Reptiloid 4 June 2020 15: 40 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: mordvin xnumx
                        Quote: Reptiloid
                        It seems to me that not everyone understood what was happening

                        In general, no one understood anything ........
                        the one who understood - quickly climbed into power, organized cooperatives, taking bad loans ... rather, rather .....
  4. Samara 4 June 2020 09: 14 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    Quote: rocket757
    in general, you can talk a lot, but this will not change anything. We live in ... different ways, we need to build our own ... so we need to unite and .....

    This is our salvation Victor (Russia as a state)! More than once you write this carefully, but I understand what you mean. hi
    1. rocket757 4 June 2020 10: 00 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Samara
      Not once you write it already

      THIS porridge cannot be oversalt ... moreover, it remains fresh, boring, a little edible while I will salt it in one !!! or everyone will salt only their porridge! soldier
      I would add a peppercorn, but .... again, "put in a corner" request
  • ser56 3 June 2020 20: 40 New
    • 8
    • 14
    -6
    Quote: Samara
    Soeti people deceived us nobly .. The market economy, etc. .. In slaves we have turned and suck ALL that remains of the USSR and nothing new ..

    are mistaken! Slaves, and not traveling, we were in the USSR .... request I traveled by train in 1990 to Bulgaria - so our border is the perimeter of a concentration camp in appearance ... hi
    1. rocket757 3 June 2020 20: 50 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Ha, and agent Trump, decided to surpass the records of the USSR!
      1. ser56 3 June 2020 21: 56 New
        • 0
        • 4
        -4
        Quote: rocket757
        and agent Trump,

        then Kozyrev ... hi
        Quote: rocket757
        decided to surpass the records of the USSR!

        if not a secret what?
        1. rocket757 3 June 2020 22: 11 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Even the USSR did not have such a “fence” on the border.
          1. ser56 4 June 2020 11: 58 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: rocket757
            Even the USSR did not have such a “fence” on the border.

            the fence is not the main thing - the main thing is the border guards ... laughing
            1. rocket757 4 June 2020 12: 30 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: ser56
              the fence is not the main thing - the main thing is the border guards ...

              They’re not animals, it’s quite possible to agree ... when you yourself are in KShM - R ***, and they only have machines drinks
    2. kalibr 4 June 2020 13: 09 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: ser56
      I traveled by train in 1990 to Bulgaria - so our border is the perimeter of a concentration camp in appearance ...

      And I went through it to Bulgaria right there in 1968 ... The same thing happened!
  • WILL 3 June 2020 13: 29 New
    • 27
    • 7
    +20
    Khrushchev was the Weakest Leader in the USSR! Is only Gorbachev a competitor - but this Frank Traitor! It was not for nothing that Stalin, at country gatherings, made him dance Gopak! But ... he managed to push everyone away from the Authority ... for a while. Samodur and Just Balbes, the Army and especially the Fleet - still do not remember him without a mat.
    1. Volodin 3 June 2020 14: 16 New
      • 15
      • 4
      +11
      Quote: ANIMAL
      Khrushchev was the Weakest Leader in the USSR!

      Quote: ANIMAL
      managed to push everyone away from Power

      Weak leader and all pushed away from power ...
      Honestly, I do not see the logic.
      1. WILL 3 June 2020 14: 30 New
        • 13
        • 7
        +6
        Quote: Volodin

        Weak leader and all pushed away from power ...
        Honestly, I do not see the logic.

        To take power into your own hands and to correctly dispose of it (power) are two big differences. Khrushchev - managed to play on the contradictions within the Nomenclature, no one took it seriously, having received the Fullness of Power - continued to dance Hopak (figuratively) from here and stupidity both in foreign policy (the same China) and in domestic (Army, Navy, Corn, etc.) .d).
        Of course - the personality is extraordinary, and the Head is Weak!
        1. Doctor 3 June 2020 15: 05 New
          • 14
          • 13
          +1
          Head - Weak!

          Strangle the stirring Hungarians? Easily.
          Shoot your workers in Novocherkassk? No problem.
          Stick missiles in Cuba, putting the Americans in a knee-elbow position? And then get them to clean their own Turkey? On this, even Stalin did not dare.
          Weak, yeah ...
          1. Say Tooth 3 June 2020 16: 38 New
            • 3
            • 3
            0
            And what is asked to minus, after all, it is correctly noted: "weak, yeah."
            1. not main 4 June 2020 01: 07 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Quote: Advance Tooth
              And what is asked to minus, after all, it is correctly noted: "weak, yeah."

              Do not confuse the weak and the cocky! And that’s the whole thing! I would be a good (at least) leader, there would be neither Hungary 56, nor crisis 62, and even Czechoslovakia 68 the consequences of his policy! About Novocherkassk just silently. And for the Army and Navy he has no forgiveness!
          2. Dart2027 3 June 2020 18: 56 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            Quote: Arzt
            Strangle the stirring Hungarians? Easily.
            Shoot your workers in Novocherkassk? No problem.

            A strong ruler is one who knows how to control. If he were a strong ruler, then he simply wouldn’t get it, but what you write is a willingness to use force, that is, a little different.
        2. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 19 New
          • 7
          • 2
          +5
          In the deterioration of Sino-Soviet relations, 70 percent of the wines of Mao and his entourage. Given all these "big leaps," "cultural revolutions," the Maoists and I would have quarreled with the continuation of the pro-Stalinist course. Under Brezhnev, who Mao considered a maniac, relations with China were even worse, but no one blames Leonid Ilyich for this.
      2. Samara 3 June 2020 14: 47 New
        • 4
        • 9
        -5
        Quote: Volodin
        Quote: ANIMAL
        Khrushchev was the Weakest Leader in the USSR!

        Quote: ANIMAL
        managed to push everyone away from Power

        Weak leader and all pushed away from power ...
        Honestly, I do not see the logic.

        Zhukov attracted “Ivan” and then betrayed him more than once .. Brezhnev is the same (hung stars)!
        And then dissidents and another set of “human rights defenders” got involved in the case ..
        And now we have what we have .. hi
      3. chenia 3 June 2020 15: 17 New
        • 9
        • 1
        +8
        Yeltsin's example. There was enough meanness and cunning to intrigue, and having stolen the instrument did not know how to use it.
        1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 19: 04 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: chenia
          Yeltsin's example. There was enough meanness and cunning to intrigue, and having stolen the instrument did not know how to use it.

          Yeltsin acted as Clinton ordered, advised him, as if negative Now, recently, staff members have declassified some of their telephone conversations. EBN did not often agree, and Clinton squeezed as he needed.
      4. MstislavHrabr 3 June 2020 15: 35 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The schemer is good. Manager, no strategist!
        1. Doctor 3 June 2020 15: 37 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          The schemer is good. Manager, no strategist!

          On the contrary. The schemers have outplayed him.
      5. Insurgent 3 June 2020 17: 59 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Volodin
        Weak leader and all pushed away from power ...

        Weak leader, but skilled intriguer and manipulator.
        Is such a definition of the "phenomenon of seeping into power" by N. Khrushchev acceptable to you?
        1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 22 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          In principle, Malenkov turned out to be an even weaker leader. In just a year and a half, he lost power.
      6. sniperino 3 June 2020 22: 42 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Volodin
        Quote: ANIMAL
        Khrushchev was the Weakest Leader in the USSR!
        Quote: ANIMAL
        managed to push everyone away from Power
        Weak leader and all pushed away from power ...
        Honestly, I do not see the logic.
        Weak, but "wise" (= schemer - "managed"). To be able to weave intrigues and apply this skill against strong leaders who aspire to power, or who are potentially capable of becoming candidates in order to occupy a leadership position ... You do not need to be a strong leader, but you must have a situation where the highest echelon of power that could him choose, did not want a strong leader. And the people wanted, but could not choose. There was no theory of socialism that would allow building an adequate model of Soviet power, therefore the rise of the USSR was manually controlled by a strong leader who responded to the challenges of the time, and then, due to loss of purpose, inertia without acceleration, stagnation and collapse (perestroika with acceleration) .
    2. kalibr 3 June 2020 18: 04 New
      • 3
      • 8
      -5
      Quote: ANIMAL
      Samodur and Just Dunce,

      He became the head of a great country ... what kind of country is this? And what kind of people are in it if they allowed him to do this and suffered for so long?
      1. alebor 4 June 2020 08: 45 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        This was done by the Stalinist party, and above all by the Politburo - the people closest to Stalin. Under a more democratic system of power, the “voluntarism” of an eccentric and not very smart leader of the country has far fewer opportunities to manifest.
      2. Insurgent 4 June 2020 08: 59 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: kalibr
        He became the head of a great country ... what kind of country is this? And what kind of people are in it if they allowed him to do this and suffered for so long?

        And these are the words of a person born in the USSR, and whose mother, if I’m not mistaken, taught the history of the CPSU at the university ...


        Further, comments, I think are unnecessary ...
        1. kalibr 4 June 2020 12: 56 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Insurgent
          And these are the words of a person born in the USSR, and whose mother, if I’m not mistaken, taught the history of the CPSU at the university ...

          And what does mom have to do with those fools who approve of fools? There were many fools in the USSR ... And if it were otherwise, we would still live in the USSR today! And am I not right to be surprised at how SAMODUR and BALBES were able to rise to the top of power in the country. There are two answers: either not tyrant and dunce, but an exceptionally intelligent person. Or ... ANY PEOPLE Worthy of Their Ruler. And if the head of the country is SAMODUR AND BALBES, then most of the people in it, too ... are like that! Is not it?
  • Glory1974 3 June 2020 13: 36 New
    • 11
    • 0
    +11
    it’s very sad that in our country one person can do all that he wants.
    We need a system so that no one can steer before the death of the country. In those days, the party podsuetsilsya and replaced an inadequate person. But later could not do the same. The human factor has worked. Therefore, so far there is only one option for this - periodic change of power. Then in a few years at the helm he will not be able to destroy everything.
    1. sniperino 3 June 2020 23: 02 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: glory1974
      Therefore, so far there is only one option for this - periodic change of power. Then in a few years at the helm he will not be able to destroy everything.
      Gorbachev for 6 years was able. Maybe they choose for six months? They certainly won’t be able to destroy everything ... But they won’t be able to create anything either. Not a working option.
      1. Glory1974 4 June 2020 08: 33 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Gorbachev for 6 years was able. Maybe they choose for six months?

        Before Gorbachev, Brezhnev was at the helm for 18 years, I do not think Andropov and Chernenko, who ruled for a short time. What did not collapse during the stagnation period, Gorbachev brought down, there were prerequisites. Maybe 6 years a lot?
        In the USA they choose for 4 years. In addition to the deadline, there is a powerful opposition from the losing party.
        In general, it is clear that blind copying will not lead to good, but it is necessary to improve the power system, and a limited period of stay in power should be mandatory.
        As experience shows, after 3-4 years in a position, a person ceases to work in full force.
        1. sniperino 4 June 2020 10: 16 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: glory1974
          As experience shows, after 3-4 years in a position, a person ceases to work in full force.
          smile This is not experience, but the study of psychologists conducted in the mass professions. A person works as a seller for 4 years, learns the secrets of craftsmanship (body kit, shortcut, grafting, etc.), and after that - a short plateau on the chart and degradation. The president is not a mass profession, it essentially does not resemble the work of a salesman or security guard, so the transfer of "experience" is not good here. Stalin scored a job since 38? Rather, he just created a tool for work: he built a power vertical for manual control in a crisis situation. This can not be transferred to another without loss of efficiency during the fit-in-hand fitting, especially in the turbulence zone.
          1. Glory1974 4 June 2020 13: 26 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            This is not experience, but the study of psychologists,

            Scientists have confirmed what experienced people knew without them.
            The president is not a mass profession, it essentially does not resemble the work of a salesman or security guard, so the transfer of "experience" is not good here.

            I don’t think that human psychology depends on the chosen profession. Rather, the opposite.
            Stalin scored a job since 38? Rather, he just created a tool for work: he built a power vertical for manual control in a crisis situation.

            That's right. I built a vertical and it started to work. And not in manual mode, but in automatic.
            1. sniperino 4 June 2020 20: 06 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: glory1974
              I don’t think that human psychology depends on the chosen profession
              What you write about (“after 3-4 years in a position, a person ceases to work in full force”) is not so much about human psychology as about labor psychology, but it very much depends on working conditions in the chosen profession: when there are no conditions for professional growth (not necessarily career), where does labor enthusiasm come from if the same thing is repeated every day. Presidents, scientists, entrepreneurs, etc. all wrong. Especially if you have to rule the country in such unpredictable times: there is no boss who will say what needs to be done.
            2. sniperino 4 June 2020 20: 19 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: glory1974
              not in manual mode, but in automatic
              Something with the death of Stalin, "automation" began to fail regularly. You won’t create an automaton without a circuit in your head, and Stalin wrote that he didn’t have a theory of socialism, they blindly walked about what kind of automaton there was.
            3. gsev 5 June 2020 14: 58 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: glory1974
              I don’t think that human psychology depends on the chosen profession.

              Pavlov received the Nobel Prize for the discovery of conditioned and unconditioned reflexes. I think that the psychology of a successful programmer, commando, businessman and lumberjack is very different. In engineering, an intuition is developed that allows you to make decisions with a lack of information. The intuition developed by an experienced military man allows him to avoid dangerous places and wrong actions. The defeat of the militia divisions in the Vyazemsky cauldron and near Leningrad showed that the patriotism of intellectuals does not replace the experience of service. The writer Daniil Granin was a mediocre commissar in the battles of 1941 but he supervised the repair of tanks in the second half of the war.
      2. alebor 4 June 2020 08: 50 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Gorbachev did not start from scratch. He started his unsuccessful, poorly thought-out reforms not from a good life. The country was brought by its predecessors - decrepit old men, irremovable until their death, to complete stagnation and decay.
    2. Alexey Z 7 June 2020 11: 11 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Will not have time to destroy, but also build. Indeed, the new will most likely have other directions. Therefore, the devil knows what is better.
  • Boratsagdiev 3 June 2020 13: 36 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    E. Spitsyna also has a “dissenting opinion” on this issue.
    Interestingly stated.
  • apro 3 June 2020 13: 45 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    The USSR needed a stable and understandable course. Khrushev with his throwing innovations. endangered a quiet life
    apparatchikov.da and the country's population expressed their displeasure.
    In all the anecdotes about Khrushchev, he is always in the guise of a fool ....
    1. Kronos 3 June 2020 16: 01 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      And the concept of communism was de-credited by promising it by 1980
      1. Doctor 3 June 2020 16: 22 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And the concept of communism was de-credited by promising it by 1980

        Not allowed to build ... winked
      2. Say Tooth 3 June 2020 16: 42 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Are you serious about communism? How, Khrushchev is to blame! Well well.
      3. gsev 3 June 2020 16: 57 New
        • 5
        • 7
        -2
        Quote: Kronos
        And the concept of communism was de-credited by promising it by 1980

        Or maybe the concept of communism was discredited by mass repressions? Under Khrushchev, there was simply a renaissance of communist ideas. The book "Andromeda Nebula" about the builders of communism on Earth had the largest circulation of those translated from Russian in the 20th century.
        1. sniperino 3 June 2020 23: 09 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: gsev
          renaissance of communist ideas. The Andromeda Nebula book ... had the largest circulation
          I wish there were a couple of communist circus programs, we’d already haven’t lived ...
    2. Free wind 3 June 2020 16: 33 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Tell me. What do i remember. How many Communists and tourists in the USSR ?. One Communist, Lenin and one tourist, Khrushchev. With tourism, the analogy is interesting.
      1. gsev 4 June 2020 00: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Free Wind
        How many Communists and tourists in the USSR ?.

        During my studies with the Communists in Stankin, there was no harassment from teachers by students. Now at Moscow State University students are forced to cohabit.
        https://lenta.ru/articles/2020/05/26/harassment/
        The Communists are the same people with their weaknesses, but the party organization kept them within certain limits and imposed certain restrictions on them. Now no one is following the moral image of the masters of life.
  • knn54 3 June 2020 14: 07 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Mayakovsky would say a man and a joke.
    In the USSR there were practically no forces left for which Nikita Sergeevich. could lean.
  • neri73-r 3 June 2020 14: 11 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    I personally am very sorry that the case ended with this, and not with a public trial of the one who, defaming the name of Stalin, derailed all the achievements of his era and took the first steps to the subsequent death of the USSR.

    100%, everything is correct.
  • Ross xnumx 3 June 2020 14: 47 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    How quickly you outlined the secrets and reality of the Kremlin court in ten paragraphs ...
    The NSH has done so much for its rule that even microscopic positives cannot justify either his trial of Stalin, or bullying of the national economy.
    This is all long gone, we should be more worried about the rule of the country of the twenty-first century of release.
  • atos_kin 3 June 2020 14: 48 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    It’s a pity that they didn’t put him on a stake.
    1. Selevc 3 June 2020 15: 01 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Khrushchev is a political dwarf who accidentally ended up in a giant's chair !!! And all the groups fighting for power understood this !!! Therefore, Khrushchev’s reign is just a respite from the battle of the giants for power ... And even Nikita himself didn’t understand this either, and he protested especially after his removal from the post of Secretary General ...

      And by the way, Khrushchev is Stalin’s hands, at least in Ukraine, that's for sure ... And by the way, there is a big suspicion that the “great reformer of the USSR” thoroughly cleared the archives of the NKVD !!!
      1. gsev 3 June 2020 15: 40 New
        • 8
        • 6
        +2
        Quote: Selevc
        Khrushchev is a political dwarf

        However, until now we are proud of the successes made precisely in the time of Khrushchev. "We" launched the first satellite, "we" first launched the first man into space. It is somehow forgotten that the housing problem was solved under Khrushchev, when it ceased to die of starvation en masse, when lawlessness ceased during it, scientists ceased to be shot and massively imprisoned for upholding scientific truths. And the bloodless withdrawal of Khrushchev in which the USSR did not fall apart could happen thanks to him. He was more concerned about the development of the country than about maintaining his power.
        Do not forget that before Khrushchev it was forbidden even to publish books about Lenin and to publish scientific works which could contain any new and previously unpublished scientific data.
        1. Selevc 3 June 2020 15: 42 New
          • 11
          • 2
          +9
          Quote: gsev
          "We" launched the first satellite, "we" first launched the first man into space.

          Stalin died in 1953 and the satellite was launched in 1957 - do you understand that Khrushchev has already arrived at everything ready ??? And there is absolutely no his personal merit in the achievements of the Soviet space !!!

          He was more concerned about the development of the country than about maintaining his power.
          Somehow the language doesn’t dare to name the wild economic projects of the Khrushchev era as concern for the development of the country !!! These are all "river turns", "corn records" - the era of Khrushchev is precisely the time of the birth of the Soviet window dress and not the development of the country !!!
          1. gsev 3 June 2020 15: 47 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            Quote: Selevc
            Stalin died in 1953 and the satellite was launched in 1957

            Communists were removed from power only in 1991. And why from 1991 to 2000, Yeltsin could not finish anything from what they started. Do not forget that after 1961 the USSR did not lag behind the United States in the space race.
            1. Selevc 3 June 2020 16: 43 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Communists were removed from power only in 1991. And why from 1991 to 2000, Yeltsin could not finish anything from what they started.
              You apparently don’t understand what a state is ... A state can be compared to a huge and complicated machine at the helm of which there was a man who controlled this machine day and night ... Stalin managed to create a unique economic system in the USSR - everyone worked for the country, both satisfied and not satisfied and yesterday's German enemies, and even English and American scientists and diplomats !!! Half the world worked in the USSR in the late 40s and early 50s ...

              And Stalin was not prevented even by the 2nd World War !!!
              And Khrushchev broke this whole mechanism with his races ... With his stupid things like - Catch up with America and overtake, give 5 norms in 2 shifts ... And this all Khrushchev races reached their climax in the late 70s and early 80s when in the USSR at every step everyone drove 2-3 standards releasing all crap. Distilled America for the production of cast iron but could not make a decent car for the population ...
          2. gsev 3 June 2020 16: 12 New
            • 3
            • 5
            -2
            Quote: Selevc
            Stalin died in 1953 and the satellite was launched in 1957

            The government’s decision on the preliminary design of the R7 rocket was made in October 1953. All East, Sunrises and Unions are deep or initial modernization of the P-7. That is, Ragozin, having decided to make a joke about Mask with a phrase about trampolines, apparently meant that he would not be able to do anything fundamentally new compared to what was planned during the time of Khrushchev. The leader of the country always makes an important contribution to the success or failure of the space program of his country. Simply Khrushchov and Kennedy can be proud of their leadership in space programs. But Eisenhour, Putin and Rogozin somehow do not look against the background of Nikita Sergeevich.
          3. Doctor 3 June 2020 16: 33 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            Somehow the language doesn’t dare to name the wild economic projects of the Khrushchev era as concern for the development of the country !!! These are all "river turns", "corn records" - the era of Khrushchev is precisely the time of the birth of the Soviet window dress and not the development of the country !!!

            And what is wild there? Real projects, you see, and the Aral Sea would not dry out.

            The same with virgin soil, for some reason they believe that this is a failure.
            In 1954, the USSR collected 85,5 million tons of grain (including virgin soil - 27,1 million tons), and in 1960 - already 125 million tons (including virgin soil - 58,7 million tons).

            From Khrushchev, late propaganda blinded a supposedly a fool, and the current parrots are repeating.
            1. Selevc 3 June 2020 17: 03 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              In 1954, the USSR collected 85,5 million tons of grain (including virgin soil - 27,1 million tons), and in 1960 - already 125 million tons (including virgin soil - 58,7 million tons).
              In Khrushchev and then Brezhnev, the USSR collected the most grain, but for some reason the shelves in the stores were empty or littered with consumer goods like no one’s busts of a leader .. And gentlemen, the capitalists at the same time had 20 kinds of sausages in stores ...
              Under Khrushchev, an economy could have arisen in which there is nothing on the counter but you can get everything through your people ...
              To understand the scope and intentions of Stalin - take a look at the center of any major Soviet city ... It was re-planned exactly in the Stalin era, huge government buildings, new avenues for vehicles were built ... The walls of houses are often more than a meter thick !!!
              Look at what cars the USSR produced under Stalin - ZIS 110 - but this is Maybach of the late 40s !!! The USSR under Stalin produced cars at the world level in those days !!! Look at their salons - you will not find Zhiguli bullshit there !!! Did soundly !!! And under Khrushchev, all this quality was broken for the sake of consumer goods and "we’ll catch up, we will overtake ..."
              Is it conceivable in modern Russia to create a world-class car ??? And under Stalin it was a reality !!!
              1. Doctor 3 June 2020 17: 17 New
                • 1
                • 3
                -2
                Look at what cars the USSR produced under Stalin - ZIS 110

                Funny.
                Borya Fitterman quite successfully copied Packard Super Eight.
                For this, Comrade Stalin, out of habit, put him in prison.
                After serving under Khrushchev, Fitterman managed to create only THIS.



                Not Maybach, but honestly his own.
                And most importantly, not for the patricians, but for the people.
                1. Selevc 3 June 2020 17: 49 New
                  • 8
                  • 0
                  +8
                  This, incidentally, is not its own - it is a Fiat 500 ...
                  All East, Sunrises and Unions are deep or initial modernization of the P-7.

                  What difference does it make when a rocket was created ??? The whole world approached the creation of an artificial Earth satellite and the flight of the 1st astronaut in the middle of the century ... And if it weren’t for the war, the German astronaut on Fau would go into space in the late 40s ...
                  But the essence is different - Comrade Stalin himself worked carefully and created in the USSR such conditions for the work of Soviet scientists and Soviet production that we quickly overtook the rest of the world and went into space first !!! But the leader himself did not live up to this triumph of the USSR !!! And laurels undeservedly went to another ...
                  Aviation, auto industry, space, energy, heavy industry are just a few examples of the directions where the USSR was preparing its breakthrough ...
                  And at the time of Khrushchev, there were negative trends of replacing quality with fiction, and this later on, everything bloomed in a stormy color in the 80s ...
                  1. Doctor 3 June 2020 17: 56 New
                    • 3
                    • 3
                    0
                    But the essence is different - Comrade Stalin himself worked carefully and created in the USSR such conditions for the work of Soviet scientists

                    Yes, they in their memoirs very colorfully described these "conditions." wink
                  2. gsev 3 June 2020 21: 12 New
                    • 0
                    • 3
                    -3
                    Quote: Selevc
                    The whole world has approached the creation of an artificial Earth satellite and the flight of the 1st astronaut in the middle of the century ...

                    But someone was the first, someone was hopelessly behind. Under Khrushchev, the United States lagged behind, and now Musk has approached the creation of cheap reusable shuttles, while Ragozin has not yet approached. In the 1970s, the United States was able to shuttle, but it turned out that it was a dead end. During the time that the USA was able to correct the old mistake, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Putin could not bother organizing the development of a fundamentally new technology, using the legacy of the R-7-Unions
              2. Doctor 3 June 2020 17: 20 New
                • 3
                • 4
                -1
                To understand the scope and intentions of Stalin - take a look at the center of any major Soviet city ... It was re-planned exactly in the Stalin era, huge government buildings, new avenues for vehicles were built ... The walls of houses are often more than a meter thick !!!


                Very accurately convey the spirit and thinking of the leader. This is the Colosseum, the Forum and the Appian Way.
                No wonder some now call him the Red Emperor.

                All this is for the elite. People - barracks and crosses along the road.
                1. Selevc 3 June 2020 17: 54 New
                  • 7
                  • 0
                  +7
                  Quote: Arzt
                  Very accurately convey the spirit and thinking of the leader. This is the Colosseum, the Forum and the Appian Way.

                  Look at any courthouse or city hall in any European city and you will see Roman architecture ... So are tyrants also building such a building there ???
                  People - barracks and crosses along the road.

                  That you do not rush perestroika lies !!! In Stalin, in the center of Kharkov, I know that both the workers and the working intelligentsia of that era lived for sure ...
                  1. kalibr 3 June 2020 18: 11 New
                    • 3
                    • 5
                    -2
                    Quote: Selevc
                    In Stalin, in the center of Kharkov, I know that both the workers and the working intelligentsia of that era lived for sure ...

                    And there were a lot of them? More than barracks across the country with one restroom on the street?
                    1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 20: 07 New
                      • 5
                      • 0
                      +5
                      Quote: kalibr
                      Quote: Selevc
                      In Stalin, in the center of Kharkov, I know that both the workers and the working intelligentsia of that era lived for sure ...

                      And there were a lot of them? More than barracks across the country with one restroom on the street?

                      In Moscow, when the king was in the courtyards of multi-storey buildings, there were latrines on the street. And in St. Petersburg on the 1st-2nd floors where the master’s apartments, they had toilets. And for the other floors ---- one toilet on the stairs. Already during the Soviet era, everything was redone. However, some do not know anything, but only in the Soviet past would not care.
                  2. Doctor 3 June 2020 18: 27 New
                    • 2
                    • 5
                    -3
                    In Stalin, in the center of Kharkov, I know that both the workers and the working intelligentsia of that era lived for sure ...

                    After the Khrushchev was set up, perhaps a part was resettled.
                    And before that - sorry, there are more important comrades

                    The building was erected at Stakhanov’s speed. Already in August 1928, writers went to the bridegroom in their apartments not yet finished. Then the party members decided to add one working family to each apartment. “Can you imagine how it would be?” Playwright Ivan Dniprovsky wrote to his wife. “A writer and his family live in 3 or 4 souls and have a working family of 3-8 people in poverty and misery nearby? But our they went to the Central Committee and, it seems, they won’t do it. "



                    The names of writers who lived in Kharkov in a house on Kultury, 9, were immortalized on a plaque.
                    1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 20: 20 New
                      • 3
                      • 1
                      +2
                      And about these writers on the board listed, I don’t know anything, like the playwright, maybe now nobody knows, have sunk into oblivion? laughing lol but if we recall modern ones, some of them are very liberal, even anti-Russian. And Solzhenitsyn ..... and Yeltsin also wrote some kind of letter ....
                      Not an indicator, no.
                      One way or another, houses were being built back in the 20s, when absolutely everything was missing.
                  3. gsev 5 June 2020 15: 06 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Selevc
                    In Stalin, in the center of Kharkov, I know that both the workers and the working intelligentsia of that era lived for sure ...

                    Under the tsar, the family of workers usually rented a corner (bed in the room), under Stalin, she lived in her room in a communal apartment. Under Khrushchev, many began to live in separate apartments. The last 30 years, there has been a degradation of these achievements.
              3. Doctor 3 June 2020 17: 33 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Is it conceivable in modern Russia to create a world-class car ??? And under Stalin it was a reality !!!

                Under Putin, this is also a reality !!!
                Meet Aurus Senat !!!



                Like VMS, the purely domestic development of the NAMI Institute !!!
                1. Selevc 3 June 2020 18: 04 New
                  • 5
                  • 1
                  +4
                  Under Putin, this is also a reality !!! Meet - Aurus Senat !!!
                  Maybe you and I will call the car factory at least one under Putin open ??? And with a modest leader in the green tunic they built dozens !!! moreover, each car factory was responsible for its class of car - as it is now in Germany for example ... And there was a healthy competition between car manufacturers - no Italian auto giants !!! Later, the USSR did not go this way, but went the way of reducing the cost of auto production and universalization - by the way, also a fashion of the Khrushchev era ...
                  As a result, we have what we have - so far AvtoVAZ is far from a Mercedes ... And there is no decent aircraft carrier - this is how the stillbirths did ...
                  1. Doctor 3 June 2020 18: 08 New
                    • 3
                    • 4
                    -1
                    Maybe you and I will call the car factory at least one under Putin open ???


                    St. Petersburg - Hyundai plant (Hyundai Solaris, Creta; Kia Rio)
                    St. Petersburg - Nissan factory (Nissan X-Trail, Murano, Pathfinder and Qashqai)
                    St. Petersburg - Toyota plant (Toyota RAV4 and Camry)
                    St. Petersburg - General Motors Plant (canned)
                    Vsevolozhsk - Ford-Sollers (Ford Focus, Mondeo)
                    Kaliningrad - Avtotor (Kia cee'd, Sportage, Soul, Venga, Optima, Quoris, Prime, Mohave, Cerato, Sorento; Hyundai, i40, Elantra; BMW X3, X4, X5, X6)
                    Moscow - Renault (Renault Duster, Kaptur; Nissan Terrano)
                    Kaluga - Volkswagen (VW Polo, Tiguan, Touareg, Multivan; Skoda Rapid; Audi A6, A8)
                    Kaluga - Peugeot Citroen Mitsubishi Automotive (Mitsubishi Outlander; Peugeot 408; Citroen C4)
                    Nizhny Novgorod - GAS (Volkswagen Jetta; Skoda Octavia and Yeti)
                    Cherkessk - Derways (Lifan Breez, Solano, Smily; Haima 3; Geely MK, MK Cross, Emgrand; Great Wall Hover; Chery Tiggo 5 and Chery Tiggo 3)
                    Tolyatti - AvtoVAZ (Renault Logan, Sandero; Nissan Almera)
                    Naberezhnye Chelny - Ford-Sollers (Ford Fiesta, EcoSport)
                    Elabuga - Ford-Sollers (Ford Kuga, Explorer, Transit)
                    Izhevsk - IzhAvto (Nissan Sentra)
                    Vladivostok - Sollers (Toyota Land Cruiser Prado; Mazda6 and CX-5)
                    1. gsev 3 June 2020 20: 58 New
                      • 2
                      • 2
                      0
                      Quote: Arzt
                      Maybe you and I will call the car factory at least one under Putin open ???


                      St. Petersburg - Hyundai plant (Hyundai Solaris, Creta; Kia Rio)

                      In general, all of the above is a screwdriver assembly: a classic way of avoiding customs payments. Machines are often exported as assembly kits. Also, sheet parts are made on the spot. Without the design support and technology of key parts, all these plants can overseas owners quickly shut down. But under Khrushchev they were able to raise microelectronics from scratch. And "Essays on the History of the Development of Cybernetics ..." say that the main merit of Khrushchev in such a leap is that under him, as under Stalin, talented scientists and students were not shot as under Stalin, but worked on at meetings and expelled from universities for several years . For example, read about the fate of the cybernetics-mathematician Lyapunov and the fate of his daughters.
                      1. Doctor 3 June 2020 21: 27 New
                        • 3
                        • 1
                        +2
                        In general, all of the above is a screwdriver assembly: a classic way of avoiding customs payments .... But under Khrushchev they were able to raise microelectronics from scratch.

                        And I agree with you. This is the answer to the question about the Stalin automobile industry.
                        Under Khrushchev, the country flourished. The foundations of the high-tech industry were laid with it.
                        And finally they began to do things for people, and not just for war.

                        IL-62 - a masterpiece of aircraft industry of the 60s.

                      2. Kronos 3 June 2020 22: 15 New
                        • 4
                        • 0
                        +4
                        Why did so impudently lie one Moscow metro under Stalin that was built for people meant a lot, numerous tractor plants, automobile, colossal projects for the development of the country
                      3. sniperino 3 June 2020 23: 44 New
                        • 3
                        • 1
                        +2
                        Quote: Arzt
                        Under Khrushchev, the country flourished.
                        Handsome, in 4 years of everything! Amazing Itself blossomed, or did he bring some necessary fertilizer into the soil? And before that, therefore, everything was sluggish and stunted, no one did anything to make the country flourish under him. Savior. And how people praised his monetary reform. I just then learned to mumble.
              4. barium 16 June 2020 08: 21 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                AURUS - face, looks like a patch of cartoons ....
            2. Doctor 3 June 2020 17: 40 New
              • 3
              • 7
              -4
              In Khrushchev and then Brezhnev, the USSR collected the most grain, but for some reason the shelves in the stores were empty or littered with consumer goods like no one’s busts of a leader .. And gentlemen, the capitalists at the same time had 20 kinds of sausages in stores ...


              Here you are right, shops appeared under Khrushchev, money was needed.
              When comrade Stalin was fed for free.

              Herring was given in the mornings - every other day in half.
              While the distributor was approaching, everyone had already calculated which particular piece would be offered to him with this indifferent hand. Everyone had already become upset, rejoiced, prepared for a miracle, reached the edge of despair if he was mistaken in his hasty calculations. Some closed their eyes, unable to cope with the excitement, to open them only when the distributor pushes him and extends herring ration.
              Grabbing a herring with dirty fingers, stroking it, shaking it quickly and gently to determine whether a portion was dry or greasy (however, Okhotsk herrings are not bold, and this movement of the fingers is also an expectation of a miracle), he cannot help but take a quick look the hands of those who surround him and who also stroke and crumple herring pieces, afraid to hurry to swallow this tiny tail. He does not eat herring. He licks her, licks her, and the little tail gradually disappears from his fingers. The bones remain, and he chews the bones carefully, chews gently, and the bones melt and disappear ...

              V. Shalamov. Bread.
            3. gsev 4 June 2020 00: 12 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Quote: Selevc
              In Khrushchevsky and then Brezhnevsky, the USSR collected the most grain, but for some reason the shelves in the stores were empty or littered with consumer goods, no one needed type of leader’s busts ..

              People had the opportunity to build cottages. By 1990, almost every family had 2 houses. Can a nurse in military service with her conscript husband raise their cottage out of nothing?
        2. Free wind 3 June 2020 16: 37 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          From 53 to 57 years in the space industry, 4 years .......... pears lounged around.? They waited 57 years to launch the satellite.
        3. gsev 3 June 2020 16: 51 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: Selevc
          These all "river turns back

          And how is Khrushchev related to the turning of the rivers? It was under Stalin that hydroelectric power plants were built to the detriment of thermal power plants. It was under Khrushchev that they began to critically evaluate the results of this bias and build more TPPs. On the other hand, hydropower plants are designed and built for 15 years if it is large. Therefore, many hydroelectric power stations built under Khrushchev began to be designed according to the directives of the “leader of all peoples” IV Stalin. In general, the first attempt to turn rivers in Russia was made by Selim Ryzhiy (in Europe his name is a drunkard) the son of the Russian beauty Roksolany. This was done during the Astrakhan campaign. Since then, this project has been under discussion. It seems that the practical work of river transfer at Gorbachev in Kalmykia began, but very quickly everything stopped.
        4. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 17: 28 New
          • 7
          • 0
          +7
          That's right, Khrushchev’s successful projects --- everything was started under Stalin. And how many projects of Stalin Khrushchev stopped instantly. Equating to 0000 as the previous costs, so was the labor of the Soviet people. The most ambitious of them are the Program for the Development of Nature and relations with China.
          1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 44 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Unaware of the essence of internal political processes in the PRC, not knowing about the struggle for power in the CPC, one should not blame any of the Soviet leaders for the deterioration of Soviet-Chinese relations. The policies of the PRC were so adventurous at the turn of the 50s and 60s that the deterioration of relations was inevitable, regardless of the personality of the Soviet leader. The Maoists were by no means pure Stalinists, in their policy there was a combination of Leninism-Stalinism, Trotskyism (unaffiliated) and Chinese patriotism (Great Han nationalism), coupled with some kind of peasant "worldly wisdom".
            1. Reptiloid 3 June 2020 23: 17 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              The fact remains. This happened during the Khrushchev. There are decent publications. I like, for example, the author of Mialo.
              Yes, with him a lot of things happened that Stalin would call wrecking.
              Quote: Sergej1972
              Unaware of the essence of internal political processes in the PRC, not knowing about the struggle for power in the CPC, one should not blame any of the Soviet leaders for the deterioration of Soviet-Chinese relations. The policies of the PRC were so adventurous at the turn of the 50s and 60s that the deterioration of relations was inevitable, regardless of the personality of the Soviet leader. The Maoists were by no means pure Stalinists, in their policy there was a combination of Leninism-Stalinism, Trotskyism (unaffiliated) and Chinese patriotism (Great Han nationalism), coupled with some kind of peasant "worldly wisdom".
        5. kalibr 3 June 2020 18: 08 New
          • 4
          • 7
          -3
          Quote: Selevc
          And there is absolutely no his personal merit in the achievements of the Soviet space !!!

          And he could take it and ban it with a stroke of the pen! So there is merit ...
        6. Insurgent 4 June 2020 09: 02 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Selevc
          Stalin died in 1953 and the satellite was launched in 1957 - do you understand that Khrushchev has already arrived at everything ready ???


          Yes, the existence of “Stalinist inertia” cannot be denied, as is the phenomenon of “post-Stalinist turbulence” in the minds and economy.
    2. Say Tooth 3 June 2020 16: 46 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Well, yes, and then the giants went, one another is gigantic.
  • Pvi1206 3 June 2020 14: 55 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    taxied - let others steer ...
  • Ros 56 3 June 2020 15: 03 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    Honestly, he had to be put together with Beria.
    1. Doctor 3 June 2020 15: 42 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Honestly, he had to be put together with Beria.

      And who would give the command? Indeed, according to Beria, he just ordered. laughing
  • Mikhalych 3 June 2020 15: 26 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    On October 14, 1964, Nikita Khrushchev was dismissed at an extraordinary Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU ...

    Not to resign, but to retire.
    One more reason is not named: he promised
    show last pop on tv.
    .
    And I myself ate corn bread and corn honey, besides them there were also tea and red pepper. I was 13 years old then. True, when he was sent out by a decision of the party congress, the next day, abundance arrived in Vilnius stores. That is, hunger was artificial. The same scheme was applied during the collapse of the USSR.
    1. Doctor 3 June 2020 15: 44 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      That is, hunger was artificial.

      He did not allow real hunger. When it was first bought grain abroad.

      And I ate corn bread and corn honey
  • Vladimir Mashkov 3 June 2020 15: 38 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    I liked the article: efficient and accurate. Especially good is the last sentence. I am sure that my deceased father and ALL the deceased and deceased veterans of the Great Patriotic War, if they were alive, would have applauded these words of Alexander!
  • Operator 3 June 2020 16: 08 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Toward the end of his reign, Khrushchev slowly but surely fell into insanity - an age worn out by boozing the body, however.

    From the moment he came to power, Khrushchev relied on immigrants from the Ukrainian SSR, who had previously been led and formed by the local party activist, including former members of the Bandera underground. At the expense of the support fee, Crimea was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR and multibillion-dollar budget injections into the Ukrainian economy began, which became subsidized.

    Brezhnev before the dismissal of Khrushchev promised to continue subsidizing the Ukrainian SSR, so the Ukrainians agreed to throw their benefactor.
    1. gsev 3 June 2020 17: 06 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Quote: Operator
      multi-billion dollar budget injections into the Ukrainian economy began, which became subsidized.

      Dnepropetrovsk missiles were able to secure the USSR from the NATO threat. This alone rehabilitates Ukrainian workers of that time. And how beautifully under Khrushchev France and Great Britain were thrown out of Asia and Africa! As the USSR, without military efforts, as now in Syria and Libya, it was able to gain access to the Libyan, Iraqi and Algerian economies! Become almost a monopolist in the development of oil fields, even Iraq!
      1. Operator 3 June 2020 19: 20 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        The most popular Soviet ICBMs UR-100, UR-100N and UR-100N UTTH, developed at the Chelomey Design Bureau and produced near Moscow, covered the Dnepropetrovsk MP UR-100 like a bull. Plus, the most reliable Proton launch vehicle, developed in the same Chelomey Design Bureau, as well as the Royal, Mitowsky and Makeevsky Design Bureau, located in the RSFSR.

        In other words, the USSR did not need the Dnepropetrovsk Design Bureau from the word at all.
        1. gsev 3 June 2020 21: 55 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: Operator
          In other words, the USSR did not need the Dnepropetrovsk Design Bureau from the word at all.

          The R-12 was the first missile to seriously scare Kennedy into the Caribbean crisis. It was these missiles that made it possible to burn the main cities of Europe and open the way for Soviet tanks to Europe, or at least bleed European armies and states in a possible war. R-16 could reach the United States and with its advent for the United States, the war with the USSR became problematic, and the R-36 allowed the USSR in the event of a first strike to hope for victory over the United States. So Dnepropetrovsk did a lot for the existence of the entire USSR. Perhaps we live because in Dnepropetrovsk military missiles were designed better than in Korolev Design Bureau.
          1. Operator 3 June 2020 22: 39 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Dnepropetrovsk R-16 (1963) was no different from the royal R-7 (1957) in range, weight of the combat load and, most importantly, the method of putting into combat readiness (storage in dry form, rolling out to an open starting position, refueling and only then start).
            1. gsev 4 June 2020 00: 21 New
              • 1
              • 3
              -2
              Quote: Operator
              no different from the royal R-7

              However, the proverb "Korolev works for TASS" walked about royal missiles until 1990. In the US spy novels, even the situation was played out that in the USSR someone was making rockets useless for war.
              1. Operator 4 June 2020 00: 32 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                In 1970, the Chelomeevsky UR-100 mine launch began to take up combat duty and the need for the Korolevsky R-7 and Dnepropetrovsk R-16 ground launch disappeared.
    2. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 23: 38 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      So Khrushchev and so considered Brezhnev and Kosygin as his successors, just did not think that they would not allow him to lead the country for several more years.
      1. Operator 4 June 2020 00: 17 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        What I'm talking about - insanity beguiled.
  • Olgovich 3 June 2020 17: 27 New
    • 4
    • 11
    -7
    After the Great Patriotic War, the Soviet Union, which had canceled the card system before Britain, was threatened with real hunger. Sometimes in the shops there was even no bread, not to mention other products.

    And the author does not want to remember about hunger with cannibalism in the year of cancellation of the card system? And the fact that the peasants didn’t have any cards, which "-Eat as you want!"
    He doesn’t want, but in vain, although it’s clear: the whole good picture will collapse.

    Alas, the author does not know that Khrushchev far outstripped his predecessor in the consumption of milk, meat, eggs per capita: 25% of these the numbers have increased!

    and housing with him received much more.

    He finally introduced a state pension for long-suffering collective farmers

    with him at least some freedom appeared.

    do not forget. that it was he who destroyed the ugly anti-Russian "state" of the KFSSR, which in 1991 would cut Russia off from Murmansk.

    Well, he did a lot of turotsky, yes.

    So there was such a system and it is flesh from its flesh: all of them, leaders who have come out of it, are oiled in one world ...
    1. Doctor 3 June 2020 18: 00 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      and housing with him received much more.

      Some do not know how much more.

      In the late 50s - the first half of the 60s. the pace of construction and the number of commissioned living space of the USSR came to first place in the world. The country's housing stock is increasing by 40% per seven-year period. This prompted the development of construction related industries. True, the housing built went down in history under the name of “Khrushchob”, but then the housing crisis was resolved in the country, communal apartments gradually began to recede into the past.
      For the years 1956-1960. moved to new apartments almost 54 million people.


      QUARTER of the population !!! For 4 years !!!
      1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 51 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I myself live in a brick three-room Khrushchev, I will say that not the worst housing.
    2. Doctor 3 June 2020 18: 04 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      He finally introduced a state pension for long-suffering collective farmers

      The main thing is passports!
      For the first time ever the peasants became her CITIZENS!

      Under Khrushchev, a radical reform of the pension law took place; since July 1956, men after 60 years of age and women from 55 years of age began to receive a pension. In February 1958, a gradual certification of collective farmers began. In July-November 1964, a set of measures was taken to pay pensions to peasants, which was the last initiative in N.S.'s career. Khrushchev. For the first time in the history of the Soviet countryside, old-age pensions began to be received by men aged 65, women - 60 years.
      1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 54 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        When part of the collective farms under him was transformed into state farms, then the workers of state farms, former collective farmers, immediately received passports. Unlike collective farmers, the workers of state farms and MTS under Stalin also had passports.
        1. gsev 4 June 2020 00: 28 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: Sergej1972
          Unlike collective farmers, the workers of state farms and MTS under Stalin also had passports.

          MTS workers were also serfs. Only MTS had more equipment and therefore the MTS authorities were less oppressive. My grandfather, in order to escape from MTS, had to enlist for a “Stalinist construction” for 3 years leaving his wife with young children for these years.
    3. ser56 3 June 2020 20: 42 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: Olgovich
      state pension for long-suffering collective farmers

      and they began to receive passports ...
  • Courier 3 June 2020 18: 35 New
    • 4
    • 8
    -4
    Khrushchev, this is a person, still half of the Russians in his Khrushchev live.

    Brezhnev, this is stagnation, the foundation of the collapse of the USSR
    1. Ryaruav 3 June 2020 20: 12 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      under Brezhnev, ordinary people began to live much better in the entire history of the Russian state, including peasants, and this illiterate eccentric letter m forbade subsidiary farming in the village, well, an ignoramus like a knee, that’s why the Stalinists kept it up * for what
      1. ser56 3 June 2020 20: 42 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Quote: Ryaruav
        better in the entire history of the Russian state

        debatable, but in the history of the USSR - exactly ....
        1. gsev 4 June 2020 00: 33 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: ser56
          debatable, but in the history of the USSR - for sure ...

          Why is debatable. The construction of cottages began. Any talented person could get higher education. Policemen walked without weapons during the day. The Russians did not die out as under Yeltsin and Putin. No one was dying of starvation as under Stalin and the kings in peacetime.
          1. ser56 4 June 2020 12: 06 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: gsev
            The construction of cottages began.

            you are about Michurin gardens - so it was an abomination - people received patches of land (at the beginning of 4 hundred parts) at inconveniences, and villages died ... request but they didn’t give houses and land in dying villages ...

            Quote: gsev
            Any talented person could get a higher education.

            it was in RI - examples of darkness ...
            Quote: gsev
            Policemen walked without weapons during the day.

            what an achievement ... bully but called them garbage ...


            Quote: gsev
            The Russians did not die out as under Yeltsin and Putin.

            it was at this time that there was a terrible number of abortions - the origins of today's demography were laid then!
            Quote: gsev
            No one was dying of starvation as under Stalin and the kings in peacetime.

            Therefore, in 1982 was Novocherkassk? 17 years after the war?
            1. gsev 4 June 2020 17: 31 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              [quote = ser56] people received patches of land (at the beginning of 4 hundred parts [/ quote]
              Received 10 acres. In areas where there was little land, later they began to give 6 acres. In the Moscow region, I did not see summer cottages of 4 acres. Perhaps it was in Ukraine and Central Asia.

              [quote = ser56] it was at that time that there was a terrible number of abortions - the origins of today's demography were laid then! [quote = ser56]
              Just changed the way of life. For a doctor or engineer to make a career, he must study for 15-16 years, after this year 3 to live in a dormitory in a remote plant. Therefore, many children did not have children up to 30 years old. No one was going to live by righteous monks. Therefore, first abortion, then contraceptives. If there was money, then in the 1990s, businessmen after having a baby did a sterilization operation on themselves. In my opinion, a modern graduate of an aviation university is less likely to arrange a secure life for his family working in his specialty. The demonstration in Novocherkassk arose because of the boorish behavior of the plant management. No one died of hunger under Khrushchev, including in Novocherkassk. In fact, events like Novocherkassky took place in the USSR almost every year. The only casualties were fewer. And the most interesting - the cause of the riots was most often police arbitrariness. For example, in 1953, police tried to arrest a citizen selling corn. Defending him to smash the police station, 600 people came out .. The policeman was put on trial, and it was not necessary to bring tanks into Kherson.
              1. ser56 4 June 2020 20: 54 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: gsev
                Perhaps it was in Ukraine and Central Asia.

                I'm about Siberia and the Urals ...
                Quote: gsev
                Therefore, until 30 years old, many did not have children.

                what nonsense! bully I was born in those years - all the friends of my friends (my friends and classmates) appeared at the age of 20-25 ...

                Quote: gsev
                If there was money, then in 1990

                we are about the 1960s ... we didn’t do such operations ... as for business fools, there are few of them to influence demography ....
                Quote: gsev
                In my opinion, a modern graduate of an aviation university is less likely to arrange a secure life for his family working in his specialty

                in my opinion you are very young and know little and live in sweet dreams that you don’t know ... bully
                Quote: gsev
                No one died of hunger under Khrushchev, including in Novocherkassk.

                do you realize what you're saying? bully
                Quote: gsev
                The policeman was put on trial,

                But didn’t he act according to Soviet law? bully
                Quote: gsev
                The cause of the riots was most often police arbitrariness.

                aha, and in the USA the cause of the riot is also the police ... wink
                1. gsev 5 June 2020 11: 38 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: ser56
                  as for business fools, there are few of them to influence demography ....

                  That was in the 1990s. Those whom you call a fool was able to ensure Yabloko’s victory in the elections in the important constituency entrusted to her. That is, even in the days of liberal domination, they could not create normal conditions for their supporters from among the intelligentsia.
                  1. ser56 5 June 2020 13: 34 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: gsev
                    Those whom you call a fool was able to ensure the victory of Apple in the elections entrusted to her an important constituency

                    So what? now she’s over 50 and has a boy ... then, if the money does not end, she will teach other children and bribe ..
                    1. gsev 5 June 2020 15: 32 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: ser56
                      she is over 50 and contains a boy ...

                      She did not become a prostitute, or a secretary, her child’s father did not become an alcoholic, her life did not pass as a saleswoman in the markets under the leadership of Chinese, Azerbaijanis, Afghans with an oriental attitude to girls with an attractive European appearance, she did not have to be humiliated by the meager salaries of medical workers, teachers engineers, she did not taste the pressure and lack of rights of work in modern large companies. She did not remain childless. And many of her peers, whose best years went back to the time of Yeltsin and Putin, lived a more difficult and unhappy life and could not realize themselves in their careers and did not try their hand at politics doing successful work or conducting quiet sabotage in the parties "Our Home Russia" and "Apple" "..
                      1. ser56 5 June 2020 20: 57 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: gsev
                        She did not become a prostitute

                        Quote: gsev
                        and didn’t try themselves in politics

                        politicians worldwide reduced social responsibility ... request
                        yes, even if you want to say - speak easier and more precisely ... laughing
                        too lazy to read your verbal delights ... hi
                      2. gsev 5 June 2020 21: 37 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: ser56
                        politicians worldwide reduced social responsibility ...

                        There is a point of view that outstanding human politicians have committed the entire human history. If instead of Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Roosevelt, Churchill, Washington, Ho Chi Minh there were other people of China, Russia, Great Britain, the USA, Vietnam, now would not exist. These people are difficult to attribute to your definition.
    2. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 22: 59 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Well, not completely forbidden. In large families of my grandparents there were household plots under Khrushchev, and they had apple trees, pears, and cherries. And then here some write that allegedly under Khrushchev cut down all fruit trees in personal plots. And the paternal grandfather built a good house just at the turn of the 50-60s.
      1. Yury Siritsky 4 June 2020 12: 25 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Your grandparents did not tell you that for every tree you had to pay a tax.
        1. Sergej1972 4 June 2020 15: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Until August 1953, when a new agricultural tax law was passed. Under Stalin, there was a complex tax system. The level of profitability of certain cultures was taken into account. By the way, when determining the tax on fruit trees and shrubs, it was not determined for the number of trees and shrubs, but based on the area occupied by them, taking into account the average density of plantings. There were special tables. My relatives were still obliged to supply eggs and milk at the expense of compulsory supplies from their personal farmstead. That is, the supply plan was for the collective farm as a whole, and for individual collective farmers from their personal farms. When it was necessary to cut the pig, a specialist from the procurement organization came to separate the skin gently, because it had to be handed over. With the advent of Malenkov, taxation of collective farmers was sharply reduced. Therefore, the people Malenkov was very popular. Since August 1953, a new system of single agricultural tax was introduced, depending on the number of acres and regardless of what was planted there. Soon, compulsory agricultural supplies from private households were canceled. In general, under Malenkov and Khrushchev, the tax burden on collective farmers decreased three times. Both my relatives and elderly compatriots all as one spoke of a serious improvement in the life of collective farmers in 1953-1958. In general, I have not met a single representative of the older generation of rural residents who would argue that under Khrushchev it became harder to live in a village than under Stalin.
      2. Li17 5 June 2020 06: 18 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        My old people cut down a whole garden, So, I had to pay for the trees and nobody cared that the harvest could be every three years!
      3. gsev 5 June 2020 12: 02 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Sergej1972
        And then here some write that allegedly under Khrushchev cut down all fruit trees in personal plots.

        Many Stalin’s apologists blame Stalin’s excesses for Khrushchev. Work on a personal plot is a heavy unproductive labor requiring high versatile knowledge in crop production, animal husbandry and gardening. She was justified when on the collective farms they received only sticks and the right to cultivate a personal plot for themselves. Easing the grip of starvation from the collective farmer, Khrushchev hoped to stimulate work on the collective farm. However, his policy was able to save the collective farmers from hunger, but could not make agriculture more productive than in the USA. I have also heard from contemporaries about the horrors of life under the tsar with typhoid and famine, about the execution of a farm laborer by the manager of a landowner, about the famine under Stalin, about the lack of rights of peasants on collective farms. I don’t know anything terrible about the times from the beginning of Khrushchev’s reign to the end of the USSR about the life of peasants on collective farms. And the life of the workers was constantly improving. There was never a sharp decline in living standards under the Communists after 1953, either in the 1990s or after 2015. It's just that people fled from places where they lived worse to where they lived better. For example, from the collective farms of Western Ukraine, they fled to Eastern Ukraine, and from there from Siberia, for example, to the Borets state farm near Moscow.
  • 16112014nk 3 June 2020 19: 00 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: ROSS 42
    The NSH has done so much for its rule

    What the EBN did with the followers - 10 NSH would not be a kind of force.
  • Ryaruav 3 June 2020 20: 05 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    well, he was stupid, but how he and Tymoshenko, during the failed Kharkov operation of 1942, hid under the bridge, their rate could not find great strategists for a long time
    1. Doctor 3 June 2020 20: 15 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      well, he was dumb

      He is not stupid, he is simple, from the people.
      Therefore, intellectuals laughed at him. Just like now they giggle at ordinary people.

      Salt of the earth. Shukshin in power.
  • Baloo 3 June 2020 20: 16 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    article is superficial, without analysis of the general political situation, the machinations of agents of imperialism. D, I stood in line for bread, only that was before Khrushchev flew off, and then suddenly everything appeared. and after a couple of years under Brezhnev it gradually became worse and worse. The advantages of Khrushchev would include refrigerators, televisions and mass housing construction. Khrushchev's entourage played against him, I would recommend this solitaire to decompose to the author.
    1. datura23 5 June 2020 08: 28 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      TV is a dubious plus
  • Bat039 3 June 2020 20: 18 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    I agree with the author. Nikita was an enemy of the people and the state !!!
  • ser56 3 June 2020 20: 37 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    "It’s already reached the riots of the people - for the first time in Soviet historyand fire on an unarmed crowd in Novocherkassk ordered Khrushchev to open. "The author does not know Soviet history well - the Bolsheviks first shot workers already in 1918 -" On January 5, a demonstration was dispersed in support of the Constituent Assembly in Moscow. According to official data (News of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. 1918. Jan 11) the number of killed more than 50, wounded - more than 200 "
    "Khrushchev put on a dubious track in the USSR literally everything that he could reach: the army, the police, agriculture, architecture, science." IVS did exactly the same request
    “Well, not only the highest state orders of the USSR, executive cars and even airplanes distributed to them by foreign princes, but also billions in gold and currency in the form of“ aid for building socialism ”, generated bad debts that neither the USSR nor Russia could not recover. "
    I agree - the IVS was more stingy, although even with it the resources from the country were not small ...
    1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 23: 02 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Under Brezhnev, aid to developing countries was many times greater than in Khrushchev's time.
      1. ser56 4 June 2020 20: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Sergej1972
        When Brezhnev, assistance to developing countries was many times more

        so the country was richer ...
    2. Yury Siritsky 4 June 2020 12: 22 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      No need to cuddle. Under Stalin, almost nothing was heard.
      1. kalibr 4 June 2020 17: 44 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Quote: Yuri Siritsky
        Under Stalin, almost nothing was heard.

        All European countries fed "following the path of socialism", built factories in China and actively armed and fed Korea ... In essence, they waged war with the USA +17 NATO countries there!
  • fa2998 3 June 2020 21: 51 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Quote: polpot
    this character did a lot of evil to our Motherland, he did 100% for the highest measure.

    Khrushchev-Korolev- "Sputnik" -Gagarin. Up to now, the R-7 modification is flying astronauts.
    Yes, I “cut” a lot - “The Storm”, aviation, artillery, etc. — but the country, the economy did not “pull.” They also created parity in nuclear weapons. And the “Khrushchevs” —cramped apartments — BUT, IT'S SEPARATE APARTMENTS. The Khrushchevs are demolished in Moscow, and in the provinces they still live in corridor-type huts, and the Khrushchevs are the most valuable in the family. After 50 years. hi hi
    1. Sergej1972 3 June 2020 23: 04 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      We live together with my wife in a three-room Khrushchev, in principle, not closely.
      1. ser56 4 June 2020 12: 00 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Sergej1972
        We live together with my wife in a three-room Khrushchev, in principle, not closely.

        until we lived in a normal apartment ... request where the ceilings cannot be reached with your hand, and in the toilet your knees do not rest against the door ... repeat
  • Sergej1972 3 June 2020 23: 43 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Khrushchev was the head of government. There was no head of state in the USSR in the Western sense. Its distant analogues were the Presidium of the Supreme Council as a kind of collegial head and its Chairman. Mikoyan was the chairman of the PVA at the time of the removal of Khrushchev. In principle, the functions of the Chairman of the PVS resembled those of the president in a parliamentary republic.
  • silberwolf88 4 June 2020 00: 22 New
    • 6
    • 1
    +5
    Khrushchev was a consistent enemy of the USSR (a quote from Churchill was simply slaughter) ... and a famous Trotskyist (here, in general, it’s a mystery why Joseph Vissarionovich knowing this didn’t clean him up) who voted FOR all Trotsky’s initiatives ... and a rare, uneducated idiot who went to the very top authorities ...
    Well, I don’t believe in chance ... I wonder who was behind this screen ...
    About the version of Stalin’s elimination ... I completely believe ... the murder of Beria during the capture in the house (there was no trial or execution) a fact confirmed by many (there is an investigation into the son of Lavrenty Pavlovich on this account) by his comrades ...
  • Fenia04 4 June 2020 02: 33 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Strange article.
    "The country needs to be urgently saved!" And not only the country ... Khrushchev put on a dubious track in the USSR literally everything that he could reach: the army, the police, agriculture, architecture, science.


    The question immediately arises. Saved, displaced from such decisions and all decisions remained in place, "saved?".
  • Tarasios 4 June 2020 10: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Samara
    There were big mistakes .. But the main thing was that they allowed the USSR to collapse! And now we’re enjoying.

    there are nuances everywhere. On the other hand, as "official" facts are now surfacing - obvious free parasites have fallen from the "friendly family". By the way, the same applies to the CMEA countries.
  • Yury Siritsky 4 June 2020 12: 18 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    What the maize farmer did, they could not fix all the following years.
    1. kalibr 4 June 2020 17: 41 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Yuri Siritsky
      What the maize farmer did, they could not fix all the following years.

      Could not or did not want to?
  • NF68 4 June 2020 16: 24 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    After all, Misha-labeled, he also had to do with agriculture before he came to the throne. Something wrong happens with these figures after they get to the throne. They begin to wonder not childishly.
  • Voltsky 4 June 2020 18: 31 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Khrushchev’s displacement: obvious and secret reasons

    he was a little debility
    1. NF68 5 June 2020 16: 34 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Voletsky
      Khrushchev’s displacement: obvious and secret reasons

      he was a little debility


      If there was a trochka. He was "sticking" to his full height and every year it showed itself more and more.
  • Li17 5 June 2020 06: 14 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    For some reason, I had the opinion that if Khrushchev had not been removed, it would ultimately be similar to the state of Ukraine. In any case, we would have earned external management. Of course, not so obvious and impudent, but ..... What do colleagues think?
  • Plastmaster 5 June 2020 06: 53 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Civil
    Quote: Far In
    Well, I agree with the author - Khrushchev had already done so many tricks by the time of the displacement that all sorts of patience were full. Further, leaving him in high office would be simply suicidal.

    This is not a reason to change power. It was the highest Maidan. The ruler in Russia must change and is changing mainly with the death of the current king.

    To poison?
  • Plastmaster 5 June 2020 07: 36 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: glory1974
    it’s very sad that in our country one person can do all that he wants.
    We need a system so that no one can steer before the death of the country. In those days, the party podsuetsilsya and replaced an inadequate person. But later could not do the same. The human factor has worked. Therefore, so far there is only one option for this - periodic change of power. Then in a few years at the helm he will not be able to destroy everything.

    So the party, the Politburo decided collectively. By voting.
  • Plastmaster 5 June 2020 07: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Personally, I see his plus in Cuba and Khrushchev. And I won’t be surprised if Khrushchev’s, or improving the living conditions of the people, was another person’s program. What went out into space? So he did not advise and build rockets. The same baton was created by the man whom he slammed. He has a personal chip in agriculture
  • datura23 5 June 2020 08: 24 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Khrushchev was recruited by the Americans, he handed over this recruitment to Brezhnev, they supported the plan for the Union to enter the world system of division of labor. Military "confrontation" was beneficial to the elites of both countries. Stalin's death too.
    1. gsev 5 June 2020 12: 11 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: datura23
      Khrushchev was recruited by the Americans, he handed over this recruitment to Brezhnev,

      This statement indicates that total civilian control should be exercised over law enforcement officials. This reminds me of attempts to expose the writer I. Efremov of spying on aliens. Such a case was really conducted by the KGB for several years and even actively continued after the death of I. Efremov.
  • Li17 5 June 2020 08: 53 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: datura23
    Khrushchev was recruited by the Americans,

    so quickly and specifically issued a statement! And you are by chance not from the very same chamber where they give such theses and a restful shot is required for clients if someone doubts and causes a nervous reaction? You have forgotten aliens.
  • tank64rus 5 June 2020 11: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It’s a pity that I did not get a trial. True, then so many things would come up.
  • ZaharoFF 8 June 2020 11: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Khrushchev’s reign and, in general, the possibility that such a clown occupies the highest position in the country is a shameful page in history, it’s sad, but it’s so. The destruction of the great country began precisely during the corn crop.
  • captain 12 June 2020 08: 15 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I do not agree with the author. They did not save the country, they saved their skins. Otherwise, in 1953 he (Khrushchev) would not have been nominated to the first secretaries. Our so-called elite wanted to live like gods and rulers of the country. But under Stalin it was dangerous to live like gods, it was possible to get into the carriage on Magadan at night. And sovereign, one could only end up in solitary confinement in the morning, under comrade Stalin. Therefore, they chose Khrushchev at one time, and when he began to behave like a king, our party gods began to fear for their skins and places. The Zhukov example told them a lot. Skinning formed the basis of what led to the removal of Khrushchev.
    Yes, under Khrushchev mistakes in government. But blaming him for hunger is in vain. In the USSR, hunger was not an isolated phenomenon. For example, in 1932-33, in 1946-47. The collapse of the army, so it was brought to Khrushchev in a very unsightly state. Remember the story with mechanized corps They were created long and hard, created in 1938, disbanded in 1939, created again, then disbanded, disbanded again in 1940 (explaining this by the lack of the required number of tanks, but actually the inability to use them), created again in 1941. At the end of 1942 they disbanded, and in 1945 they began to form again and so on.
    The struggle for power and their material well-being led our elite to the desire to remove Khrushchev. Although I have a negative attitude towards him.
  • Thomas the Unbelieving 14 June 2020 00: 10 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I am very sorry that we very poorly know our true history. For the post-Stalinist leadership, tired of the war and post-war reconstruction, the most important thing is that they wanted a quiet life. They considered Khrushchev to be their Ukrainian peasant, but not far off. Therefore, after Stalin's death, his main post, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, was given to his weak apparatchik Malenkov. His first speech contained the main ideas of Stalin in a populist exposition. Khrushchev, as secretary of the MK, was by position and secretary of the Central Committee. Nobody wanted to touch him, because at that time the state apparatus had real power, and the party was guided more by ideology. Khrushchev used his position for personnel policy. I remember at that time I started work in the area and then the selection and updating of party cadres began with the nomination of people with an engineering education. Of course, many years later it came to many that he selected people at all levels who would suit him with the same personality cult that he diligently exposed when it was not about him. Then he proved himself to be a joke guy (tolerant-unpredictable now say this). It is clear that the top did not like it — they wanted a quiet life. Therefore, after Khrushchev, reforms were drawn and nothing was done either inside the country or outside. Andropov in 56 did not just cope with the Hungarian uprising (he was then our ambassador), persuading Mikoyan to make a compromise. Hungary then always had certain preferences in the social camp and there were no more incidents there - they were allowed to live as they want. And with Czechoslovakia, the new elite did not find anything other than military force, although it was then possible to talk with the Czechs. In the economy, they did not come up with anything better than to develop oil exports for the import of goods. How this policy ended, we see. We are now sitting on the stranglehold of the IMF, WB and WTO, which the states are behind. It may be possible to overcome the resistance of the oil and gas lobby to the development of the manufacturing industry if we change our position in the world due to the threat of the use of force against opponents of our development. I think that there are many forces in the country that are satisfied with the status quo. The fight will not be a joke. In the United States, a civil war was needed to overcome the resistance of the South slaveholders to the protectionist policies of the northerners. It was in our head that they fought for the freedom of blacks; this is an external version of the story, which is worth considering and looking for real driving forces. This is now shown to us - that then the Negroes really did not get freedom, for what was the war going on?