August 1 - Day of Remembrance of Russian soldiers who died in the First World War

133

The First World War lasted from 1914 to 1918. On August 1, our country celebrates a memorable day in honor of those who fell on its fronts.

Almost two thirds of all independent states existing at that time - 38 countries of the world took part in this war. And although the most dramatic events took place on the European continent, the conflict very quickly took on a global character, engulfing a large part of Asia, engaging the African continent. The naval operations of the First World War took place in the waters of all four oceans of the Earth.



And although hostilities began on July 28, 1914, after Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, the Russian Empire entered it four days later, on August 1, when German troops invaded its territory. This date was considered in Russia as a memorable day in honor of the fallen heroes of that war.

Even the approximate death toll in the First World War is unknown, because in our country it grew into two revolutions, and then into an even more bloody fratricidal Civil War. There was no time and no one to count. And it was difficult to understand in which particular war this or that citizen of our country died. So, according to various sources, the death toll in the First World War ranges from half a million to two million people.


Despite all the tragedy and scale of those events, in Soviet times it was undeservedly ignored, shamefully calling it imperialist. This is understandable, because the horror of this war in our country then did not stop in 1918, as in other European countries, but grew into another horror that lasted for at least four more years and almost led to the disintegration of Russia into small parts. But the country was able to bring together about the same forces that had previously participated in its collapse.

It is not surprising that under these conditions the heroes of the First World War were undeservedly forgotten. But they, despite all the complexity and ambiguity of what was happening, honestly performed their duty, defending their homeland from the enemy.


They were remembered relatively recently. On the territory of the former Bratsk cemetery, founded in 1915 in the village of Vsekhsvyatskoye near Moscow, which was subsequently swallowed up by the sprawling capital, a park appeared. In 1994 it was declared a monument stories and culture, subsequently, in 2004, creating a memorial complex of the Heroes of the First World War there. This place now hosts commemorative events. Over time, memorials began to be erected in memory of the events of 1914-1918 in other places in Russia.

And in 2014, a monument to the Heroes of the First World War appeared in Moscow on Poklonnaya Hill, in the opening of which Russian President Vladimir Putin took part.

It is good that they began to remember the fallen soldiers and officers of that distant war, undeservedly forgotten by the country for many decades. But better late than never, because they are also part of our history.

Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War.
133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +26
    1 August 2021 04: 58
    It is a sin not to remember the Russian warriors who heroically fought on the fields of the 1st MV. And the allies more than once rescued at the expense of their lives, but they modestly forgot about this, as well as about the 2nd MV.
    1. +6
      1 August 2021 07: 01
      A day that, unfortunately, we do not often remember ...

      R. Malinovsky. "Russian soldiers"

      ... Finally, the train started, clanking buffers. The train is heavy - forty wagons packed to capacity. It is difficult for a steam locomotive to take it right away, jerks are obtained, and such that you can fly off the shelf. Lanterns were lit in the heating house. Someone, throwing a duffel bag on the shelf, noticed the fugitive.

      - Wow, lads, but here the hare is hiding. Come on, get out, scythe! - and began to pull Vanyusha off the shelf.

      Vanya looked at the soldier with pleading eyes.

      - You, Bilchenko, take it easy, don't frighten the kid, - it was the voice of the platoon commander. And, already turning to Vanyusha, the non-commissioned officer calmly said:

      - Get out, my dear, let's look at you.

      The soldiers surrounded the "hare". From all sides it was heard:

      - Uh, yes, it's a kid, a sucker.

      - And my mother, go and see.

      And again the platoon commander intervened:

      - Sit down, tell me where you are going? - He sat down beside him the embarrassed and somewhat confused Vanyusha.

      - Tell, tell, do not be afraid, we will not eat you, and so - we will lower our trousers and pour a little so that we will not climb into the military echelon, - one of the soldiers promised.

      - Why are you going to beat me? - Vanyusha bristled with a wolf cub. - I'm going to war!

      - To the war, - the platoon commander was surprised. - That's it. So, we will beat the Yerman ... - And he said seriously: - Do you think, son, in the war - it's like licking honey and smearing that gingerbread?

      - No, I don’t think anything like that, I know that it will be hard, but I decided so.

      - So, I decided, and we can override here, - the platoon commander smiled good-naturedly. - Here you tell us why you ran away from home, and we will judge whether you did the right thing or not.

      Vanyusha, without hiding, told everything about himself, about his mother, about Aunt Elena, about his scarlet fever disease and about the fact that the owner had taken another "boy" in his place.

      For a long time, the platoon commander and the soldiers tried and judged what to do with Vanyusha, and the whole platoon decided: let him go, and then it will be seen; to the authorities to report about it at the entrance to the front.

      So Vanyusha was among the machine gunners, who began to call him "son" ...
    2. +13
      1 August 2021 08: 38
      Russia has always had allies only on paper, both then and now.
  2. +31
    1 August 2021 05: 18
    Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War.
    1. Alf
      +6
      1 August 2021 21: 23
      Quote: SERGE ant
      Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War.

      1. 0
        2 August 2021 17: 57
        There is also a good song. "Spring will not come for me." I do not know how to insert the video, unfortunately.
  3. +18
    1 August 2021 06: 22
    Everlasting memory!
  4. +9
    1 August 2021 06: 23
    Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War.

    I join. Memory must be honored. Whatever it is.
    1. +12
      1 August 2021 07: 05
      Quote: aszzz888
      Memory must be honored. Whatever it is.


      And the soldier is not to blame for the fact that the fate of Russia was so ordered by the worthless nobility, the "elite" of that time ...

      The soldier stood and fought until he was betrayed.
      1. +7
        1 August 2021 08: 41
        Peak
        Today, 07: 05
        NEW

        +3
        Quote: aszzz888
        Memory must be honored. Whatever it is.


        And the soldier is not guilty the fact that the fate of Russia was so ordered by the worthless nobility, the "elite" of that time ...

        The soldier stood and fought until he was betrayed.
        At all times, they asked the commanders.
  5. -4
    1 August 2021 07: 17
    Germany DIDN'T INVOLVE FIRST on the territory of Russia. This war was imperialist, which was unleashed by the tsar-rag Nicholas the Bloody for the sake of a vain desire to be called "the king of all Slavs." It is good that he did not manage to escape to England, as he wanted, and he was shot like a dog without trial and investigation, he got what he deserved. By the way, the first to start the offensive was the Russian army on August 17, 1914, 16 (!!!!) days after the start of the war. The Germans planned a strategic defense in the East before the surrender of France, and only then they planned, already having a free rear in the west, to finish off Russia. So if it were not for the offensive itch of Nikolasha and his generals, the Russian army could well sit out in the trenches throughout the war without active hostilities and heavy losses.
    1. +3
      1 August 2021 09: 42
      And so, for thirty years, twisting the hands of history, the propagandists of the backbone power have been creating a person of a new type.
      Already created on the outskirts, from kindergarten age they teach Russians to hate. Westerners teach Russians to hate Russians.
      1. +3
        1 August 2021 09: 59
        Quote: Essex62
        Westerners teach Russians to hate Russians.

        Who created Ukraine?
        1. -2
          1 August 2021 12: 50
          Quote: Dart2027
          Quote: Essex62
          Westerners teach Russians to hate Russians.

          Who created Ukraine?

          The Trotskyists created Ukraine under the leadership and influence of Jewish globalists in the same "PROLETARIAN" International.
          Stalin was against it. He advocated only the cultural autonomy of the Westerners, while Lenin insisted on a republic.
          1. +1
            1 August 2021 13: 40
            Quote: Tatiana
            and Lenin insisted on a republic.

            Was he a Trotskyist?
            I am aware of Stalin.
            1. -2
              1 August 2021 14: 04
              Quote: Dart2027
              Quote: Tatiana
              and Lenin insisted on a republic.
              Was he a Trotskyist?
              I am aware of Stalin.

              Trotsky and Lenin - as they say, of the same field of berries. They were both pro-Western social democrats and advocated the WORLD Socialist Revolution, and Stalin - in a single country.

              The condition for the West (Britain and the United States) to support Russian Social Democracy of all stripes - both during the February and October State Revolution of 1917, and earlier - was precisely the administrative division of the Republic of Ingushetia and Soviet Russia on the basis of the so-called. "titular" nationality.
              И this is a mandatory administrative-territorial division of Russia on a national basis was a prerequisite absolutely in all PROGRAMS of all 10 leading political parties of that time.
              1. -1
                2 August 2021 11: 39
                Stalin was also for the world Socialist Revolution. But not at the cost of the death of the country and the Russian People, as Bronstein suggested. Lenin created the Communist Party, which has nothing to do with Social Democracy, after the victory of the VOSR, of course. At the stage of moving towards the goal, everyone could be allies. And yet Ilyich, like Vissarionich, was very well aware of how the campaign for world, and at least European, socialism would end. But in the future, not a single Bolshevik could be against it. Strength is needed to change the world of slavery, which has existed for several millennia. When the opportunity arose, Stalin partially realized it.
                And stop talking liberal nonsense about the leadership of our Revolution from insolent Saxony. To use, even a sworn enemy, to achieve a goal is quite a strategy and tactics.
                The main thing is the result, the most powerful USSR.
                1. 0
                  2 August 2021 12: 33
                  Quote: Essex62
                  The main thing is the result, the most powerful USSR.

                  The main historical RESULT is that the USSR and the countries of the socialist camp have long been gone! Exactly NO !!! And why?

                  First, it is very strange that Lenin did not see methodological errors from the position of the most perfect dialectical-materialist method in philosophy in the communist theory of Karl Marx. And they lay and lie on the surface in plain sight. For the leader of the Russian proletariat, this is strange to say the least!
                  And you personally, too, still do not see these errors! And because of these mistakes of the classics in building socialism, we lost all the merits of the socialist system with the collapse of the USSR and the bourgeois STATE REVOLUTION in 1991.
                  The main RESULT is that the USSR and the countries of the socialist camp have long been gone!

                  Secondly. I would say more, but it is useless for you to speak.
                  You do not own diamat: you don’t really know it and don’t know how to apply diamat in practice - and therefore you are not in a position to critically evaluate the hypotheses m / l as a guide to action. You just blindly BELIEVE in them with the filing of the communist INNERATORS of Marxism, blindly believing in Marxism-Leninism!
                  At the same time, you forget that the criterion of truth is PRACTICE!
                  If the theory does not work in practice, as it should, then it is necessary to check its hypotheses, for compliance with the philosophical method of constructing its hypotheses proclaimed by the classics, that is, for compliance with the dialectical materialistic method. And on this in the USSR, the top of the CPSU imposed a "taboo" - and you personally lag behind this "taboo", as a believer behind the communist leaders during the procession!

                  And if you check the m / l theory for its scientific consistency, then you will have to use the classics m / n and the Great Okt. sots roar. look with completely different eyes.

                  If you want to return to socialism - first correct the methodological errors in the theory of minerals! Otherwise it will only get worse - we will simply GEOPOLITICALLY lose our country.
                  1. -1
                    2 August 2021 12: 54
                    I don't give a damn about theory, let alone the top of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which has ruined the country.
                    It was only, at a certain stage, the weapon was against the selfish essence. What are the methodological errors, in what? For example, Stalin?
                    I understand what you mean. About that selfish essence of a predator-man. There is only one way to root out the weed. Until he reaches the gene level. We didn't have time last time.
                    1. 0
                      2 August 2021 14: 57
                      Quote: Essex62
                      I don't give a damn about theory, let alone the top of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which has ruined the country.
                      In no case should you spit on this issue!
                      Ideology, formalized into theory, formats and reformats the consciousness of people in the interests of the authors, who created them, and those people whom they represent.
                      Ideology is a philosophical FRAMEWORK for politicians.
                      And POLITICS is a concentrated expression of an individual, a group of people, societies, peoples and nations, professional corporations and religious confessions.
                      Losing and winning a war begins, respectively, with losing and winning in ideology.
                      The loss of the USSR and the countries of the socialist camp in the Cold War is, first of all, the loss of the communist ideology in the form of the m / l theory of bourgeois ideology in the form of Milton Friedman's presentation about the existence in the world of an allegedly absolutely "free" and "clean" market with elements of monetarism (financial pursuit of profits). So figure out why exactly the bourgeois-liberal "market ideology defeated the communist one!"

                      You have been on the VO site for 5 years, but you rarely visit it and, apparently, missed the comments of the participants on this topic. And I'm just tired of repeating myself for the uninitiated in this controversy.
                      Quote: Essex62
                      It was only, at a certain stage, the weapon was against the selfish essence.
                      Firstly, Lenin accused SKOPOM of only all Russians of their "selfish nature" - including the Russian proletariat - as a state forming a people! Russophobia and the Russian question in Russia originates from Lenin and Trotsky.
                      And secondly. And the criteria of this "selfish essence" were determined by ideology in the context of the theory of minerals. And who by nationality created it, in whose national interests was it implemented in practice in Russia on the back of the Russian people? Who exactly implemented and headed it? Since the question is about nationality and the propaganda of Russophobia in our country!
                      What are the methodological errors, in what?
                      I will answer briefly.
                      1. The state is an attribute (inalienable property) of humanity. Therefore, the people must defend their national state, otherwise they will be under external control and then without their own national state, land and livelihood.
                      If you do not want to have your own state, you will live in a foreign state, if you are still taken there and you do not know who else!
                      The MLT contains an anarchic ERROR about the "withering away" of the state under COMMUNISM. In principle, this cannot be! But this m / l ideology just allows the renegades to eliminate on the part of the people vigilance against the degeneration of the ruling communist elite.
                      Stalin, on the contrary, spoke of the sharpening of the class struggle during the building of socialism - the first phase of communism.
                      And Khrushchev, on the contrary, in spite of Stalin, consolidated this erroneous position in the theory after the death of Starin.
                      2. And a lot more.
                      1. 0
                        3 August 2021 00: 46
                        And yet where is Stalin's mistake? It is precisely the exacerbation of the class struggle. And in the late USSR, classes were abolished. The Great Community of the Soviet People is the delirium of reincarnated people. The mistake is not in the methodology. “Cadres decide everything.” And as these cadres see the world, so it is built. There is no need for any heaps and theories. It was this boring nonsense that killed the USSR. The working man had to clearly explain that if he does not strangle the shopkeeper, currency dealer, carrier and attorney with his own hands, then after a while he will cease to be a hegemon, these organisms will sit on his neck and establish the rules of the game, where again he will be nothing and become everything will be very problematic.

                        I do not quite understand what is the basis for your peremptory judgment about Lenin's hatred of the Russian proletariat. Those. it turns out who in the first place carried out the VOSR and established and defended Soviet power, under his leadership, they were despised by him and were transferred to the category of backbones? Yes, liberal nonsense has gone deeply (sorry, social science). Although everything is correct. Having decomposed the Soviet youth and carried out restoration, now it is necessary to powder the brain of a modern teenager.

                        There will be no states under communism. This is such a world that is still incomprehensible and fantastic, which is not worth discussing. And it is pointless to look for an error here, you deduce it almost as a key one.
                        But at the stage of moving towards it, it is necessary to expand the zone of socialism in order to push as far as possible the zone of influence of the bourgeoisie. Opportunities to influence weak minds with beautiful tinsel, vile lies and playing on the most sensitive human egoism.
                        And finally, the communist bourgeois ideology did not win. We won, literally on points (several tanks on the bridge in front of the White House) and the complete inertia of the niggas. Then they will open stalls and cooperatives that have blown up. So how else? They were brought to this in a few years, but there was no core in them. They dissolved it with endless chatter, slogans and theories. If these tanks had not happened, they would have caught Yeltsin on the way to Moscow and lived, all these, under socialism and beyond. Needless to say, the people chose capitalism.
                        And the USSR did not lose the Cold War, it was betrayed and sold.
                        There is no theory or regularity here. The prevailing circumstances, as always in the history of mankind.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. 0
                        3 August 2021 13: 09
                        Quote: Essex62
                        And yet where is Stalin's mistake?
                        That you are constantly moving the arrows from Lenin to Stalin in our conversation? You cannot understand the essence of our dispute in any way.
                        There were two political currents in the party of the CPSU (b): Trotskyism and Stalinism. Both came from MLT.
                        The Trotskyists advocated a world "proletarian" revolution and with the transfer of Russia to an external supranational - i.e. for international "proletarian" - world government.
                        The STALINISTS advocated the possibility of building socialism in a single country - Soviet Russia - and for the national sovereignty of Soviet Russia in the world from the international bourgeois environment. AND it was Stalin's theoretical departure from Lenin's revolutionary RADICALISM и it was not Stalin's METHODOLOGICAL MISTAKE from the standpoint of using diamat!
                        But this is already a significant FORK in the ideology of Karl Marx and Lenin with Stalin in the theory of minerals. Why? Yes because in the theory there are methodological errors from the standpoint of testing its hypotheses for compliance with the dialectical-materialist method.!
                        Scientific methods exist in order to think correctly - adequately to reality; it is correct, as in mathematics, to solve the assigned tasks and identify manipulators of public consciousness and those to whom they serve as their enemies!
                        And for this you need to learn - to study formal logic and the dialectical-materialistic method as a guide to action. And you personally do not even have a desire for it.
                        There will be no states under communism. This is such a still incomprehensible fantastic world that [b] is not worth discussing.
                        But it is the cadres that decide everything! So N.S. Khrushchev came to power - and ruined everything in this regard! We have built a lot of communism, he announced the completion of its construction in 1980 ?!
                        the communist bourgeois ideology did not triumph. We won, literally on points (several tanks on the bridge in front of the White House) and the complete inertia of nihilists. Then to open stalls and cooperatives
                        Firstly. The cooperative movement began under Gorbachev, not the other way around. And secondly, where, in your opinion, did the "pofigists" come from in the country? Ask yourself this question!
                        The USSR did not lose the Cold War, it was betrayed and sold.
                        And what is the betrayal based on? Ideology first.
                        So, first understand the ideology and philosophical methods of its construction!
                      4. +2
                        4 August 2021 11: 10
                        Study for health. I am too many years old and need to think about my daily bread, I have no time to think. And then I am a practitioner, to fight with counter - even now, well, to pore over the works, thank you I don't see the point.
                        But from the standpoint of my, well-established, ideas, I will answer.
                        It is not worth shoving Lenin and Trotsky into one string bag. There are no weighty arguments for this. Lenin did not suggest that in the near future, after the victory of the Bolsheviks, the world revolution should be carried out and transferred under external control. He built a state within the borders of the Republic of Ingushetia, where he could not be held back by force of arms. I don’t know what you read, but I haven’t come across anything like that, where he explicitly declares the liquidation of the RSFSR and the Russians as a nation.
                        And Bronstein was an adventurer and a Bonapartect who used VOSR as a springboard and his ultimate goals are not known. But he was definitely not an idiot and did not even dream of the victory of the world proletariat. But the Russian people were ready to throw the suicidal war into the furnace. For which he was excommunicated and later sacred.
                        Stalin in no way renounced socialism from his neighbors, with the preservation of national (multinational) states. And if it were not for another historical justice, nuclear weapons from the enemy, could completely expand to the whole of Europe.
                        Larkids appeared under the hunchback, but in a planned economy that continues to function, this is the same as artels under a temporary detention center, but it had a demoralizing influence.
                        There should be an ideology, and it was, they just scored on it. A very simple ideology, without any abstruse heaps. Such as the workers, soldiers and sailors, at the beginning of the last century, a bourgeois-bourgeois, "in the belly fat with a bayonet of a world-eater."
                        If the working class rigidly rebuffed the attempts to restore, did not tolerate the facts of personal gain, independently, without waiting for the competent authorities to sway, this would make many people forget about their selfish nature and work for a salary.
                        Yesterday I stumbled upon an old Soviet TV series about ZnatoKov on TV. How helpless the (workers 'and peasants', initially) militia looks. There is operational information, but to prove it - to pinch the usual director of the stadium, who lives very hard not for salary. I had to build a whole oper-combination. They planted. Already in the second episode. And there are tens of thousands of them. Just come, open the floors, as the thief Tsarapov did, only by representatives of the authorities
                        not destiny, of course they did not have time, organs. And political educators, teachers in universities, political officers in the army continued to talk about Marxism-Lenenism. And everyone yawned and thought it would soon be over. And they missed it.
                        The working class must have a clear ideology and it must be ready to gnaw its throat for it. Margin - you can't, pick and robe, was born - start like everyone else in equal conditions.
                        And so everywhere, then on the basis of scientific and technological progress, when these postulates are written down to the gene level, for feeding, then communism.
                      5. 0
                        4 August 2021 16: 44
                        Quote: Essex62
                        It is not worth shoving Lenin and Trotsky into one string bag. There are no weighty arguments for this. Lenin did not suggest that in the near future, after the victory of the Bolsheviks, the world revolution should be carried out and transferred under external control.
                        Unfortunately, you have a knowledge gap here.
                        And Bronstein was an adventurer and a Bonapartect who used VOSR as a springboard and his ultimate goals are not known. But he was definitely not an idiot and did not even dream of the victory of the world proletariat. But the Russian people were ready to throw the suicidal war into the furnace. For which he was excommunicated and later sacred.

                        With your characterization of Trotsky, I absolutely agree with you.
                        political educators, teachers in universities, political officers in the army continued to talk about Marxism-Lenenism. And everyone yawned and thought it would soon be over. And they missed it.
                        Yes, I agree with you that dogmatically, ideological formal parentage was a ubiquitous phenomenon already in the mid-1970s. and so on.
                        However, I was very lucky to be teachers of the history of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union already in the first year of the university.
                        The working class must have a clear ideology and it must be ready to gnaw its throat for it. Margin - you can't, pick and robe, was born - start like everyone else in equal conditions.
                        But it was the ordinary workers who for the most part earned more than the majority of engineers and during the "perestroika", nevertheless, they openly, for the most part, did not care about saying: "" It's okay! We lived under communism for 70 years - now we will also live under capitalism! Working hands are always and everywhere needed! We, workers, will never be lost anywhere! "
                        During the "perestroika", the teaching and teaching staff quickly also became "Sorosyatsk".

                        In general, I understand you.
                      6. +1
                        5 August 2021 10: 40
                        Well, maybe a knowledge gap. Just because of the above about the theory and the works of the classics, I did not want to get into them deeply, in my youth. Yes, and it is not possible, most likely, it was to find such sedition, in the works of the "lacquered" Ilyich, with official deification in the cut going. Many "not docking", even then, seemed incomprehensible to me. But I did not find answers and explanations and scored. The main thing is that the country lives right, youth is characterized by lightness.
                        The salary of the workers, above the engineers and technicians, is the achievement of the VOSR and the dictatorship of the proletariat. How else? The main working man is the hegemon. Only many of these "hegemons", in the absence of a real class struggle, forgetting about Stalin's behests about its intensification under socialism, softened the brain. Not realizing that if a bourgeois comes, he will establish his own rules of the game, very far from the social paradise of the late USSR.
                      7. 0
                        5 August 2021 12: 47
                        And it never seemed to you that a civil engineer, constructor, technologist, etc. - this is the same hard worker in production, living from paycheck to paycheck, barely making ends meet, and without which the improvement of production CANNOT take place in principle? !!!
                        I think it was sabotage on the part of the careerists-partocrats "at the top" of the Khrushchev spill!
                        I know how university graduates, after 3 years of compulsory work as engineers in production, ran away to work as workers, in particular as bus drivers, for piecework construction specialties, simply as workers in a shop at a factory, factory; loaders, etc., just to feed the family.
                        The matter reached the point of absurdity. For example, so that a worthy foreman in the shop, who was already considered an ITR worker, could not be admitted to the CPSU for years only because there was no way to recruit three workers for 1 ITR worker who would have joined the party by random order. The workers did not want them, because of their mercenariness, to join the party (pay dues), or all the workers were already party members.
                        Well, how do you understand this?
                        Well, what was the attitude of such engineers and technicians, who became ordinary workers, to the Soviet regime after all this ?!
                        The cynical contempt of the poorly educated party members from the same workers for the engineers and technicians - this was a fertile ground for all kinds of political cynics during the Gorbachev "perestroika" in the country, and for Yeltsin's coming to power ..
                        The M / L theory "at the top" not only has not been scientifically correct, but it was also defiled, and then completely withdrawn from circulation!
                      8. +1
                        6 August 2021 10: 36
                        It doesn't seem to me, Tatiana, I know. Because he himself escaped from the engineering and technical personnel in the workers. hi But I had no reason to dislike the secular authorities, and why I understood the priorities of the worker. By the way, I was accepted as an engineer as a candidate for the party, but I never joined a worker.
                      9. 0
                        6 August 2021 13: 34
                        The theory says about the dictatorship not so much of the workers as of the PROLETARIANS in general, who create material wealth and the surplus value of the materialized products of their labor.
                        Well, how could the party instructors from the CPSU, under Khrushchev, equate the ITRists with bourgeois ancestral roots during the revolution with ITRists from the same proletarian families after the revolution - especially after the Second World War?
                        This is no longer a dialectical method of cognition as a guide to action. And this is metaphysical dogmatism in the thinking of the administrators of the Soviet country - and this has nothing to do with the theory of socialism and its development.

                        All hypotheses that form social theory are based on specific logical methods of thinking in philosophy. These methods should be:
                        1) to know, to be able to distinguish them among themselves, to identify them in the construction of their social hypotheses by the authors;
                        2) at the same time, it is necessary to identify, based on methodological errors, for whom and whose interests these authors and their hypotheses actually work politically - for which strata of society;
                        3) it is necessary at all times to reveal the scientific inconsistency of these old and supposedly new ones and either scientifically consistently correct them in time as a guide to action, or, because of unreliability, reject them as a guide completely. In this case, the criterion of truth is PRACTICE. And a negative result indicates either the limitations of historical experience, or errors in the theory itself, which must be checked FIRST. Otherwise, we will step on the same rake over and over again.
                        The USSR collapsed, the socialist system was liquidated - check the theory and practice of its application!
                      10. +2
                        3 August 2021 15: 15
                        What are the methodological errors, in what?
                        I will answer briefly.

                        It's better deployed, Tatyana. Because "short" you got it, don't understand that there is a bow on the side.
                        The state is an attribute (inalienable property) of humanity.

                        Is it? For thousands of years, mankind has done without states in the modern sense of the word. Moreover, individual peoples today live outside the state.
                        The MLT contains an anarchic ERROR about the "withering away" of the state under COMMUNISM. In principle, this cannot be!

                        You wrote in the message below about the need to master formal logic. And how are you with her? Because "This cannot be in principle" is a logical error of anticipating the state.
                        Therefore, the people must defend their national state, otherwise they will be under external control and then without their own national state, land and livelihood.
                        If you do not want to have your own state, you will live in a foreign state, if you are still taken there and you do not know who else!

                        In what foreign state will I live in a world where there are no states?
                        2. And a lot more.

                        The same as in point 1?
                      11. 0
                        3 August 2021 15: 59
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        In what foreign state will I live in a world where there are no states?

                        "Where there are no states" is, firstly, just a particular, not a general case!
                        You will live there according to the rules of the religion that is present there and fulfills the role of the "state" ideology and worldview. Otherwise, you will either become an outcast there, or simply be physically eliminated by the local community.
                        The main question of any state is the question of power.
                        А the desire for power in society is motivated by the desire of people to organize themselves, distribute and protect their property.
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        Because "This cannot be in principle" is a logical error of anticipating the state.
                        No. In this case, this is a logical conclusion as a result of checking the m / l theory from the standpoint of the dialectical-materialist method for determinism - i.e. testing the construction of MLT hypotheses for compliance with the principle of determinism (the dialectical principle of cause-and-effect relationships, taking into account not only external connections between objects, but also internal connections due to changes in the internal properties of the objects themselves.
                        In the metaphysical method, objects are assumed to be unchanged in time - that is, they are conventionally idealized and absolutized.
                        For example. Metaphysical identity: the object "a" is always equal to itself in time, i.e. "a" = "a".
                        Dialectical identity: Object "a" internally changes over time and in time is not initially equal to itself. Those. in time "a" ≠ "a". Because motion is an inalienable property of matter, and uniform motion is just a special case of the motion of matter.

                        And in this case, you are arguing from a position, at best, not just from the position of formal logic, on which mathematical logic is built in elementary mathematics, but also do not go beyond the very metaphysical method in philosophy in the field of the principle of cause-and-effect relationships.
                        Formal logic refers to dialectical-materialistic logic, as elementary mathematics to higher mathematics.
                      12. 0
                        3 August 2021 16: 40
                        "Where there are no states" is, firstly

                        It doesn't matter "first", "second" or "tenth". On my part, it was only a demonstration of the "quality" of your reasoning in your specific words - you contradict yourself and do not even understand this.
                        The main question of any state is the question of power.
                        And the desire for power in society is motivated by the desire of people to organize themselves, distribute and protect their property.

                        Do you realize that you've just refuted yourself?
                        No. In this case it is

                        In any case, this is a logical error of anticipating a state. Buzzwords won't change that.
                        a logical conclusion as a result of checking the m / l theory from the standpoint of the dialectical-materialist method for determinism

                        I look forward to hearing from you the train of thought that preceded the "logical conclusion" and led to it.
                        Dialectical identity: Object "a" internally changes over time and in time is not initially equal to itself. Those. in time "a" ≠ "a".

                        I have to repeat myself - do you understand that you contradict yourself that something "cannot exist in principle"?
                        Maybe it's better not to engage in verbiage?

                        Quote: Tatiana
                        And in this case you are arguing from a position, at best, not just from the position of formal logic, on which mathematical logic is built in elementary mathematics

                        Quote: Tatiana
                        Scientific methods exist in order to think correctly - adequately to reality; it is correct, as in mathematics, to solve the assigned tasks and identify manipulators of public consciousness and those to whom they serve as their enemies!
                        And for this you need to learn - to study formal logic and the dialectical-materialistic method as a guide to action.

                        Do you have a hobby of contradicting yourself?
                      13. 0
                        3 August 2021 16: 54
                        This is philosophy for you - "verbiage", because you do not know it and philosophical methods, as it should, have not studied, you do not know how to use them as a guide to action. Those in power can easily manipulate you both on the right and on the left.
                        You are not trained to assess the situation analytically and critically.
                        You think at best in the framework of common sense and nothing more. You cannot go beyond the historically established worldview traditions, just as wolves cannot go beyond the red flags that hunters have hung in front of a wolf pack, which hunters will simply shoot.
                        So you shouldn't have taken offense at me, if that's the case. I'm just not being honest.
                      14. 0
                        3 August 2021 17: 00
                        This is philosophy for you - "verbiage", because you do not know it and philosophical methods, as it should, have not studied, you do not know how to use them as a guide to action. Those in power can easily manipulate you both on the right and on the left.

                        Another example of a logical error from you.
                        For me, not philosophy is verbiage, for me what you write here is verbiage. Agree, this is not what you attributed to me. Just for some reason you decided that what you write ... has to do with philosophy.
                      15. 0
                        3 August 2021 17: 13
                        I have been engaged in philosophy since 1993, I have scientific work. I can recommend them to you if you like. They are in libraries and can be read on the Internet.
                      16. 0
                        3 August 2021 17: 25
                        I have been practicing philosophy since 1993

                        This does not conflict with this in any way.
                        why did you decide that what you write [here in correspondence with me and Alexander]... has to do with philosophy.

                        I can recommend them to you if you like.

                        Completely sincerely want to be recommended
                        You are not trained to assess the situation analytically and critically.

                        It's weird to hear from someone asking for "I look forward to hearing from you line of thought preceding "logical conclusion", who led to him. "and who ignores this request.
                        Well, and that besides this, there is not one or two "pearls" here. But of course, due to my limitations, I don't understand them))))
                        So you shouldn't have taken offense at me, if that's the case.

                        I do not take offense at you, on the contrary, I have to state that you have more reasons to be offended.
                      17. 0
                        3 August 2021 17: 29
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        Completely sincerely want to be recommended
                        I will write to you in a personal. You will be able to personally familiarize yourself with them, how the dialectical-materialist method is applied in practice in political analysis.
      2. -1
        2 August 2021 02: 15
        This is how the Bolsheviks hated people, who shot at the innocent beauty and even finished them off with bayonets.
        Anastasia Romanova ...
        1. -2
          2 August 2021 09: 32
          The Bolsheviks were not even close there.
          And how the landowners hated the Russian peasants, driving them with guns through the fields like hares and shooting, torturing and holding them in a black body.
          An answer flew in for the age-old humiliation, hatred and contempt of the People.
          The heads of their monarchs and nobility in "civilized" Europe were cut off at the same time. They even invented frogs.
          And it's a pity the girls, they fell under the distribution. So millions died then. Human beings are born equal. And it's also a pity for the Bolshevik woman who was stabbed with bayonets by the White Guards ...
    2. +8
      1 August 2021 09: 58
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Germany DIDN'T INVOLVE FIRST on the territory of Russia.

      And who declared war on whom?
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      This war was imperialist, which was unleashed by the tsar-rag Nicholas the Bloody for the sake of a vain desire to be called "the king of all Slavs."

      Seriously? So it was the Russian tsar who ruled over the British, French, Italians, etc.? Well, well, I didn't know, honestly.
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      The Germans planned a strategic defense in the East before the surrender of France, and only then they planned, already having a free rear in the west, to finish off Russia. So if it were not for the offensive itch of Nikolasha and his generals, the Russian army could well have sat out in the trenches throughout the war without active hostilities and heavy losses.

      That is, if the Russian army did not save the French and remained with the Germans one on one, would it be by reducing losses? Truth?
      1. -4
        1 August 2021 10: 52
        Quote: Dart2027
        And who declared war on whom?

        Germany announced, but Nikolasha and his generals were the first to cross the border and launched a strategic offensive in East Prussia and Galicia, and were shamefully beaten and the next year the Germans were standing near Riga. By the way, the Germans on the Eastern Front kept only 16 divisions, while on the Western they kept 96 divisions, since according to the plan of the German General Staff, they had to defeat France first, and only then Russia. But even the tsarist generals could not defeat 16 German divisions.
        Quote: Dart2027
        Seriously? So it was the Russian tsar who ruled over the British, French, Italians, etc.? Well, well, I didn't know, honestly.

        If the tsar for the sake of "brothers" did not begin mobilization and stomp his feet against Germany and Austria-Hungary, and gave firm guarantees of neutrality, then the Germans would have taken Paris in September 1914 and there would have been no World War, especially since Turkey entered in the war in November 1914, that is, Turkey simply would not have time to get involved in a world massacre.
        Quote: Dart2027
        That is, if the Russian army did not save the French and remained with the Germans one on one, would it be by reducing losses? Truth?

        Why should the Russians save the French at the cost of their lives? The French should be rescued by the French themselves, not the Russians, not the British or anyone else.
        1. +3
          1 August 2021 11: 43
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Germany announced, but Nikolasha and his generals were the first to cross the border and began a strategic offensive

          That is, Germany declared war, but Russia had to surrender?
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          By the way, the Germans on the Eastern Front kept only 16 divisions, while on the Western they kept 96 divisions, since according to the plan of the German General Staff, they had to defeat France first, and only then Russia. But even the tsarist generals could not defeat 16 German divisions.

          The fact that they had to transfer forces to the east, which saved France, do we forget?
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          If the tsar for the sake of the "brothers" did not begin mobilization and stomp his feet against Germany and Austria-Hungary, and would give firm guarantees of neutrality, then

          That is, the fact that AB begins mobilization on the border with Russia, and the German Kaiser refuses to resolve issues with the help of peace negotiations (the communists do not read the correspondence of the Russian and German tsars), but Russia must sit and wait for the weather by the sea.
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Why should the Russians save the French at the cost of their lives?

          Quote: Dart2027
          and was left with the Germans face to face, would that be by reducing losses? Truth?

          Can't read?
          1. -6
            1 August 2021 11: 52
            Quote: Dart2027
            o is Germany declared war, but Russia had to surrender?

            It was possible not to launch a strategic offensive and sit in the trenches, watching the French and the British pounding with the Germans, and picking up dividends.
            Quote: Dart2027
            The fact that they had to transfer forces to the east, which saved France, do we forget?

            If Nikolasha had not launched a strategic offensive in East Prussia and Galicia, then there would have been no troop transfer.
            Quote: Dart2027
            That is, the fact that AB begins mobilization on the border with Russia, and the German Kaiser refuses to resolve issues with the help of peace negotiations (the communists do not read the correspondence of the Russian and German tsars), but Russia must sit and wait for the weather by the sea.

            And what a fuck was Nikolasha for the sake of "brothers" of the Serbs to harness, this Balkan scum is not even worth one life of a Russian soldier. Austria-Hungary was Germany's main ally, and it was clear that if you run into Austria-Hungary, then Germany will definitely stick in for it. It is as if modern Russia began to run into Britain, it is clear that the United States will stand up like a mountain for its main ally.
            Quote: Dart2027
            Can't read?

            Well, the Germans would have defeated the French, Russia would have made peace with Germany and Austria-Hungary, would have given them the Vilnius region, these Poles would only have more worries than benefits. Let the Austrians and Germans themselves be engaged in pacifying the violent gentlemen.
            1. +4
              1 August 2021 11: 56
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              It was possible not to start a strategic offensive and sit in the trenches, watching the French and the British pounding with the Germans

              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              If Nikolasha had not launched a strategic offensive in East Prussia and Galicia, then there would have been no troop transfer.

              The fact that the German army would have carried out the French like the last time and the Republic of Ingushetia would have remained alone incomprehensible?
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              But what a fuck it was for Nikolasha to harness himself for the sake of the "brothers" of the Serbs

              This is called politics. There was nothing for Germany to harness for AB, but they also harnessed.
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              Well, the Germans would have defeated the French, Russia would have made peace with Germany and Austria-Hungary

              And who said that everything would be limited only to the Poles? Would the Germans not be interested in the same territories of modern Ukraine and Belarus?
              1. -6
                1 August 2021 12: 05
                Quote: Dart2027
                The fact that the German army would have carried out the French like the last time and the Republic of Ingushetia would have remained alone incomprehensible?

                The Germans would not have endured the French, since they were helped by Britain, the then hegemon, who ruled half the world. Yes, and the French themselves had colonies, the French government would be evacuated to Algeria and from there would lead the struggle against the Germans. And the Germans had little guts to land in North Africa, the combined Franco-British fleet would not have allowed this to be done.
                Quote: Dart2027
                And who said that everything would be limited only to the Poles? Would the Germans not be interested in the same territories of modern Ukraine and Belarus?

                No. After the capture of Paris, Russia had to conclude a peace and give the Vilnius region to the Germans, from which there were only worries and expenses.
                1. +2
                  1 August 2021 13: 43
                  Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                  The Germans would not have endured the French, since they were helped by Britain, the then hegemon, who ruled half the world.

                  Ask in what year Britain announced mobilization.
                  Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                  Yes, and the French themselves had colonies, the French government would be evacuated to Algeria and from there would lead the struggle against the Germans.

                  So what? The Germans would calmly spit on these colonies, as they did 20 years later.
                  Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                  No. After the capture of Paris, Russia had to make peace and give the Vilnius region to the Germans

                  I ask again - who said that Germany and AB would be content with only the Poles?
                  1. -2
                    1 August 2021 23: 15
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    Ask in what year Britain announced mobilization

                    I know that in 1916, before that, only British volunteers fought in France. And there was no need for Britain to announce mobilization before 1916. What for? For the sake of British interests, not the British should die, but the French and the Russians. The Anglo-Saxons are faithful in their tradition of raking in the heat with someone else's hands. If Germany would have split France in September 1914, and Russia would have withdrawn from the war, then the lords and peers would have to announce mobilization in September 1914.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    So what? The Germans would calmly spit on these colonies, as they did 20 years later.

                    In 1940, the French made peace with the Germans. Have you heard about the Vichy government? And de Gaulle until 1943 did not have a real army and strength, the influence of the French "Free France" was even weaker than the Polish government in exile in London, which had Anders' army.
                    Quote: Dart2027
                    I ask again - who said that Germany and AB would be content with only the Poles?

                    It was possible for the Austrians and Germans to give up the Ukraine and the Baltic states. These devils do not mind.
                    1. -1
                      2 August 2021 19: 23
                      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                      I know that in 1916, before that, only British volunteers fought in France. And there was no need for Britain to announce mobilization before 1916. What for

                      That is, Britain did not mobilize in 1914, but would have saved France from defeat. What is it like?
                      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                      Germany would have split France in September 1914, and
                      England would have remained on its island, protected from the Germans by the strait and the fleet, and RI would have remained with the Germans on the same mainland.
                      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                      In 1940, the French made peace with the Germans.

                      Well, they didn't know that it was possible to organize a government in the colonies. The Germans captured the metropolis and the war ended, which I wrote about.
                      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                      It was possible for the Austrians and Germans to give up the Ukraine and the Baltic states. These devils do not mind.

                      Just recently I came across a record of your colleague
                2. +4
                  1 August 2021 18: 45
                  These are the cats that passed everything. Like, give the Vilensk region and you will be happy, and then such Judas gave the Baltics, Kazakhstan, Central Asia, Ukraine, the Caucasus, but already those to whom these cats gave so much came for the rest of Siberia and the Far East.
                  You need to shoot such cats.
    3. +5
      1 August 2021 10: 31
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      This war was imperialist, which was unleashed by the tsar-rag Nicholas the Bloody for the sake of a vain desire to be called "the king of all Slavs."

      I don’t want to draw analogies, but then Brezhnev could be called a rag, who did not oppose the introduction of troops into Afghanistan for the sake of international friendship, and this also led to the collapse of the Soviet Empire, which was even more powerful than the Russian one.
      That is why I do not advise you to spit on the past, if only because Nicholas II acted as his conscience and his idea of ​​the world order of that time told him. I understand perfectly well that he was not suitable as a person to govern such a great country, but Gorbachev looks like a scumbag against his background.
      So stop breaking spears and pouring slop over the past - learn to at least respect those who lived at that time, even if they were mistaken according to modern ideas. At the same time, I have always believed and still believe that the USSR is the pinnacle of civilizational development in the history of our country.
      1. +1
        1 August 2021 11: 48
        pour slop over the past - learn to at least respect those who lived at that time, even if they were mistaken according to modern ideas
        and where did your opponent say all this? He just listed the facts request
        1. -2
          1 August 2021 11: 54
          Quote: Region-25.rus
          He just listed the facts

          He just manipulated the facts to please his views, omitting others, including our ideas of Pan-Slavism, popular in Russian society since the 19th century - this is a well-known trick of falsifiers of history.
          1. +1
            1 August 2021 12: 08
            I do not think that this is HIS worldview. Russia was dragged into this war. And the war was exactly imperialist - for money and territory. Well, what is propaganda - "help to Serbs - Slavs" and so on, it is such propaganda. Only it did not last long. Although the people were illiterate, they saw what they saw. While a lot of things were lacking at the front, in the capitals a certain percentage of the population, for whom "the war is a mother," led a much more than idle way of life, even more ostentatious. At the entrance to the Summer Garden, there were still signs "No entry for lower ranks and dogs", and most importantly, after the recession of the "rise to the hurray-patriotic-Christian" wave, the people cooled down and began to understand something. Namely, that the war is not being waged in their interests. No. This is me, down to earth, in a nutshell. And not even the propaganda of any Socialist-Revolutionaries was breaking up the army. Here, even a peasant who had recently been called to service could have folded twice two. Put yourself in the shoes of a simple soldier who, after a couple of years of war, has lost all motivation to fight.
            1. -6
              1 August 2021 12: 13
              Quote: Region-25.rus
              This is me, down to earth, in a nutshell.

              I went through all this in a Soviet school and a Soviet university, and I am not interested in various propaganda shows at the events of a century ago. You just need to silently, without tearing the vest on the chest, take these events as a period of our history, and not try to mock innocent people with the help of Marxism. My grandmother's elder brother died in that war, and why should I now vilify Nicholas II at any opportunity?
              Maybe it's time to think again, especially since we also lost the USSR mediocrity ...
              1. +3
                1 August 2021 12: 21
                I went through all this in a Soviet school and a Soviet university, and I am not interested in various propaganda shows at the events of a century ago
                and I went through this in the 90s, on my own skin, when the ship owner spits on your life and health, when you are treated like cattle, when you come with an application for the repair of equipment and you - "read the contract." And the whole contract is six lines. In which you only have to and are obliged. When you go to sea in the winter on a rusty trough - the same age as you (steamers don't live that long) and you know that if you drown your relatives won't receive a dime of compensation. And if you kick up, then either they will be punished by cutting off the already meager ruble salary, or they will be deprived of "per diem", or they will simply be thrown ashore (and who needs me there with a naval diploma?) Or, as I observed on other ships of the company, just strong guys came and explained by concepts that - "you shouldn't rock the boat on your beloved master!" It didn't add much motivation. But there was no choice at that time. Or do you think that the attitude towards the private soldier was then much better. And yes, the soldier went and fought anyway. Like us, we went on a flight like the last time, almost every time.
                You just need to silently, without tearing the vest on the chest, take these events as a period of our history, and not try to mock innocent people with the help of Marxism.

                where did I tear my vest and sneer? Do you at least understand the difference between mockery and simply analyzing behavior-motivation-moods of the masses?
                1. -1
                  1 August 2021 16: 06
                  Quote: Region-25.rus
                  and I went through this in the 90s,

                  You were not alone then, but it is good that you remembered that time - this is a good vaccination against those who are now shouting "Down with the power!"
                  Quote: Region-25.rus
                  When you go to sea in winter on a rusty trough - your age (that is how many steamers do not live)

                  You don’t need to tell me this, my older brother was wandering around the seas of the whole world for forty years, and his grandson a couple of years ago he drowned in the Kerch Strait when he went to Turkey on the "river-sea" and their rescuers were filming. I am in the subject of how sailors live, especially since my brother on the last voyage in India himself put a ship on the shore, they cut him on pins and needles.
                  Quote: Region-25.rus
                  Do you at least understand the difference between mockery and simply analyzing behavior-motivation-moods of the masses?

                  What were you living then, were you offended then, or are you a professional historian with a doctoral dissertation on this topic? Yes, give up this business - take it as a fact of our history without any slobbering, and critical assessments of the past. So it will be more honest in relation to our common ancestors, even if there was inequality then, as indeed it is now. And it will be with us as the Cossacks - they still cannot forgive the events of those years and everyone remembers who fought on whose side ...
                  1. +1
                    1 August 2021 16: 57
                    You were not the only one who lived then
                    I was not alone. Yes, only the lessons learned by no means all. Some even call them "saints".
                    this is a good vaccination against those who are now shouting "Down with power!"
                    What is this for? Graft? Well, if you please, who is in power now? Aren't they the ones that derbanit the country? And which laws are now pushing through those written for themselves? Or do you think the whole country is St. Petersburg and Moscow? (I myself have been in St. Petersburg for the last six years, but before that I looked ... I looked)
                    You don’t need to tell me this, my older brother roamed the seas of the whole world for forty years,
                    and I have two good friends, one went through two Chechens, a conscript and a special forces, the other only the second. And on this basis, I am not saying that much in the topic of hostilities.
                    across the seas of the whole world
                    for those who walk around the world, those companies have different standards! Everything is tougher there in terms of security. Do not confuse with petty gangster in packs of 2-4 rusty steamers, from which everything was bought. Including it was bought in Japan itself. But at the beginning of the XNUMXs, even the Japanese stopped letting in.
                    when I went to Turkey on the "river-sea" and their rescuers filmed
                    Well, I myself burned twice, once they drowned, but managed on their own. So what?
                    What did you live then, then offended you
                    I would say what "offended" is. But I won't. And I’m not a defactor who was blown away and she was angry with ALL men laughing
                    Those. do you think someone punished me there and I harbored a grudge for the rest of my life? Well, everyone judges for himself) I don't think so (primitively) about people. And, to paraphrase the character of the famous film - "Virgins are offended! And I ... draw conclusions. Harsh conclusions" wink And I make CONCLUSIONS, usually after a few years, collecting statistics, both my own and from other sources (the more the better)
                    Yes, give up this business - take it as a fact of our history without any slobbering, and critical assessments of the past
                    I would accept but "I am a man tormented by narzan! The soul does not accept such conditions!" (c) "12 chairs". And I do not accept it because they are constantly trying to cheat on one thing (see the post above about "mockery") and justify the other. Show black as white and vice versa.
                    or are you a professional historian with a doctoral dissertation on this topic?
                    that is, if a certified historian is talking nonsense and nonsense from the screen of a federal channel, should I trust him unconditionally? Hmm ... no really! Thank you! Since 89 I have been listening to all this. And yes, then I "swung to the right" (I was young) like many others. What is there to hide. But then, a lot of things made me reconsider and doubt.
                    and here it is relatively recently defended their dissertation on theology So what am I going to do now, go from atheists to some religion? ))))
                    Otherwise it will be like the Cossacks
                    these mummers, who hung themselves with incomprehensible awards in three rows, ready to whip with whips all objectionable (somewhere I already had such a thing) Cossacks? Well maybe. By the way, on my paternal side, my ancestors are from the Kuban Cossacks.
                    1. -1
                      1 August 2021 17: 21
                      Quote: Region-25.rus
                      that is, if a certified historian is talking nonsense and nonsense from the screen of a federal channel, should I trust him unconditionally? Hmm ... no really! Thank you!

                      No, just in this case, your motives would be clear - they defend only their point of view until the end of their lives. And to believe or not to believe them is your right.
                      Quote: Region-25.rus
                      What is this for? Graft? Well, if you please, who is in power now? Aren't they the ones that derbani the country?

                      Do not forget that they derbanized the country thanks to our people, who wanted to live under capitalism - that's what we shouldn't forget when we remember the nineties.
                      1. -1
                        1 August 2021 17: 55
                        And to believe or not to believe them is your right.
                        "on matters of faith, I usually go to church" And I'm an atheist))
                        they jerked off thanks to our people
                        and the people were specifically asked? They sold the oil port where my deceased father worked. Someone asked him? Sold out ships NBAMR (more than a hundred), someone asked the people?
                        The overwhelming majority voted for the preservation of the USSR at the referendum - who asked the people? And the list can go on for a very long time.
                        people who wanted to live under capitalism
                        what, straight ALL the people? Or do you decide for ALL? hi
                      2. -1
                        1 August 2021 20: 15
                        Quote: Region-25.rus
                        The overwhelming majority voted for the preservation of the USSR at the referendum - who asked the people? And the list can go on for a very long time.

                        There is no need for lists - it is better to look at the photo, since you have forgotten the truth of those years.


                        Is it not our people who shouted "Down with the Communist Party!"
                      3. -1
                        1 August 2021 20: 25
                        Demonstration May 1, 1993 Google it. And also "Black October 1993" in the appendage. And since you already bring a photo, work hard to indicate the dates. And you know, 1991 and 1993 are two big differences in people's perception of the new order. I already wrote that -
                        And yes, then I "swung to the right" (I was young) like many others. What is there to hide.
                        You seem to be reading your opponent inattentively.
                      4. -3
                        1 August 2021 20: 48
                        Quote: Region-25.rus
                        Demonstration May 1, 1993 google it.

                        In 1993, there was bourgeois Russia, and I bring you photographs from the Soviet period to refresh your memory:


                        Quote: Region-25.rus
                        That says that you still think in categories, this is called "maximalism".

                        I am a realist, and I saw it all at that time. But you seem to have "forgotten" it, since you began to justify the stupidity of our people.
                      5. 0
                        1 August 2021 20: 53
                        justify the stupidity of our people.
                        for the alternatively gifted, I quote for the third time -
                        And yes, then I "swung to the right" (I was young) like many others. What is there to hide.
                        and .. where is the excuse? And in 1993 Russia finally became bourgeois. And through shooting at people from armored personnel carriers and tanks. since "it has been forgotten"
                        And there is no need to call the CPSU of the end of the decline of the USSR "the party of communists". These "communists" are now, as it were, in power if anything. I do not mean the Communist Party. Now, what kind of oligarch you do not dig up, the majority "were" in the party. At least they were members of the Komsomol. And some are ardent activists. So what have the real communists got to do with it? Do not confuse the ruling party with ideological people. This is clear? I think no. just throw a photo with the same slogans. And not with for example - "Yeltsin's gang on trial." you have one-sided thinking (while with a capital letter, unlike you)
                      6. 0
                        1 August 2021 20: 32
                        There is no need for lists - it is better to look at the photo, since you have forgotten the truth of those years.
                        is ALL the people yelling? Also performances on Bolotnaya can be called - "ALL the people" wink Bulk can be exhibited by ALL people, performances of "rainbow" on Malaya Sadovaya too ... You have too many words "EVERYTHING" and "EVERYTHING" That says that you still think in categories, this is called "maximalism". And if we have not yet outgrown this stage, then .... then here it is "medicine is powerless."
                      7. -1
                        1 August 2021 17: 58
                        No, just in that case, your motives would be clear.
                        I have no motive. It is just that it was, it was, and it led to this and that, in consequence of this or that. Strange, say that you also have a Soviet education. Here is my teacher-historian just laid this principle in me - to treat history in this way, and not from the position of "motives", and not just serving the line reading the school curriculum. For which he still has a huge THANK YOU !!
                  2. 0
                    1 August 2021 17: 11
                    And it will be with us as the Cossacks - they still cannot forgive the events of those years and everyone remembers who fought on whose side ...
                    now, they are trying to "reconcile" the two eras. Rather, not reconcile, but dissolve, mix everything together. Okay, when the descendants "fight" who fought on different sides. This is silly. But it is not the descendants that are reconciled (we are more likely to be knocked together), they are trying to "reconcile" the two "systems." And to be more precise, they are trying, as already written, to shield one (the one that is profitable) and to belittle, dehumanize the other (the one that, unlike today, has achieved real success. And not in the sale of resources and the withdrawal of money abroad) So all this is "reconciliation ".. Well, yes, Krasnov = Molotov, Ataman Semenov = Frunze, Kolchak = Stalin (Hitler ???) Sergei Lazo = Ataman Kalmykov, etc. .... And yes, I'm not a professional historian)) I'm just interested in her (history) And I approach it as impartially as possible. Mostly causal relationships, and "that came out for a reason and a consequence of this or that"
              2. 0
                1 August 2021 13: 37
                by the way oh -
                with the help of Marxism to mock innocent people.
                What does wine-innocence have to do with it? For me personally, our people who fell both in the RIV and in WWI are victims of the rash and stupid policy of the elite. That they got into these adventures without proper economic and other bases. Just thrown to the slaughter. And I'm always in front of them hi soldier
                but about
                mock
                well .. the drapery of the mausoleum is not a mockery? Series like "Penal Battalion", "Fighters", the trilogy "Burnt by the Sun", films like "Stalingrad" (junior B.), "Bastards", "Zoya" (new), "I Serve the Soviet Union", "To Paris", " Indestructible "," T-34 "," Tanks "and so on and so forth ...... not a mockery? I don't hear much about this.
                Now remind me of the films where the soldiers of WWII were mocked in the same way? Old, "soviet".
          2. 0
            1 August 2021 12: 09
            Quote: ccsr
            He just manipulated the facts to please his views, omitting others, including our ideas of Pan-Slavism, popular in Russian society since the 19th century - this is a well-known trick of falsifiers of history.

            That is, you think that Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, Serbs, Bulgarians want to become part of Russia and kiss the Russians? Are you adequate at all?
            1. 0
              1 August 2021 12: 16
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              That is, you think that Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, Serbs, Bulgarians want to become part of Russia and kiss the Russians? Are you adequate at all?

              Now they do not want to, but in the 19th century, the same Bulgarians, Montenegrins and Serbs prayed for our salvation. There was no question of their entry into the Republic of Ingushetia - no need to pass off your conjectures as facts.
              So think about your adequacy when you talk nonsense about that time, not knowing our history.
            2. +3
              1 August 2021 12: 41
              when you go to surrender, shout - "We are not Austrians! We are Czech brothers!" (c) J. Hasek. "The Adventures of the Gallant Soldier Švejk" laughing
              Then the brothers showed themselves that Adik Schicklgruber himself expressed personal gratitude for the repair of equipment and the supply of weapons! hi
              1. -3
                1 August 2021 16: 13
                Quote: Region-25.rus

                Then the brothers showed themselves oh,

                Come on crying - did you personally, living in the USSR, expect such an attitude from Ukrainians to Russians? I personally never thought that it would be possible to come to such hatred for the Russian people, and you are telling something about "brothers".
                1. -3
                  1 August 2021 16: 20
                  expected from Ukrainians such an attitude towards Russians?
                  actually, it meant Czechoslovakia. Something I do not remember that on the territory of the Ukrainian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic they would repair German equipment and produce weapons for the Wehrmacht. or am I missing something? what
                2. -1
                  1 August 2021 23: 24
                  Quote: ccsr
                  did you personally, living in the USSR, expect such an attitude from Ukrainians to Russians? I personally never thought that it would be possible to come to such hatred for the Russian people, and you are telling something about "brothers".

                  Yes, I did. Back in the USSR, the Ukrainians despised the Russians and treated them condescendingly. There was no hatred yet, but there was already contempt. It was cultivated in the USSR that Ukraine is a breadbasket and a breadwinner, that Ukrainians are an exclusive nation, that Ukrainians are better than Russians. And by the way, in everyday life it looked like that, due to subsidies from the union budget, the Ukrainian SSR lived much better than the RSFSR, in the shops of Kiev and Kharkov it was much richer than in the same Leningrad or Kazan. I remember how Belgorodians traveled to Kharkov for a shortage, Kharkov stores were supplied much better than Belgorod ones, since Kharkov was then the Ukrainian SSR, and Belgorod was in the RSFSR, and it was a rolling ball in Belgorod stores. And the Ukrainians then sincerely believed that they were better than the Russians, that they were feeding the lazy and always drunk Russians. Even now, Ukrainians sincerely believe that they are better than Russians, because they are Central Europeans, and Russian Asians and Moksha. Plus to this contempt was added hatred for the fact that Russians live better than them, and they are so European, the poorest in Europe.
                  1. 0
                    2 August 2021 10: 33
                    Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                    Yes, I did. Back in the USSR, the Ukrainians despised the Russians and treated them condescendingly.

                    You were probably a prophet, although under the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Shelest was quickly knocked out when he decided to present such superiority in his book, vparivaya something about the Zaporozhye Cossacks and their construction of socialism in his community. As for the attitude towards Ukrainians at that time, it was more cultivated at the household level, and never a single Kiev republican secretary allowed himself such ranting. And the everyday attitude towards various small peoples in our country was manifested in anecdotes - should I remind you about the Chukchi or about the Jews and Armenians?
                    This did not prevent us, in general, from living quite closely together, and normal soldiers served from Ukraine - I know that for sure, I had such. But I well know how hatred appeared in the nineties - I watched this process until 2014, and I will say that in Soviet times this was not even close.
    4. +7
      1 August 2021 11: 13
      How! It turns out that Minister Sazonov ran all over St. Petersburg in order to catch the German ambassador Pourtales and hand him the news of the beginning of the war, and not vice versa. It turns out that the Romanovs passionately wanted war and the Kaiser who was not allowed to sleep by the colonies of Britons and Franks. I in no way justify the last Russian tsar .But he definitely didn’t want war, Count Witte popularly explained to him WHAT would happen to the empire if she would contact the world massacre. But the last emperor may have been a good man - but as a "master of the Russian land" - shit shit. Pardony for my "German" .Dixi.
      1. +1
        1 August 2021 11: 18
        Quote: Andrey Chizhevsky
        How! It turns out that Minister Sazonov ran all over St. Petersburg in order to catch the German ambassador Pourtales and give him the news of the beginning of the war, and not vice versa. It turns out that the Romanovs passionately wanted war and the Kaiser who was not allowed to sleep by the colonies of Britons and Franks

        Who was the first to start mobilization? Nikolasha or Wilhelm? Wilhelm telegraphed Nikolasha that if he stopped mobilizing, then Germany would not start a war with Russia. But Nikolasha stubbornly continued to mobilize, as a result of which Germany declared war on Russia.
        Quote: Andrey Chizhevsky
        But he definitely did not want war, Count Witte popularly explained to him WHAT would happen to the empire if she would be in a world massacre. But the last emperor may have been a good man - but as a "master of the Russian land" - shit shit. Pardonite for my "German". Dixi.

        Nikolasha wanted war, otherwise he would not have started mobilization, and the first to cross the Russian-German border were Russian troops, not German ones. It was the Russian army that first launched a strategic offensive in East Prussia and Galicia.
        1. +6
          1 August 2021 11: 45
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          Nikolasha wanted war, otherwise he would not have started mobilization, and the first to cross the Russian-German border were Russian troops, not German ones.

          In this you are right.
        2. +3
          1 August 2021 11: 51
          Did you start mobilization first? Do you know how many WEEKS Russia needed to mobilize? And how many DAYS it took Germany to put its army under arms. You have forgotten that there was also the army of Austria-Hungary. In the south - Turkey. Start saying the first offensive in East Prussia? Right. And where was the Kaiser's army at that time? Don't you remember? So I was reminded, rushed to Paris. So who mobilized earlier?
          1. +1
            1 August 2021 11: 59
            Quote: Andrey Chizhevsky
            Did you start mobilization first? Do you know how many WEEKS Russia needed to mobilize? And how many DAYS it took Germany to put its army under arms

            That's it. Nikolasha began mobilization back in July, so Wilhelm declared war on Russia. And then another 16 days after the start of the war, troops were accumulating near the border, and only on August 17, the Russian army began a strategic offensive on the Eastern Front.
            Quote: Andrey Chizhevsky
            Have you forgotten that there was also the army of Austria-Hungary. In the south - Turkey

            Turkey entered the war only in November 1914.
            Quote: Andrey Chizhevsky
            And where was the Kaiser's army at that time? Don't you remember? So I was reminded, rushed to Paris. So who mobilized earlier?

            Such "allys" are worse than enemies. There was no need to launch an offensive and save the paddling pools.
            1. +4
              1 August 2021 12: 23
              Once again, I’m not justifying Nikolai at all. But he didn’t want a war. If he had shown himself as a true statesman — namely, by refusing Russia's obligations to the Entente and retaining neutrality — he really would have been great. As a simple man in the street - what then. .A very sweet man. A loving husband and father. To a measure (or not to a measure) a drinker. His place was - in some Zakhryukinsk to command a reserve regiment. And then there was an empire. And what else. were laid down even during the reign of the last tsar's father, Emperor Alexander, under serial number three. And his son turned out to be too weak to stand at the state helm. But be that as it may - eternal glory to the soldiers of Russia who fell in the name of the glory of the Fatherland!
            2. +3
              1 August 2021 12: 59
              Speaking of Turkey. She entered the war later - this is true. Only after all, "Goeben" and "Breslau" appeared in the waters of the Bosphorus much earlier. Just do not need to assure us that warships under the command of Admiral Souchon arrived there to guard the Sultan's seraglio.
        3. +2
          1 August 2021 11: 51
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          And who was the first to start mobilization?

          Austria-Hungary. Which lay entirely under Germany.
          1. -3
            1 August 2021 12: 01
            Quote: Dart2027
            Austria-Hungary. Which lay entirely under Germany.

            To fight with Austria-Hungary, it was not necessary to start mobilization, the existing cadre army would be enough. Starting mobilization, Nikolasha thereby showed that he was going to fight with Germany.
            1. 0
              1 August 2021 12: 04
              Quote: Kot_Kuzya
              To fight with Austria-Hungary, it was not necessary to start mobilization, the existing cadre army would be enough.

              Who said that? Source?
              1. -1
                1 August 2021 12: 08
                Quote: Dart2027
                Who said that? Source?

                The Russian army beat the Austrians throughout the WWII, so that one-on-one Russia would beat the Austrians all the more.
                1. +4
                  1 August 2021 13: 45
                  Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                  The Russian army beat the Austrians throughout the WWII

                  Mobilized army.
              2. +5
                1 August 2021 17: 25
                Exactly! Franz Joseph himself, beating his head against the wall of his palace, said so "Why the hell are these Russians mobilized in response to the mobilization of my army and the army of the Kaiser?" laughing
            2. +4
              1 August 2021 12: 27
              Of course he was going to fight with Germany. Why are we modestly silent that Germany was also going to fight with Russia?
              1. 0
                3 August 2021 15: 53
                Why are we modestly silent that Germany was also going to fight with Russia?

                What for?
    5. +1
      2 August 2021 21: 33
      Do you know why the Russian army launched an offensive even before the end of mobilization? But because France begged to save her from defeat. And we, as loyal allies, have fulfilled our duty to the Entente. And Russia still would not have been able to sit on the sidelines, since Germany, with the support of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, was planning aggression against Russia.
    6. 0
      3 August 2021 20: 40
      Quote: Kot_Kuzya
      Germany DIDN'T INVOLVE FIRST on the territory of Russia. This war was imperialist, which was unleashed by the tsar-rag Nicholas the Bloody for the sake of a vain desire to be called "the king of all Slavs." It is good that he did not manage to escape to England, as he wanted, and he was shot like a dog without trial and investigation, he got what he deserved. By the way, the first to start the offensive was the Russian army on August 17, 1914, 16 (!!!!) days after the start of the war. The Germans planned a strategic defense in the East before the surrender of France, and only then they planned, already having a free rear in the west, to finish off Russia. So if it were not for the offensive itch of Nikolasha and his generals, the Russian army could well sit out in the trenches throughout the war without active hostilities and heavy losses.

      I do not like to offend people, but you are a friend or irrevocably stupid or a deliberate provocateur here! Germany was the first to declare the country for which it has been preparing since the 90s of the 19th century! Serbia would be the cause or something else, but it would be! Hitler in the future only copied the plans hatched by Wilhelm. And it would have been in 14, for one simple reason, a military reform was being carried out in RI, which was supposed to end by 17-18, and the chief of the German General Staff Moltke Jr. told the Kaiser back in 12 that if you start a war with Russia later than 14, then it will be too tough for Germany !!!
      1. +1
        3 August 2021 23: 34
        Quote: azkolt
        And it would have been in 14, for one simple reason, a military reform was being carried out in Ingushetia, which was supposed to end by 17-18, and the chief of the German General Staff Moltke Jr. told the Kaiser back in 12 that if you start a war with Russia later than 14, then it will be too tough for Germany !!!

        Another crystal baker :)))). Russia was hopelessly behind Germany in development, and over the years the gap between Germany and Russia only grew. Compare Germany in 1871 and Germany in 1914! These are incomparable countries, just the same as comparing Japan in 1853, which lived in the Middle Ages, and Japan in 1904, which had a developed industry and a strong fleet, which gave tsar captains and admirals according to mustals. And what kind of military reform in Russia, which was supposed to end in 17-18 years? Could it be that the reform, due to which "Russia We Lost", could not provide its soldiers even with rifles and shells, not to mention machine guns, artillery and aviation?
  6. +14
    1 August 2021 07: 20
    ***
    "My friends, we, as the Prussians-cockroaches from poisoning, do not die, we will show them so that they will remember forever!" “Attack of the Dead ...
    ***
  7. +11
    1 August 2021 08: 50
    Eternal memory to the soldiers of the Russian army who died on the battlefields of the First World War ...
  8. +7
    1 August 2021 09: 25
    "Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War." Debts must be repaid! At least it's too late. Those who fell for the Motherland in that war will forgive us the way!
  9. Cat
    +11
    1 August 2021 09: 49
    Everlasting memory...
    This topic is especially close to me, because at the very beginning one of my great-great-grandfathers, a Cossack military sergeant major, died in that war.
    Another great-great-grandfather on the maternal side was a simple ordinary dragoon, was wounded with a bayonet in the knee, then happily survived the Civil War, despite his age, participated in the Great Patriotic War. I remember him when he died I was in 4th grade.
    In the photo he is on the right:
  10. -3
    1 August 2021 10: 46
    The German did not reach the territory of the Russian Federation during the "unsuccessful" WWI.
    1. 0
      1 August 2021 11: 10
      Quote: iouris
      The German did not reach the territory of the Russian Federation during the "unsuccessful" WWI.

      Because Germany kept 3/4 of its divisions on the Western Front, but even against a quarter of the German army, "Russia which we lost," shamefully retreated to Riga. Whereas for Operation Barbarossa, Germany concentrated 95% of its troops.
      1. 0
        1 August 2021 11: 52
        Quote: Kot_Kuzya
        Because Germany held 3/4 divisions on the Western Front, but even against a quarter of the German army,

        And we do not take into account the armies of AB and Turkey?
        1. 0
          1 August 2021 11: 56
          Quote: Dart2027
          And we do not take into account the armies of AB and Turkey?

          Why don't you take into account the armies of Hitler's allies: Finland, Italy, Romania and Hungary? Well, plus a couple dozen more SS divisions from France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Croatia, where hundreds of thousands of garbage were recruited to the Eastern Front? 86 thousand Sumerians passed through one Ukrainian "Galicia". Let's not forget the Spanish Blue Division.
          1. +2
            1 August 2021 12: 03
            Quote: Kot_Kuzya
            Why don't you take into account the armies of Hitler's allies

            What are you talking about? Trying to get away from uncomfortable questions about the number of RI opponents? Well let's remember WWII.
            How many German divisions were in the same France? How many were in other conquered countries? Thanks to whom did Finland separate from the Republic of Ingushetia? Why weren't there so many traitors from Ukraine and the Baltic states in WWI?
            1. 0
              1 August 2021 12: 07
              Quote: Dart2027
              Thanks to whom did Finland separate from the Republic of Ingushetia?

              Thanks to a handful of liberals from the Provisional Government, who destroyed the front and the economy. The Bolsheviks collected the collapsed country back.
              Quote: Dart2027
              Why weren't there so many traitors from Ukraine and the Baltic states in WWI?

              Because then Galicia was not part of Russia, and the Balts were Chukhonts, who did not even have sorting and shit in the bushes.
              1. +1
                1 August 2021 13: 45
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                The Bolsheviks gathered the collapsed country back

                So it was not Lenin who signed the relevant documents?
                Quote: Kot_Kuzya
                Because then

                That is, this wonderful national policy of the USSR gave such results.
        2. +3
          1 August 2021 18: 01
          By the way - no one at all mentions the Bulgarian army that fought against Russia.
  11. +3
    1 August 2021 11: 10
    Eternal memory to great-grandfathers and their fathers for defending their homeland .. It is a pity that many who remained after this massacre died and perished in the scrapes of the coming Civil War ..
  12. +2
    1 August 2021 11: 22
    My great-grandfather died in 1914 ... and my grandfather (born in 1914) - during the Second World War, he just walked through the very places where my great-grandfather died ...
  13. +3
    1 August 2021 11: 50
    In my opinion, the author is far from fully told about the monuments to the warriors of the First World War.
    I propose to do it now and together.
    - In St. Petersburg - at the Vitebsk railway station a sculptural group - "sending to the front"
    - The city of Pushkin - an obelisk next to the cemetery for the fallen soldiers (there were hospitals in Pushkin)
    - Pushkin - Museum of the First World War
  14. +8
    1 August 2021 12: 31
    only remembering some, there is no need to dirty others. The Bolsheviks did not start a war, they did not ask the tsar to abandon the country in a difficult period, they reassembled its parts. They were not allowed to fall apart into pieces, which were already preparing to pull apart all sorts of Entente - whoever could pinned themselves to profit ...

    and the date is good, the fallen warriors of the First World War must be read, no matter what epaulettes they were wearing. They came up with a good date, it is fair, humanly, kindly.
    1. 0
      1 August 2021 14: 43
      Winners write history. If Aleksandrych Vissarionich had been, he would have been for
      Lenin's slogan "Let us turn the imperialist war into a civil war" would have put all the Bolsheviks, Menshiviks and other Socialist-Revolutionaries against the wall.
      1. +1
        1 August 2021 17: 27
        do not judge history so superficially. The collapse of the USSR - something similar happened and we survived it, drank no less, and there were wars, and deaths, and the "buy-laborer" who did not fit into the new production relations - too. And how many people have disappeared ... And it will hurt for a long time, not at ease. And here there are psychopaths who play on people's nerves, dance on corpses and arrogantly despise the feelings of other people ... You can feel the youth of the next generation, still unclouded by emotions ... ...

        In the mess created by the organizers of the bourgeois revolution, who did not have a clear goal, and what to do next, they simply let everything go to chance, invited the benefactors of the Russian land - greedy for someone else's Euronischer. which is banal to eat, and those let's rob and kill. Not their land, not their people. They picked up the good. And the Bolsheviks, and no one else, were able to put the uninvited guests out, so that they could wash themselves with snot and blood. Why were they able to win? did not think. And why do they have such a name - Bolsheviks :? Perhaps because they were for the PEOPLE, and they were in the majority. Personally, I am against the fact that they were put on a par with the traitors to their homeland - the Mensheviks, who called to plunder the country of the Naglobritts, Czech Poles and other stinking evil spirits. Little blood has been spilled for you? The people suffered little in poverty, lack of education? The Bolsheviks were for the people who supported them for a reason from a good life, wanting to get rid of the oppression of church thieves and murderers as well. Remember this and respect the choice and fate of our ancestors.

        but keep your arrogant stupidity to yourself.

        and who instilled this in you - "the history is written by the winners" ... this is a cynical lie. A vivid example - Ukrainians who won the mind write their unbelievable, who won themselves ...
        1. 0
          1 August 2021 22: 40
          Understood nothing. Stop the tantrum. If Lenin's thesis does not fit into your picture of history, this is not a reason to be rude.
        2. -1
          4 August 2021 11: 57
          Well, you write heresy! ... "The Bolsheviks were for the people ..." It turns out the military experts - the former officers of the tsarist army who came to serve in the ranks of the Red Army were not the people? And there were tens of thousands of them. And hell would have been expelled without them. For the people you say were the Bolsheviks? And the peasant uprisings that the Bolsheviks drowned in blood? And the sailor uprising in Kronstadt? And the executions of the clergy? And the destruction in the Crimea of ​​thousands of officers who were PROMISED to save their lives? And the fate of the Cossacks? Weren't these ALL people killed by the Bolsheviks part of the people? And who were then subjected to repression in the thirties? These were also invaders?
    2. -1
      4 August 2021 11: 39
      I do not agree. You say that the Bolsheviks did not start a war. But the same Bolsheviks did everything possible to defeat Russia. By the way - the Brest Peace Treaty, which even a certain Ulyanov named Lenin called as "obscene peace" who signed? Aren't these “gatherers of the Russian land?” And this treaty, most shameful for Russia, was signed for only one thing - to stay in power.
  15. +4
    1 August 2021 13: 33
    It is good that the heroes of the Great War were recognized in Russia. And they erected monuments. And the Museum of the Great War in Tsarskoe Selo is excellent.


  16. +1
    1 August 2021 14: 24
    A war in which it seemed impossible to lose, but managed to lose. A sad moment in history.
  17. -2
    1 August 2021 15: 38
    Nikolashka was bound by debts to France and England. If he had canceled the mobilization, then there would have been no war. But he was a weak ruler and could not calculate the options for the development of events. And the German wife turned them around, and there were a dime a dozen spies from the country ... We must erect monuments to all the heroes of that war all over the country, and not Yeltsin, who loves vodka ...
    1. +1
      1 August 2021 18: 26
      Quote: Dzafdet
      And a German wife turned them around, and there were a dime a dozen spies from the country

      And what was he fighting for Germany?
    2. 0
      1 August 2021 23: 54
      Quote: Dzafdet
      And the German wife turned them around


      So the German element was generally present with a significant share in the genealogy of the Russian nobility ... What does this have to do with it? True, then they had not yet thought of the eviction of the Tauride and Volga Germans to Kazakhstan and Siberia ...
  18. +1
    1 August 2021 16: 13
    But the country was able to bring together about the same forces that had previously participated in its collapse.
    Oh well.
  19. -1
    1 August 2021 17: 31
    А Why should the Russians save the French at the cost of their lives? The French should be rescued by the French themselves, not the Russians, not the British or anyone else.

    Because the tsars took loans from the Entente countries, and it was necessary to work them off.
    1. 0
      1 August 2021 18: 27
      Quote: Pavel57
      Because
      otherwise I would have to fight alone.
  20. 0
    1 August 2021 18: 27
    It is a pity that there are commentators who accuse Russia of unleashing the First World War. Let them even bashfully hide behind Nicholas II. How do they not understand that they are pouring water on the mill of those who blame the USSR for the beginning of World War II. Destroy the Russians and no matter how good the First and Second World War will be, eternal peace in Europe. And again, Russia started a war with Ukraine, defend the Russians. Here are the results of their reasoning.
    1. -2
      1 August 2021 20: 36
      I don't understand why history should be mixed with politics, then the game of politicians, let them play, right there are ordinary people who are interested in history itself and the reliable facts in it.
      1. 0
        1 August 2021 21: 16
        Here ordinary people play politics, realizing that this does not shine for them in life. They play the game based on their own tastes and preferences and only then based on their knowledge. And not noticing the reliable facts that do not fit into their preferences and contradict their tastes.
  21. 0
    1 August 2021 18: 43
    would have to fight alone


    Russia did not need this war at all.
  22. +2
    1 August 2021 18: 43
    Eternal memory to all Russian soldiers who gave their lives for their Motherland in that very First World War.

    Kingdom them Heaven.
  23. -1
    1 August 2021 20: 41
    That is, this wonderful national policy of the USSR gave such results.

    The Bolsheviks eventually reassembled the country, but on controversial principles. And this, among other things, was a prerequisite for the collapse of the USSR.
  24. +1
    2 August 2021 11: 26
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: Dzafdet
    And a German wife turned them around, and there were a dime a dozen spies from the country

    And what was he fighting for Germany?

    But what about? A smart politician would have avoided war. What did Stolypin tell him about "at least thirty years without a war"? And his wife was called the Hessian fly behind her back.
    1. +1
      2 August 2021 19: 27
      Quote: Dzafdet
      A smart politician would have avoided war.

      How? RI neither the ocean nor the strait defended.
  25. +3
    2 August 2021 17: 51
    "The heroes of the First World War were undeservedly forgotten. But despite all the complexity and ambiguity of what was happening, they honestly performed their duty, defending their homeland from the enemy."
  26. -1
    3 August 2021 20: 49
    Quote: Essex62
    The Bolsheviks were not even close there.
    And how the landowners hated the Russian peasants, driving them with guns through the fields like hares and shooting, torturing and holding them in a black body.
    An answer flew in for the age-old humiliation, hatred and contempt of the People.
    The heads of their monarchs and nobility in "civilized" Europe were cut off at the same time. They even invented frogs.
    And it's a pity the girls, they fell under the distribution. So millions died then. Human beings are born equal. And it's also a pity for the Bolshevik woman who was stabbed with bayonets by the White Guards ...

    Do you tell fairy tales? Tell me, even purely practically, why did the landowners have to destroy the people who brought them income? ))) 0 I'm not saying that only 40% of the peasants were serfs, and even some of them were quitrent. Why are you lying? Maybe it was not about the landowners and peasants, but about the Pale of Settlement? Or in persistent hatred of Orthodoxy?
    Did you regret the Bolshevik woman who was stabbed with bayonets by the White Guards?)) But she was a Bolshevik, but why in Yekaterinodar they first raped, and then killed all the senior classes of the female gymnasium? Or did only the children of the landowners study there and were all White Guards? Why was the city of Nikolaevsk on the Amur practically destroyed? Did some landowners also live there? you and ghouls accustomed to dispose of someone else's blood! For one thing alone, one can greet Stalin, that he then pressed all this Leninist guard of bastards and ghouls to his fingernails !!!
  27. 0
    3 August 2021 20: 54
    Quote: Dzafdet
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: Dzafdet
    And a German wife turned them around, and there were a dime a dozen spies from the country

    And what was he fighting for Germany?

    But what about? A smart politician would have avoided war. What did Stolypin tell him about "at least thirty years without a war"? And his wife was called the Hessian fly behind her back.

    How many couch clever people have divorced!))) Why sit on your couch and give out clever thoughts to the mountain!))) Smart guy, you never know what Stolypin wanted, it was not in the will of the emperor to avoid war! If a closet with a strong desire to stuff your face is suitable for you (you didn't deserve it because of utter stupidity) in a dark courtyard, then tell us how you, as a smart politician, will avoid this?)) 0 Well, of course you can, or rather for sure you will make your legs, but the state cannot run away! And if Wilhelm wanted war, then how do you not cool here, how not to meet in him on yachts, war cannot be avoided, because the time has come for Germany to attack!
    1. 0
      4 August 2021 08: 44
      And if Wilhelm wanted war

      With whom?
  28. 0
    9 August 2021 20: 10
    "bashfully calling it imperialist" - and what was it like, I wonder? belay