Military Review

Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the turning 20s

271

The political figure of Stalin still evokes many positive and negative emotions. Since his activities at the head of the Soviet state contributed to the breakthrough to a superpower, while accompanied by colossal sacrifices. How did this man reach the heights of power and what did he pursue - the creation of his own cult of the leader? Or building a new state? And how did he see him? What drove him? And why did he deal so cruelly with his fellow party members?


The formation of the future leader and the formation of his political philosophy began in the early 20s at the end of the era of Lenin's rule and the fierce struggle of Lenin's entourage for power and for choosing the further path of development of the state.

The beginning of the path to the post of general secretary


Stalin's advance to leadership in the party and state was largely due to the decisions of the fateful X Congress of the RCP (b) (March 1921). It was with this congress that Stalin's path to the post of general secretary began.

This period was characterized by colossal problems in the construction of the Soviet state: mass protests of the population against the policy of "war communism", confusion and vacillation in the party, which led to the creation of many party factions and platforms, and the imposition of "discussion about trade unions" on the ambitious Trotsky. And the peak of discontent was the uprising in Kronstadt.

Trotsky suffered a serious political defeat at the congress, and his idea of ​​"labor armies" was rejected. And a program was adopted for the transition to a new economic policy, the inadmissibility of factionalism and the need to purge the party from "petty bourgeois elements." The congress outlined the ways of reorganizing the leadership of the party. And, above all, he focused on strengthening the organizational foundations aimed at eliminating factionalism.

In preparing for the congress, Stalin showed himself to be a good organizer in the formation of the "Leninist platform." And after the congress he was elected secretary for organizational work.

The fact that the Secretariat and the Organizing Bureau did not cope with the tasks assigned to them contributed to a serious strengthening of Stalin's positions. And Stalin (as the chief specialist in organizational matters) enthusiastically began to restore order. Under his leadership, a party "purge" was carried out, which led to the expulsion of more than one hundred thousand "petty-bourgeois elements" from the party and the strengthening of the Leninist platform.

Stalin's experience, efficiency and loyalty to the Bolshevik line were noticed by Lenin. By that time, he was already seriously ill. And in the face of Stalin I saw a figure capable of resisting Trotsky's ambitions and strengthening his own position.

The rubicon for Stalin was his election after the 1922th Party Congress (April XNUMX) at the suggestion of Lenin as general secretary, whose responsibilities so far included purely organizational work and nothing more.

Immediately after the XNUMXth Congress, the Central Committee began to reorganize the organizational forms of the work of the central apparatus and local party organizations. Stalin vigorously set about reorganizing the Central Committee apparatus. He considered the building of a ramified and effective apparatus to be one of the central tasks. And he saw the selection and distribution of party, state and economic personnel as the main instrument in achieving this goal.

The apparatus became the alpha and omega of Stalin's political strategy, one of the fundamental foundations of his entire political outlook and the forthcoming struggle for power.

Lenin, nominating Stalin for this post, appreciated in him the talent of an organizer. He was distinguished by his decisiveness and firmness of character, as well as the fact that he shared all the fundamental principles of Bolshevism. Nevertheless, between Lenin and Stalin in 1922-1923 there were several conflicts based on personal grounds and dictated in many respects by Lenin's illness.

On the instructions of the Politburo, Stalin provided conditions for Lenin's treatment and tranquility in Gorki, limiting his rest from public affairs. It was to him that Lenin turned with a request to bring poison if he could not recover. The views of Lenin and Stalin seriously diverged on the issue of "autonomization" and the form of state structure of the USSR. Then Lenin's point of view won out.

In December 1922, Lenin handed Krupskaya a letter to Trotsky on one of the issues of commercial activity. She violated the established rules for limiting Lenin's activities. And Stalin rudely reprimanded Krupskaya for such willfulness. She told Lenin about this. And relations between them became sharply complicated.

Lenin at this time wrote his "letter to the congress" or "political testament", in which he gave characteristics to the leading members of the party Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Bukharin and Stalin. In the letter, he pointed out Stalin's personal shortcomings (rudeness, disloyalty, desire to expand his power) and did not rule out the possibility of replacing him as Secretary General.

This letter from Lenin then (like a sword of Damocles) hung over Stalin for years. But at that time it was considered inappropriate to remove him from this post.

Struggle against Trotsky and the "Left Opposition"


Immediately after Lenin's death, the struggle for leadership in the party intensified. On the one hand, Trotsky and his entourage spoke. On the other, there is a "troika" consisting of Zinoviev, Kamenev and Stalin.

The triumvirate was formed in May 1922 with a sharp exacerbation of Lenin's illness. He actually retired from the leadership of the party. And the "troika", closely cooperating with each other and ignoring Trotsky, began to preliminary discuss and prepare decisions on all the most important party and state affairs. And actually ruled by the state.

The triumvirate lasted for about two years. Lenin was still alive. And none of the members of the troika risked taking any decisive steps.

In addition, Trotsky's positions were still quite strong after the defeat at the Tenth Congress. And all members of the triumvirate retained the appearance of unity among themselves in the face of a common enemy. It was an alliance of people united by the goal of defeating a common enemy in the person of Trotsky, who claimed to take the place of the sole leader after Lenin's death. And to provide assistance and support to each other as long as it is beneficial to them.

The collapse of the triumvirate was predetermined in connection with the intensified struggle for power after Lenin's death. In addition to attacks on Trotsky, confrontation between the members of the triumvirate grew. At the XII Party Congress (April 1923), the confrontation between Zinoviev and Trotsky intensified. Stalin, despite his contempt for Zinoviev for his irrepressible vanity, ambition, idle talk and political worthlessness, supported his comrade-in-arms. And he, in "gratitude" after the congress, launched a failed campaign to remove Stalin from the post of general secretary.

The aggravation of the confrontation resulted in the formation of the so-called "left opposition". In the fall of 1923, Trotsky imposed a party discussion, provoked by a letter from 46 prominent party workers, in which they accused the leadership of the party, or rather the troika, of the collapse of the economy, usurpation of power, imposition of party functionaries and removal of the party masses from decision-making.

At a party conference (January 1924) on the very eve of Lenin's death, the results of the discussion were summed up and a resolution was adopted condemning the petty-bourgeois deviation in the party, which meant Trotskyism. At this stage, Stalin, in his struggle for a key political role in the leadership of the party, emphasized the struggle against the highly respected Trotsky, who was backed by leftist ideas about a "permanent" world revolution. Stalin, through his cadres, prepared the conference well for striking a blow at Trotsky and Trotskyism, so that he could no longer recover from it.

The party conference, through the cadres skillfully placed by Stalin, dealt a powerful blow to Trotsky, after which he actually found himself in a position of political bankruptcy, although he continued to hold high party and state posts. However, the defeat was not complete and did not remove Trotsky from the ranks of the candidates for political leadership.

After Lenin's death, the country entered a fundamentally new phase of development, since, due to the prevailing circumstances, he could not develop an integral program of socialist construction. The inconsistency and ambiguity of his statements opened up a wide field for their interpretation by the opposing groupings in the parties, which had turned into an object of a fierce, not so much theoretical struggle, but into a real personal rivalry and struggle for power.

Stalin understood better than his rivals how to interpret Leninism as a powerful weapons in internal party battles. Lenin's "political testament" criticizing his personal shortcomings did not play a significant role in his rise. He successfully confronted his main rivals in the person of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Bukharin. And in the end he managed to outplay them.

At the 1924th Party Congress (May XNUMX), the first after Lenin's death, the "trio" of winners, united on a temporary coincidence of interests in the personal struggle for power, felt themselves on horseback and triumphed over Trotsky, who licked his wounds and never recovered from the blow inflicted to him by Stalin in the process of party discussion.

Stalin, showing restraint, caution and iron restraint, begins to promote the cult of Lenin as a kind of forerunner of his own cult.

Knowing his support in the party, he makes another move at the first plenum and submits his resignation, which is naturally not accepted. Convinced of the strength of his positions after the congress, Stalin literally two weeks later launched an attack against his former comrades-in-arms and rivals - Zinoviev and Kamenev. On his initiative, the "troika" unofficially expanded to the "five" by joining the "leading nucleus" Bukharin and the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars Rykov.

In parallel, for the consolidation of his position, Stalin is conducting a broad campaign not only to politically discredit Trotsky, but also seeks to bury Trotskyism as an ideological trend. The final defeat of Trotsky did not yet correspond to his plans, since he already foresaw the inevitability of a direct confrontation with the Zinoviev-Kamenev group.

In January 1925, Stalin and Bukharin sent a letter to the Politburo with a proposal to release Trotsky only from the post of chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council and keep him a member of the Politburo. The plenum of the Central Committee adopts such a decision. And Trotsky loses his post. Stalin dealt with Trotsky later. In January 1928, he was exiled to Alma-Ata. And in February 1929 he was exiled abroad.

Fight against the "new opposition"


After defeating Trotsky, Stalin begins to put pressure on the Zinoviev-Kamenev group. In the spring of 1925, the confrontation between them entered an extremely tense phase. His opponents tried to raise the issue of reviving the troika, but suffered yet another defeat. And Stalin remained the first among equals, whose superiority could still be challenged by rivals.

Stalin saw the struggle for power not as an end in itself, but as a mechanism for realizing the building of socialism in one country. This was the basis of Stalin's entire political philosophy and the foundation on which the system of his state views was formed, as well as his transition to the position of a statesman. Marxist dogmas about the world proletarian revolution gave way to the national idea of ​​strengthening and developing the Soviet state in conditions of rivalry with other countries.

Stalin stressed that supporting the revolution in other countries is an essential task of the victorious October. Therefore, the revolution of the victorious country must see itself as an aid to accelerate the victory of the proletariat in other countries and advance the revolutionary cause. He regarded Soviet Russia as a top priority; it should not serve the cause of the world proletariat, but, on the contrary, revolutionary upheavals should be placed at the service of building socialism in one country.

Based on this, he fought for power, he needed associates not to advance the world revolution, but to build a powerful socialist state. There were practically no such people in Lenin's circle. Hence the bitterness and irreconcilability of the struggle with former comrades-in-arms. He saw power itself as an instrument for the implementation of certain political goals that he set for himself. There were, of course, personal motives for the struggle for power. And they put their stamp on the acuteness of this struggle.

To build such a state, industrialization was necessary. And he was looking for ways to obtain material, human and other resources to solve this problem. They could only be taken from the village. And as a result - the merciless and rapid collectivization carried out by him.

The Zinoviev-Kamenev grouping was not going to give up its positions. Using his strong position in Leningrad, Zinoviev formed a faction that openly challenged Stalin. By the fall of 1925, in preparation for the XIV Congress, the so-called "new opposition" had developed.

In the political fate of Stalin, the XIV Congress (December 1925) became a decisive stage in the creation of the necessary political, ideological and organizational prerequisites for turning him into a sole leader. It is unique in an unprecedented political battle between the majority of the party leadership, headed by Stalin, and opponents of the majority.

The "New Opposition", headed by Zinoviev and Kamenev, decided to go all-in at the congress. Stalin, being a brilliant master of political intrigue and tactical maneuvers, was fully armed and prepared for the battle. On the eve of the congress, his group demonstratively called everyone to unity, in contrast to the opposition, who sought to split the party. This position was supported by the majority in the party.

The main issue at the congress was the definition of the general line of the party. Stalin pursued his line of building a socialist state in a capitalist environment, and for this his economy must be industrial and independent, relying on internal forces. The opposition believed that it was necessary to seek a compromise with the capitalists and prepare a world revolution. Kamenev again raised the question of the inadmissibility of forming a "leader" and demanded that Stalin be removed from his post.

The congress supported Stalin in everything and adopted a program for the industrialization of the country, the "new opposition" was defeated. At the plenum after the congress, Stalin transformed the Politburo, Zinoviev and Kamenev were transferred from members to candidates, and his supporters - Molotov, Voroshilov and Kalinin - were introduced.

Stalin decided to change the leadership of the party organization of Leningrad, headed by Zinoviev. A commission was sent there, which included his loyal ally Kirov. He showed himself in Leningrad from the best side, quickly gained popularity and even love from the Leningrad people. And Stalin, in the interests of the cause, left Kirov to lead in Leningrad.

The defeat of the "new opposition" was due not only to the personal qualities of the secretary general as a skillful strategist and tactician. This was facilitated by his course not to kindle the fire of the world revolution, but to build and strengthen the Soviet state. And this was the cornerstone of the Stalinist concept of building socialism in one country.

The defeat of the opposition did not become the complete and final end of the confrontation at the top of the party, since Stalin had not yet become the only leader.

So far, he has received a legitimate consolidation of the first among equals in the highest echelons of power and among the broad party masses. He came close to creating a solid foundation of his own power, which he strove for throughout his political life, fighting to establish and expand his positions of power. This was the prologue of a new round of struggle, for which Stalin prepared according to all the rules of waging a political war.

Struggle against the "Trotskyite-Zinovievist opposition"


Discontent of the population with the power of the Bolsheviks was brewing in the country. The NEP went through a series of acute economic crises that led to imbalances in prices for manufactured goods and agricultural products.

The failure of grain procurements in 1925 due to the refusal of the peasants to bring most of the grain to the market, took advantage of Zinoviev and Kamenev. They accused Stalin of the capitalist path of development of the peasantry and the need to return it to the socialist path by means of state coercion. They proved the impossibility of building socialism in the USSR because of its economic backwardness until the revolutions in the developed countries were defeated and the USSR provided the necessary economic assistance.

Thus, Kamenev and Zinoviev went over to Trotsky's platform. And by the spring of 1926 a united "Trotskyite-Zinoviev opposition" was formed. The struggle for power over the disputes over the ways of further development of the country was of a fateful nature and went far beyond personal rivalry and the struggle for political supremacy. Now Stalin needed power as a tool and means of implementing the strategic program of building a socialist state.

The united opposition accused Stalin of betraying the ideals of not only the world, but also the Russian revolution to please the "NEP", support the rich peasantry, the policy of degenerating the dictatorship of the proletariat into the dictatorship of the party bureaucracy and the victory of the bureaucracy over the working class. They considered the well-to-do peasants to be the main source of funds for industrialization and demanded to impose a "super tax" on them, which should be directed towards industrialization.

In the fight against the opposition, Stalin adopted the tactics of combining methods of politically discrediting his opponents, debunking their political platform and proving the ruin of their proposed path for the country's further development. He mastered this art in full and became a grand master of internal political battles and confrontations.

At the April and July plenums of the Central Committee of 1926, a powerful blow was dealt to the opposition, and at the October plenum, Zinoviev's work in the Communist International was declared impossible because he did not express the party line. Trotsky was relieved of his duties as a member of the Politburo, and Kamenev was relieved of his duties as a member of the Politburo. At the party conference, the Trotskyite-Zinoviev bloc did not receive a single vote and actually lost influence in the party.

The opposition began to create illegal organizations, hold illegal meetings and attract workers to their participation. The plenum of the Central Committee in August 1927 threatened Zinoviev and Trotsky with expulsion from the members of the Central Committee if factional activity continued. However, the opposition did not stop.

In May 1927, the opposition sent a platform letter to the Politburo - "Statement of the 83s", in which the idea of ​​building socialism in one country was declared petty-bourgeois and had nothing to do with Marxism. Support for the world revolution was offered as an alternative. And there was a demand for concessions to foreign capital in the area of ​​concession policy.

They also put forward the thesis about the Thermidor of Soviet power and its degeneration, which excluded the possibility of any compromise with Stalin's group. During the celebrations of the 10th anniversary of the October Revolution, opposition leaders staged parallel demonstrations in Moscow, Leningrad and other cities, which virtually no one supported. All this ended with the exclusion of Trotsky and Zinoviev from the Central Committee in October 1927.

At the 1927th Congress (December 75), the defeat of the united Trotskyite-Zinoviev opposition was formalized organizationally, the congress decided to expel XNUMX active opposition figures from the party, including Kamenev. At the congress, Stalin strove to achieve the complete and unconditional surrender of the opposition and to lay the foundation for eradicating this possibility in the future.

This congress was a decisive stage in the establishment of Stalin as the main leader of the party, and in the eyes of the party masses, he increasingly acquired the aura of a consistent and unyielding fighter for party unity. The opposition was crushed and looked pitiful, Kamenev in a speech at the congress declared that their way of creating a second party was disastrous for the proletarian revolution, and they renounce their views. Stalin, feeling himself a complete winner, again resorted to his favorite trick - he proposed his resignation, which was rejected.

The defeat of the Trotskyite-Zinoviev opposition did not become the final of the internal party struggle; Stalin was preparing for new battles with his opponents. His victory was not complete as long as there were people in the party leadership who were able to challenge him. Stalin needed a one-man power, where his voice in any scenario will always be decisive.

Fight against the "right-wing opposition"


In 1928-1929, a fierce struggle against the so-called Right deviation unfolded. Bukharin was the main political and ideological exponent of this deviation, along with him the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars Rykov and the leader of the Soviet trade unions Tomsky became the leading figures of this deviation.

The disagreements in the position of Stalin and Bukharin consisted in the incompatibility of approaches to the development of the country's economy and the forms of class struggle under socialism. Stalin believed that the NEP policy pursued since 1921, in principle, could not bring the country out of backwardness in a hostile environment. He defended the course of pursuing a mobilization economy, allowing for accelerated modernization and ready to quickly switch to a military track.

Bukharin insisted on the continuation of the NEP policy, the gradual development of socialist forms of management and the priority satisfaction of the needs of the population. In the confrontation between Stalin and Bukharin, it was a question of choosing a strategic course for the country's development.

On the issue of the class struggle, Stalin defended the theory of an aggravation of the class struggle as one moves towards socialism, since the resistance of the capitalist elements will inevitably increase and they must be suppressed. This theory gave Stalin the opportunity to introduce emergency measures, and in the future, large-scale repressions.

Bukharin considered this to be Stalin's invention and refuted his theory by the fact that in this case the most fierce class struggle occurs when classes will already disappear and this is absurd. Bukharin's main slogan was an appeal to the peasantry

"Get rich".

He defended the formula

"Growing kulaks into socialism."

The attitude towards the kulak became the main issue in the village.

During the 1927 procurement campaign, the kulak farms began to refrain from selling their grain reserves in anticipation of higher prices, which led to an increase in the price of bread and the introduction in 1928 of the rationing system. Repressive measures were taken against the kulaks, they began to seize grain by force, arrest them and exile them to remote regions, middle peasants and peasants who were disliked by the local authorities began to fall under this. Grain riots and uprisings swept across the country, which exacerbated the political struggle at the top.

The leaders of the right bloc argued that the Stalinist course and its policy were a dead-end path for the further development of the countryside, it was not capable of leading the country onto the path of effective development. And fraught with the threat of class antagonism between workers and peasants.

In February 1929, they sent a statement to the Politburo, in which they accused the secretary general of serious distortions of the policy in the field of agriculture and industry. And in the fact that Stalin essentially imposed on the party a course of military-feudal exploitation of the peasantry.

Stalin, using already worked out methods of influencing the party and state apparatus, convinced everyone of the viciousness of the platform of the "right opposition" and, with massive propaganda, introduced this to the masses. The tactics he chose gradually shaped his image, first as an exemplary leader, relying on collegiality and the first among equals, and later as the sole leader.

The Bolsheviks' blind admiration for discipline was for them above the interests of truth; Stalin skillfully used this circumstance and did not hesitate to overstep the norms of morality and party principles when it was dictated by strategic interests.

As a result, Stalin achieved another victory over the opposition, the November 1929 plenum decided to remove Bukharin from the Politburo and warned Rykov and Tomsky that in case of the slightest attempt on their part to continue the struggle against the party line, organizational measures would be applied to them. Rykov was still the nominal head of government.

The political and organizational defeat of the right bloc predetermined the paths of further socio-economic development of Soviet society as a whole. historical era. It was then that the question of a fundamentally new course of the country was decided. It was also a turning point in the political biography of Stalin, not only his personal power was significantly strengthened, but conditions were also created for the implementation of the socio-economic turn in the development of Soviet society outlined by him.

At the 1930th Party Congress (July XNUMX), tasks were formulated to implement Stalin's plans. The main purpose of the congress was to approve the general line of the party, of which Stalin was personified. Rykov spoke and repented on behalf of the opposition at the congress, his speech was expressed in worthy tones. He understood that he had lost the political struggle, and there was no reason to count on leniency.

Stalin, on the eve of new aggravations of the situation in the country, considered it extremely important and obligatory to confirm the historical necessity and political inevitability of the struggle against Bukharin's group. In September 1930, without much ado, after thorough preliminary preparation by the secretary general, Rykov was removed from the members of the Polyutburo and lost the post of chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, Molotov became the new head of government. Tomsky also lost his seat in the Politburo, although, like Bukharin, he joined the new Central Committee.

Stalin was aware of the fact that the position of the right against the excessive pace of industrialization and extraordinary measures for collectivization enjoyed fairly wide support among the party masses, especially against the background of growing difficulties with the supply and introduction of the rationing system. In this regard, he did everything possible so that the leaders of the opposition and their views received the harshest assessment at the congress and, in general, in the country.

Stalin's victory over the right was undeniable, he forced their leaders to make repentant speeches and tried to create such an atmosphere that their speeches were constantly interrupted by remarks of condemnation and mistrust on the part of the delegates. He understood that the defeat of the right did not at all make them supporters of his political course.

They lost the open confrontation, but deep down they were sure that they were right and in one form or another could oppose Stalin's policy.
Stalin understood that the defeat of Bukharin's group did not eradicate the political orientation in the party, which they defended. In part, they retained their influence in the party and their views were supported by certain groups of communists.

Stalin naturally feared that with any sharp turn of events, the picture could radically change. And they can become, in the eyes of society, the conductors of a development path that is different from the one proposed by it, since the real situation in the country was far from favoring it. All this predicted an intensification of the political struggle, in which Stalin's opponents would lose not only their posts, but also go to Calvary and part with their lives.

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
fb.ru/misc
271 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mustachioed Georgian
    Mustachioed Georgian 2 February 2021 05: 28
    +28
    The fact that Stalin was able to outplay everyone only confirms his great intelligence and ability to plan. The country was lucky that such a man-rock was found in that difficult time for her and did not let her disappear from the world map.
    1. DrEng527
      DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 02
      0
      Quote: Mustachioed Georgian
      only confirms his greatest mind

      by no means - only his ability to fight for power by any means ...
  2. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 2 February 2021 05: 32
    -2
    Fierce Stalin's struggle for power in the critical 20s
    Have you confused anything? repeat
    1. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 2 February 2021 11: 41
      +27
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Fierce Stalin's struggle for power in the critical 20s
      Have you confused anything? repeat

      The title of the article jarred me too, as well as its very content.
      I would like to remind you that Stalin considered any struggle, as it should be for a Bolshevik, only as a CLASS struggle!
      Lenin gave a clear definition of opportunism as a bedding for the bourgeoisie and comrade. Stalin never once departed from Lenin's behests in the fight against opportunism and opportunists, and therefore firmly pursued the line of struggle against class enemies and their henchmen!
  3. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 2 February 2021 05: 56
    0
    Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the turning 20s
    belay Was Stalin fighting a shadow, or did Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev and others fiercely fight for power? That's right!
    Fierce struggle in the Central Committee for power in the turning 20s
    And then some kind of slander, a shame. request
  4. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 2 February 2021 06: 26
    +8
    Grain riots and uprisings swept across the country, which exacerbated the political struggle at the top.
    However, they were greatly exaggerated, if only because the most massive poor people did not particularly support them.
  5. tatra
    tatra 2 February 2021 06: 35
    +15
    In world history, it has often happened that in the struggle against power, people with different convictions, with different visions of what needs to be done in the country united, and after the seizure of power a fierce struggle for power began between them, as the French revolutionaries fought with each other for 10 years, staged coups against each other, chopped off each other's heads. And the Bolshevik party after Lenin's return to Russia increased from 25 to 350 thousand people in October 1917, whole parties joined it, including Trotsky, who, together with the "Mezhraiontsy" party, joined the Bolshevik party 2 months before the October Revolution.
    1. Crowe
      Crowe 2 February 2021 07: 48
      +24
      Irin, it’s good that it was not Trotsky who took power then, but Stalin. We would have washed ourselves with blood for “instantaneous revolution.” Trotsky, despite Lenin, saw the main world revolutionary force not in the Russian, but in the European proletariat. ...
      1. tatra
        tatra 2 February 2021 07: 56
        +8
        Well, Trotsky is the same person slandered by the enemies of the communists, like Lenin and Stalin. For example, they created their next fake that Trotsky said a phrase starting with the words "we must turn Russia into a desert inhabited by white blacks ,,, '. 99% of the enemies of the communists attribute this phrase to Trotsky without specifying the source, and the rest indicate only one source - the memoirs of Rasputin's personal secretary Aron Simanovich, but they do not have this phrase, and not a word about Trotsky, but there is, for example, that Alexandra Feodorovna gave birth to a son, Alexei, not from Nicholas II.
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 2 February 2021 08: 27
          -4
          Quote: tatra
          ... and after the seizure of power, a fierce struggle for power began between them

          The same is happening today. Starting from the beginning of this century, Putin managed to push back the clans of the regionals (Shaimiev), the clan of Moscow (Luzhkov), etc. The struggle for power never ends ... Stalin only managed to close the International in 1943.

          Quote: tatra
          Trotsky is the same person slandered by the enemies of the communists, like Lenin and Stalin

          Stalin, who "gave" Trotsky an ice ax, slandered him? Did I understand you correctly?
        2. bober1982
          bober1982 2 February 2021 08: 28
          +4
          Quote: tatra
          and the rest indicate only one source - the memoirs of Rasputin's personal secretary Aron Simanovich

          The words- memoirs и Simanovich, it is necessary to give in quotation marks, since of course it is impossible to believe such an essay. The author of such an opus, which most likely, was a group of persons, in the "memoirs" themselves there are a lot of inventions, gossip and lies.
          Himself, Aron Simanovich, was an incredible dodger.
        3. BAI
          BAI 2 February 2021 10: 09
          +6
          "we must turn Russia into a desert inhabited by white blacks

          they do not have this phrase


          But no one refutes the presence of this phrase of Trotsky:
          “Russians are a socially alien element. At a dangerous moment, they can become enemies of the Soviet regime "
        4. nemez
          nemez 3 February 2021 06: 19
          0
          They did not slander him much, read the works of Trotsky. And Alexei was the son of Nicholas, since hemophilia manifests itself in close relatives, and Alexandra was the niece of the Queen of Great Britain, like Nicholas.
      2. sniperino
        sniperino 2 February 2021 12: 07
        +2
        Quote: Crowe
        In spite of Lenin, Trotsky saw the main world revolutionary force not in the Russian, but in the European proletariat
        Could you quote a quote from which it would become clear what Lenin saw in the Russian proletariat? Or at least formulate his explanation, from which such a vision follows.
        1. depressant
          depressant 2 February 2021 17: 53
          +8
          Well, here is, for example, one such quote:
          "Such a transition to the side of the bourgeoisie is made by virtually all the representatives and supporters of the Second International and all the leaders of the German so-called" independent "Social Democracy, when they, recognizing in words the dictatorship of the proletariat, in fact, in their propaganda instill in him the idea that he must first to achieve a formal expression of the will of the majority of the population under capitalism (ie, the majority of votes in the bourgeois parliament) for the transition of political power to the proletariat, which will then occur. "
          Complete Works of V.I. Lenin, volume 40.
          1. sniperino
            sniperino 2 February 2021 18: 16
            +3
            I see Lenin's claims to the representatives and supporters of the Second International and all the leaders German "independent" Social Democracy. Hence it is clear why he counted on the fact that the Russian proletariat, slave RSDLP (b), will be able to break the bonds of the Republic of Ingushetia and ignite the fire of the world proletarian revolution. But it does not follow from this that Lenin saw not in the European, but in the Russian proletariat the main world revolutionary force. If only because of the small number of the Russian proletariat in comparison with the German, and even more so the European.
    2. antivirus
      antivirus 2 February 2021 18: 11
      +2
      "you are a strange people, taxi drivers .."
      the struggle of the IVS for power - he looked at whom to rely on - and determined - the subconscious helped. led to ... the conservative class of peasants and workers from the remote outskirts of the countryside. A very small layer of "fiery revolutionaries" lost to the GIANT MASS, which received a start in life without segregation-racism-parochialism.
      What did LIBrezhnev want (it seems 1905) ?? - that is what the IVS and his associates did .. give power to the lower classes. not to outsiders.
      and a VERY CONSERVATIVE, GROUND PLAN FOR THE COUNTRY'S DEVELOPMENT - TO Catch up and Overtake the capitalists. live on your own land, don't die for the slogan
      1. sniperino
        sniperino 2 February 2021 19: 05
        +2
        Quote: antivirus
        VERY CONSERVATIVE, GROUNDED COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
        When, after Trotsky's unsuccessful trip to Germany, it became clear that everything was dull in Europe, the Bolsheviks still had an option: to end the Civil War with the victory of the Reds, in order to set an example and stir up, help the main force of the world revolution - the European proletariat. However, in 1921 the labor movement in Europe began to fade away, and the NEP was introduced "seriously and for a long time." Here and there are 2 options for continuing the "banquet". 1. Trotsky. Sell ​​all the gold, valuables, everything that can be sold to the capitalists in order to buy rifles, cannons, ammunition, arm all the walkers and move them to Europe ("bundle of firewood"), so that they only need to ignite the European proletarians, and only then they will complete this world fire and will build communism in the whole world. 2 Stalin. Build a socialist state capable of living and developing in a hostile environment, and influencing other countries, attracting them to your camp.
        1. motorized rifle
          motorized rifle 2 February 2021 20: 09
          +3
          and influence other countries by attracting them to your camp

          Just about, and some of those who fell under the influence and attracted, now, are almost the first economy in the world. I wonder what would have happened to China, without Stalin and Mao, and what would have happened to Israel ...?
          1. sniperino
            sniperino 3 February 2021 00: 00
            +1
            Quote: motorized infantryman
            I wonder what would have happened to China, without Stalin
            I wonder what would have happened to Russia according to the first option: would Trotsky have thrown Russia along with the world revolution, or not. I think I would have thrown for a good kickback. Would have been Soros only 1 years ago.
  6. pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 2 February 2021 06: 39
    +6
    For industrialization, workers were needed, and the peasant did not want to leave the land, for it provided even meager food. They paid good money to work in the city, but it was impossible to buy food with them. by the way all these products were eaten on the spot, in the village. Commodity agriculture did not exist. So the party and the government faced the task of "fencing" and driving the peasants from the land into the city by creating a commercial agricultural production through mechanization and collectivization.
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 2 February 2021 07: 05
      +2
      Quote: pmkemcity
      So the party and government faced the task of "fencing" and driving the peasants from the land into the city

      Yes? And here, for some reason, you can often hear that, on the contrary, they did not give passports no matter where they ran away ...
      1. place
        place 2 February 2021 15: 14
        +1
        Quote: mat-vey
        passports were not given no matter where they ran ...

        ------

        Usually all over the world passports and registration are the means of restricting movement. But if someone is itching and the desire to "prove" the opposite - what, besides logic, will prevent? But you can always "put" on logic and it's in the bag. True, the Bolsheviks did not know about this when they canceled the passport regime of the Russian Empire and migration to the USSR reached 20 million people in the 20 post-revolutionary years. The Bolsheviks needed not to hold back, they needed working hands - to build new cities and industrial enterprises. But for "the first of Russia's two troubles" - this is certainly not an argument. We understand, we sympathize ...
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 2 February 2021 15: 58
          -1
          Quote: ort
          True, the Bolsheviks did not know about this when they canceled the passport regime of the Russian Empire

          According to the passport regime of the Republic of Ingushetia, the peasants did not have passports.
          Quote: ort
          Usually all over the world passports and registration are a means of restricting movement.

          And the lack of documents in the whole world leads to the restriction of freedom - that is, to detention. And when in your country, even in the entire aftermath of two wars, it is generally a disaster without documents.
          Quote: ort
          The Bolsheviks needed not to hold back, they needed working hands - to build new cities and industrial enterprises.

          First of all, the Bolsheviks had to get some food somewhere, otherwise there had already been so many collectivisations in the cities that you couldn’t feed a plow ... and you couldn’t carry out any industrialization on an empty belly ..
          1. place
            place 2 February 2021 19: 17
            +6
            Quote: mat-vey
            According to the passport regime of the Republic of Ingushetia, the peasants did not have passports


            And from what hangover? According to the passport regime of the Republic of Ingushetia, the peasants had passports.
            The decree of 1803 established "printed" passports of the Republic of Ingushetia for merchants, petty bourgeois and peasants in order to combat the use of false passports and the increasing cases of peasants' flight. The main rule of the Charter was that no one can leave the place of permanent residence without a legalized form or passport. Nobles who did not serve in the civil service could not have passports, for them the document was a certificate of nobility.

            Since the end of the XIX century. Until 1917 the passport system in Russia was regulated by the law of 1897, according to which a passport was not required only for permanent residence. However, it was required to have passports for permanent residence in capitals and border towns; in a number of localities, workers of factories and plants were required to have passports. There was no need to have a passport when leaving the place of permanent residence within the county and outside it no further than 50 miles and no more than 6 months, as well as to persons hiring for rural work.
            SO, learn the math and do not fantasize.

            [/B]
            Quote: mat-vey
            The Bolsheviks, first of all, had to get some food somewhere, or else about any collectivization, so many had already run into the cities that it was no longer possible to feed a plow


            Collectivization began in the late 20s. Not 1917. Didn't know? Sokha was BEFORE the collective farms. And the first machine and tractor stations appeared on the collective farms, because they were financed by the state.

            Precisely because there was the experience of the Russian Empire, where during the 1st World War they paid the debts of the Allied Entente with Russian bread. To sow which there was simply no one. Neither with a plow nor with a hand. Therefore, in 1916, a surplus was established, since there was no zhrachki, the February Revolution took place. (It was only in "our recent history" that some brains were told that supposedly both the revolution and the USSR arose "just like that" and the Bolsheviks introduced collective farms "just like that, you can't do it")

            But the most interesting thing was not then, but in 1992. When the complete collapse of the economy and "market abundance began at the same time. Gaidar saved the country from hunger. The Soviet deficit disappeared in a couple of weeks. A miracle similar to the biblical one happened. There was no goods and suddenly there were many without any collective farms and even without farmers .... ". And now it suddenly turned out that meat production in the Russian Federation reached the level of 1990 in the RSFSR only by 2015! Which country was the field of miracles?
            I WILL RECOGNIZE COMPATRIOTS BY EARS.
            1. mat-vey
              mat-vey 2 February 2021 19: 33
              -1
              Quote: ort
              The main rule of the Charter was that no one can leave the place of permanent residence without a legalized form or passport.

              And what has changed? The peasants could leave the collective farms without paperwork problems? Eased them, so to speak, the problem of fleeing to the city? What would be easier to "drive"?
              Quote: ort
              Collectivization began in the late 20s. Not 1917. Didn't know? Sokha was BEFORE the collective farms. And the first machine and tractor stations appeared on the collective farms, because they were financed by the state.

              How interesting ... what are you talking about?
              Quote: ort
              Precisely because there was the experience of the Russian Empire, where during the 1st World War they paid the debts of the Allied Entente with Russian bread. To sow which there was simply no one. Neither with a plow nor with a hand. Therefore, in 1916, a surplus was established, since there was no zhrachki, the February Revolution took place. (It was only in "our recent history" that some brains were told that supposedly both the revolution and the USSR arose "just like that" and the Bolsheviks introduced collective farms "just like that, you can't do it")

              And this is what?
              Quote: ort
              But the most interesting thing was not then, but in 1992. When the complete collapse of the economy and "market abundance began at the same time. Gaidar saved the country from hunger. The Soviet deficit disappeared in a couple of weeks. A miracle similar to the biblical one happened. There was no goods and suddenly there were many without any collective farms and even without farmers .... ". And now it suddenly turned out that meat production in the Russian Federation reached the level of 1990 in the RSFSR only by 2015! Which country was the field of miracles?
              I WILL RECOGNIZE COMPATRIOTS BY EARS.

              Well, as for the type of "sgon", it is not at all clear.
            2. DrEng527
              DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 13
              0
              Quote: ort
              in the Russian Federation, meat production reached the level of 1990 in the RSFSR only by 2015!

              you shouldn't believe the Soviet statistics ... bully
              1. ivan2022
                ivan2022 3 February 2021 18: 26
                +1
                I think I realized that the blame for the Bolsheviks is Mr. mat-vey ....... He is not happy that the Bolsheviks could not instantly provide jobs in cities for tens of millions of men and women who wanted to become urban. Whether the peasants from the village really wanted it or not, it's hard for me to say now. I did not sit under the bed of these peasants.
                But the authorities probably limited migration so as not to flood the cities with unemployed. It is this circumstance that acts on our "patriots of the 21st century" like a red rag on bulls.
                The Bolsheviks did a lot, because the migration to the cities was enormous, they created jobs, but they should have even more ... well, well .. I believe that this is already a problem of the psyche of modern "creative" people and should not interfere here. They will find a reason everywhere to come into a state of high excitement.
                When it comes to cases that are 90 years old, this is very convenient.
                1. mat-vey
                  mat-vey 4 February 2021 07: 43
                  -1
                  Quote: ivan2022
                  I think I realized that the blame for the Bolsheviks is Mr. mat-vey .......

                  Am I betting something? Have you tried to read the dialogues, but not the hotel answers? Or is your "psyche" unable to reach this?
                2. DrEng527
                  DrEng527 4 February 2021 11: 40
                  0
                  Quote: ivan2022
                  the Bolsheviks could not instantly provide jobs in cities for tens of millions of men and women who wanted to become urban.

                  Then answer the banal question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms? Or has this question never crossed your mind?
                  1. mat-vey
                    mat-vey 4 February 2021 12: 09
                    0
                    Quote: DrEng527
                    Then answer the banal question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms?

                    And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"? And yes, if you know in the city life is easier than in the countryside - I have worked my way and is free. And the cultural life, again, is not richer. Well, all education is higher than the primary in the same place - in the city.
                    1. DrEng527
                      DrEng527 4 February 2021 12: 22
                      -1
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"?

                      there was no mass exodus - there was an ordinary process of urban growth, as in the Republic of Ingushetia!

                      Quote: mat-vey
                      And yes, if you know in the city life is easier than in the village - I have worked my way and I am free

                      You are funny ... you worked for yourself in the village ...
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      And cultural life, again, is not richer. Well, all education is higher than primary in the same place - in the city.

                      The peasants do not need ballet even in the city bully you have some kind of shovel stamps ... bully
                      Why does a peasant in the 30s need more primary education? However, even then in large villages there were seven years, and under the king of the school ...
                      1. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 12: 28
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        You are funny ... you worked for yourself in the village ...

                        So all the same, the collective farm is for itself?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        Ballet peasants and in the city do not need bully you have some kind of soviet stamps ..

                        And that in every city there is (was) a ballet?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        Why does a peasant in the 30s need more primary education?

                        You will not believe - to become an engineer, military man, artist, teacher. Or according to your cliches, he should be poking around in the earth all his life?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        there was no mass exodus - there was an ordinary process of urban growth, as in the Republic of Ingushetia!

                        Well, the usual one - here they say they just drove the peasants to the cities from the villages ..
                      2. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 12: 51
                        -1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        So all the same, the collective farm is for itself?

                        you don't have a healthy habit of taking a phrase out of context! We look at your phrase, to which I answered:
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And because of what conditions before collectivization "ran"? And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the village - worked his way and is free.

                        in my opinion you are engaged in forgery ... hi
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And that in every city there is (was) a ballet?

                        and that every peasant needs a cultural life in your understanding? bully
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        You will not believe - to become an engineer, military man, artist, teacher. Or according to your cliches, he should be poking around in the earth all his life?

                        1) in my opinion, this is a task for the children of peasants! Let me remind you that in the Republic of Ingushetia, many of the peasants got out bully
                        2) those who do not love it "poke" in the ground! The profession of a peasant / farmer is quite prestigious everywhere, except for the USSR ..
                      3. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 12: 58
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        and that every peasant needs a cultural life in your understanding?

                        What is cultural life in my understanding?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        1) in my opinion, this is a task for the children of peasants! Let me remind you that in the Republic of Ingushetia, many of the peasants got out

                        So the children mostly went to the city. And by the way, they taught me to be a machine operator for MTS in the city.
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"? And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the village - worked his way and is free.
                        And the concept of "mass" is the same controversial before the war, the proportion of the urban population somewhere up to 30% and rose .. It was not for nothing that recruiters all over the country ran about people at construction sites and recruited factories.

                        in my opinion you are engaged in forgery ...

                        What is the fraud, that life is easier in the city?
                      4. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 13: 35
                        -1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        What is cultural life in my understanding?

                        don't you know yourself? I recommend a psychologist ...

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        So the children mostly went to the city

                        then what are you talking about? the itch of writing?
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        What is the fraud, that life is easier in the city?

                        I have selected the text for you on purpose, if you are not able to understand - these are your problems ... hi
                      5. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 13: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        What is cultural life in my understanding?

                        don't you know yourself? I recommend a psychologist ...

                        Oh, again I go to a psychologist with your problems - it was you there who decided something about my "cultural life" for me.
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        and that every peasant needs a cultural life in your understanding?

                        Quote: DrEng527
                        So the children mostly went to the city

                        then what are you talking about? the itch of writing?

                        Are you talking about something ... your ...
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        I have selected a text for you on purpose, if you are not able to understand - these are your problems ..

                        So you twice need to .. LIFE IN THE CITY IS EASIER THAN IN THE VILLAGE.
                        By the way, about the "itch" - when you went into the branch about what we are talking about at least asked? And abruptly into battle? Out of habit ..
                      6. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 13: 52
                        -1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        So you twice need to .. LIFE IN THE CITY IS EASIER THAN IN THE VILLAGE.

                        stupidity! if you think a little, you will understand! Home improvement does not depend on the area, as well as the desire to keep livestock! You are confusing warm and soft! I recommend going to any cottage community and improving your wits ... bully

                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And abruptly into battle? Out of habit ..

                        whipped you? so wind it up ... hi
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        it you there for me something about my "cultural life" decided.

                        so you brought up the topic and into the bushes ... bully
                      7. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 13: 58
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        You are confusing warm and soft! I recommend going to any cottage village and increasing your wits ...

                        Where has a typical "cottage" of the 20-30s survived?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        And abruptly into battle? Out of habit ..

                        whipped you? so wind it up ...

                        Do you even understand what the branch was about? Although you can live in your own little world ..
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        it you there for me something about my "cultural life" decided.

                        so you brought up the topic and into the bushes ...

                        What do you ascribe yours to me about five?
                      8. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 14: 00
                        -1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Where has a typical "cottage" of the 20-30s survived?

                        I don't know, but they built it for the Americans near Magnitogorsk ...
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        About five that you attribute yours to me?

                        I caught you on a forgery - see above! Flood hi
                      9. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 14: 03
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        I caught you on a forgery - see above! Flood

                        On the forgery of what? Just wondering what I put you there ...
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        Where has a typical "cottage" of the 20-30s survived?

                        I don't know, but they built it for the Americans near Magnitogorsk ...

                        Yeah, a typical village cottage, but the men did not know ... you said something about "forgeries" there?
                      10. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 14: 07
                        -1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Yep, a typical country cottage, but the men did not know.

                        the peasants did not know from poverty! but this has nothing to do with life in the village!
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        you there something about "forgeries" claimed?

                        this is your path!
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        So all the same, the collective farm is for itself?

                        you don't have a healthy habit of taking a phrase out of context! We look at your phrase, to which I answered:
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"? And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the village - worked his way and is free.

                        in my opinion you are engaged in forgery ...


                        I kindly gave you the point: I answered your question "before the start of collectivization," and you dragged "the collective farm on to yourself?"
                      11. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 14: 19
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        I kindly gave you the point: I answered your question "before the start of collectivization," and you dragged "the collective farm on to yourself?"

                        What a gentle and nervous you are. Do you start to shout at all the questions "forgery", "forgery"?
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        the peasants did not know from poverty! but this has nothing to do with life in the village!

                        And in the city? Or is it, in your opinion, it’s not easier to work out his own and eat a piece of bread, but in the village, at least for yourself, at least for a fist, no one gives such guarantees ... plus cinema, electricity, library and dancing? Yes, and less dirt, but it is everywhere yes.
                      12. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 14: 34
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        How gentle and nervous you are.

                        I don't like liars ... hi
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        it is not easier to work out and eat a piece of bread

                        where to work? Have you tried stirring and ramming concrete by hand? After that, work in the garden is just a rest ... wink
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        in the village, at least for yourself, at least for a fist, work such guarantees, no one gives

                        aha in the city rolls grow on trees ... in the early 60s I lived with my parents in a room in a 2-storey wooden house without amenities, with stove heating ... It was much worse than my grandfather in the village - there is a house and a bathhouse there ... and the toilet is for the family, and not shared with the garbage can next to it!
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        .plus cinema, electricity, library and dancing?

                        my grandfather had a club in the village - with all this ... before the revolution people had other entertainments, but there were also dances - anything! hi
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Yes, and less dirt, but it is everywhere yes.

                        the improvement of the city in the USSR did not suffer, especially on the outskirts and far from Moscow ... hi
                      13. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 14: 44
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        where to work? Have you tried stirring and ramming concrete by hand? After that, work in the garden is just a rest ..

                        Have you tried mowing? After that, work in the garden and take care of the cattle, and at 3 am back to the fields ..
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        my grandfather had a club in the village - with all this ... before the revolution people had other entertainments, but there were also dances - anything!

                        But my grandfather did not have, and my grandmother did not have ..
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        I don't like liars ...

                        So what's the lie? you are so mysterious .. If "fled" it means that you thought that it would be easier. Or what kind of good, good were you looking for?
                      14. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 15: 53
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Have you tried mowing?

                        from the age of 12 he mowed, and in the taiga and in the swamps ... hi In the meadows near the river, mowing is just a song, a well-beaten Lithuanian in the dew, but in the taiga - vile ...
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        But my grandfather did not have, and my grandmother did not have ..

                        like there were clubs in almost all villages request
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        So what's the lie? you are so mysterious

                        mow? your right, 3 times I do not show what to throw beads bully
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        If they "ran" then they thought that it would be easier.

                        by no means - people have different ambitions!
                      15. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 16: 11
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        like there were clubs in almost all villages

                        And it seems not, and depending on when.
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        by no means - people have different ambitions!

                        Understandably, the cities were filled with crowds of ambitious peasants ... was ballet in their "ambition"? Or is there a career in cinema?
                      16. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 16: 23
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Understandably, the cities were filled with crowds of ambitious peasants ..

                        aha, starting with Lomonosov ... wink
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Was ballet part of their "ambitions"?

                        people are different, many outstanding ballerinas and dancers from serf families ...
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Or is there a career in cinema?

                        and this happened, for example, Khadzhonkov from the Cossacks ...
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        And it seems not, and depending on when.

                        cleverly crying
                      17. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 16: 28
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        aha, starting with Lomonosov ...

                        Can you imagine Lomanosov walking in a crowd? I am not .. a crowd of peasants who have moved to the city, but I can earn money, but the crowd of Lomanosovs is not, although yes, he moved to the city a long time before the collective farms .. And he was interested in culture.
                      18. DrEng527
                        DrEng527 4 February 2021 17: 55
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        a crowd of peasants who moved to the city and I can earn money

                        it was at all times - including under the king - latrine trades ... hi
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        olpu Lomanosovs no, although yes, he moved to the city long before the collective farms

                        probably you think that you wrote something clever? bully
                      19. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 18: 03
                        0
                        Quote: DrEng527
                        probably you think that you wrote something clever?

                        Well, where am I to such a giant of thought like you .. By the way, for what purpose did you write about Lomanosov?
          2. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 14: 53
            0
            You are funny ... you worked for yourself in the village ...

            So all the same, the collective farm is for itself?
            And this is the same I pulled out "Then answer the trivial question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms? Or did this question never occur to you?"
          3. DrEng527
            DrEng527 4 February 2021 15: 55
            -1
            Quote: mat-vey
            So all the same, the collective farm is for itself?

            I repeat for the poor - it’s up to the collective farms ...
            Quote: mat-vey
            why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms

            why did they shoot each other? spiders - orthodox - teachers ...

            Quote: mat-vey
            Or has this question never crossed your mind? "

            don't confuse me with yourself ... bully
          4. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 16: 07
            0
            So it is not necessary to mold one of two posts and blame others for mental instability ...
            Quote: DrEng527
            why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms

            This is your question. Or I vomited again?
            Quote: DrEng527
            do not confuse me with yourself ..

            I've been scared by you for a long time, you have a mania to catch someone ... pulling posts (taking out of context, but attributing it to others).
          5. DrEng527
            DrEng527 4 February 2021 16: 09
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            This is your question. Or I vomited again?

            no, you just couldn't answer it and I had to ... bully
            Quote: mat-vey
            I've been scared by you for a long time

            noticeably ... the main thing is that there is no spontaneous defecation ... hi
          6. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 16: 24
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            no, you just couldn't answer it and I had to ...

            There were just two questions:
            "Then answer the trivial question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms? Or did this question not occur to you?" Yours and not me.
            and one for you:
            And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"?
            So who's got the context from whom ...

            "And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the village - I have worked my way and are free

            You are funny ... in the village you worked for yourself ... "Why are you catching" ivan2022 "from me? Answer yourself.
          7. DrEng527
            DrEng527 4 February 2021 17: 54
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"?

            and before the beginning, did they run en masse? Or are you confusing the consequences of GW?
          8. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 17: 59
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            and before the beginning, did they run en masse?

            And where did I say this? Although maybe you would have fled wherever .. The peasants, although they were ambitious, did not suffer from mass idiocy. Especially in the city there was no one to "cover" before the accelerated industrialization began ..
          9. DrEng527
            DrEng527 4 February 2021 18: 19
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            Where did I say that?

            Quote: mat-vey
            And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"? And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the countryside

            do you have memory problems? wink
          10. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 18: 23
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            Quote: mat-vey
            Where did I say that?

            Quote: mat-vey
            And because of what conditions before the beginning of collectivization "fled"? And yes, if you are aware of the city life is easier than in the countryside

            do you have memory problems? wink

            And where is here about "Then answer the banal question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms?" especially since this is not me and not my question.
            Here is my question: “What conditions did you“ run away ”from before the start of collectivization?” And note in quotes - you’re smart, you know the meaning of quotes ...
          11. DrEng527
            DrEng527 5 February 2021 11: 38
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            "And notice in quotes - you are smart, you know the meaning of quotes ...

            It's funny when the actual inability to express one's thoughts is passed on to the opponent - they say, guess what I want to say ... bully
          12. mat-vey
            mat-vey 5 February 2021 12: 56
            0
            Signs („“ or “”) to highlight direct speech, quotations, titles, as well as words used in a conventional or ironic sense.
            Although if you are confusing posts and people ...
          13. DrEng527
            DrEng527 5 February 2021 14: 07
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            and you confuse people ...

            are there people here? I communicate with nicknames ... bully
            Quote: mat-vey
            as well as words used in a conventional or ironic sense.

            you are just creating a new language ... wink
          14. mat-vey
            mat-vey 5 February 2021 14: 34
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            you are just creating a new language ...

            What school did you go to? Quotation marks in the 4th grade pass.

            "and there are people here? I communicate with nicknames ..." Well, if you don't care who you write nonsense, write to the site administration.
          15. DrEng527
            DrEng527 6 February 2021 13: 40
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            Quotation marks in 4th grade pass.

            alas, you stayed in it ... bully
            Quote: mat-vey
            Well, if you don't care who you write nonsense - write to the site administration.

            do not give advice and you will not be sent ... hi you have some kind of feminine approach to communication - you teach and give advice ... laughing
          16. mat-vey
            mat-vey 6 February 2021 13: 49
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            do not give advice and you will not be sent ...

            A person who does not even know about quotation marks, in principle, cannot offend ...
          17. DrEng527
            DrEng527 6 February 2021 15: 53
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            A person who does not even know about quotation marks, in principle, cannot offend ...

            why should I offend you? bully Or are you like this in life? repeat I just showed that you lied and that's it ... in response, instead of admitting the banal, a stream of knowledge went bully
          18. mat-vey
            mat-vey 7 February 2021 06: 10
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            why should I offend you?

            Well, I don't know, maybe a touchy person is hidden under a nickname.
            Quote: DrEng527
            I just showed that you were lying and that's it ...

            Does your nickname always have such a hard time understanding? Well then, one more time:
            Quote: mat-vey
            And where is here about "Then answer the banal question - why did they create conditions for the peasants to flee to the cities from the collective farms?" especially since this is not me and not my question.
            Here is my question: “What conditions did you“ run away ”from before the start of collectivization?” And note in quotes - you’re smart, you know the meaning of quotes ...

            And yes, since a nickname cannot, then you open the textbook and read what quotes are. Otherwise, it's not even funny ...
          19. DrEng527
            DrEng527 9 February 2021 14: 27
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            Does your nickname always have such a hard time understanding?

            pony runs in a circle, it happens bully
          20. mat-vey
            mat-vey 10 February 2021 10: 14
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            pony runs in a circle, it happens

            So under your nickname is a pony? How many circles do you need to do so that you finally understand that under different nicknames there can be different people? And that they have different questions and you need to answer exactly the questions that come from this nickname?
          21. DrEng527
            DrEng527 10 February 2021 11: 18
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            This is how a pony is hiding under your nickname

            you probably think it's smart request
            Quote: mat-vey
            How many circles do you need to do so that you finally understand that under different nicknames there can be different people?

            you know poorly both the structure of the Network and the psychology of a person, I will not educate - there is no point ...
            Quote: mat-vey
            What about exactly the questions that come from this "nickname"?

            1) Offended is fate ...
            2) This is a FORUM! Personal conversation is on LAN ... hi
          22. mat-vey
            mat-vey 10 February 2021 11: 22
            0
            Quote: DrEng527
            Offended by this fate ...

            you have a difficult fate ..
            Quote: DrEng527
            This is a FORUM! Personal conversation is on LAN ...

            So you also got confused in the branch ..
            Quote: DrEng527
            you probably think it's smart

            And you probably just keep your pearls for the masterpieces of oratory? And how are you with such a talent among gray people?
          23. DrEng527
            DrEng527 10 February 2021 12: 19
            0
            Quote: mat-vey
            And you probably just keep your pearls for the masterpieces of oratory? And how are you with such a talent among gray people?

            I already wrote to you earlier that your complexes and grievances do not interest me - contact the league of sexual minorities, as the classic said ... hi
          24. mat-vey
            mat-vey 10 February 2021 12: 21
            0
            And your complexes scare me ... You should see a doctor ..
  7. mat-vey
    mat-vey 4 February 2021 16: 30
    0
    Quote: DrEng527
    This is your question. Or I vomited again?

    no, you just couldn't answer it and I had to.

    Only he was not for me.
  • ivan2022
    ivan2022 3 February 2021 17: 51
    0
    Quote: mat-vey
    The Bolsheviks, first of all, had to take some food somewhere,


    Wow - made a discovery! And mister mat-vey never needs to take a zhrachka anywhere? Everyone and at all times had to take a zhrachka somewhere. Especially in a country that has survived the intervention and civil war. But only from this it does not follow that all the inhabitants of the USSR were terribly eager to emigrate to the United States or to leave for cities. In the cities, too, it was necessary to take a zhrachka somewhere. She didn't grow on trees there. Have you ever wondered?
    What really happened? And the fact that millions worked in the countryside, and millions went to work in factories and construction sites. And the demand for these millions of workers in the city was created precisely by the Bolsheviks, who understood that one "zhrachka" was not enough. It was necessary to develop the country. Or was it not necessary to develop the country?
    In cities, of course, documents were required for registration, registration. And what - mister mat-vey thinks that it was necessary to take to work anywhere anyone is not known from anywhere? Or does he not understand that there can be no other way but to obtain such certificates from the local authorities? What does he want? Did he figure it out himself? And where is it differently - without documents?
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 4 February 2021 07: 45
      -1
      Quote: ivan2022
      Quote: mat-vey
      The Bolsheviks, first of all, had to take some food somewhere,


      Wow - made a discovery! And mister mat-vey never needs to take a zhrachka anywhere? Everyone and at all times had to take a zhrachka somewhere. Especially in a country that has survived the intervention and civil war. But only from this it does not follow that all the inhabitants of the USSR were terribly eager to emigrate to the United States or to leave for cities. In the cities, too, it was necessary to take a zhrachka somewhere. She didn't grow on trees there. Have you ever wondered?
      What really happened? And the fact that millions worked in the countryside, and millions went to work in factories and construction sites. And the demand for these millions of workers in the city was created precisely by the Bolsheviks, who understood that one "zhrachka" was not enough. It was necessary to develop the country. Or was it not necessary to develop the country?
      In cities, of course, documents were required for registration, registration. And what - mister mat-vey thinks that it was necessary to take to work anywhere anyone is not known from anywhere? Or does he not understand that there can be no other way but to obtain such certificates from the local authorities? What does he want? Did he figure it out himself? And where is it differently - without documents?

      Have you watched the movie "Seryozha"? There is an episode about you with a candy.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. pmkemcity
      pmkemcity 2 February 2021 07: 24
      0
      Quote: mat-vey
      As I understand it, there will be no clear answer to this cognitive dissonance ...

      Sorry, something jumped below. But I don't think my answer will bring you out of the state of mental discomfort.
      1. mat-vey
        mat-vey 2 February 2021 07: 32
        +2
        I am more worried about your mental comfort - you attribute sadistic and anti-human inclinations to people who made justice and equality the goal of life.
        1. pmkemcity
          pmkemcity 2 February 2021 09: 32
          -4
          Quote: mat-vey
          you attribute sadistic and antihuman inclinations to people who made just justice and equality the goal of life.

          “You will be righteous, Lord, if I plead with You; and yet I will speak with You about justice: why is the way of the wicked prosperous, and all the treacherous prosper? " - asks the prophet Jeremiah.
          On the Day of Atonement - Yom Kippur - each prayer repeats the words of the author of The Pure Prayer, Abraham Danzig: “And now, my Lord, I did not heed Your voice and walked in the ways to which a bad impulse led me, and in the ways of my heart, disdaining choosing evil ... The agonizing shame does not allow me, Lord, to raise my face to You, Because with the help of those parts of the body and feelings that You have endowed me with, and the vitality that You constantly pour into them, I did evil before By thee and transgressed thy will. Woe to me, woe to my soul! "
          The Spanish philosopher and theologian Abraham ibn Ezra interpreted Jewish history through the image of the destroyed Temple: "Because of our sins, the Holy of Holies was destroyed, and the Temple was burned for our iniquities."
          1. mat-vey
            mat-vey 2 February 2021 09: 34
            +2
            Will you have anything in essence? Or did you decide to score the entire site with biblical quotes?
            1. pmkemcity
              pmkemcity 2 February 2021 09: 35
              -6
              Quote: mat-vey
              Will you have anything in essence? Or did you decide to score the entire site with biblical quotes?

              Are you Jewish? It's very strange to hear questions instead of answers.
              1. mat-vey
                mat-vey 2 February 2021 09: 38
                +3
                Quote: pmkemcity
                Are you Jewish? It's very strange to hear questions instead of answers.

                Have you decided to switch to nationalities and biblical quotes?
                Questions because there are no answers from you.
                1. pmkemcity
                  pmkemcity 2 February 2021 09: 45
                  -6
                  Quote: mat-vey
                  You have decided to switch to nationalities

                  What are you ashamed of? Nationality or your own sin?
                  It is written in the Talmud (treatise Berachot 12b): "Everyone who, having committed a sin, burns with shame, receives the forgiveness of Heaven."
                  1. mat-vey
                    mat-vey 2 February 2021 09: 49
                    0
                    Quote: pmkemcity
                    What are you ashamed of?

                    You have some other nationalist problems with additives ... Why am I ashamed? I was a crest here and now a Jew ...
                    So can you share how you can drive away without letting go? Or is it still not necessary to ascribe to people that which was not there? There were already enough problems ...
                    1. pmkemcity
                      pmkemcity 2 February 2021 09: 54
                      -3
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      So can you share how you can drive without letting go?

                      There is an objective reality - the population of cities has grown three times during Stalin's time - from 17 million to 58 million. All the rest is innuendo. Let's comment on this. If someone was not allowed in, then the valuable shot was on the agricultural "front".
                    2. mat-vey
                      mat-vey 2 February 2021 10: 00
                      -1
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      There is an objective reality - the population of cities grew three times during Stalin's time

                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      Everything else is innuendo.

                      Well, stop your innuendo and reality will remain reality - peasants moved to cities even before collectivization began. .. which was just one of the reasons for collectivization ...
                    3. pmkemcity
                      pmkemcity 2 February 2021 10: 02
                      -1
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      peasants moved to cities even before collectivization began. ..

                      What did I give you the schedule for? From the 14th to the 22nd, a fall, then an irrepressible rise until the war itself.
                    4. mat-vey
                      mat-vey 2 February 2021 10: 16
                      -2
                      If you apply your logic further, then only Yeltsin stopped the "drive" ... Only the question is still the same - if they were "driven", then why did they not let go so easily? Maybe everything is simpler - there was no "drive"? People left for cities? especially young people ..
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      then irrepressible growth until the war itself.

                      And after the war the same thing, moreover, so "unstoppable" that the rural population with the urban only by 1961 became equal. And this despite the fact that after the war, to restore industry, people needed no less than industrialization ...
                    5. pmkemcity
                      pmkemcity 2 February 2021 10: 37
                      -1
                      Quote: mat-vey
                      Only the question is still the same - if they were "driven away", then why did they not let them go so easily? Maybe everything is simpler - there was not any "drive"? People left for the cities themselves?

                      Why are these wrong "questions" containing wrong "answers"? You are trying to substitute your subjective opinion for objective reality.
                      Perhaps you are a Gnostic, not a Jew! Has acquired some special knowledge and lives in accordance with it.
                    6. mat-vey
                      mat-vey 2 February 2021 10: 48
                      -5
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      Why are these wrong "questions" containing wrong "answers"?

                      You continue to increase your anxiety about your mental health ... You have traced signs of some kind of "special knowledge" - in real life it was that it was not so easy to leave the collective farm, and you, proceeding from some "special knowledge", assure you that there was a ouster ... The outflow of the rural population is a phenomenon of any industrial state, but what does it have to do with some kind of “ouster” by the Bolsheviks?
    2. BMP-2
      BMP-2 2 February 2021 10: 25
      +3
      Are you Jewish? It's very strange to hear questions instead of answers.
      - Either this is not a question, or I get scared for you! lol
    3. Daniil Konovalenko
      Daniil Konovalenko 2 February 2021 12: 42
      +5
      [b
      ]Are you Jewish?
      [/ b] "And the prophet Samuel is asked the same questions:" Why is there no animal oil on sale? "or" Are you a Jew? "(c) smile
      1. pmkemcity
        pmkemcity 2 February 2021 18: 19
        -1
        Quote: Daniil Konovalenko
        "Why is there no animal oil on sale?"

        There is a prohibition that (a unique case!) Is mentioned three times in the Torah. This is the prohibition: "Do not boil a kid in its mother's milk" ("Shemot", 23:19, "Shemot", 34:26, "Dvarim", 14:21). The commanding form of the phrase indicates that this is a commandment. Tradition specifies that repeating a phrase three times implies three prohibitions:
        - you cannot cook meat and milk together;
        - you cannot eat meat and milk together;
        - you can not use meat and milk mixture in any way.
        Both meat and milk, and even more so animal oil, are expensive and useless today, say thank you to Samuel.
  • DrEng527
    DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 10
    -1
    Quote: pmkemcity
    Commodity agriculture did not exist.

    Why, fists led him! hi Bukharin also proposed an economic way - to support the strong, and the IVS, on the contrary, is a purely commanding way - to rob the wealthy once again and secure the peasants in the collective farms request
    1. pmkemcity
      pmkemcity 3 February 2021 18: 43
      +1
      Quote: DrEng527
      Why, fists led him! Bukharin also proposed an economic way - to support the strong, and the IVS, on the contrary, is a purely commanding way - to rob the wealthy once again and secure the peasants in the collective farms

      The existence of a class of kulaks, that is, small owners, contradicted the fundamental laws of socialism (the socialization of the means of production), as well as state-monopoly capitalism, the quintessence of which was the National Socialism of Germany. The collective farm is just a degeneration of the peasant community on a new round of evolution. Where there was a community, the transition to a collective farm was quick and painless. And where the Stolypin farms had managed to gain a foothold, problems arose. In Siberia and the Urals, for example, little was evicted, since the severity of the climate did not allow farming, the peasants lived in villages and willingly created collective farms, and it happened that several pieces in one village, consolidation began after Stalin.
      Regarding repressions, I will tell you an example from my personal life. In the village from which my mother's parents, Dolganka of the Altai Territory, lived immigrants from Russia, as they said, whole streets - Tanbovskaya, Smolenskaya, Kurskaya ... Stalypinsky times, and 80 km away from the village of my father's parents Lukovka, Cheldons lived there, then there are first settlers. So, in the obscene village they passed each other through the house - some for a year, some for half a year, but did not hear about long terms, "for reforging." Only one was imprisoned in his father's village, and that for the fact that he blurted out at the meeting when they debunked the personality cult of a certain Eikhe - yes, they say, there are no Russians there, all sorts of Eikhe-Peikhe! The proletarian had to work, in the sense of plowing for the state, destroying class enemies who did not want to plow for the state, but worked only for themselves.
      1. DrEng527
        DrEng527 4 February 2021 11: 46
        -1
        Quote: pmkemcity
        contradicted the fundamental laws of socialism (

        you checkered or go? bully if not a secret - did Marxism recognize the primacy of economics?
        Quote: pmkemcity
        state-monopoly capitalism,

        by no means - kulaks are already average owners, not small ones ... wink They have their own way out - cooperation, see Europe.
        Quote: pmkemcity
        The collective farm is just a degeneration of the peasant community on a new round of evolution.

        enchanting nonsense ... bully the collective farm in the USSR is a form of enslaving the peasants - a new corvee! And they fed from the garden ...
        Quote: pmkemcity
        In Siberia and the Urals, for example, little was evicted, t

        nonsense, see Altai Territory or Novosibirsk Region ... they were evicted to Narym, Siberia is big ...

        Quote: pmkemcity
        Dolganka Altai Territory,

        my grandfather / grandmother s. Beregovoe, Pankrushikhinsky district, great-grandfather moved in the middle of the 19th century.
        Quote: pmkemcity
        they annihilated class enemies who did not want to plow for the state, but worked only for themselves.

        that is why there was either malnutrition or famine in the USSR, before the mass purchase of grain in the USA ... request
        1. pmkemcity
          pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 52
          0
          Quote: DrEng527
          with. Beregovoe, Pankrushikhinsky district

          I was passing through. So what? Was your grandfather / grandmother evicted?
          1. DrEng527
            DrEng527 4 February 2021 12: 18
            0
            Quote: pmkemcity
            Was your grandfather / grandmother evicted?

            the whole family of the great-grandfather and his relatives, brothers / sisters in Narym ... a village council was made in the house of the great-grandfather, it was there in the 90s, now I don't know ...
            1. pmkemcity
              pmkemcity 4 February 2021 12: 52
              0
              There was a strong partisan movement in the Pankrushikha region. Can you remember the struggle for Soviet power?
  • VS
    VS 2 February 2021 07: 03
    +3
    "" Stalin saw the struggle for power not as an end in itself, but as a mechanism for realizing the building of socialism in one country. This was the basis of Stalin's entire political philosophy and the foundation on which the system of his state views was formed, as well as his transition to the position of a statesman. Marxist dogmas about the world proletarian revolution gave way to the national idea of ​​strengthening and developing the Soviet state in conditions of rivalry with other countries. He saw the power itself as an instrument for the implementation of certain political goals that he set for himself. ""

    Here is what Stalin himself precisely said about the essence of the "fifth column", about the goals of those who were called Pravotrotskyists, in his letter to the creators of the film "The Great Citizen" - in Stalin's letter to the head of the main department of cinematography of the USSR B.Z. Shumyatsky on January 27, 1937 regarding the script of the film "Great Citizen":
    “The center and the highest point of the scenario should be the struggle of two programs, two directives: one program - for the victory of socialism in the USSR, for the elimination of all remnants of capitalism, for the independence and territorial integrity of the USSR, for anti-fascism and rapprochement with non-fascist states against fascist states, against wars, for the politics of peace; another program - for the restoration of capitalism in the USSR and the curtailment of socialist gains, against the independence of the USSR and for the state dismemberment of the USSR to please the fascist states, for rapprochement with the most powerful fascist states against the interests of the working class and to the detriment of the interests of non-fascist states, for the aggravation of the military danger and against politics of peace.
    The matter must be arranged so that the struggle between the Trotskyists and the Soviet government did not look like a struggle between two coteries (groups of persons - K.O.) for power, one of which was "lucky" in this struggle, and the other was "unlucky", which would be gross distortion of reality, but as a struggle between two programs, of which the first program corresponds to the interests of the revolution and is supported by the people, and the second is contrary to the interests of the revolution and is rejected by the people.
    But it follows from this that the script will have to be redone, making it more modern in its content, reflecting all the main things that were revealed by the Pyatakov-Radek process.
    With com. greetings I. Stalin. January 27, 1937 " (RGASPI F.71. Op.10. D.127. L.188-189. Published in the magazine "Soviet screen" No. 14, 1989. Also - IV Stalin. Complete works. Volume 18, p. 44. M. 2013)
    Those. in the "37th year" there was a struggle not for power as such, between the right-wing Trotskyists and the Stalinists, but a struggle between two groups in the Communist Party for what will be in Russia - socialism and Soviet Power, or - capitalism and the subsequent dismemberment of Russia into a bunch of independent republics with external control of the West! After all, Stalin and his group of like-minded people were originally Bolsheviks, from the first days of the creation of the Bolshevik party, the RSDLP (b) by Lenin. But Trotsky and his fellow tribesmen joined the Bolshevik Party, the CPSU (b) only in the summer of 1917! And they have always been just opponents of real socialism in Russia!
    As we know, in the 1980s, the Trotskyists won in the USSR, as well as the "Bulkokhrusty Februaryists" who joined them and outright Vlasovites, lovers of lace panties, and now we live in what Stalin and his supporters fought against. And no matter how much those sitting in the Kremlin today puffed up, RFiya is that a raw material colony, a gas station of the West, England and the United States, which control most of the RFia's economy. And naturally in the ranks of the opposition to Stalin there were the highest party members-Bukharins, and the highest Chekists-berries, and the highest military in the Red Army, the Tukhachevites! ...
    1. tasha
      tasha 2 February 2021 07: 38
      -2
      the struggle of two groups in the Communist Party for what will be in Russia - socialism and Soviet Power, or - capitalism and the subsequent dismemberment of Russia into a bunch of independent republics with external control of the West!
      No, you're wrong. That Stalin, that Trotsky, that Bukharin and others - all were building a socialist state.
      1. mat-vey
        mat-vey 2 February 2021 07: 45
        +1
        Quote: tasha
        No, you're wrong. That Stalin, that Trotsky, that Bukharin and others - all were building a socialist state.

        Only the right and the left do not what follows from objective reality ...
        1. pmkemcity
          pmkemcity 3 February 2021 18: 53
          +1
          Quote: mat-vey
          Only the right and the left do not what follows from objective reality ...

          Only objective reality can follow from objective reality, it does not even follow, it simply exists, regardless of you, of the subject. The affairs of the subject reflect only his (one) subjective reality.
          1. mat-vey
            mat-vey 4 February 2021 07: 47
            0
            Quote: pmkemcity
            Only objective reality can follow from objective reality,

            Well, in spite of the objective reality, you can walk down the street in shorts in 50 degrees below zero. A normal person will put on a fur coat.
            1. pmkemcity
              pmkemcity 4 February 2021 09: 40
              +1
              50 degree frost is an objective reality, but my feelings will create MY subjective reality, just like a "normal person" will have his own world outlook.
              1. mat-vey
                mat-vey 4 February 2021 10: 57
                -1
                Quote: pmkemcity
                50 degree frost is an objective reality, but my feelings will create MY subjective reality, just like a "normal person" will have his own world outlook.

                Quote: pmkemcity
                , it simply exists, independent of you, of the subject. The affairs of the subject reflect only his (one) subjective reality.

                You can even grab a bare live wire - that you won't get anything, you seem to convince yourself without difficulty.
                1. pmkemcity
                  pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 05
                  0
                  Quote: mat-vey
                  You can even grab a bare live wire - that you won't get anything, you seem to convince yourself without difficulty.

                  In the 90s I had one electrician who, after spitting on his fingers, poked around in the shield up to 380 V. A-a-a! He said - here is 220! My Tseshka said that it was 380. Who should I believe?
                  1. mat-vey
                    mat-vey 4 February 2021 11: 08
                    -2
                    Quote: pmkemcity
                    Whom to believe?

                    Check your language ...
                    1. pmkemcity
                      pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 22
                      +1
                      I have already mentioned my Tseshka - I'm used to using my knowledge in understanding the world. If your tongue has already withered, then do not embarrass the younger generation, let them lick not the wires, but the swing, since the weather allows it.
                      1. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 11: 30
                        -1
                        You yourself understand what you are writing? That's just about a different assessment of objective reality based on different methods and knowledge, and describe. Just why do you understand this .. how many pretentious mentor fog caught up.
                        Especially for you, in your examples - Stalin measured a little and had a more objective picture, while Trotsky relied on language ..
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        If your tongue has already withered, then do not embarrass the younger generation, let them lick not the wires, but the swing, since the weather allows it.

                        What did you write this for? The pressure torments, the head hurts - you break down on others?
                      2. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 47
                        +1
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        do you break down on others?

                        Do not speak! Surrounded by the cut off ...
                      3. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 11: 49
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        do you break down on others?

                        Do not speak! Surrounded by the cut off ...

                        Have you tried it on with a test or on the tongue?
                      4. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 12: 00
                        0
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Have you tried it on with a test or on the tongue?

                        Don't erase your fingers, lisp!
                      5. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 4 February 2021 12: 03
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        Don't erase your fingers, lisp!

                        And after that, are you talking about the search for objective reality? It was not for nothing that you immediately mentioned the doctors.
  • DrEng527
    DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 15
    -2
    Quote: V.S.
    for anti-fascism and rapprochement with non-fascist states against fascist states,

    if not a secret - who signed the Treaty of Border and Friendship with Hitler? request So the IVS lied ... hi
    1. VS
      VS 4 February 2021 07: 44
      0
      And over it was not to conclude a border treaty with Germany after Hitler smashed Poland in a couple of weeks and could go UNDER MINSK? And it was necessary to write in the Agreement - a Non-Friendship Agreement?))
      1. DrEng527
        DrEng527 4 February 2021 11: 48
        0
        Quote: V.S.
        And above it was not to conclude with Germany

        the IVS shouldn't have spanked nonsense from the stands bully
        Quote: V.S.
        Non-Friendship Treaty?

        no, it's just - the Treaty on the Border ... No one pulled the IVS by the tongue, you just don't want to see the obvious ... bully
  • pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 2 February 2021 07: 10
    -3
    Quote: mat-vey
    Yes? And here, for some reason, you can often hear that, on the contrary, they did not give passports no matter where they ran away ...

    “A sower went out to sow, and when he was scattering seeds, some fell by the side of the road and were trampled into the ground and ate by birds. Other seeds landed on rocky soil where there was not enough soil, and soon germinated, because the layer of earth there was shallow. But when the sun rose, it scorched the sprouts, since they did not have roots to nourish them with moisture. Other seeds fell among the thorns, and when the thorns grew, they drowned out the sprouts so that they did not produce grain. The remaining seeds fell on fertile soil. They sprouted and began to bear fruit and brought a harvest, yielding thirty, sixty and a hundred times more seeds than were sown. " And, having told this parable, he said to the people: "He who has ears, let him hear".
    Don't make yourself an idiot!
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 2 February 2021 07: 30
      +5
      Quote: pmkemcity
      Don't make yourself an idiot!

      Well, as long as you have signs of cognitive dissonance ... If the task was to "drive away", then what were the problems with legalization? Maybe you shouldn't slander people? Just raise "agricultural production by means of its mechanization and collectivization."
      1. pmkemcity
        pmkemcity 2 February 2021 09: 25
        +1
        Quote: mat-vey
        If the task was to "drive", then what were the problems with legalization?

        I give you arguments, and you give me emotions. If you ask for a lecture, I'm not ready, just like that in a hurry. If this is a "dispute", then try to argue not in the "one grandma said" style.
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 2 February 2021 09: 32
          0
          Quote: pmkemcity
          I give you arguments, and you give me emotions.

          And where are the "arguments"? The fact that it was impossible to leave the collective farm without a certificate? What an interesting way to "drive away" is not to let go.
          1. pmkemcity
            pmkemcity 2 February 2021 10: 48
            +1
            Quote: mat-vey
            The fact that it was impossible to leave the collective farm without a certificate?

            Everything is learned in comparison - who are you now "without reference"? Where can you go? What, the registration was canceled? Previously, you could just throw the keys to the apartment in the trade union committee and leave wherever they looked, and get a new one in six months in a new place. And now you fucking sell an apartment so that you can buy it in another place without losing the quality of life (perhaps in Israel or Moscow). In any office, from individual entrepreneurs to Gazprom, not like on a collective farm, they will give you such a footcloth-runner - you still have to stay for life!
            1. mat-vey
              mat-vey 2 February 2021 10: 53
              -2
              Quote: pmkemcity
              Everything is learned in comparison - who are you now "without reference"? Where can you go? What, the registration was canceled? Previously, you could just throw the keys to the apartment in the trade union committee and leave wherever they looked, and get a new one in six months in a new place. And now you fucking sell an apartment so that you can buy it in another place without losing the quality of life (perhaps in Israel or Moscow). In any office, from individual entrepreneurs to Gazprom, not like on a collective farm, they will give you such a footcloth-runner - you still have to stay for life!

              For what purpose did you write all this? To say that socialism is more humane than capitalism?
              1. pmkemcity
                pmkemcity 2 February 2021 11: 50
                +4
                Quote: mat-vey
                is socialism more human than capitalism?

                The followers of Marxism (Marx himself did not use this term) call the first phase of communism socialism, which begins after the transitional stage from capitalism to communism: the transitional stage begins with the seizure of political power and ends with the destruction of private ownership of the basic means of production. Some comrades even at one time asserted, in which I endlessly support them, that socialism and state-monopoly capitalism are one and the same (from an economic point of view).
                1. mat-vey
                  mat-vey 2 February 2021 12: 14
                  -5
                  Have you decided to flood?
                2. Malyuta
                  Malyuta 2 February 2021 13: 14
                  +21
                  Quote: pmkemcity
                  Some comrades even at one time asserted, in which I endlessly support them, that socialism and state-monopoly capitalism are one and the same (from an economic point of view).

                  A very controversial statement of the adherents of Mr. Zyu, who is now the main opportunist.
                  1. Fat
                    Fat 2 February 2021 18: 10
                    +2
                    Knowingly not correctly "date" this thesis? This is from the Andropov platform. We discussed at seminars at the Institute (IMI) in 1983. Zu, opportunists are nonsense. In view of Suslov, ideologists had a "gray" period.
                  2. pmkemcity
                    pmkemcity 2 February 2021 18: 11
                    +1
                    Quote: Malyuta
                    Mr Zyu

                    I don't know such a classic. The above statement is based on the most important characteristic of state-monopoly capitalism - the merging of monopoly with the state. This term was first used by Lenin in his work "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism" (1916). The name itself has so much meaning that it is difficult to comment. Merging of monopoly with the state - why not socialize the means of production? Common property (for example, a joint-stock company) and private profit (for example, a party functionary.) It was not by chance that I gave you an example from opposite political formations, for to paraphrase Hegel, in contrast, unity.
                    1. Fat
                      Fat 2 February 2021 21: 37
                      0
                      Paul hi Well, for whom did you write this? Words and thoughts are reasonable, you can not hide behind the classics. One vegetable, most of the words ... Like the "Old Man" spell to summon a "goldfish" ... The old woman will not lose her "broken trough" ... laughing drinks
                      1. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 3 February 2021 04: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Thick
                        Pavel Well, for whom did you write this? Words and thoughts are reasonable, you can not hide behind the classics. One vegetable, most of the words ... Like the "Old Man" spell to summon a "goldfish" ... The old woman will not lose her "broken trough" ...

                        Everything for your beloved! Is there anyone behind the screen in these liquid crystals that "change the plane of polarization of the light passing through them in proportion to the voltage applied to them"?
                    2. sniperino
                      sniperino 4 February 2021 08: 45
                      0
                      Quote: pmkemcity
                      paraphrasing Hegel - as opposed to unity
                      This is not a paraphrase, but an amputation: the unity of socialization without a competitive struggle loses its development potential.
                      1. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 09: 52
                        0
                        Quote: sniperino
                        the unity of socialization without competition loses its development potential.

                        Give up your Keynesianism! Here it definitely went bankrupt long ago. The development potential is in China in the 90s and in the USSR in the 30s.
                      2. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 11: 10
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        Give up your Keynesianism!
                        I am against Hegel's mutilation, but I never mentioned market competition. We had some cases. For example, after the war in Spain, competition was created between our design bureaus to improve the quality of fighters: the Gurevich (Mikoyan) group was separated from the Polikarpov design bureau; created the Lavochkin Design Bureau. Such competition was clearly not enough for the Soviet economy as a whole for its development. And basically, socialist competition is crap, not competition.
                      3. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 19
                        0
                        Quote: sniperino
                        And basically, socialist competition is crap, not competition.

                        Grandma, certificates of honor, cookies at the end. All these are nishtyaks for which a person is ready to compete with another person.
                      4. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 11: 25
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        nishtyaks for which a person is ready to compete with another person
                        The point is that without this our aircraft industry would not have reached the forefront of the world.
                      5. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 41
                        0
                        So all the same - socialist competition is shit, or competition?
                      6. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 11: 47
                        -1
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        So all the same - socialist competition is shit, or competition?
                        Shit is when the economy is deprived of the driving forces for development, and then the people are accused of selling for jeans and sausage.
                      7. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 11: 53
                        0
                        Quote: sniperino
                        Shit is when the economy is out of the driving force

                        What do you think are the "driving forces of development"?
                      8. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 12: 05
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        What do you think are the "driving forces of development"?
                        See Hegel. The very thing that you cut out from him (the struggle of opposites) + that which the "communists" (opportunists) buried, having preserved Marxism-Leninism - the denial of negation. Without them, there is no transition from quantity to quality: no matter how much water you pour, it will remain with water, it will not turn into wine.
                      9. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 12: 27
                        0
                        Quote: sniperino
                        See Hegel. The very thing that you cut out from him (the struggle of opposites) + that which the "communists" (opportunists) buried, conserving Marxism-Leninism - denial of negation

                        They wanted a new religion and got it, with their dogmas, saints, martyrs and the Inquisition.
                        For example, methanol according to SanPiN can be in tap water up to 3 mg / l, I don't remember from ethyl alcohol. So, if you drink a lot, you can get drunk without wine.
                      10. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 12: 39
                        0
                        Quote: pmkemcity
                        if you drink a lot, you can get drunk without wine.
                        On such experiments, where there are 1000 molecules of hell for 500 water molecules, I would not dare. In Moscow, they say, tap water is cleaner, let them try, but you will have to drink a lot laughing
                      11. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 12: 55
                        0
                        Quote: sniperino
                        I wouldn't dare.

                        Yes ... It's good that SanPiN drunks don't read!
                      12. sniperino
                        sniperino 4 February 2021 13: 11
                        0
                        I, too, in a hurry overdid it - I didn't finish 3 zeros, it turned out not water, but hell, diluted with water 1: 2.
                      13. pmkemcity
                        pmkemcity 4 February 2021 13: 22
                        +1
                        Quote: sniperino
                        damn what, diluted with water 1: 2

                        The classic recipe.
  • tasha
    tasha 2 February 2021 07: 52
    +1
    Stalin saw the struggle for power not as an end in itself, but as a mechanism for realizing the building of socialism in one country. ..
    He regarded Soviet Russia as a top priority; it should not serve the cause of the world proletariat, but, on the contrary, revolutionary upheavals should be placed at the service of building socialism in one country.

    A controversial issue. It all depends on the interpretation:
    ... for our country is the base of the international revolution, for our country is the main lever for the development of the international revolutionary movement ...

    Who knows what Comrade Stalin meant by "the main lever" and "base of the international revolution"? I would like to believe that, according to J.V. Stalin, the USSR should have become a model for other countries, and not a source ...
    1. place
      place 2 February 2021 15: 21
      +3
      The interpretation is determined by the facts. And the fact is that from 1923 to 1941, Stalin did not hold any positions in the Government. And in the ruling party there was a statutory principle of "democratic centralism" - the positions of leaders were elective and accountable to meetings and congresses.
      Normal people call all this the word "democracy"
      But what if the mores of society are not entirely normal? Then, under any democratic legislation, whatever you like, both the Secretary General and the President will be Monarchs, Tsars.
      In "the land of slaves, the land of lords" no high leader except the King can be. We even have a locksmith - a plumber sometimes behaves like a king and somewhere even a god.
      1. pmkemcity
        pmkemcity 3 February 2021 18: 57
        0
        Quote: ort
        We even have a locksmith - a plumber

        HEGEMON!
  • Olgovich
    Olgovich 2 February 2021 09: 18
    -3
    Since his activities at the head of the Soviet state contributed to a breakthrough to a superpower, while accompanied by colossal sacrifices.


    Did the Bolsheviks promise in 1917 ... colossal victims? belay request

    No, they promised the exact opposite: more food, clothing, housing, peace, wealth. And they gave, yes ... colossal casualties, hunger, rags, barracks, wars.

    Suffice it to recall the recognition registered by the Soviet statistics itself that, through huge sacrifices, the level of 1913 in the consumption of food, clothing, and the provision of housing, the new government was only able to catch up - in forty years!

    Has anyone ever given someone permission to do this? No, nobody, never and nobody.

    The Pravda newspaper turned out to be inedible in taste and did not replace bread, and cast iron - you cannot put on your feet or live in it.

    And the terrible demographic catastrophe that began in the 1930s, generally ended with the extinction of the Russian people by 1992.

    The state exists for people, and not people - for the existence of the state ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 2 February 2021 10: 21
      +1
      Quote: Olgovich
      The state exists for people, and not people for the existence of the state ...

      Can you name such a state? laughing
      Maybe the problem is in the very structure of society according to the principle of states?

      The state personifies power. Power is formed as a result of the struggle of different groups among themselves. Most of the winners in this struggle think least of people. For them, people are a tool to achieve their victory. "Promise them whatever you want. We'll hang them later." Exception: Grozny, Stalin, Putin.

      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 2 February 2021 10: 28
        -2
        Quote: Boris55
        Can you name such a state?

        The state personifies power.

        Find out what a "state" is and what are the reasons for its occurrence.

        Hint: there were HUMANS first.
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 2 February 2021 10: 34
          +2
          Quote: Olgovich
          Hint: there were HUMANS first.

          "In the beginning was the word" laughing

          As I understand it, you cannot name such a state that would meet the people's aspirations, but there was such a state in which the interests of the majority were above the interests of the minority and it was called the USSR, during the second half of Stalin's rule.

          According to Karl Marx's definition, the state is an apparatus of minority violence over the majority.
          The state is also a system for the survival of the people, the preservation of its language, culture and other values.

          Power personifies the state. Once the power is shaken (collapse of the USSR, color revolutions) and the state perishes. Attempts to "bulk up" the power (to overthrow Putin) and, if successful, will lead to the collapse of Russia. This cannot be allowed!
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 2 February 2021 12: 43
            0
            Quote: Boris55
            As I understand it, you cannot name a state that would meet the people's aspirations.


            The state is a special organization of political power that has a special management mechanism society to ensure its normal operation..

            This is a tool for ensuring the existence of a community of PEOPLE, forcedly arising from the need to streamline their relationships and manage society.

            People cannot exist outside the state and they need it.
            Quote: Boris55
            , in which the interests of the majority were above the interests of the minority and it was called the USSR, during the second half of Stalin's rule.

            Is that you about permanent HUNGER of the 40s, early 1950s, with starvation mortality and cannibalism of St. 46-47 (while grain was sent to Romania, Hungary, France), with endless lines for bread, with no meat, milk, etc.

            This is for people, yes: Head of the Commission for Checking the Food Situation, Skcretar of the Central Committee of the CPSU A.B. Aristov, 1952
            “I was in Ryazan. - What's there? Interruptions? - No, I say, Comrade. Stalin, no interruptions, but for a long time there is no bread there, no butter, no sausage. He stood in line with Larionov at 6-7 in the morning, checked. No bread anywhere
            ?
            Quote: Boris55
            As soon as the power is shaken (collapse of the USSR, color revolutions) and the state dies. Attempts to "bulk up" the power (to overthrow Putin) and, if successful, will lead to the collapse of Russia. This cannot be allowed!

            I completely agree here
          2. Astra wild2
            Astra wild2 2 February 2021 14: 38
            +3
            Boris, from the point of view of the psychology of the layman. Vladimir Vladimirovich BORED EVERYONE and people think that if Vladimir Vladimirovich does not become and universal grace will come. Navalny is attracted by the fact that he talks about painful issues. Think, who is Navalny, what is his program? Nobody is in a hurry.
            A similar situation was in Ukraine: the people are TIRED of Poroshenko. And then the actor Zelensky jumped out from somewhere. He gained popularity for his role in some mediocre serial where he played the role of a fighter against the concept and people believed him. And now people see that they made a mistake and are again ready to vote at least for a chair, but against Zelensky!
            R.
            S
            Now, they are especially emotional, they will slap me with minuses, like you, but I will tell you. Navalny is even worse than Vladimir Vladimirovich, he does not hide the fact that he is working on the instructions of America. Putin has some positive moments, somewhere around 00,9, but Navalny doesn't even have that.
            The other day, somewhere flashed about a new aircraft carrier for Russia. And everyone cried together that there is no and will not be a supercarrier, and if Navalny comes, what do you think they will build a new one? Figo. And the old will not be!
            1. Fat
              Fat 2 February 2021 17: 00
              0
              hi Vera, you are a fine fellow. I support. Capaciously said good
              1. Astra wild2
                Astra wild2 3 February 2021 10: 33
                +3
                I did not expect that there are many Navalny's supporters on the site.
            2. Kushka
              Kushka 2 February 2021 19: 47
              -2
              Well, where is the minus then?
              A plus.
              1. Fat
                Fat 2 February 2021 21: 15
                +1
                Thanks. Not scary, at least "15" minuses and more. This is not cash. And "the implementation of the right." And "Astra" is right. 100 %
                1. Kushka
                  Kushka 2 February 2021 22: 03
                  +2
                  So I say, right. I could have put
                  "fat" plus. They slapped me two minuses
                  Well, I’m not my mother’s joy, and I’m not
                  Daddy was still a tomboy. therefore
                  no offense.
                  ("but it doesn't hurt me, the chicken is happy" -
                  in my childhood a ragamuffin was such
                  proverb and here it came in handy)
            3. Olgovich
              Olgovich 2 February 2021 20: 27
              +1
              Quote: Astra wild2
              Boris, from the point of view of the psychology of the layman. Vladimir Vladimirovich ALL Tired

              Quote: Astra wild2
              Boris, from the point of view of the psychology of the layman. Vladimir Vladimirovich BORED ALL

              And you, dear Astra, has someone authorized to speak on behalf of ALL?
              No?

              And why are you then?

              The President is elected by all the people, recognized by all, and recently his trust was again confirmed at the Referendum on the Constitution, whether someone likes it or not.
              1. Fat
                Fat 2 February 2021 22: 23
                +1
                Andrew! hi Do you always speak from "yourself"? Did your great-grandfather escort the First March to the Semyonovsky parade ground? Astra expressed the opinion of many people, those around her. On behalf of his "egregor" he says "ALL". I don't see much bad in this, but a lot. Your point of view meets understanding even from my side, a tough opponent. So what? Will you give up polemics with convinced Bolsheviks? The president? so even Stalin and the FDR took and left at a turning point. What will be the legacy, Who will raise the flag?
                This is a concern.
              2. Astra wild2
                Astra wild2 3 February 2021 12: 12
                +2
                Olgovich, no offense. You are a monarchist, which means you only recognize: the Rurikovichs and the Romanovs, and Vladimir Vladimirovich's surname is Putin ...
                Have you read carefully: "from the point of view of the layman,"? I didn’t say that from my point of view. Who I think I am is my little secret
            4. DrEng527
              DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 18
              +1
              Quote: Astra wild2
              people think that if Vladimir Vladimirovich does not become and universal grace will come.

              so I think not people, but ohlos ... request
            5. hjvtp1966
              hjvtp1966 3 February 2021 21: 24
              0
              Are we all aircraft carriers? No other worries?
          3. pmkemcity
            pmkemcity 3 February 2021 19: 09
            +2
            Quote: Boris55
            According to Karl Marx's definition, the state is an apparatus of minority violence over the majority.

            "The state is an apparatus of violence in the hands of the ruling class" V.I. Lenin.
      2. DrEng527
        DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 17
        0
        Quote: Boris55
        Most of the winners in this struggle care the least about people.

        that is why under Nicholas the Bloody the population of Ingushetia increased by almost 1,5 times? request
    3. chenia
      chenia 2 February 2021 10: 36
      0
      Quote: Olgovich
      And the terrible demographic catastrophe that began in the 1930s, generally ended with the extinction of the Russian people by 1992.


      The extinction began after 1991. Swift. This is what capitalism is for Russia. And on the example of Ukraine, in general, horror (for 30 years, the loss of a third of the population).
      1. Olgovich
        Olgovich 2 February 2021 12: 48
        -4
        Quote: chenia
        The extinction began after 1991. Swift. This is what capitalism is for Russia. And on the example of Ukraine, in general, horror (for 30 years, the loss of a third of the population).

        A catastrophe since the 1930s.

        Since 1964 - depopulation

        Already in 1990, a THIRD of the population of Russia lived in conditions of absolute decline - extinction

        By 1992 - the extinction of all the people - after what happened in 1917-1991
        1. Malyuta
          Malyuta 2 February 2021 13: 08
          +24
          Quote: Olgovich
          Already in 1990, a THIRD of the population of Russia lived in conditions of absolute decline - extinction

          I am very sorry, but I would like to see proofs of the extinction of the population in Soviet times, or to cast a shadow over the fence, is this your credo?
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich 2 February 2021 13: 16
            -3
            Quote: Malyuta

            I am very sorry, but I would like to see proofs of the extinction of the population in Soviet times, or to cast a shadow over the fence, is this your credo?

            1. Read Stalin 1930,34,35 and the population census 37 and 39 g

            2. Read the Soviet demographer Perevedentsev, read http://www.demoscope.ru/weekly/2010/0417/tema02.php:
            not a single generation of Russiansborn after 1910 and entering an active reproductive age, starting from the era of the "great turning point", the late 1920s - early 1930s, did not reproduce itself.
            , read L. Denisova, Beznin, etc.
            Quote: Malyuta
            to cast a shadow over the wattle fence is this your credo?

            These are well-known FACTS, which only the ignorant do not know.
            1. Malyuta
              Malyuta 2 February 2021 13: 28
              +26
              Quote: Olgovich
              These are well-known FACTS, which only the ignorant do not know.

              The reported population of the USSR in 1926 was 147 million. The majority were rural residents (120,7 million). About 18% of citizens, or 26,3 million people, lived in cities. Illiteracy was more than 56% among people aged 9-49 years.
              1926 - 147 million people.
              1939 - 170,6 million
              1959 - 208,8 million
              1970 - 241,7 million
              1979 - 262,4 million
              1989 - 286,7 million -
              That is, the increase for 63 proud was 140 million people !!!
              So you're in a mess, colleague.
              1. Olgovich
                Olgovich 2 February 2021 13: 56
                -3
                Quote: Malyuta
                So you're in a mess, colleague.

                I am sincerely sorry for you: you do not know anything and do not even want to know, alas.
                Didn't even bother to read the presented.

                If someone has a child with his wife, then this is an increase of 50%.
                But they are DIE OUT.
                It's hard to understand, right?
                Quote: Malyuta
                1979 - 262,4 million
                1989 - 286,7 million -
                That is, the increase for 63 proud was 140 million people !!!

                Yes, yes: and in 1992 (laid down by 1991), there was already an absolute MINUS increase.

                And before that, already in 1990 g A THIRD of the population of Russia lived in conditions of absolute decline - extinction.

                And at the same time, the population of Russia was rapidly AGING, that is. able to give birth, everything is less, and the elderly, rapid growth.

                Old people don't give birth, find out ...
                1. Malyuta
                  Malyuta 2 February 2021 14: 07
                  +22
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  I am sincerely sorry for you: you do not know anything and do not even want to know, alas.
                  Didn't even bother to read the presented.

                  If someone has a child with his wife, then this is an increase of 50%.
                  But they are DIE OUT.
                  It's hard to understand, right?

                  Let us, colleague, do without unnecessary sentiments about pity.
                  But in fact, can you dispute the figures I have cited about the population growth in the USSR for 63 years by 140 million people, or will you continue to engage in demagoguery and verbal equilibrium?
                  1. Olgovich
                    Olgovich 2 February 2021 14: 48
                    -4
                    Quote: Malyuta
                    But in fact, you can dispute the figures I have given about the population growth in the USSR for 63 years by 140 million people, or you will continue to study demagoguery and verbal equilibrium?

                    You are doing this ignorantly:

                    if in 1987 the absolute population decline was observed only in the Pskov, Kalinin and Tula regions, then by 1990, a THIRD of the population of Russia, living in 21 territories, belonged to this category. These are all areas of the North-West, Central and Central Chernozem regions (except for the Bryansk and Belgorod regions) and the Gorky region. (with)

                    And by 1992, the Russian cross



                    I repeat: the foundation was laid in the 1930s, since 1964 - DEPOPULATION: in 1964 total fertility rate ceased to provide simple substitution of generations for the entire population of Russia, net- the reproduction rate dropped below one.
                    1. pmkemcity
                      pmkemcity 3 February 2021 19: 18
                      +2
                      Quote: Olgovich
                      Russian cross

                      This is the start of the "pump". Draw the same "HER" for Moscow?
                    2. Malyuta
                      Malyuta 7 February 2021 02: 43
                      +8
                      Quote: Olgovich
                      You are doing this ignorantly:

                      You were awarded the 2nd belt in the voting for the best commentator "only because of your unbridled stubbornness, which I would equate to the" galosh commentator of the year. "
                      They speak to you in the eye with statistical indisputable indications that that the population growth for 63 years amounted to 140 million. people !!!
                      Why are you wagging astern?
                      1. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 7 February 2021 06: 11
                        +1
                        Quote: Malyuta
                        Why are you wagging astern?

                        This is a standard situation - do not pay ..
                2. chenia
                  chenia 2 February 2021 14: 34
                  +4
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  then this is an increase of 50%.


                  In the family, Yes.
                  And the growth in the country, as it is considered differently. (number of births - child deaths throughout the year) + (growth due to the increase in average life expectancy) - (natural decline). The last two terms are interrelated - you can show only natural loss (I just specially highlighted it).

                  Quote: Olgovich
                  which only the ignorant do not know


                  And since you think, it is not even ignorant. and frank with .... ki.
                  1. Olgovich
                    Olgovich 2 February 2021 15: 03
                    -3
                    Quote: chenia
                    In the family, Yes.
                    And the growth in the country,

                    So that every family (and with them the country) does NOT become extinct, it must have two with a tail child.

                    And they even know it
                    Quote: chenia
                    frank at ki.


                    But someone broke the bottom ...
                    1. chenia
                      chenia 2 February 2021 15: 29
                      +4
                      Quote: Olgovich
                      NOT extinct, she must have two tailed babies.


                      Yes. But not only.
                      -Increased lifespan (but it still has a limitation).
                      -Immigration.
                      In the late USSR, the increase in the Slavic population was low (0,45 -0,5% per year - (0 -9 million people / year)).
                      But he was. But this is a process of urbanization In other European countries, it is even worse.
                      But now there is a terrible extinction (there are no longer any communists).
                      By the way, under Stalin, from 1937 (the year of the beginning of the repressions) until his death, there was a significant increase due to the increase in births (the prohibition of abortion). I think it's smart enough not to associate growth with unnatural losses (war).
                      1. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 2 February 2021 20: 35
                        0
                        Quote: chenia
                        But he was. But this is a process of urbanization In other European countries, it is even worse.

                        This is the process of wild abortion (the first in the world and more than the whole WORLD combined), general alcoholism, tobacco smoking (first place in the world), a catastrophic shortage of housing and yes, and urbanization.

                        And yes: the USSR is the FIRST country in Europe that has come to depopulation (1964).

                        Even France, which was almost dying out already at the beginning of the 20th century, came later ...
                      2. chenia
                        chenia 2 February 2021 21: 00
                        -1
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        And yes: the USSR is the FIRST country in Europe that has come to depopulation (1964).


                        ?????

                        Germany 1939 -70 млн... (excluding Austria and the Sudetenland), in 2020 -83 ml.(and as some say with "minimal losses" in WWII.

                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Even France

                        France -1920- 39 million 1990 57million growth 46%

                        What became the USSR - Let according to RI-1918- 170 million 1990 - 290 million increase70% and this with losses in the Second World War.

                        What's with your arithmetic?
                      3. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 3 February 2021 09: 21
                        +1
                        Quote: chenia
                        What's with your arithmetic?

                        What is your knowledge? Full seams.

                        Learn what DEPOPULATION is, generational replacement, production rate, etc., and then it may come that Since 1964, the total fertility rate has ceased to provide a simple replacement of generations for the entire population of Russia, the net reproduction rate has dropped below one., which was the reason for the Russian Cross.
                      4. chenia
                        chenia 3 February 2021 09: 53
                        0
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        What is your knowledge? Full seams


                        Are you definitely not an alien?

                        Growth 1960 -1970 - growth over 10 years ---33 млн.person (by the way the biggest ever).

                        And by the way. what about France?

                        The degeneration is in full swing now. (thanks to liberals and dertmocrat).
                      5. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 3 February 2021 11: 34
                        +1
                        Quote: chenia
                        Are you definitely not an alien?

                        Growth 1960 -1970 - growth in 10 years - 33 million people (by the way, the largest ever).

                        You are still uporting in your deep IGNORANCE: people stopped giving birth and mechanical growth was due to the born ONE (with a tail) child in a couple.

                        But then this ONE child with another child again gave birth to ONE child, From four grandparents-grandmothers-ONE grandson.
                        This is a HIDDEN extinction.

                        But as long as grandfathers are alive, grandmothers are coming, yes. growth (see your figures), but when they are gone, there is already an ABSOLUTE decrease -Russian cross.

                        Again, didn’t get it? belay
                    2. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 3 February 2021 11: 26
                      0
                      Since 1964, the total fertility rate has ceased to provide a simple replacement of generations for the entire population of Russia, the net reproduction rate dropped below one, which was the reason for the Russian Cross.

                      Here is a comparative table of the net reproduction rate according to the statistics database Knoema.ru for some European countries and the RSFSR in the second half of the 20th century

                      And yes, it will not be difficult for you to explain the "terms" you use, I have never met such terms in demography
                      absolute MINUS gain

                      conditions of absolute decline
                    3. Foul skeptic
                      Foul skeptic 3 February 2021 11: 47
                      0

                      Total fertility rate for the RSFSR / RF. You can analyze it at your leisure.
                3. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 3 February 2021 16: 38
                  0
                  USSR - the FIRST country in Europe, which came to depopulation (1964)

                  La révolution démographique. Études et essais sur les problèmes de la Population (translated by E. Petukhova):
                  According to Kuchinsky, 1000 girls born in France in 1926 should have given birth to 937 daughters. This year, the net replacement rate was 0,89 in Germany, 0,86 in England, and 0,93 on average for Western and Northern Europe. In Austria in 1928 the net reproduction rate was at around 0,782, in Sweden in 1930 - at around 0,858.
                  Although all of these countries still have more births than deaths - due to the age structure shaped by previous demographic trends that explains this anomaly - these countries are already depopulated.

                  Even if you are looking not by the net reproduction rate, but by the general one (those same 2,1 children per woman), you will still be wrong - in 1960 Hungary already had 2,02 children per woman.
                  In general, pointing out to others:
                  Learn what DEPOPULATION is

                  you yourself interpret it distortedly
                4. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 3 February 2021 17: 00
                  +1
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  you yourself interpret it distortedly

                  You don't know him at all:
                  Depopulation is a decrease in the absolute number of a country or territory, or its narrowed reproduction, in which the number of subsequent generations is less than the previous ones "
                  "Demographic Encyclopedic Dictionary" (1985):
                5. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 4 February 2021 16: 51
                  0
                  You don't know him at all:

                  Judging by your argument, you think that "knowing" something is being able to look up words in a dictionary? And only one thing. Then you are a "connoisseur" of many things laughing
                  And for some reason, well, it probably happened by accident, you have a slightly truncated version of the definition from the source you specified.
                6. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 4 February 2021 20: 53
                  0
                  Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                  Judging by your argument, you think that "knowing" something is being able to look up words in a dictionary? And only one thing. Then you are a "connoisseur" of many things
                  And for some reason, well, it probably happened by accident, you have a slightly truncated version of the definition from the source you specified.


                  I'm glad that it dawned on you that I was right in using this word, and you, alas, did not even understand the meaning of it (otherwise you would not have written nonsense)
                7. Foul skeptic
                  Foul skeptic 5 February 2021 10: 31
                  0
                  I'm glad that it dawned on you that I was right in using this word, and you, alas, did not even understand the meaning of it (otherwise you would not have written nonsense)

                  Did I write above that you are right? You perceive information in a very peculiar way. Then I am all the more not surprised that you could not figure out what depopulation is.
    4. pmkemcity
      pmkemcity 3 February 2021 19: 21
      0
      Quote: Olgovich
      So that every family (and with them the country) does NOT become extinct, it must have two children with a tail.

      Fear God! A tailed baby is not normal even in Africa!
  • Fat
    Fat 2 February 2021 17: 07
    0
    I wonder how many Russian people out of the millions you have cited. Can you distinguish from the Soviet people? At least for the analysis of colleagues' problems.
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich 2 February 2021 20: 36
      +1
      Quote: Thick
      I wonder how many Russian people out of the millions you have cited. Can you distinguish from the Soviet people? At least for the analysis of colleagues' problems.

      And the Russians are even worse: the RSFSR was in TWELFTH place out of 15 in terms of population growth
      1. Fat
        Fat 2 February 2021 20: 47
        0
        At the expense of the Caucasus. Not vyatka, God forgive me.
      2. Fat
        Fat 2 February 2021 21: 52
        +1
        Andrey. This is not a question for you, but for your opponents. You know I am familiar. Let them puff, tearing off objections (sorry for the cynicism). I bet 15 against 3 - they will lose. If we take a period of 100 years. from 1920 to 2020. I am very bitter to admit, but you are right ... Yes, I do not argue with your opinion, well, almost always. I don’t put any cons, even if I don’t agree on something. I'll think about it two or three times. With respect hi
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 3 February 2021 12: 20
    +1
    Colleague Malyuta, I agree with you, but let me make a small comment: "this is your credo." Is there a lot of Olgovichi on the site?
  • place
    place 2 February 2021 15: 31
    -1
    Quote: Olgovich
    No, they promised the exact opposite: more food, clothing, housing, peace, wealth. And they gave it, yes ... colossal victims, hunger, rags, barracks, wars

    ---------

    For a serf with the psychology of the 18th century it is very logical. "The master promised, the master did. The master promised, the master did not." But in reality, no ruling party "promises"! It's just that some people have such an interpretation programmed in their heads.

    Ruling party ADOPTS LEGISLATION. And how it will be realized depends on the customs and mores of society. If the savages from the Solomon Islands are asked to comply with the "constitution", the reaction will be just as terrible as among our compatriots. And if you offer them to live as in a gang, "according to concepts", they will understand everything, because this is something close to them and "approving" - there will be no end. Even if their numbers begin to decline rapidly.
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 2 February 2021 16: 40
      0
      Quote: ort
      Ruling party ADOPTS LEGISLATION.

      Is it possible to get acquainted with at least one such law in the USSR?
      1. place
        place 2 February 2021 19: 30
        0
        Quote: mat-vey
        Quote: ort
        Ruling party ADOPTS LEGISLATION.
        Is it possible to get acquainted with at least one such law in the USSR?



        And what Mr. 'mat-vey' thinks that there was no legislation in the USSR?
        Yeah ... yeah ... "in the USSR, bln ... all the women were common, there were no laws and people with dog-headed heads lived there, but they knew how to make rockets ....."
        You can get acquainted, for this you need to type in a search engine; "Soviet legislation".
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 2 February 2021 19: 36
          -2
          Quote: ort
          And what Mr. 'mat-vey' thinks that there was no legislation in the USSR?

          I suppose if you are a pro
          Quote: ort
          Ruling Party ADOPTS LEGISLATION

          Then at least one law from the ruling party you will find ... and not a flood of chatter. And then what law you will not look or where "adopted at the congress of VKPB" no.
      2. Fat
        Fat 2 February 2021 21: 22
        0
        No need to send everyone to the madhouse. Whoever has the majority in the "parliament" (read, in the councils) is the one who rules. So you deny the legislative function of the Soviets? The Constitution of the USSR 1936. Reread. Is it a secret document?
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 3 February 2021 04: 33
          0
          Quote: Thick
          So you deny the legislative function of the Soviets?

          No need to send everyone to the “madhouse.” At that moment, the entire topic from the article under discussion was present in the “ruling party” ..
  • VS
    VS 4 February 2021 07: 47
    -1
    You will also tell us that it was the Bolsheviks who staged a CIVIL war - in order to kill more people ..
  • populist
    populist 2 February 2021 10: 08
    +2
    Good article in many ways.
    Basically, it correctly reflects the events of the 20s in the party and state. But there are unfortunate positions. First of all, the title of the article is incorrect. "Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the critical 20s." The correct title would be "Stalin's Fierce Struggle to Hold the Party Line in the Turning 20s". Stalin in those years fought precisely for the party line, and not for his personal power, which is actually revealed in the article. hi
    1. tasha
      tasha 2 February 2021 10: 42
      +2
      A very correct name.
      The struggle for power was precisely within the party. There was only one direction - but each grouping in the party suggested its own.
      1. populist
        populist 2 February 2021 11: 42
        +1
        That's right!
        And it was the party that, through a broad discussion, developed the program for building socialism, and not Stalin personally. Of course, Stalin was the most important supporter of this plan, the most important participant in the discussion and its main conductor.
        1. tasha
          tasha 2 February 2021 11: 50
          +1
          There was no single program for building socialism in the party. I.V. During a fierce struggle, Stalin and his supporters managed to seize power and become the conductors of the plan, which at that moment they considered correct ..
        2. Fat
          Fat 2 February 2021 21: 27
          0
          "Broad discussion" is on your conscience, almost a "fake". But the idea is clear.
      2. Malyuta
        Malyuta 2 February 2021 13: 06
        +21
        Quote: tasha
        The struggle for power was precisely within the party. There was only one direction - but each grouping in the party suggested its own.

        ABOUT MITIGATION MEASURES
        INTERNAL PARTY FIGHT
        Speech at a meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b)
        11th of October 1926

        "If we discard the little things, then we could go straight to the point.

        What is the dispute about? About the result of that inner-party struggle in which the opposition was defeated. The struggle was started not by us, not by the Central Committee, but by the opposition. The Central Committee several times dissuaded the opposition from discussing, the Central Committee at the April plenum, at the July plenum dissuaded it from a discussion of an all-Union scale, because such a discussion means an aggravation of the struggle, the danger of a split and weakening of the positive work of the party and government bodies for at least two months.

        In a word, the matter is about summing up the struggle started by the opposition and drawing appropriate conclusions.

        There is no doubt that the opposition suffered a severe defeat. It is also clear that indignation in the ranks of the Party against the opposition is growing. Now the question is, can we keep the opposition leaders as members of the Central Committee, or not? This is now the main question. It is difficult to agree that people who support Shlyapnikov and Medvedev were in our Central Committee. It is difficult to agree that people who support the struggle of all kinds of Ruth Fischer and the Urbahns against the Comintern, against our party, remain in the Central Committee.

        Do we want to keep the opposition leaders in the Central Committee? I think we want. But in order to preserve them, they must dissolve their faction, admit their mistakes and dissociate themselves from the impudent opportunists inside and outside our Party. The opposition must agree to these conditions if it wants peace in the party."
      3. place
        place 2 February 2021 15: 46
        -1
        Quote: tasha
        The struggle for power was precisely within the party.

        ----------

        "Struggle for power", which affects tens of millions of fates, but according to the laws adopted by the Bolsheviks themselves, gives the right to food from the district committee cafe or a dacha with a car - this is a class! And at the same time, this is the final diagnosis of our modern society with its leaders who fly on weekends to their villas in Nice and send millions of dollars to offshore,

        And the fact that the struggle was waged in a political party, where there was not even a position of "party chairman", but there was a principle of "democratic centralism"?
        And were all posts elective?

        This "escapes" the consciousness of our compatriots, whose brains are clearly "sharpened" under the concepts of "struggle", "repression", "grouping" .... just like in a gang. Yes, sir, such a relationship is close to our "blessed" society. This is your own, dear, as in a song; "bush bush over the river, native land, forever beloved ..." It does not imagine any other relationship and does not take it seriously.
        1. Keer
          Keer 2 February 2021 22: 33
          +2
          escapes "from the consciousness of our compatriots, whose brains are clearly" sharpened "under the concepts of" struggle "," repression "," grouping ".... just like in a gang.
          First, the parties "fellow travelers" were cut out, which turned out to be shitties, then the "Faithful Leninists" turned out to be shitties (in parallel, real power passed from the Soviets to the CPSU (b) where Stalin became the "decisive"), then after death Stalin himself became the "shit" and then all this parsley was cut out by the faithful sons of the party "Leaders of the Lenin Type", and, subsequently, people from the Komsomol, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the KGB, all of them, showed that communism is guano, while taking away the common fund. What are not bandos? laughing
  • pytar
    pytar 2 February 2021 10: 20
    -5
    The party is a gadyushnik! And this sect ruled half the world and taught people "how to live"! belay
    1. populist
      populist 2 February 2021 11: 34
      +5
      You are wrong Boyan.
      This party has created the most advanced, the most popular and the fairest state in the world. This party turned the development of mankind in a better and fairer direction.
      Unfortunately, many of the party's dignities were lost at the end of the road and the "iron law of bureaucracy" worked.
      1. pytar
        pytar 2 February 2021 12: 23
        -3
        This criminal party, under the noble slogans, created a semi-feudal totalitarian society with an ineffective economy. A higher caste emerged, and podcasts serving it, and ideology trumpeted equality! On behalf of the proletariat, people ruled who were not elected by anyone! Constant inner grumbling accompanied the whole existence of this sect! It could not be otherwise, the law of the jungle was acting! Each new leader with nails and teeth who reached power, declared the former enemies and traitors. Depravity, wretchedness of this insincere system was rooted in its foundation! You cannot create a just society guided by an anti-spiritual, materialistic ideology! Ideology of the Antichrist, dressed in a beautiful shell! In fact, Bolshevism is a kind of religious sect disguised as atheism! hi
        1. populist
          populist 2 February 2021 12: 51
          +2
          Quote: pytar
          You cannot create a just society guided by an anti-spiritual, materialistic ideology!

          The Soviet people had the highest spirituality!
          What god do you believe in Witzli-Puzli or in Juggernaut?
          This is one of my first questions when I am forced to talk with itinerant preachers on the streets of St. Petersburg.
          For sim I take my leave. We must go for a walk while it is light and the weather is acceptable. hi
          1. pytar
            pytar 2 February 2021 13: 21
            -3
            The Soviet people had the highest spirituality!

            Lead with a decent "divine", "infallible" leader? To a society preaching materialism? When did you find time about spirituality? Meditating waiting in endless queues for basic things? Or when they rotted in the camps? Probably there, because it was not only a test of survival, but also a spiritual one! In any case, there were always bright people! They were better seen in the darkness of the bolshevist obscurantism!
            What god do you believe in Witzli-Puzli or in Juggernaut?

            The one who placed your Soul in the womb, and you were born with a Human! Without a Soul, you are just a biological machine.
            The ego is called differently, they come up with religions, they build temples, and some fanatics do not good things ... He does not need this ... because he is always there! And always, if you want to show you the way, so as not to get confused. It depends only on you which path you will take! He gave you Soul, Reason and Freedom of choice! That's all you need!
            This is one of my first questions when I am forced to talk with itinerant preachers on the streets of St. Petersburg.

            I've never talked to such people. Generally not religious, religion is not interested! Born with Vera, I will die with her! Good will save the world, not violence! You cannot do good by doing evil! hi
        2. Astra wild2
          Astra wild2 2 February 2021 13: 46
          +3
          "a totalitarian society with an ineffective economy" colleague Putard, you probably know this expression "everything is learned in comparison"?
          Now let's compare: bread -8 kopecks "black" and 30 rubles. water-3 cop. and 39 rubles, and now think: what is more profitable for a woman for me?
          1. pytar
            pytar 2 February 2021 16: 13
            -3
            everything is known in comparison ... what is more profitable for a woman for me?

            By limiting the comparison of the situation to yourself personally, it is more beneficial for you then. Your needs then and now are minimal, you don't need much. We go to demonstrations with red banners, slogans, formally raise our hands "choosing" the only one on the list, do not bother to discuss. Leader, the party will decide everything for us! Time seems to have stopped! This is only possible in an isolated environment. Degradation inevitably sets in in it. In the natural, there is constant competition, everything moves, evolves, changes! For the system to develop, it needs internal and external competition. Delete even one of them and ... you will lose ... So you lost. Everything is natural! hi
            1. kalibr
              kalibr 3 February 2021 12: 30
              +2
              Quote: pytar
              This is only possible in an isolated environment. Degradation inevitably sets in in it. In the natural, there is constant competition, everything moves, evolves, changes! For the system to develop, it needs internal and external competition. Delete even one of them and ... you will lose ... So you lost. Everything is natural!

              How well you said!
            2. Astra wild2
              Astra wild2 3 February 2021 12: 45
              0
              I was talking about myself. Most of them think of themselves first. This is the merit of your beloved capitalism
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 3 February 2021 13: 54
                0
                Quote: Astra wild2
                This is the merit of your beloved capitalism

                You wrote that women are pragmatic? Then where is "favorite capitalism". Favorite, unloved he is !!! But there is no beloved-no-beloved socialism ... And one must live by what is, and not by what is not!
                1. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 3 February 2021 15: 09
                  +1
                  Vyacheslav Olegovich, you know that we are unpredictable. Perhaps because women, in the majority, are multifaceted, humanity still exists
              2. pytar
                pytar 3 February 2021 16: 36
                0
                Most of them think of themselves first.

                Do you want to force the majority to live as the minority orders? How do we figure out which minority is "correct"? The one that will overheat everyone else? Or will the king / leader / patrgenoise decide for us? laughing
                This is the merit of your beloved capitalism

                I don't know what you mean by capitalism. This is an economic system, there are many of them. And the social system is different. Possible different combinations of both. My ideal is democracy (electivity and change of government, referendums), free entrepreneurial initiative (competition within reasonable limits) and social guarantees for everyone. But having created an effective, stable foundation, you can already think about what is new. You cannot jump over the stage! Falling hit hard ...hi
                1. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 3 February 2021 17: 54
                  0
                  Perhaps YOU are right in everything, but I remember the "fairy tale" and that's enough for me
                  1. pytar
                    pytar 3 February 2021 21: 46
                    0
                    Perhaps YOU are right in everything, but I remember the "fairy tale" and that's enough for me

                    In the little personal world of a kind person, even a fairy tale is enough to make him warm and comfortable ... yes May it always be like this! love
          2. kalibr
            kalibr 3 February 2021 12: 32
            0
            It is beneficial for you, a woman, to find a job with a lower salary threshold of 30 thousand per month, and the upper one, so that it is unlimited. And ... to work effectively to exceed it, so that there are 40, 50, and 100 ...
            1. Astra wild2
              Astra wild2 3 February 2021 12: 51
              +1
              Vyacheslav Olegovich, you are an intelligent person and you should know: although women love the sublime and romantic, but basically, we are realists. I don't aim at much, do you?
        3. The comment was deleted.
      2. kalibr
        kalibr 2 February 2021 12: 51
        -2
        Quote: populist
        This party has created the most advanced, the most popular and the fairest state in the world. This party turned the development of mankind in a better and fairer direction.

        Yuri! No need to tell jokes. A Take and read the TWO LAST PAGES of the Short Course of the HISTORY of the CPSU (b) ... And remember what happened in the country.
        1. Keer
          Keer 2 February 2021 22: 51
          0
          But the book "On tasty and healthy food" of the Stalinist period was gorgeous, I read it in childhood, although the recipe for Uzbek pilaf turned out to be shitty there. laughing
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 3 February 2021 08: 05
            +1
            Oh, Cyril ... this book ... I have it, of course. But here's what I never cease to be surprised at. I, a boy, watched it as a "book of fairy tales". Neither my grandmother nor my mother practically used it. Although the products described in it were generally. Can you imagine WHAT SCARY INERTIA OF THINKING ?! And this is in our family of educated people. And then ... I tried basil only in 1984 in Rostov-on-Don. He was not in Penza. In 1990, my students did not eat olives in a hodgepodge of the meat team in a restaurant, and when they tried they found them disgusting, leeks ... were absent in Penza until ... 2000, and various "herbs" (described in this book, including asparagus) have only recently appeared. 5 years ago!
            1. Keer
              Keer 3 February 2021 11: 33
              +2
              The products from the store, with the exception, perhaps, of the Live Fish stores, were not suitable to get what the authors of the Book intended. In the markets, yes, there was everything, ordinary people bought potatoes there, and the rest for us was a little expensive. laughing
              1. kalibr
                kalibr 3 February 2021 12: 28
                0
                Well, as I started to work, I never "lived on one salary." And apples, and rabbits, and nutria, and persimmons - everything was from there. As it is now, however. There is bread from a private bakery, and only milk from Magnet. We do not like private milk. Very greasy and smells like a cow.
                1. Astra wild2
                  Astra wild2 3 February 2021 18: 35
                  +1
                  Vyacheslav Olegovich, we rented an apartment in the village and for the first time tried homemade milk there. It was incomparable, and the milk of the neighbors was not so tasty. I now periodically buy homemade - it is different
    2. place
      place 2 February 2021 19: 37
      +1
      Quote: pytar
      The party is a gadyushnik! And this sect ruled half the world and taught people "how to live"!

      -------

      Specifically, how should you live? "He who does not work, he does not eat" - is it a gadyushnik?
      Maybe those who work don't need to eat? Then everything will be in chocolate?
      1. pytar
        pytar 2 February 2021 21: 48
        +1
        Specifically, how should you live?

        Start with yourself. Give by example. Do good. laughing
  • Radikal
    Radikal 2 February 2021 10: 26
    +5
    Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the turning 20s
    Why exactly for power? Rather, for choosing the right path for the country's development. What did she (power) personally give him as a result? An opportunity to build a palace in the Krasnodar Territory, or create an industrial power? Probably it is more correct to pose the question. winked
    1. Malyuta
      Malyuta 2 February 2021 12: 57
      +25
      Quote: Radikal
      Why exactly for power? Rather, for choosing the right path for the country's development. What did she (power) personally give him as a result? An opportunity to build a palace in the Krasnodar Territory, or create an industrial power? Probably it is more correct to pose the question.

      Totally agree with you.
    2. hjvtp1966
      hjvtp1966 3 February 2021 21: 48
      0
      [quote = Radikal] [quote] Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the critical 20s Why for power? Rather, for choosing the right path for the country's development. What did she (power) personally give him as a result? An opportunity to build a palace in the Krasnodar Territory, or create an industrial power? Probably it is more correct to pose the question. winked[/ Quote]
      There is super passion! there is a super passion! It is called - POWER! laughing
  • pmkemcity
    pmkemcity 2 February 2021 10: 39
    0
    Quote: BMP-2
    - Either this is not a question, or I get scared for you!

    Are you offering your protection, or are you “scary in anger”?
  • Red Alert
    Red Alert 2 February 2021 11: 25
    +1
    Quote: Crowe
    Irin, it’s good that it was not Trotsky who took power then, but Stalin. We would have washed ourselves with blood for “instantaneous revolution.” Trotsky, despite Lenin, saw the main world revolutionary force not in the Russian, but in the European proletariat. ...

    Stalin was also in favor of the world revolution.
  • Red Alert
    Red Alert 2 February 2021 11: 27
    +1
    Quote: populist
    Good article in many ways.
    Basically, it correctly reflects the events of the 20s in the party and state. But there are unfortunate positions. First of all, the title of the article is incorrect. "Stalin's fierce struggle for power in the critical 20s." The correct title would be "Stalin's Fierce Struggle to Hold the Party Line in the Turning 20s". Stalin in those years fought precisely for the party line, and not for his personal power, which is actually revealed in the article. hi

    Very superficial article.
  • Petrik66
    Petrik66 2 February 2021 12: 26
    0
    When a systemic person comes to power, not inclined to demagoguery, speaking little, but doing a lot, he immediately evokes antagonism on the part of demagogues who, by the will of fate, ascended during the "perestroika" and revolutions in power. These demagogues are not afraid to shed their blood in the name of an idea, and around them all intilligent bastard of journalists, hacks and poets begins to concentrate, quickly transforming demagoguery into material goods and singing praises of their bosses. Agree with them? What for? they are incorrigible. Now, Putin is being driven out mainly by those who found a great job under Yeltsin and Gorby ... who received material handouts for their verses in honor of the new owners. Apotheosis - look at Telman Ismailov's birthday. How are all our luminaries of literature, progressive directors and singers crawling with their mouths ... But behind them are always very serious uncles with their own interests. Even on this forum, "historians" are immediately visible, replaying the perestroika creations of the "heralds" of democracy.
  • vladcub
    vladcub 2 February 2021 13: 02
    +2
    "The political figure of Stalin still evokes a lot of both positive and negative emotions" here you cannot argue with the author.
    In any case, do not treat Stalin as Stalin, but he has qualities that I respect.
    1) LOYALTY OF THE IDEA. This quality is sorely lacking. Even an ideological enemy deserves at least understanding. Tatiana Salomakha, Maria Spiridonova, Sofia Perovskaya. Charlotte Corday, Katepov, Slashchev, Kornilov. They were enemies, but IDEAL.
    Philippe Aligote, Kirill Vladimirovich SHOEEDERS
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 2 February 2021 13: 33
    +2
    "Why did he deal so cruelly with his fellow party members"? Good day. Colleagues, now I argue from the point of view of psychology.
    Let's say Kamenev and Zinoviev won. I was always interested in the question: are they "Siamese twins", that they are constantly remembered together? If they had won, what do you think, they would have patted Stalin on the head? There could be nothing like this in the conditions of ideological struggle.
    Probably, after Stalin's death, the "Siamese twins" would have immediately grabbed each other.
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 2 February 2021 14: 09
      +1
      Quote: Astra wild2
      I was always interested in the question: are they "Siamese twins", that they are constantly remembered together?

      Two Jews of the same age, simultaneously entered the revolutionary struggle, both managed to get into the confidence of Lenin, both were against the October coup, together opposed Trotskoco, then also together against Stalin, and so on.
      Stalin shot both of them in the future.
  • Keer
    Keer 2 February 2021 14: 40
    -2
    He was a pragmatist and understood perfectly well that without periodic bloodletting and intensive therapy sessions "real socialism" would not last long, and he was with it. That is, his personal and state interests, as he understood them, coincided.
  • dgonni
    dgonni 2 February 2021 15: 20
    +4
    To put it simply, Stalin was a pragmatist and strove to create and strengthen the state at the expense of internal forces and reserves, without the withdrawal of capital abroad!
    Trotsky and his company were populists, while hiding behind the world revolution they took away gold and diamonds to foreign banks. And the revolution itself, as it were, is not engaged, from the word vaabsche!
    And Trotsky went beyond the cordon and not to the execution ditch, for one reason! For VERY much was written on it and values ​​were laid in a foreign country! There was more than one Magnitogorsk and more than one tractor factory. There was a thought to pull the thread back into the union. But after Trotsky began to get personal and write too much about the plans of the Bolsheviks, he had to give him an ice ax, spitting on money!
    Or does someone think that Trotsky lived in Mexico with a personal guard on his hard-earned money from writing?
    1. mat-vey
      mat-vey 2 February 2021 17: 41
      +1
      Quote: dgonni
      Or does someone think that Trotsky lived in Mexico with a personal guard on his hard-earned money from writing?

      Now he raised chickens and rabbits ... And he collected donations from supporters from all over the world ..
      1. dgonni
        dgonni 2 February 2021 18: 03
        0
        TA-dah. Do you know the cost of paying for a professional security guard in modern realities?
        Since then, nothing has changed.
        They would have chipped in for cigarettes and for food. But neither the mansion nor the guard with a fun life.
        Lyova loved luxury and beautiful women. On what he was caught by the way.
        And money? Well Duc pumped a lot from the treasury of the early USSR in favor of the type of proletariat.
        Yasha who Sverdlov won't let you lie!
        1. mat-vey
          mat-vey 2 February 2021 18: 10
          0
          Quote: dgonni
          TA-dah. You know the cost of paying for a professional in modern realities?

          And you tried to find out who was guarding? How and why did you get to Mexico in the course?
          Quote: dgonni
          But neither the mansion nor the guard with a fun life.

          Trotsky had a happy life in recent years? What Trotsky are you talking about? The one whom neither in Europe nor in the states did you want to see? The one who even had to collect new donations on the fence? Right here on the site they said - about Trotsky there are no less myths than about Lenin and Stalin.
          1. dgonni
            dgonni 2 February 2021 18: 54
            +1
            Yes Yes. About him unfortunate. And who guarded him everyone knows akromya those who are strongly party and blinkered.
            And yet Yasha wanted to go to the states. But since the states knew for his desires and the presence of dough. They shot him.
            He was going to build his own state, unlike those who just cut money from Russia and fattened it.
            Therefore, and flew past.
            To understand this, you do not need to dig into the archives. Everything is in the public domain. You just need to open your eyes!
            And yes! Without Stalin, the State of Israel in the Promised Land would not exist. And yet, and yes, the agents working throughout the war in the USSR boarded Vissarionovich!
            If not? Madagascar as suggested by the Angles with the statesmen!
            Open your eyes! Everything is in the public domain!
            1. mat-vey
              mat-vey 2 February 2021 19: 04
              0
              Quote: dgonni
              Yes Yes. About him unfortunate. And who guarded him everyone knows akromya those who are strongly party and blinkered.

              Since they were blinkered and guarded ...
              Quote: dgonni
              He was going to build his own state

              And about permanent revolution, it means like Trotsky ...
              1. dgonni
                dgonni 2 February 2021 19: 34
                0
                Well Duc look at the guards! Families, children, later life. It's in the public domain.
                Permanent is for the goyim! Be under no illusion. He fulfilled his mission. Not as needed, but I gave the money where I needed it!
                1. mat-vey
                  mat-vey 2 February 2021 19: 41
                  0
                  Quote: dgonni
                  Not as needed, but I gave the money where I needed it!

                  So gave it away or flapped at them?
                  Quote: dgonni
                  Do not have illusions.

                  And for what reason is the illusion? What was a curmudgeon? A lot of money and he himself lived in modesty on the verge of poverty, pulling the last from his supporters.
                  1. dgonni
                    dgonni 2 February 2021 20: 02
                    +1
                    Gave! But a correctly written will works wonders!
                    He did not live in poverty and lived normally. Not Nero, of course, but he did not deny himself anything. Both in terms of nutrition and security. I did not miss a single pretty face. On what he was caught and that is why the ice ax was attributed to a person for jealousy!
                    He NEVER lived in poverty! At least from the moment he put his hand into the tsarist and then Soviet bins!
                    Again! Everything is in the public domain!
                    But laziness!
                    1. mat-vey
                      mat-vey 2 February 2021 20: 10
                      0
                      Quote: dgonni
                      he put his hand into the royal and then Soviet bins!

                      Well, this can hardly be doubted ... Only here is the beauty of money and the banking system, that any funds can be deprived ... if the state enters ...
                      Quote: dgonni
                      Again! Everything is in the public domain!

                      There is a lot of things in the public domain ... including "Lenin is a German spy (as well as English as well as American), as well as a collection of Stalin's thoughts that were not expressed to anyone.
                      1. dgonni
                        dgonni 2 February 2021 20: 41
                        +1
                        If I have anything, the trial of the ice ax and the party press of the 30s!
                        P.S. Stalin did not have the leverage to take the money back! And what is the point in Europe and the states to withdraw colossal assets from their banks?
                        Not to let go to the states? No problem. Provide access to accounts for a comfortable life? No problem.
                        To the states? Naw. Sit in Mexico and cut the loot for Israel in the Promised Land.
                      2. mat-vey
                        mat-vey 3 February 2021 04: 20
                        0
                        Quote: dgonni
                        And what is the point in Europe and the states to withdraw colossal assets from their banks?

                        And, of course, to take it for yourself means to lose assets, and not to become richer by this amount - for free.
  • peter1v
    peter1v 2 February 2021 17: 18
    0
    The half-witted author judges Stalin by himself. It never occurs to him that he can do something not only for himself good.
  • Doliva63
    Doliva63 2 February 2021 18: 32
    0
    Once again I am convinced that Stalin chose the only correct path. So we won.
  • Petr Vladimirovich
    Petr Vladimirovich 2 February 2021 19: 18
    +2
    The intensity of the discussion is impressive! This means that there are people who are not indifferent to the fate of the Motherland.
    I am very much poisoned by the Chinese approach to a similar issue.
    Mao did 70% right, 30% wrong. Tiananmen mausoleum in place. Portraits in yuan too. The question is closed!
    Today the first production in the world. The raw material industries are in the hands of the state, the oligarchs do not exist as a class. 1,4 billion live normally ... I know firsthand ...
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 2 February 2021 23: 22
    0
    controversial article with stretching and distortion ... which did not reflect many moments, including the open uprising of the Trotskyists (in fact, after which Trotsky was exiled) ... and much more ...
  • Bashibuzuk1
    Bashibuzuk1 3 February 2021 07: 47
    0
    I read the comments on the article ... Against the background of the article, everyone somehow forgot or did not read the history of the CPSU. In 1917, 7 parties came to power .... Who will name them, how was the power divided? The Bolsheviks, oddly enough, were in a clear minority.
    L, Bronstein (Trotsky) - the "father" of military communism, the Cheka, the Red Terror - when Russian teachers, engineers, doctors, officers, clergymen, nobles, surplus appropriation, export revolution (world), where the Russian people should be "wood", were destroyed.
    Why were the Jews declared by Trotsky the most oppressed people in Ingushetia?
    A simple question - the life of the IVS has been investigated .. And who knows - about the life of L. Bronstein before 1917? What party was he in, why did the revolution take place on 25.10.1917/XNUMX/XNUMX (old style) and not later? Why and how did you get to the top of the RSFSR? The real names of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Tomsky ...
    The IVS implemented the ideas of the RSDLP (B) into reality, created a strong state ... (Accordingly, the apparatus of violence in the form of power). Where did you see something else? Name or write ... Something new will be.
    1. place
      place April 22 2021 18: 14
      0
      Quote: Bashibuzuk1
      IVS embodied the ideas of the RSDLP (B) into reality,


      Uh-huh .. uh-huh ... "good gentleman" descended from the clouds and "embodied"?
      And how did the IVS manage to "embody ideas"? He did not seem to be born heir to the throne. He did not even hold any positions in the Government from 1923 to 1941.


      And in the VKPB there was a statutory principle of "dem- centralism" - all positions are elective and accountable to meetings and congresses ....... Both for the IVS and for Trotsky. Maybe the whole point is that the IVS was supported by rank-and-file members of the party, whom you don't even consider for people? So. bbl ....... "party functionaries".
      You all think in terms of Napoleonic level ........

      But when the years of "increasing prosperity" and prosperity came, and the existence of our blessed society gradually passed to its usual state; "In Russia, who can rob, who cannot steal" - then those who liked to grab more, work less, got into the CPSU. And they chose Yeltsin and Gorby as their leader at their meetings and congresses, not someone like the IVS, but Yeltsin and Gorby ... Maybe that's the whole point?
  • kalibr
    kalibr 3 February 2021 13: 19
    0
    Quote: Astra wild2
    I don't aim at much, do you?

    I'm also within reason, but I'm trying my best!
  • mark021105
    mark021105 3 February 2021 13: 24
    +1
    The disagreements in the position of Stalin and Bukharin consisted in the incompatibility of the approaches to the development of the country's economy and the forms of the class struggle under socialism. Stalin believed that the NEP policy pursued since 1921, in principle, could not lead the country out of backwardness in a hostile environment. He defended the course of pursuing a mobilization economy, allowing for accelerated modernization and ready to quickly switch to a war footing. "
    How it reminds of the present times ...
  • DrEng527
    DrEng527 3 February 2021 18: 04
    0
    "Trotsky suffered a serious political defeat at the congress, and his idea of ​​'labor armies' was rejected."
    unfortunately the author repeats Agitprop or did not read the Manifesto of the Communist Party of K. Marx and F. Engels - "However, in the most advanced countries, the following measures can be applied almost everywhere:
    .....
    8. Equal obligation to work for all, the establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. "So Trotsky was a convinced Marxist, but the VIL fell into opportunism request
  • Gips
    Gips 4 February 2021 03: 42
    0
    Wow! How I visited Yakovlev's archive. It is stuffed with perestroika tales of capitalism restorers.
    In the article I especially liked the fact that there are NO links to archival documents AT ALL, there are NO archival ciphers of the documents themselves.

    Good composition, Mr. Altukhin! Sit down. Five. No need to continue. Get some rest.
  • SID
    SID 11 March 2021 19: 26
    +1
    Read Bushkov's "Stalin - the Red Lord" and "The Ice Throne".