Red Emperor. Stalin's lessons for Russia

197
Red Emperor. Stalin's lessons for Russia

On January 4, 1943, the American magazine Time named Joseph Stalin the Man of 1942. The Red Emperor managed to create a unique Soviet civilization, which achieved an unprecedented unity of the people, a bright faith in the future Victory and our beautiful bright world.

The magazine said:



“... Not a step back! .. 1942 was a year of blood and strength. The man whose name means steel, the one whose English vocabulary includes tough guy, is the 1942 Man. Only Joseph Stalin knows how close Russia was to defeat in 1942. And only Joseph Stalin knows how he managed to save Russia. Joseph Stalin won. He is that cool guy…”

Red emperor


Stalin got a completely ruined, murdered country. A destroyed civilization and a people bled white by the First World War, turmoil and intervention. Virtually no industry, no gold reserves, no technology and no future. Mass unemployment, poverty. Rampant crime. The dominance of the bureaucracy, which has grown monstrously in comparison with tsarist times (due to the decline in the quality of management). The fusion of the bureaucracy, the local party apparatus with the NEPmen (then the new Russians - the new bourgeoisie). The famous "Golden Calf" by Ilf and Petrov is an encyclopedia of theft and fraud that permeated Russia at that time.

It seemed that Soviet Russia of the 20s was doomed to become a raw material appendage of the more developed West and East (Japan). In conditions when the next round of the crisis of capitalism began in the West, deindustrialized, poorly armed Russia inevitably became a victim of stronger neighbors. Even Poland and Finland were a threat, not to mention militaristic Japan and the future Third Reich. At the same time, a new turmoil was brewing within Russia itself: a clash between the city and the countryside. In the 20s, Soviet Russia, barely emerging from the catastrophe of 1917-1920, was slipping towards a new national “Hiroshima”. The end was approaching: either after a military defeat, or because of an internal, economic catastrophe. Or all together.

Stalin managed to do the almost impossible. He not only kept civilization, country and people on the edge of a new catastrophe, but also threw it into a breakthrough, into the future. The Iron General Secretary was able to materialize a new reality, a new Soviet civilization. Create a new society focused on development, knowledge, creation and service.

Stalin was able to give the people and especially the younger generations the image of a new beautiful world - "beautiful far away." The ideal of a new reality, tomorrow's world, in which labor, creativity and creation will be the main thing. A world in which there will be no exploitation of man by man. A world where an immeasurably higher level of development will be achieved due to labor, creativity, the disclosure of the intellectual, spiritual abilities of a person, due to a completely different attitude and mood of people (who do not work for someone else's uncle), an effective organization of the economy.

A new civilization will arise - the world of the future, where human desires will be reasonable, where spirituality will take up over the material, responsibility to society will outweigh animal egoism. At the same time, everyone understands that in order for a happy tomorrow to come, today one must endure hardships and work hard. If necessary, then be prepared to make sacrifices.

Thus, Russian communism, Stalinism, in essence, repeated the best ideals of Christian civilization. He tried to save people from the world of the "golden calf", from the materialization, "ossification" of people. Stalin and his associates built a new bright reality, where the ethics of work, conscience, goodness and justice will prevail.

Society of the Future


An attractive, beautiful dream, alluring and possible reality became the basis of the Soviet miracle. People believed the red emperor, and faith works wonders. With the whole world, all the people and all the earth they built a great power, defended it in the fiercest battles with the Western world and brought humanity into space.

Stalin solved several great, seemingly unsolvable tasks. An appropriate defense potential and the country's economy were built. As a result, when the collective West struck, Russia was ready, unlike the Russian Empire of 1914. The grandiose task - to overcome the age-old economic and technological backwardness of 10 years in one jerk and repel an external threat - has been solved!

There was another important task. "The Fifth Column", which destroyed the Russian Empire on the verge of its victory (the German bloc was losing the war). Stalin neutralized her. This is the secret of the Great Purge. They destroyed most of the Trotskyists, internationalists, nationalists (in the Baltics and Ukraine), military conspirators. The Red Emperor cleared out the party, which was rapidly degenerating, using power for personal enrichment. This made it possible to avoid the collapse of the USSR at the very beginning of the Great Patriotic War, which was expected in Germany, the USA and England.

Stalin literally before our eyes, every year created the future. I didn’t “rebuild”, I didn’t “optimize”, I didn’t “modernize”, but I created it. Thousands of plants, factories, machine and tractor stations, laboratories were built, new houses, new communications, and transport were built in cities. They built railways, oil pipelines, communications. Kindergartens, schools, technical schools, institutes, theaters, libraries, houses of culture and creativity. They built a new reality, one that did not exist after the Civil War, when everything was destroyed.

The well-known expression of W. Churchill, which actually belongs to the British historian I. Deutscher:

“... he accepted Russia with a plow, and leaves with nuclear reactors. He raised Russia to the level of the second industrialized country in the world. It was not the result of purely material progress and organizational work. Such achievements would not have been possible without a comprehensive cultural revolution, during which the entire population attended school and studied very hard. ”

social creator


Russia was lucky that a former seminarian, a revolutionary, self-taught and, perhaps, the best manager in our entire country turned out to be at the head. history.

For example, he clearly defined that there was no alternative to collectivization in the then conditions. Either economic, and then the state, civilizational collapse, or collectivization, as a completely reasonable, technological operation to bring the Russian village to a different, modern level, while maintaining the world-community as the foundation of the Russian people. Money and resources were obtained for industrialization, cheap labor resources appeared for the rise of industry. A modern agriculture was being established, capable of providing raw materials for industry, sustainably supplying cities and the army. Such agriculture, which made it possible to create the industrial basis of the new world. It was planned that in the future the new Soviet industry would ensure the revival of the Russian village. He will return the debts of society to the peasantry, revive them to a new life. Unfortunately, first the Great War, and then "Khrushchevism" did not allow this to be done.

Another source for a breakthrough into the future was the rich resources of the country. They did not go to enrich a narrow caste of plutocrats, capitalists, and did not invest in Western economies and banks, but for the development of the country, they invested in the future (education, science, technology, industry, etc.). Therefore, Stalin not only restored the gold reserves of the Russian state, plundered by various kinds of revolutionaries, whites and Westerners, but surpassed it.

Stalin used the crisis of capitalism and the West as much as possible to develop the Union. Western equipment, technologies, design services were bought. The West was in crisis. Therefore, Moscow skillfully bargained, knocked down prices. The USSR took a lot from the West. While the capitalist world was in decline, production in Russia grew rapidly. With the help of American specialists, giants of the industry were built, such as GAZ in Nizhny Novgorod, the Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works, tractor factories in Kharkov and Stalingrad.

Stalin found a replacement for market competition: he set tasks for the regular reduction of prices and costs. This forced plant and factory directors to look for and implement new technologies, reduce costs, and manage prudently.

The Stalinist system showed that Russia was capable of amazing mobilization and concentration of forces. The maximum effect was achieved with the least expenditure of money, materials and time. This is how modern mechanical engineering, metallurgy, fuel and energy complex, aircraft building and the nuclear industry were created.

The Soviet elite was responsible for the assigned work with their heads. And to the highest degree. Party workers, officials and directors of factories were personally responsible for the assigned work and entrusted values. The country was spared from mass theft, the withdrawal of huge funds abroad. Therefore, the funds did not go to cash palaces with golden toilets, yachts and planes, but to factories, schools, design bureaus, research institutes. This was how the real power of the state and the country was created.

Industrialization, collectivization, and the scientific and technological revolution went hand in hand with the cultural revolution. A cult of youth, education and science, strength and purity was created. All the best was given to children (the future of the nation). A network of pioneer camps, houses of culture, creativity, music schools, etc., has been created throughout the country so that children can identify and develop their physical, intellectual and creative abilities, engage in self-education, science, art, and creativity. Get basic military training, become future paratroopers, pilots, snipers to defend the Motherland. Soviet power has enabled tens of millions of people to realize their physical, intellectual and spiritual potential.

Therefore, the Russians won the most terrible war in their history, when they wanted to completely destroy them. They fought to the death and they knew what they were dying for. Soviet people believed in the future of their country.

Stalin managed to create a unique Soviet (Russian) civilization, which achieved an unprecedented unity of the people, a bright faith in the future Victory and our beautiful bright world, which was expressed in the fury of noble and selfless work. People worked real miracles in labor and in war. We won. Created a superpower and the basis of the society of the future. Societies of knowledge, service and creation. What gives hope for a bright future for the current generations of Russian people.
197 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +19
    4 January 2023 05: 55
    Ambiguous attitude towards Stalin. On the one hand, the harsh suppression and breaking of the society of an agrarian country to an industrial Power, on the other hand, the destruction of the bloodthirsty Leninist "guard of comrades-in-arms", which undoubtedly cleansed the country of the demagogues of ghouls-destroyers. One thing is for sure, this is a great personality in history, which cannot be measured by only two concepts of good or bad.
    1. -59
      4 January 2023 07: 01
      Everything was taken away from millions of people called "harmful classes" and they were taken to "settlements" in places "not so remote." Millions of peasants were called "only fellow travelers" and deprived of passports were attached to collective farms. Millions of "condemned" slaves worked on "great construction projects", in mines, forged "public happiness" for the rest ..... Fear. The fear of being in their place, or turning into a rotting corpse with a bullet in the back of the head, is the main "driving force" of the "Stalinist miracle." Zhvanetsky spoke with black humor about what exactly those who drown for the "red emperor" like so much today, but they are embarrassed to say it out loud - the owner's whip - did not fulfill the norm or workdays - that means the enemy, an accomplice of the imperialists - to his camp! in camp dust! and the fact that squealing was very effective - he snitched on a person and he was immediately taken away and no one saw him again. Lyapota.
      1. +29
        4 January 2023 09: 45
        deprived of passports, were attached to collective farms

        No need to write liberal nonsense. A Soviet person generally needed a passport only when checking into a hotel and buying a plane ticket. Carrying it with you - there was no such thing in the plant, unlike the current type of democracy. I remember at the age of 20 I accidentally dropped it for books on a shelf - so I remembered about it only four years later, when something needed to be re-registered there .. And so - I didn’t need it in figs. Such a terrible totalitarianism flourished under the Bolsheviks .. Now - go and try to leave the house without a document ..

        As for the peasants, you need to read history .. The Bolsheviks, having come to power, GENERALLY abolished all identity cards, believing that this is a tool for suppressing freedom. Well, a Soviet person is not obliged to prove his identity with a government piece of paper! But life is harsher than ideas, and when ration cards were introduced in the cities, it was necessary to introduce passports in order to stop deception and speculation. And in the villages - there were no clear cards, which means that there was no need for a passport ..

        And so - on all counts of your kaki, which you deigned to bestow on us .. Alas - to the extreme chagrin of the liberals, those who lived in the great Soviet Union are still alive and can tell how it really happened. This means that they can immediately convict the crap-crats of outright lies and lies.
        1. 0
          4 January 2023 09: 52
          Quote: paul3390
          The Bolsheviks, having come to power, GENERALLY canceled all identity cards

          Well, if ... they couldn’t either deprive their passports or cancel them - then, in fact, the peasants didn’t have passports ..
          1. +8
            4 January 2023 12: 28
            Quote: mat-vey
            Quote: paul3390
            The Bolsheviks, having come to power, GENERALLY canceled all identity cards

            Well, if ... they couldn’t either deprive their passports or cancel them - then, in fact, the peasants didn’t have passports ..

            Where did they get their passports? Where did you get this from? From Gozman, Amnuel, Albats and Igor Chubais?
            Above I gave an example from our family.
            1. 0
              4 January 2023 12: 34
              Quote: Ulan.1812
              Where did they get their passports?

              Familiarize yourself with the passport system of the Russian Empire ..
              1. +1
                4 January 2023 14: 16
                Quote: mat-vey
                Quote: Ulan.1812
                Where did they get their passports?

                Familiarize yourself with the passport system of the Russian Empire ..

                And what does the Russian Empire have to do with it? Did you change the topic by any chance? I actually asked a different question.
                1. +1
                  4 January 2023 15: 18
                  Quote: Ulan.1812
                  Did you change the topic by any chance?

                  Come on...
                  Quote: Ulan.1812
                  The Bolsheviks, having come to power, GENERALLY canceled all identity cards

                  Here is the topic, if there are problems, go back to the beginning of the branch.
                  1. 0
                    4 January 2023 15: 58
                    Quote: mat-vey
                    Quote: Ulan.1812
                    Did you change the topic by any chance?

                    Come on...
                    Quote: Ulan.1812
                    The Bolsheviks, having come to power, GENERALLY canceled all identity cards

                    Here is the topic, if there are problems, go back to the beginning of the branch.

                    Actually, the second quote is not mine. I did not say that. You are confused.
                    1. +7
                      4 January 2023 16: 03
                      Quote: Ulan.1812
                      You are confused.

                      You got it mixed up. The conversation was for, but for the fact that the Bolsheviks cursed when they came to power, they deprived the peasants of their passports, but at the time the Bolsheviks came to power, not all of the nobles had passports ... so ..
                      1. +6
                        4 January 2023 19: 45
                        Quote: mat-vey
                        Quote: Ulan.1812
                        You are confused.

                        You got it mixed up. The conversation was for, but for the fact that the Bolsheviks cursed when they came to power, they deprived the peasants of their passports, but at the time the Bolsheviks came to power, not all of the nobles had passports ... so ..

                        Did I argue with the fact that in the Republic of Ingushetia the peasants did not have passports? Once again, it was not I who wrote that "the Bolsheviks deprived the peasants of their passports."
                        It was written by some monster. Or whatever it is.
                        I wrote that the peasants in the USSR had passports. Not right away, of course. In general, the dispute is about nothing.
          2. 0
            5 January 2023 14: 46
            There were passports in the Russian Empire, by the way, religion and estate (including peasants) were entered in them, and it was difficult to travel around the country without a passport ...
        2. +3
          4 January 2023 11: 46
          Without a passport it was possible to travel all over the country from Minsk to Vladivostok and from Murmansk to Kushka.
        3. +13
          5 January 2023 10: 23
          No need to write liberal nonsense.

          Absolutely correct. There is nothing to carry this liberal muck thrown to us by Soros and his clique.
          A small addition for those who do not know what the USSR is.
          1. On October 29 (November 11), 1917, an 8-hour working day was established in Russia, a 48-hour working week was introduced with six working days and one day off. (Those who are interested can look into history and see when the 8-hour day was introduced in the West)
          2. Free general education - primary, secondary, higher.
          3. Free children's summer and winter camps (Where are the free children's camps now!?)
          4. Free pioneer houses for children, where children could be creative, develop their natural skills. (What's up with free child development now!?)
          5. Free medicine
          6. Free spa treatment (all holiday homes belonged either to the state, or trade unions, or enterprises). Members of the trade union paid for travel to the resort, everything else was paid by the union. (Where is the free spa treatment now!?)
          7. The retirement pension was equal to the employee's last salary at retirement. Therefore, before retirement, the employee was always transferred to a higher salary. (What is the current pension for pensioners who have worked for 30-40 years!?)
          8. Anyone could complain about injustice to the party committee, to the party commission, to the party control commission of the Central Committee of the party. (An example from life. Relatives fought. When they returned from the front, their house in the destroyed city did not exist, there was nowhere to live. They wandered, 2 children were born. They wrote a letter to Stalin that there was nowhere to live. Answer from Moscow - within a month they gave a room in apartment). (Where to complain about injustice now!?)
          9. Trade unions existed at all enterprises. An employee could not be fired without the consent of the union. (How do they get fired now?!...)
          Etc., etc. So, all this liberal nonsense is not worth reading and, moreover, retold and moved. Already passed, we know ...
        4. 0
          11 January 2023 21: 01
          Totally agree with you. Only the passports were canceled not by the Bolsheviks, but by the provisional government, as a "relic of tsarism." And this was one of the main points in the program of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party.
      2. +13
        4 January 2023 10: 20
        Typical anti-Soviet slander:
        Who did not lie on the stove and managed to work out workdays on the collective farm, and sell the products of personal subsidiary plots on the market.
        And the Gulag was then necessary - too powerful resistance to the reforms of the USSR, collectivization and industrialization was provided by the bourgeois henchmen left from the tsarist era, embarrassed the people, tempted them to leave the collective farms and work for them.
        1. +10
          4 January 2023 10: 23
          Quote from StarWarrior
          And the Gulag was then necessary

          Everyone has it and always (I hope "for now") - criminality will be for a long time ...
        2. +13
          4 January 2023 12: 48
          Quote from StarWarrior
          Typical anti-Soviet slander:
          Who did not lie on the stove and managed to work out workdays on the collective farm, and sell the products of personal subsidiary plots on the market.
          And the Gulag was then necessary - too powerful resistance to the reforms of the USSR, collectivization and industrialization was provided by the bourgeois henchmen left from the tsarist era, embarrassed the people, tempted them to leave the collective farms and work for them.

          Collectivization was not a whim.
          Before the revolution, the main volume of grain was produced by large commodity landlord and church farms.
          The Bolsheviks nationalized these lands and distributed them to the peasants.
          But all the same, these peasant allotments did not allow the use of mechanization, chemicalization, etc.
          There was only one way out - the creation of large farms where it was possible to use tractors, combines, etc.
          There were two ways or to wait when, in a natural way, by ruining some of the peasants, large farms will be created, as in the west.
          But it's a long way, in the west it's been happening for decades.
          The USSR did not have so much time.
          So there was collectivization.
          The fact that it was carried out with excesses is known.
          In addition to the fact that this was supposed to increase the commodity production of agricultural products, it was also supposed to ensure industrialization.
          The main factor that led to such decisions is time.
          If we do not run this distance in 10 years, we will be crushed.
          By the way, Stalin strongly encouraged the private farms of the peasants.
          Which for certain types of products gave up to 50%.
          Few people know that before the war there were two million individual peasant farms in the countryside.
          That is, with families it is 5-6 million people.
          Everything was ruined by Khrushchev, who decided that the peasant should buy everything for his table in the store, and not grow it in his courtyard.
          The result is known.
          My grandmother on the line of my mother said that before the war they began to live prosperously.
          1. -4
            4 January 2023 17: 32
            Is it really bad for a collective farmer to buy a significant part of the products in stores? And why grow everything in your backyard? In the socialist GDR, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary, members of agricultural cooperatives and employees of state farms could buy almost all products in rural stores. Or it was possible to write out the necessary products on the farm itself. Whoever wanted, who liked it, worked on their personal plots. Who did not want to hunchback on them - no one forced them either. By the way, our villagers did not go to the city for sausage, cheese and other products because they did not have meat or milk. Cattle, birds were in the majority. But I wanted sausages, ham, I wanted cheese, which cannot be cooked at home. My grandparents always had a lot of products grown on their farm, but they also bought a lot of products in stores. Naturally, we are talking about the 60-80s.
            1. +3
              4 January 2023 19: 50
              Quote: Sergej1972
              Is it really bad for a collective farmer to buy a significant part of the products in stores? And why grow everything in your backyard? In the socialist GDR, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary, members of agricultural cooperatives and employees of state farms could buy almost all products in rural stores. Or it was possible to write out the necessary products on the farm itself. Whoever wanted, who liked it, worked on their personal plots. Who did not want to hunchback on them - no one forced them either. By the way, our villagers did not go to the city for sausage, cheese and other products because they did not have meat or milk. Cattle, birds were in the majority. But I wanted sausages, ham, I wanted cheese, which cannot be cooked at home. My grandparents always had a lot of products grown on their farm, but they also bought a lot of products in stores. Naturally, we are talking about the 60-80s.

              Did I say that the peasants were forced to grow something on their personal plots?
              It seemed to you. By the way, you can make sausage, cheese, butter yourself.
              How they churn butter, I saw with my aunt on the Don.
        3. -8
          4 January 2023 17: 18
          It was very hard to work on a collective farm, and then on a personal subsidiary plot. There was no time for intellectual and spiritual development. Just to feed the family.
          1. +8
            4 January 2023 19: 54
            Quote: Sergej1972
            It was very hard to work on a collective farm, and then on a personal subsidiary plot. There was no time for intellectual and spiritual development. Just to feed the family.

            That is, you just said that all collective farmers were stupid and spiritually poor?
            Is there a conscience?
            You actually eat what the peasants grow. Buns don't grow on trees.
            1. +1
              12 February 2023 13: 57
              The peasants are long gone. And if there is in some distant corners, then it is not at their expense that we eat with you.
          2. 0
            7 January 2023 22: 59
            Just to feed? Or buy a TV, a motorcycle?
        4. +5
          7 January 2023 17: 32
          Well, Comrade Stalin, as if looking into the water !!! But all this happened in the early 90s and is still happening. Here's how to disrespect him after that.
      3. +9
        4 January 2023 11: 25
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        turn into a rotting corpse with a bullet in the back of the head - this is the main "driving force" of the "Stalinist miracle".

        According to you, the people out of fear won the war and increased the population.
      4. +7
        4 January 2023 11: 47
        "Spark" read in due time, liberoid? Change the manual, it's rotten.
        1. +4
          4 January 2023 12: 30
          Quote: AVESSALOM
          "Spark" read in due time, liberoid? Change the manual, it's rotten.

          Clinical case of brainwashing, illiteracy and unwillingness to think. Alas, the nineties will haunt us for a long time.
      5. +12
        4 January 2023 12: 24
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        Everything was taken away from millions of people called "harmful classes" and they were taken to "settlements" in places "not so remote." Millions of peasants were called "only fellow travelers" and deprived of passports were attached to collective farms. Millions of "condemned" slaves worked on "great construction projects", in mines, forged "public happiness" for the rest ..... Fear. The fear of being in their place, or turning into a rotting corpse with a bullet in the back of the head, is the main "driving force" of the "Stalinist miracle." Zhvanetsky spoke with black humor about what exactly those who drown for the "red emperor" like so much today, but they are embarrassed to say it out loud - the owner's whip - did not fulfill the norm or workdays - that means the enemy, an accomplice of the imperialists - to his camp! in camp dust! and the fact that squealing was very effective - he snitched on a person and he was immediately taken away and no one saw him again. Lyapota.

        Just millions? Why not tens or hundreds of millions?
        Solzhenitsyn's laurels do not give rest?
        Did you live at that time?
        Can you answer how my mother before the war from the collective farm, allegedly without a passport, was able to leave the Tula region for Domodedovo and go to work at the Domodedovo railway station?
        And after the war, she took her mother to her from the collective farm, and then she took all four sisters. All "without a passport"?
        You can sell this nonsense to the victims of the exam.
        My sister graduated from the only high school in the area, which was in our city in the 68th year. Children from the surrounding villages studied at the school and ALL of them had passports at the age of 16.
        I graduated in 73 and we also had a lot of guys from the villages and they all had passports.
        So enough fables.
      6. +7
        4 January 2023 16: 32
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        Everything was taken away from millions of people called "harmful classes" and they were taken to "settlements" in places "not so remote."

        Better tell us how "The Red Army was crushed at a ratio of 14:1 in forty-one and 2:1 in forty-five."
        Most importantly, lie confidently and categorically. It's still crap, but more or less - it doesn't matter anymore!
      7. +7
        5 January 2023 17: 07
        Peasants were not deprived of passports (they did not have them under the "old" regime, like almost the entire population of the country), passports then successfully replaced certificates. - You need to understand that a passport is not a cheap thing, so they were not distributed for quite a long time ... Peasants were not attached to collective farms: if over a quarter of a century of the reign of Nicholas II, the population of cities grew by - 10 million people, then from 1925 to 1940 the urban the population of the USSR grew by - 40 million people, i.e. population mobility under Stalin quadrupled (at least). There are convicts everywhere and in the current United States, per capita, there are not fewer, but more than in the USSR. Well, as for fear, the current States, the West as a whole can give a hundred points head start to the Soviet Union in this: you blurted out something superfluous and you are out of work, without housing (because housing is on credit and you have to pay for it regularly), without a family, without children, who can be taken away, especially if you allow yourself to condemn pederasty, etc., and live in a box under a bridge .... In Soviet camps, at least they fed, there was a roof over your head, in the Solovetsky special purpose camp there were: a library, a newspaper, a first-aid post, a club, etc. At that time, Americans (and among them were illegally convicted (as elsewhere) were chained to the floor ....).
      8. +7
        5 January 2023 17: 17
        Passports were simply not needed. Nobody restricted the movement of people. Where did millions of workers suddenly come from, hundreds of thousands of engineers, scientists, doctors, officers, finally? Marshal Zhukov was from the village. from the same peasants. My father-in-law was a collective farmer in a village near Moscow, studied well at a rural school, went to circles, then got a job (without a passport?) as an electrician at a mine near Moscow, where he worked throughout the war. Then he entered MPEI, graduated from it and went to work at VEI, where he worked all his life. He received a Ph.D. degree, rose to the head of a department, where he worked until he was 90 years old. Often traveled abroad on business. Received Mr. Prize of the Russian Federation, had more than 40 inventions. After perestroika, he was called to Siemens - he did not go. Here's a typical "collective farmer without a passport" and "disenfranchised Soviet slave."
      9. +1
        10 January 2023 10: 27
        Well, yes, in your opinion, of course, the current reality is better with all these traitors, oligarchs, exporting the lion's share of profits abroad, commensurate with several budgets of Russia, with liberda and the fifth column, which, using liberal concessions and democratic laws, seeks to please the West to destroy Russia from the inside , and in general, our amorphous consumer society, after decades of being in a state of relaxation and constant imposition of Western values ​​alien to us, is not able to solve global problems that our people were capable of in the days of the great Stalin.
      10. 0
        12 February 2023 13: 51
        Quote: Monster_Fat
        and deprived of passports, were attached to collective farms

        A woman married a city dweller and goodbye to the village .. the boy went into the army, returned and received a passport, the state had to excel in order to tear the peasant from the land to eliminate the shortage of workers in industry. a large organization, let's call it a chok - "Belomor Canal" about 40 people working at the peak of construction, "Magnitogorsk" - 60,000-5 thousand and ten more similar construction sites. Food - do you remember a standard Soviet bread tray? so this is the prisoner's work norm for twenty-five people (the average brigade) just then they entered the tray three seven kilogram loaves of bread.
    2. +21
      4 January 2023 07: 10
      ... In 1965, on the 20th anniversary of the Victory, at our home, in the Nizhny Novgorod (then Gorky) region, in the district town on the Oka River, veterans gathered - those who survived from that call, who met "them" in June 41... in Belarus. Few, just a few people. Gathered not in May - in August. On the date when they left the encirclement ...
      They rejoiced at the meeting ... they remembered ... they smoked and drank ... they cried. And they sang...
      "... Let's drink to the Motherland! Let's drink to Stalin!
      Let's drink - and pour again!" ...
      I was a kid, but I remembered the words of this song tightly ...
      1. +12
        4 January 2023 08: 38
        Quote: Dingo
        .Let's drink for the Motherland! Let's drink to Stalin!
        Let's drink - and pour again!" ...

        hi
        People respected Stalin. A lot of people cried, sincerely worried when they learned about his death. And the words of Marshal Rokossovsky are often recalled
        Comrade Stalin is a saint for me!
        Whether he said it or not, that's the tenth thing, but it's certain that many in the Union thought so. It is difficult to even force a bad leader to be called a "saint" ...
        1. +6
          4 January 2023 14: 23
          Quote: Doccor18
          Quote: Dingo
          .Let's drink for the Motherland! Let's drink to Stalin!
          Let's drink - and pour again!" ...

          hi
          People respected Stalin. A lot of people cried, sincerely worried when they learned about his death. And the words of Marshal Rokossovsky are often recalled
          Comrade Stalin is a saint for me!
          Whether he said it or not, that's the tenth thing, but it's certain that many in the Union thought so. It is difficult to even force a bad leader to be called a "saint" ...

          Read what the first patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexy the First said on the death of Stalin, after the restoration of the patriarchy in the country.
          Peter the Great liquidated the patriarchate, and Stalin restored it.
          The current hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church have forgotten about the words of Alexy the First.
    3. +3
      4 January 2023 17: 15
      Without exception, all memoirists say that Stalin treated Lenin and his ideas with respect. And even during the years of the cult of Stalin, Lenin was still put in first place in all speeches and speeches of officials.
    4. TIR
      +4
      7 January 2023 21: 29
      To judge Stalin by his deeds, you need to think big. Whoever tries to look at his deeds always looks at the person through a small hole. Moreover, individuals who do not know history and economics are trying to judge by his deeds. So to speak, they pour mud on him mainly by professionals in boltology. Well, how can you restore order in a country where the civil war has just ended and people are used to relying on violence even in domestic disputes. How can one rely on cadres who can only break the state system and move from one camp to the opposite. Yes, they are great for going over to the Reds, but they are already unreliable! And how much have our modern private traders done for the village when compared with the times of collective farms and state farms? It is difficult to judge a person if he is like a rock, and you stand at its foot like an ant
    5. 0
      11 February 2023 22: 59
      It would be interesting to see how an agrarian country would fight the Japanese in Mongolia, the Finns in the north, and most interestingly, with the united Nazi Europe in the west.
  2. -9
    4 January 2023 05: 58
    Does the author have his own thoughts? Since he *took* so much from imported *giants of thought* and *fathers of RUSSIAN democracy*.
    Sorry.
    Previously, the author wrote out his washings for readers.
    Now it’s in vogue * to pull * all sorts of * opinions * and historical stuffing from foreign media, even if they are frankly false.
  3. +24
    4 January 2023 06: 10
    Industrialization, collectivization, and the scientific and technological revolution went hand in hand with the cultural revolution. A cult of youth, education and science, strength and purity was created. All the best was given to children (the future of the nation). A network of pioneer camps, houses of culture, creativity, music schools, etc. has been created throughout the country.


    Yes, they tried to make people not just literate, but also culturally educated. There was also a cult of classical art, opera, ballet, theater. The whole country knew Lemeshev, Kozlovsky, Lepeshinsky...
    Let me give you an example about the attitude towards music education. When the war began, all construction projects in Moscow were frozen, except for the construction of the metro, but one ground construction site was left and it was the Gnessin Sisters Music Institute. When young Sasha Pakhmutova was evacuated from Stalingrad to Moscow to the music school at the conservatory, she, like other students, was given a work card for food. It was under Stalin that the Bolshoi Theater became world famous. Soviet cinema was recognized by the whole world. There were no such number of children's music and art schools in any country in the world.
    1. +10
      4 January 2023 06: 18
      Quote: Konnick
      Yes, they tried to make people not just literate, but also culturally educated.

      This is part of the triune task of building communism. People did the job, not projectiles and tales were told.
      "You can become a communist only when you enrich your memory with the knowledge of all the riches that mankind has developed." VI Lenin - a guide to action.
    2. +10
      4 January 2023 09: 52
      Yes, they tried to make people not just literate, but also culturally educated.

      How else to exercise Soviet power?? You can’t put an illiterate, ignorant peasant to steer the country through the Soviets .. Communism is possible only with a highly educated people without exception .. It’s the bourgeois who need stupid biomass, it’s much easier to exploit and rob, and the communists - exactly the opposite. They have completely different tasks.
  4. 0
    4 January 2023 06: 12
    Samsonov Alexander!
    Beautiful essay: literature - 5, Russian - 4, history - 3.
    And now about the "heir" of I. V. Stalin, that is, about V. V. Putin, will you try to write?
    It’s not all the same for Surkov to carry all sorts of crap and snowstorms.
    1. +2
      4 January 2023 06: 24
      Quote: Vyacheslav Krylov
      Samsonov Alexander!
      Beautiful essay: literature - 5, Russian - 4, history - 3.
      .

      I'm afraid that you "...banned"! laughing
    2. 0
      4 January 2023 07: 38
      So there is every chance to move to the next class next year.
    3. +6
      4 January 2023 16: 55
      Quote: Vyacheslav Krylov
      And now about the "heir" of I. V. Stalin, that is, about V. V. Putin, will you try to write?
      It’s not all the same for Surkov to carry all sorts of crap and snowstorms.

      What to write? Took Russia with nuclear weapons, and left with a gas station.

      And yes, just in time for its innaguration, by May 7, 2024, the Victory Parade will be hosted - on the podium of the Movzolei, to the sound of defeated enemy banners from the hands of the National Guard.
  5. +5
    4 January 2023 06: 12
    Stalin was not an "emperor" ... And yes - he was just one of the "Lenin's guard of comrades-in-arms" ..
    1. +5
      4 January 2023 14: 27
      Quote: mat-vey
      Stalin was not an "emperor" ... And yes - he was just one of the "Lenin's guard of comrades-in-arms" ..

      He was not an autocrat.
      For example, the Central Committee did not approve Stalin's draft of a new electoral system that provided for the competitiveness of candidates.
      1. 0
        4 January 2023 15: 20
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        He was not an autocrat.

        Did I say that? Or did you not read the article?
        1. 0
          4 January 2023 20: 00
          Quote: mat-vey
          Quote: Ulan.1812
          He was not an autocrat.

          Did I say that? Or did you not read the article?

          You didn’t like me for some reason that you constantly turn my words around?
          Where did I write that you called Stalin an autocrat?
          What a reaction out of the blue. It was I who wrote that he was not an autocrat, as the liberals claim, and led the fact
          Can you refute it?
    2. +4
      4 January 2023 17: 01
      Quote: mat-vey
      Stalin was not an "emperor" ... And yes - he was just one of the "Lenin's guard of comrades-in-arms" ..

      Personally, Stalin as an "emperor" impresses me more. Man created an Empire that controlled the entire socialist bloc.
      1. +1
        4 January 2023 17: 13
        And on what grounds did you record the USSR in the empire?
      2. +1
        4 January 2023 17: 38
        Well, the PRC was not controlled even during Stalin's time. It had its own leader, Mao, who considered himself equal to Stalin. There were allied relations with China.
  6. 0
    4 January 2023 06: 13
    A normal, "fashionable" article on the wave of SVO .. Partially washes away the dirt that various gozmans and wellers are pouring (I liked how Weller ended up in the same company with outright Nazis on the Solovyov show about three years ago and how theatrically expressed his "embarrassment" by this)
  7. +14
    4 January 2023 06: 19

    "After my death, a pile of garbage will be put on my grave, but the wind of history will ruthlessly dispel it"
    1. 0
      4 January 2023 10: 14
      Very little time will pass and the Russian people, exhausted by gray mediocrities on the throne, will force the ROC to canonize I.V. Stalin.
  8. -8
    4 January 2023 06: 20
    Stalin got a completely ruined, murdered country.

    Incorrect expression - I.V. Stalin did not receive power in the state as an inheritance, but actively participated in its capture.
    1. +6
      4 January 2023 06: 27
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      and actively participated in its capture.

      That's right. Otherwise, the country would not have remained on the map.
    2. +13
      4 January 2023 07: 07
      and actively participated in its capture
      Together with Guchkov and Shulgin, he accepted the abdication of the throne from Nicholas II?hi smile
      1. -1
        4 January 2023 07: 16
        And he also led Protopopov and Alekseev ..
        1. +5
          4 January 2023 08: 02
          And he also led Protopopov and Alekseev ..
          Kornilov, provoked a coup .. smile
          1. -1
            4 January 2023 08: 11
            He is like that ... and he laid bombs ...
            1. +2
              4 January 2023 08: 28
              He is like that ... and he laid bombs ...
              Yes, nah ... this is Ilyich's handiwork, do not slander .. laughing
              1. -2
                4 January 2023 08: 31
                Quote: parusnik
                this is Ilyich's handiwork

                That's how I wrote it..
        2. +5
          4 January 2023 08: 42
          Quote: mat-vey
          And he also led Protopopov and Alekseev ..


          Quote: mat-vey
          He is like that ... and he laid bombs ...


          Carry nonsense, this is your "everything"!

          It is difficult to catch the difference between “got it”, which is acceptable for a legitimate change of power, and “captured”, which became possible after the “October Revolution”. Wake up and sing - in my understanding, Stalin achieved everything himself, unlike "citizen Romanov"!
          Now it's over, dear?
          In your case, because except for slogans and "snot" about the "Soviet past" they are not able to write! By the way, Stalin in his works, affecting the economy more than once or twice, refers to the pre-war 1913. Moreover, he gives a fairly sober assessment, which causes sincere respect.
          I personally feel “sickening” even to communicate with you, tk. I know all your arguments a step or two ahead.
          It's like the Author of the article, after two decades peeping the thesis of "Stalin's Soviet empire" from Shirokorad, hangs it on the republican form of government of the USSR!
          However, with this everything is clear, you need a “srach” on the forum. Achieved - this is only one way. The works of strong authors are stopped and a provocative theme from Samsonov is thrown in! Hamsters - Foreva!!!
          1. -4
            4 January 2023 08: 49
            Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
            Hamsters - Foreva!!!

            Ek you yourself.
            Tell us about the legitimacy of the interim government ..pzhsta.
            Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
            In your case, because except for slogans and "snot" about the "Soviet past" they are not able to write!

            Does the hangover hurt?
          2. -1
            4 January 2023 12: 51
            There is almost no sracha in articles about Stalin - this is a feast of sectarians. Look at the authors of the comments - they are not visible in historical articles. As well as vice versa - in such eulogies almost no commentators write from the "historical", sorry, part of the "History" section.
    3. +8
      4 January 2023 09: 38
      Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
      Incorrect expression - I.V. Stalin did not receive power in the state as an inheritance, but actively participated in its capture.


      Stalin received real fullness of power in 1929. From whom did he seize it? Trotsky? Well, Leiba was really a legitimate heir, of course!
      Or do you mean the "seizure of power" by the Bolsheviks in 1917? But as one of the Bolsheviks rightly noted, they did not seize power, but raised it from the St. Petersburg pavement.
      Since the government (Provisional Government), which does not control the situation even in the capital, allowing the existence of armed groups of people who are not really dependent on this government, a government that can be overthrown by the forces of several hundred armed sailors and soldiers is not power at all, but a fiction.
      And then there was the Civil War - the most democratic and most conscious choice of the people, which regime of power should be established. Convincing people to tick off the ballot in an election is one thing, but convincing people to take up arms and go to war for your ideas is much harder and harder. One PR is clearly not enough.

      Stalin is often presented as a kind of intriguer who outplayed his competitors in the struggle for power. In fact, the post that he formally held was not so important in the party hierarchy. This is the case when it is not the place that colors the person, but the person who painted, gave authority to the place that he occupied. The comrades realized that Stalin belongs to a rare category of people of action, of those who are really capable of managing, creating and organizing. Therefore, he got such a volume of real power.

      At the beginning of the Second World War, the GKO (State Defense Committee) was created. Stalin himself offered to take the post of its head G.K. Zhukov. But Zhukov, with all his ambition, refused. Understood - will not pull. Therefore, this post also went to Stalin. He was the one who was able to pull this heavy cart.
      And that's it.
      1. 0
        4 January 2023 17: 44
        Stalin did not offer Zhukov to take this post. The GKO was a party-state body uniting the activities of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR.
    4. 0
      4 January 2023 14: 31
      Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Stalin got a completely ruined, murdered country.

      Incorrect expression - I.V. Stalin did not receive power in the state as an inheritance, but actively participated in its capture.

      In fact, the post of General Secretary provided for election. And when he replaced Molotov as chairman of the government, this position provided for the appointment.
      1. 0
        4 January 2023 17: 58
        The Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars was appointed by the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, and then by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR at the suggestion of the Central Committee of the party. Naturally, his candidacy was previously discussed at the Plenum of the Central Committee. Then the decision of the Central Committee was brought to the members of the party group of the Central Executive Committee or the Supreme Soviet, which always met shortly before the start of the sessions of these bodies.
        1. -1
          4 January 2023 20: 04
          Quote: Sergej1972
          The Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars was appointed by the Central Executive Committee of the USSR, and then by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR at the suggestion of the Central Committee of the party. Naturally, his candidacy was previously discussed at the Plenum of the Central Committee. Then the decision of the Central Committee was brought to the members of the party group of the Central Executive Committee or the Supreme Soviet, which always met shortly before the start of the sessions of these bodies.

          So I wrote that the appointment.
  9. +1
    4 January 2023 06: 34
    The Soviet elite was responsible for the assigned work with their heads. And to the highest degree. Party workers, officials and directors of factories were personally responsible for the assigned work and entrusted values. The country was spared from mass theft, the withdrawal of huge funds abroad. Therefore, the funds did not go to cash palaces with golden toilets, yachts and planes, but to factories, schools, design bureaus, research institutes. This was how the real power of the state and the country was created.

    It is this concept of the organization of production that needs (is vital) to be urgently restored without any changes. So that there are simply no conditions for existence for liberal mold. Well, then - as in a good and smart children's riddle from the time of my youth - five sparrows chirped on a branch, two were shot, how many sparrows were left to THIRT on a branch?
  10. Eug
    +10
    4 January 2023 06: 40
    There is one more thing - Stalin sought to reduce the working day (with a corresponding increase in REAL labor productivity) so that workers would have more time for further
    education, sports, reading, attending pop concerts and theaters, and other leisure activities. Unfortunately, he did not bring up worthy followers ... or did not promote him.
    1. +3
      4 January 2023 06: 47
      Quote: Eug
      Unfortunately, he did not bring up worthy followers ... or did not promote him.

      Either they died, or they died ... or they were devoured by the more toothy "clings".
      1. +1
        4 January 2023 14: 33
        Quote: mat-vey
        Quote: Eug
        Unfortunately, he did not bring up worthy followers ... or did not promote him.

        Either they died, or they died ... or they were devoured by the more toothy "clings".

        Khrushchev ate everyone with the help of Zhukov. And then he ate Zhukov.
        1. +1
          4 January 2023 15: 21
          Quote: Ulan.1812
          Khrushchev ate everyone with the help of Zhukov.

          Not only Zhukov ..
    2. 0
      4 January 2023 18: 00
      Unfortunately, this did not apply to the countryside. After a hard, often irregular working day on the collective farm, one still had to work on his personal plot.
      1. +1
        7 January 2023 23: 20
        Yep, especially in winter. When it was just necessary to feed the living creatures of the grain received in kind from the collective farm ...
    3. 0
      4 January 2023 18: 05
      The most worthy in the mid-40s are Zhdanov and Voznesensky. Zhdanov could well head the Central Committee, and Voznesensky the government. Zhdanov died suddenly, and Voznesensky was shot, partly because of the intrigues of Malenkov and Bulganin. Remained Malenkov, Khrushchev, Bulganin. Beria could only claim the role of "gray eminence". Ultimately, Khrushchev won.
    4. TIR
      +2
      7 January 2023 21: 39
      Yes, the 8-hour working day was introduced in the USSR for the first time. At the same time, an economic crisis was raging in the West. Ordinary people had to work from sunrise to sunset in order to earn food for the same day. And this is not fiction. I do not remember the author, but I remember the name of the story - "The Grapes of Wrath". That is why communist ideas could easily take over the minds of the poor population of Western countries. They were forced to introduce mitigations for workers following the example of the USSR
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. -29
    4 January 2023 06: 52
    Stalin got a completely ruined, murdered country. A destroyed civilization and a people bled white by the First World War, turmoil and intervention.


    Actually, the militant, the terrorist Stalin did everything, together with Lenin, so that the country reached such a state.

    The consequences and results of Stalin's activities can and should be assessed on the basis of simple and accessible facts. These facts include the statistics of changes in the population of the Russian Empire before the revolution and the USSR in 1991. In 1916, 191 million people lived in the Russian Empire. At the same time, 102 million people lived in the United States. In 1991, the population of the USSR was 288.2 million people, in the United States at that time 253.5 million people lived. In fact, the population of the USSR, thanks to the mediocre rule of the Bolsheviks and communists, increased by 50%, while the population of the United States increased by 150%. It is this simple fact that is the answer to the questions of assessing activity, primarily Stalin. Simply, probably because there was probably no more bloodthirsty dictator in the history of mankind. In fact, Russia lost during the reign of Stalin and from 1917 to 1991 at least 190 million people. for various reasons, due to the physical destruction of the population and the decline in demographic growth, due to unbearable living conditions. If we compare the pre-revolutionary population growth rates of the Russian Empire and the United States, then much more. You should not look for good in the bloodthirsty dictator Stalin, and Lenin too. The Bolsheviks not only destroyed the third economy of the world, but brought countless suffering to the population.
    1. +9
      4 January 2023 06: 54
      Oh, the inhabitants of the parallel universe have pulled themselves up ... Something for a long time today. Probably the New Year holidays are affecting?
      1. +7
        4 January 2023 07: 42
        The Bolsheviks not only destroyed the third economy of the world, but brought countless suffering to the population

        Especially the pot head
        1. +3
          4 January 2023 07: 45
          Quote: Konnick
          Especially the pot head

          And it doesn't matter where you live.
      2. +2
        4 January 2023 14: 39
        Quote: mat-vey
        Oh, the inhabitants of the parallel universe have pulled themselves up ... Something for a long time today. Probably the New Year holidays are affecting?

        More like a problem with email. energy.
    2. +9
      4 January 2023 10: 00
      pre-revolutionary population growth rates of the Russian Empire and the United States, then much more

      My friend - everything is trivial ... The fact is that before the reforms of the father of the Russian revolution, Stolypin, the land in the peasant community was divided by eaters. The more children, the more he put on .. But as soon as the communal land tenure was destroyed by him, the birth rate immediately went down. Even in recent years, RI. For having 5-7 children in the village has simply become unprofitable ..

      As for the terrible birth rate under the damned Bolsheviks - why don’t you compare it with the modern one? It seems like blessed capitalism is in the yard, like democracy is flourishing - but the people don’t want to procreate in any way .. But you viciously hate Comrade Stalin for the allegedly low birth rate, but Mr. Putin for the outright extinction of the Russian people - no ... Why so, huh?
      1. +6
        4 January 2023 10: 03
        In the demographics of the United States, one cannot ignore immigrants and the absence of serious wars.
        1. +3
          4 January 2023 14: 41
          Quote: mat-vey
          In the demographics of the United States, one cannot ignore immigrants and the absence of serious wars.

          As one of my acquaintances said, in the USA, due to World War II, not a single stool was broken. Just got rich.
      2. -6
        5 January 2023 01: 28
        To call a spade a spade, and not to operate with templates is probably right. To assess the activities of the Bolsheviks, including Stalin, or Lenin, one must talk with grandparents on the rubble, comparing their words with smart books. The picture doesn't match unfortunately. In the families of my parents there were 5 children, before the war, in the 20s and 30s of the last century, and I was alone. All relatives also had no more than three children. Who will build, develop and defend the country if there is no one to take weapons and tools into their hands. Where will the children come from, at best, in one or two rooms and a 6-meter kitchen. You are probably a pilot and you can see everything from above, except for details. I am not defending Putin, but he corrects the mistakes of Stalin, Lenin and their followers.
        1. +4
          5 January 2023 04: 56
          Quote from Eugene Zaboy
          Where will the children come from, at best, in one or two rooms and a 6-meter kitchen.

          And what about a five-walled hut (with one room) or even a four-walled hut (without rooms at all), where did they come from? laughing
    3. +6
      4 January 2023 10: 11
      I collected all the liberal clichés about the USSR in one comment.
      Russia was destroyed not by the Bolsheviks, but by Tsar Nicholas II with his abdication in March 1917 and the Duma liberals.
      And the Bolsheviks only picked up in October 1917 the power in the country, lying on the pavements.
      1. 0
        4 January 2023 14: 45
        Quote from StarWarrior
        I collected all the liberal clichés about the USSR in one comment.
        Russia was destroyed not by the Bolsheviks, but by Tsar Nicholas II with his abdication in March 1917 and the Duma liberals.
        And the Bolsheviks only picked up in October 1917 the power in the country, lying on the pavements.

        Did you read what this illiterate miracle wrote? - "... during the reign of Stalin from 1917 to 1991 ...".
        FUCK!
        This guy is stupid as a cork and climbs to discuss serious topics.
        1. -2
          4 January 2023 21: 29
          Oh! If only it were so! Judas of all times and peoples, the devil, the bald labeled son of the Devil Gorbachev would have been shot and we would now live in the best and most powerful Country in the world - the USSR!
      2. 0
        4 January 2023 18: 12
        To be fair, under Nicholas II we lost South Sakhalin. And the Kuriles were assigned to Japan under an agreement between the Republic of Ingushetia and Japan, signed during the time of Alexander II. In accordance with it, Sakhalin, which had previously been jointly owned by the two countries, was completely assigned to Russia, in return, Japan gained control of the Kuriles, more precisely, over their northern and central parts. The southern part was under the rule of Japan before that.
      3. -6
        5 January 2023 02: 20
        Quote from StarWarrior
        I collected all the liberal clichés about the USSR in one comment.


        In the 1890s railway construction continues to grow, and with it industry (an average of 7,6% per year), moreover, not only because of the demand for raw materials for the needs of construction, but due to increasing exports. In the period from 1906 to 1914, industry grew by an average of 6% a year. In general, for the period 1887-1913. industrial production in Russia increased by 4,6 times, the country takes 4-5 places in the world in terms of the absolute size of the extraction of iron ore, coal and steel smelting. The share in world industrial production was 2,6% in 1913.[68] In terms of total industrial production, it ranks 5th-6th in the world.

        With the beginning of the exploitation of the Baku region, Russia in 1900 came out on top in oil production. After the end of the crisis of 1899, industrial production increased 1,5 times in 1909–1913, with heavy industry 174% and light industry 137%.

        In 1912, the national income per capita in Russia was 110 rubles. in gold, in Germany - 300 rubles, England - 500, USA - 720 [69]. In 1913, industry grows, but the country remains a peasant one (in the cities 16% of the population, the number of proletarians is almost 4.2 million people, when in Germany the population of the city is 43,7%, in England - 51,5%).


        The Bolsheviks should not have interfered in their own business, and We would have lived in a beautiful country with a population of at least 500 million people.

        I. V. Stalin

        1. Destroyed the NEP, depriving the country of small farms, cafes, restaurants, shops, entrepreneurs. Destroyed it all along with the owners. Thus, he programmed the collapse of the USSR in 1991.
        2. Destroyed the highest command staff of the Red Army, programming the highest losses in the Second World War.
        3. With completely inexplicable orders, he actually destroyed the cadre army of the USSR in 1941, sending unprepared conscripts to fight the Nazis, leaving the country without a population.
        4. He built plants and factories on the bones of builders (private entrepreneurs, scientists, doctors, military men, intellectuals), leaving the country without cultural, scientific and technical potential.

        You can continue for a long time.
        1. TIR
          +2
          7 January 2023 21: 49
          When such amateurs write, and even operate with statistics, they only show how narrow-minded and miserable people are in this camp. Well, if we say in 1980 there was exactly 1 bucket of oil production in the Republic of Ingushetia, and in 1913 they began to produce a barrel, then yes, the increase will look beautiful. Increased production by 10 times! Moreover, this oil will be in the hands of Western companies))) Lord, how miserable all these statistics are
    4. +5
      4 January 2023 14: 38
      Quote from Eugene Zaboy
      Stalin got a completely ruined, murdered country. A destroyed civilization and a people bled white by the First World War, turmoil and intervention.


      Actually, the militant, the terrorist Stalin did everything, together with Lenin, so that the country reached such a state.

      The consequences and results of Stalin's activities can and should be assessed on the basis of simple and accessible facts. These facts include the statistics of changes in the population of the Russian Empire before the revolution and the USSR in 1991. In 1916, 191 million people lived in the Russian Empire. At the same time, 102 million people lived in the United States. In 1991, the population of the USSR was 288.2 million people, in the United States at that time 253.5 million people lived. In fact, the population of the USSR, thanks to the mediocre rule of the Bolsheviks and communists, increased by 50%, while the population of the United States increased by 150%. It is this simple fact that is the answer to the questions of assessing activity, primarily Stalin. Simply, probably because there was probably no more bloodthirsty dictator in the history of mankind. In fact, Russia lost during the reign of Stalin and from 1917 to 1991 at least 190 million people. for various reasons, due to the physical destruction of the population and the decline in demographic growth, due to unbearable living conditions. If we compare the pre-revolutionary population growth rates of the Russian Empire and the United States, then much more. You should not look for good in the bloodthirsty dictator Stalin, and Lenin too. The Bolsheviks not only destroyed the third economy of the world, but brought countless suffering to the population.

      And do people like you take responsibility for words?
      In the 91st, did Stalin still rule?
      Why such a stupid comparison?
      Dropped the war? How many in the US died during WWII?
      Baby, can you bring at least one sentence of the court to Stalin under a criminal article?
      For whom is your primitive lie intended, for the same illiterate victims of the Unified State Examination?
    5. +3
      4 January 2023 18: 08
      A decrease in demographic growth was noted during this period in all developed countries. And the migration factor played an important role in the growth of the US population.
  13. +1
    4 January 2023 07: 02
    Red Emperor JV Stalin
    Blue Emperor - VV Putin
    White Emperor is yet to come.
    all the best to all the russian people in the coming year.
    AMB
    1. +2
      4 January 2023 07: 10
      White Emperor yet to come - who do you mean? If it's not a secret, of course.
      1. -1
        4 January 2023 07: 45
        What did Vanga say about this...top secret?
      2. +1
        4 January 2023 07: 54
        Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
        White Emperor

        Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev! So what ? Turns white by age 24.
        1. +5
          4 January 2023 08: 13
          So what ? Turns white by age 24.
          Why would? He was not pale pink either. During the years of his presidency, the third round of debunking the "cult of personality", de-Sovietization began ..
          1. +5
            4 January 2023 14: 47
            Quote: parusnik
            So what ? Turns white by age 24.
            Why would? He was not pale pink either. During the years of his presidency, the third round of debunking the "cult of personality", de-Sovietization began ..

            Medvedev has always been anti-Soviet.
  14. +1
    4 January 2023 07: 09
    Red Emperor. Stalin's lessons for Russia
    It started, let it be "red", but the emperor .. smile
  15. +12
    4 January 2023 07: 25
    Stalin was able to revive the country, though under a different name. His greatness lies precisely in the fact that despite attempts to erase his name from Russian history, the people still honor his memory.
    1. +1
      12 January 2023 14: 00
      This is because Stalin earned the respect and love of the people with the real deeds and achievements of the country he led, and everyone who was in leadership after him practically nullified many of his achievements, Khrushchev alone is worth anything, I’m not talking about such tyrants and traitors to the interests of their country as Gorbachev and Yeltsin, may they burn in eternal hell.
  16. -2
    4 January 2023 07: 51
    Quote: Leader_Barmaleev
    Well, then - as in a good and smart children's riddle from the time of my youth - five sparrows chirped on a branch, two were shot, how many sparrows were left to THIRT on a branch?

    Shine! The answer is none.
  17. +13
    4 January 2023 07: 51
    Yes, IV Stalin, whose man the world will never forget. Only under him, they started talking about the USSR in a respectful tone. The mediocrities who came after him slowly lowered their inheritance, which was inherited by the enormous tension of the country and its people. The last rulers, starting with Gorbachev, blew all post-war achievements and successes , having thrown the Russian Federation back into an incomprehensible system, while ruining almost all industry and science created with such difficulty, and returning Russia to the borders of the XNUMXth century. Now more relevant than ever....
    The question is - is there in Russia at the moment, a personality of the level of Comrade Stalin, in order to pull the country from where the current rulers drove Russia?
    1. -3
      4 January 2023 08: 51
      The question is - is there in Russia at the moment, a personality of the level of Comrade Stalin, in order to pull the country from where the current rulers drove Russia?

      Centuries are running, but the Russian inhabitant does not change - "The master will come - the master will judge us"! laughing
      In vain I put a smiley, in fact, the expectation among the people of the “Good Tsar” or “Strong Hand” is the most terrible vices of our Fatherland!
      1. +6
        4 January 2023 09: 55
        Enough of this nonsense already. History has proven that the head of the State can both make a huge breakthrough in the development of his country - like Peter the Great, Stalin, Lee Kuan Yew, and ruin it - like the benefactors of the Stalinophobes - Gorbachev, Yeltsin, his "successor".
        And the enemies of the USSR, who seized the RSFSR, slandered the Soviet period, especially the Stalin period, proved that they did not care for the entire centuries-old pre-revolutionary period - except for the reign of Nicholas II, which they falsified for the sake of profit in the anti-Soviet era, the reign of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, they threw out their history of their anti-Soviet period.
        It was on such a "history" of our country and people that they created their State.
        1. +4
          4 January 2023 14: 51
          Quote: tatra
          Enough of this nonsense already. History has proven that the head of the State can both make a huge breakthrough in the development of his country - like Peter the Great, Stalin, Lee Kuan Yew, and ruin it - like the benefactors of the Stalinophobes - Gorbachev, Yeltsin, his "successor".
          And the enemies of the USSR, who seized the RSFSR, slandered the Soviet period, especially the Stalin period, proved that they did not care for the entire centuries-old pre-revolutionary period - except for the reign of Nicholas II, which they falsified for the sake of profit in the anti-Soviet era, the reign of Gorbachev and Yeltsin, they threw out their history of their anti-Soviet period.
          It was on such a "history" of our country and people that they created their State.

          They are also trying to make the Russian army the heir to the army of the Russian Empire, and not the Slavic army of victoriousness.
          Removed all Soviet orders, remade from stars to crosses.
          They removed the red banners and introduced banners with crosses as they were in the Russian Empire.
      2. 0
        4 January 2023 14: 24
        the Russian inhabitant does not change - "The master will come - the master will judge us"!


        Yes, the Second Commandment is not about them, that's for sure - "Do not make yourself an idol" (c)
        1. +2
          4 January 2023 15: 24
          Quote: Sea Cat
          Yes, the second commandment is not about them

          And you, apparently, from the counts, sir ...
      3. 0
        4 January 2023 14: 27
        Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
        in fact, the expectation among the people of the “Good Tsar” or “Strong Hand” is the most terrible vices of our Fatherland!

        And where, and in what country, do they not wait for the Good Tsar? In our Fatherland, there are vices and it is not necessary to list them, we know without a reminder. And what country, people do not have them? There are no sinless ones. More elections? More honestly? So we could also be, to be honest ..but...
        That's it.
        1. 0
          4 January 2023 15: 21
          Quote: Unknown
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          in fact, the expectation among the people of the “Good Tsar” or “Strong Hand” is the most terrible vices of our Fatherland!

          And where, and in what country, do they not wait for the Good Tsar? In our Fatherland, there are vices and it is not necessary to list them, we know without a reminder. And what country, people do not have them? There are no sinless ones. More elections? More honestly? So we could also be, to be honest ..but...
          That's it.

          The state, like any organization, any system cannot exist without leadership.
          If the leadership is weak and incompetent, then at best it will lead to problems.
          At worst, to the collapse of the state, as in 1917 and 1991.
          In relation to the enterprise - bankruptcy and closure.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. TIR
      +1
      7 January 2023 21: 52
      We do not even now have personalities not of the same level as him, but at least such that there is enough intelligence and knowledge to assess how great Stalin was. Compared to Stalin, GDP will remain an official of a county town
  18. -1
    4 January 2023 08: 38
    The "Golden Calf" by Ilf and Petrov could not possibly be an encyclopedia of the theft of the then Russia, as the author pointed out.
    Those events, which are described in the book, fell on the period of great construction projects, the decay of the NEP, general enthusiasm, so to speak - the flight to a new civilization.
    It is believed that the famous books of Ilf and Petrov were anti-Russian, these two writers simply mocked everything Russian.
    1. +4
      4 January 2023 18: 18
      There is no need to invent, there is nothing anti-Russian in these books.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  19. +6
    4 January 2023 09: 09
    The Stalinist period of Rus'-Russia is the healthiest in a 1000-year period. Criterion: the degree of convergence with the natural organic state of the people. The last 30-year period is a Russian national catastrophe, the same criterion.
    1. -3
      5 January 2023 08: 21
      Quote: Alexander Ra
      The Stalinist period of Rus'-Russia is the healthiest in a 1000-year period

      trouble, fooled to amazement, like Ukrainians
  20. +3
    4 January 2023 09: 42
    Quote: Eug
    Unfortunately, he did not bring up worthy followers ... or did not promote him.


    Rather, they were quickly "pushed" after the death of the IVS. There was a purge of the Politburo and the party apparatus in general ... I think it is clear who carried it out (wanting to establish their own "cult of personality".

    - And what is this noise, Joseph?
    - Yes, this is Khrushchev with his cot climbing towards us, Vladimir Ilyich.
    1. 0
      4 January 2023 09: 54
      And while he was climbing, how many of Stalin's undertakings he ruined, in order to remove the people who embodied them, but prevented the authorities from tidying up.
      1. 0
        4 January 2023 18: 20
        In the economic sphere, many projects were closed at the initiative of Beria and Malenkov, even before the transfer of power into the hands of Khrushchev.
  21. +5
    4 January 2023 09: 49
    Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
    In vain I put a smiley, in fact, the expectation among the people of the “Good Tsar” or “Strong Hand” is the most terrible vices of our Fatherland!


    "An army of deer led by a lion will overcome an army of lions led by a deer."

    Does the quote belong to a Russian serf or to someone else?
    There is nothing to be done, other methods of management, except for command-administrative, vertical-hierarchical - humanity has not yet come up with.
    And if you believe that power in the "free world" of the West is not centralized, that there are no "emperors" there, then you are deeply mistaken.
    There are those who make decisions, there are those who are obliged to fulfill them. In the state, business, army... no matter where.
    Any system is an analog of an organism. Just as a highly developed organism cannot exist without a brain, so a system cannot exist without a "decision-making center".

    Someday it will be different. But before that - thousands of years, at least.
    1. -2
      4 January 2023 09: 58
      Quote: Illanatol
      Any system is an analog of an organism. Just as a highly developed organism cannot exist without a brain, so a system cannot exist without a "decision-making center".

      They are more at turning points and critical moments. Nevertheless, the ideas of a more democratic structure of society have never been forgotten.
  22. +5
    4 January 2023 10: 04
    Stalin is undoubtedly the Greatest and most successful Leader of Russia in the last thousand years, with whom no tsar and president can compare.
    And all the phenomenal economic and political successes were achieved by Stalin not only thanks to his intellect, but also due to his personal non-acquisitiveness, his lack of craving for luxury and nepotism and the introduction of a clear and inevitable responsibility for failure to fulfill orders for everyone.
    He did not have palaces trimmed with gold, except for the Kremlin.
    If Stalin had selected personnel on the basis of personal devotion and the complete irresponsibility of those close to him, as now, then he would not have achieved any success.
    And cruelty in management then was absolutely inevitable and necessary, since Stalin was surrounded by very cruel people who had drunk blood during the First World War and the Civil War and they did not understand other means of persuasion.


    1. -3
      5 January 2023 02: 33
      Where are they now, your collective farms and your USSR? After great people there should be no ruins.
  23. +3
    4 January 2023 11: 29
    Thus, Russian communism, Stalinism, in essence, repeated the best ideals of Christian civilization[B] [/ b]
    Oho ... Beauty))))
    1. 0
      4 January 2023 21: 32
      Yes, everything is so - Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church in 1943
  24. +9
    4 January 2023 11: 34
    The fear of being in their place, or turning into a rotting corpse with a bullet in the back of the head, is the main "driving force" of the "Stalinist miracle."

    Thus, for you, Stalin is like the Lord God. A creature of supernatural power that instills fear in everyone. If he believes you, and Zhvanetsky, Stalin defeated his party, army, working class and peasantry of Russia with fear and terror, and then he himself did the same with Nazi Germany. Such a crazy idea of ​​political leaders and their role in history exists only in the Western worldview.
    The leader is a separate person who does not represent anything without his followers, those who believe him and follow him. Without those who went into battle for "Stalin and the Motherland".
    And the title "red emperor" or "tsar" is an insult to Stalin. He didn't inherit anything.
    1. +4
      4 January 2023 14: 56
      Quote: Kostadinov
      The fear of being in their place, or turning into a rotting corpse with a bullet in the back of the head, is the main "driving force" of the "Stalinist miracle."

      Thus, for you, Stalin is like the Lord God. A creature of supernatural power that instills fear in everyone. If he believes you, and Zhvanetsky, Stalin defeated his party, army, working class and peasantry of Russia with fear and terror, and then he himself did the same with Nazi Germany. Such a crazy idea of ​​political leaders and their role in history exists only in the Western worldview.
      The leader is a separate person who does not represent anything without his followers, those who believe him and follow him. Without those who went into battle for "Stalin and the Motherland".
      And the title "red emperor" or "tsar" is an insult to Stalin. He didn't inherit anything.

      You are absolutely right. Nothing can be built on fear.
      You can build only with faith in what you build and with faith in those with whom you build.
  25. +2
    4 January 2023 11: 50
    Does the current leader look pale? countries against the backdrop of titanium. Maybe that's why he never went to the grave of the Leader?
    1. -3
      4 January 2023 12: 38
      Quote: AVESSALOM
      Does the current leader look pale? countries against the backdrop of titanium. Maybe that's why he never went to the grave of the Leader?

      Let it “work-work”, and not roam the graves of the leaders!
      1. +4
        4 January 2023 15: 01
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Quote: AVESSALOM
        Does the current leader look pale? countries against the backdrop of titanium. Maybe that's why he never went to the grave of the Leader?

        Let it “work-work”, and not roam the graves of the leaders!

        Could have gone and would not have fallen apart.
        A decent person would show gratitude to those who built the country that he got.
        But for some reason he shows respect for those who ruined the country.
        To Yeltsin, I went to the grave of Denikin, Ilyin.
        The preferences are clear.
  26. -3
    4 January 2023 13: 22
    As a result, when the collective West struck, Russia was ready
    The collective West is today, and in the 41st Germany and its satellites.
    Get basic military training, become future paratroopers
    become future paratroopers
    A cult of youth was created
    there is no need to write nonsense - there was never such a cult in the USSR.
    A cult of a healthy lifestyle was created - physical culture and sports
    Stalin managed to do the almost impossible. He not only kept civilization
    the author is clearly in love with Stalin laughing
  27. +4
    4 January 2023 13: 35
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    The Bolsheviks not only destroyed the third economy of the world, but brought countless suffering to the population.


    Please us with a list of achievements of the "third world economy".

    So, in the first - second place - the United States and the British Empire. And on the third - the Russian Empire?
    Like the Second Reich (Kaiser's Germany) was inferior to Tsarist Russia? What, may I inquire? In the production of hemp and the extraction of fur-bearing animals? laughing
    1. +2
      4 January 2023 15: 28
      Quote: Illanatol
      Quote from Eugene Zaboy
      The Bolsheviks not only destroyed the third economy of the world, but brought countless suffering to the population.


      Please us with a list of achievements of the "third world economy".

      So, in the first - second place - the United States and the British Empire. And on the third - the Russian Empire?
      Like the Second Reich (Kaiser's Germany) was inferior to Tsarist Russia? What, may I inquire? In the production of hemp and the extraction of fur-bearing animals? laughing

      In 1913, the Republic of Ingushetia ranked sixth in economic development. After USA, Germany, England, Japan, France.
      As well as the pace of economic development.
      Of course, there were some successes, but at the same time, entire industries were absent. For example engine building, production of bearings and so on.
      All this had to be created almost from scratch.
      The country remained largely agricultural.
      1. +1
        4 January 2023 15: 47
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        For example engine building, production of bearings and so on.

        You are right .. if you list this "other" then almost all industrial sectors of that time turn out ..
        1. +2
          4 January 2023 20: 11
          Quote: mat-vey
          Quote: Ulan.1812
          For example engine building, production of bearings and so on.

          You are right .. if you list this "other" then almost all industrial sectors of that time turn out ..

          Absolutely right. That's why I didn't list it. It will be a very big list.
      2. +3
        4 January 2023 18: 26
        I would like to correct you. In fifth place. Japan was in sixth place, and its share in world industrial production was more than three times less than in Russia.
        1. +2
          4 January 2023 20: 12
          Quote: Sergej1972
          I would like to correct you. In fifth place. Japan was in sixth place, and its share in world industrial production was more than three times less than in Russia.

          Accepted... Thank you.
    2. -1
      5 January 2023 02: 36
      Quote: Illanatol
      Please us with a list of achievements of the "third world economy".

      So, in the first - second place - the United States and the British Empire. And on the third - the Russian Empire?
      Like the Second Reich (Kaiser's Germany) was inferior to Tsarist Russia? What, may I inquire? In the production of hemp and the extraction of fur-bearing animals?


      In the 1890s Railway construction continues to grow, and with it industry (an average of 7,6% per year), moreover, not only because of the demand for raw materials for the needs of construction, but due to increasing exports. In the period from 1906 to 1914, industry grew by an average of 6% a year. In general, for the period 1887-1913. industrial production in Russia increased by 4,6 times, the country takes 4-5 places in the world in terms of the absolute size of the extraction of iron ore, coal and steel smelting. Its share in world industrial production was 2,6 percent in 1913. In terms of total industrial production, it ranks 5th or 6th in the world.

      With the beginning of the exploitation of the Baku region, Russia in 1900 came out on top in oil production. After the end of the crisis of 1899, industrial production increased 1,5 times in 1909–1913, with heavy industry 174% and light industry 137%.

      In 1912, the national income per capita in Russia was 110 rubles. in gold, in Germany - 300 rubles, England - 500, USA - 720 [69]. In 1913, industry grows, but the country remains a peasant one (in the cities 16% of the population, the number of proletarians is almost 4.2 million people, when in Germany the population of the city is 43,7%, in England - 51,5%).
  28. +1
    4 January 2023 13: 37
    Author:
    Samsonov Alexander - everything is so. Your words would be yes to Putin's ears
  29. +2
    4 January 2023 13: 45
    Quote: mat-vey
    Nevertheless, the ideas of a more democratic structure of society were never forgotten.


    "An idea becomes a force when it seizes the masses."
    A necessary condition, but not a sufficient one. In order for the idea to come true, objective prerequisites for such a thing are needed.
    Real democracy requires citizens, not subjects.
    "The more king in the head - the less you need a king on the throne." That is, less external management and stimulation is needed for those who have more consciousness, intelligence, initiative, commitment to self-discipline and self-organization skills.
    To do this, you need education, culture in the broadest sense of the word. One of the main achievements of the Stalinist system is that it dramatically increased the average level of education of our people. Yesterday's subjects became citizens and their citizenship was extremely convincingly shown in the Second World War.
    Alas, over time, this heritage began to be squandered, we began to degrade. Especially quickly - since the "perestroika times", when the process of bydlization of the population began to grow. Colonial compratodor capitalism does not need citizens, it needs loyal subjects.
    1. 0
      4 January 2023 15: 28
      Quote: Illanatol
      In order for the idea to come true, objective prerequisites for such a thing are needed.

      Well, that's why it turned out that practically only "didn't forget."
    2. +1
      4 January 2023 18: 32
      But, you see, the level of leadership, management, ideological work in Khrushchev's and especially in Brezhnev's times clearly did not correspond to the increased cultural and educational level of the population. It was during this period that it was necessary to slowly but steadily carry out a controlled, but real democratization in the country. The people were ready for this.
  30. +4
    4 January 2023 14: 08
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    In 1991, the population of the USSR was 288.2 million people, in the United States at that time 253.5 million people lived. In fact, the population of the USSR, thanks to the mediocre rule of the Bolsheviks and communists, increased by 50%, while the population of the United States increased by 150%.


    1. The decline in population growth in our country is due to accelerated urbanization. In 1916, the share of the urban population in the Republic of Ingushetia was less than 15%. By 1991, the share of the urban population of the USSR was approximately 70%. The fact that in cities the birth rate is lower than in rural areas was known in antiquity.
    2. What demographic losses did our country suffer in the two world wars, and what did the United States suffer? Moreover, participation in the First World War is the merit exclusively of the tsar-priest. Well, what can we do, we are not as lucky with geography as the United States, which is protected from external aggression by two oceans (Canada and Mexico are not drawn to aggressors).
    The United States in the world wars had a fair amount of money, and at the expense of other Western countries.
    3. The Russian Empire and the USSR did not exactly coincide geographically. Poland (eastern part) and Finland were not included in the USSR. Well? How's the demographics? Also the population grew by 150% or what?
    4. Why are we comparing with the USA? Why not with France and Germany, not with England or Italy? Or then the comparison will not be in favor of these Western countries, which will be closer historically and geographically?
    5. And what, after the modern analogue of the "belyakov" came to power, did the demographic situation improve? Private property has returned, there are capitalists and landlords, a flag and a double-headed eagle - in place ... what is missing? "God save the king"? We will return - and we will start breeding, as in the 19th century? Sure?
    6. If tsarism was so good, why didn’t anyone even try to return it to the Civil War? The Whites then fought more for democracy and a republic (like Denikin) or for a right-wing dictatorship (Kolchak and Kornilov).
    And where are the supporters of the autocracy now? The communists have enough supporters, there is a political party represented in the State Duma ... but where are the home-grown monarchist autocrats?

    So, Mr. "Olgovich", you are trying in vain. Okay, Happy New Year to you...
    1. +1
      4 January 2023 15: 32
      Quote: Illanatol
      Quote from Eugene Zaboy
      In 1991, the population of the USSR was 288.2 million people, in the United States at that time 253.5 million people lived. In fact, the population of the USSR, thanks to the mediocre rule of the Bolsheviks and communists, increased by 50%, while the population of the United States increased by 150%.


      1. The decline in population growth in our country is due to accelerated urbanization. In 1916, the share of the urban population in the Republic of Ingushetia was less than 15%. By 1991, the share of the urban population of the USSR was approximately 70%. The fact that in cities the birth rate is lower than in rural areas was known in antiquity.
      2. What demographic losses did our country suffer in the two world wars, and what did the United States suffer? Moreover, participation in the First World War is the merit exclusively of the tsar-priest. Well, what can we do, we are not as lucky with geography as the United States, which is protected from external aggression by two oceans (Canada and Mexico are not drawn to aggressors).
      The United States in the world wars had a fair amount of money, and at the expense of other Western countries.
      3. The Russian Empire and the USSR did not exactly coincide geographically. Poland (eastern part) and Finland were not included in the USSR. Well? How's the demographics? Also the population grew by 150% or what?
      4. Why are we comparing with the USA? Why not with France and Germany, not with England or Italy? Or then the comparison will not be in favor of these Western countries, which will be closer historically and geographically?
      5. And what, after the modern analogue of the "belyakov" came to power, did the demographic situation improve? Private property has returned, there are capitalists and landlords, a flag and a double-headed eagle - in place ... what is missing? "God save the king"? We will return - and we will start breeding, as in the 19th century? Sure?
      6. If tsarism was so good, why didn’t anyone even try to return it to the Civil War? The Whites then fought more for democracy and a republic (like Denikin) or for a right-wing dictatorship (Kolchak and Kornilov).
      And where are the supporters of the autocracy now? The communists have enough supporters, there is a political party represented in the State Duma ... but where are the home-grown monarchist autocrats?

      So, Mr. "Olgovich", you are trying in vain. Okay, Happy New Year to you...

      Indeed, where is the monarchist party in Russia? lol
    2. +1
      4 January 2023 18: 41
      In fairness, there is an example of a country where the birth rate in rural areas was lower than in cities. This is France for much of the 19th century and early 20th century. There were social and economic reasons. You are right when you write about Finland and Russian Poland. On the other hand, the USSR included the territories of Eastern Galicia, Northern Bukovina, Transcarpathia, the former Emirate of Bukhara and the Khiva Khanate that were not part of the Russian Empire. I do not take into account the territories of part of Finland, the former East Prussia, South Sakhalin, the Kuriles, since the Finnish, German and Japanese population was evicted there, only a part of the Korean population of Sakhalin and the Kuriles remained. Well, I agree with you on most points.
    3. -1
      5 January 2023 02: 41
      Happy New Year! I am not a monarchist. Nevertheless, I recognize the genocide programmed by Stalin.
      The monarchists were shot, rotted in the camps, killed in the civil war, the remnants were drowned in the Black Sea. Sad story and senseless cruelty. Idiocy in one word. They forced my relative to dig a grave and shoot him (a misfire, for some reason they didn’t finish him off, probably there was nothing to kill for, they left him near the grave) simply because he grew a lot of grain during the NEP. He was recognized as a fist, without trial, and his last name is Kulakov - he probably came up in all respects.
  31. -3
    4 January 2023 15: 10
    I start reading and immediately thought "this is Samsonov .." and that's right - Samsonov.
    No offense, of course, but to paint the Stalinist time in such a way that people salivate and the dystopia becomes a utopia - you need to be able to, damn it!)))

    Damn, they broke people on the knee! They were tied to the ground like serfs, they took away the penny property that they had inherited from their ancestors or that they managed to amass. They were driven to the collective farms. In the cities they were driven to fucking communal apartments. they encouraged squealing and generally did not stand on ceremony either with human property, or with life, or with rights - from the word "absolutely". There were no alternatives at all - either you are the bolt that the state needs, or die.
    How many great people were then bludgeoned in prisons or marinated in "sharashkas"? How many of them died, how many were not allowed to develop their breakthrough ideas by Stalin's hangers-on like Trofim Lysenko?

    Which is true - Stalin really got the country "at the bottom". And that meant that you had to be a Yeltsin-level goofball to make things even worse. Of course, he made the country stronger - but at WHAT COST? This price may not have been very noticeable because it was masked by the population explosion and the lack of independent statistics in the USSR, but it was huge.
    In essence, "Stalin's Rush" can be compared to an athlete who is drugged with hard anabolics and at the same time survives - but his success and results come at the cost of everything that is beyond the boundaries of this success and results. The damage to the original culture, national identity, religion, traditions, legal framework (actual) was enormous. The consequences of such a breakthrough and, in general, short-sighted policy of Stalin were not long in coming - they surfaced a generation after his death, resulting in many things, such as the shock of society and diasporas from understanding what was happening, the general reputational damage to the concept, a split in the theoretical environment, the growth of scientific and technical conceptual lag.
    It was Stalin who killed the development of ideas within the party and thoroughly cut down, in principle, the development of ideas within society - by founding an environment that was powerless against foreign ideas seeping through the imperfect iron curtain "from the outside."

    So the "delight of pink slobber" on the part of the Stalinists is not clear to me - put yourself with your habits and lifestyle in the place of any pawn at that time and ask yourself the question - how soon would you fall into the "millstone"? And to what animal state you would be brought there.
    1. -1
      4 January 2023 15: 31
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      put yourself with your habits and lifestyle in the place of any pawn at that time and ask yourself the question - how soon would you hit the "millstone"?

      What would be calculated by IP?
    2. +3
      4 January 2023 15: 48
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      I start reading and immediately thought "this is Samsonov .." and that's right - Samsonov.
      No offense, of course, but to paint the Stalinist time in such a way that people salivate and the dystopia becomes a utopia - you need to be able to, damn it!)))

      Damn, they broke people on the knee! They were tied to the ground like serfs, they took away the penny property that they had inherited from their ancestors or that they managed to amass. They were driven to the collective farms. In the cities they were driven to fucking communal apartments. they encouraged squealing and generally did not stand on ceremony either with human property, or with life, or with rights - from the word "absolutely". There were no alternatives at all - either you are the bolt that the state needs, or die.
      How many great people were then bludgeoned in prisons or marinated in "sharashkas"? How many of them died, how many were not allowed to develop their breakthrough ideas by Stalin's hangers-on like Trofim Lysenko?

      Which is true - Stalin really got the country "at the bottom". And that meant that you had to be a Yeltsin-level goofball to make things even worse. Of course, he made the country stronger - but at WHAT COST? This price may not have been very noticeable because it was masked by the population explosion and the lack of independent statistics in the USSR, but it was huge.
      In essence, "Stalin's Rush" can be compared to an athlete who is drugged with hard anabolics and at the same time survives - but his success and results come at the cost of everything that is beyond the boundaries of this success and results. The damage to the original culture, national identity, religion, traditions, legal framework (actual) was enormous. The consequences of such a breakthrough and, in general, short-sighted policy of Stalin were not long in coming - they surfaced a generation after his death, resulting in many things, such as the shock of society and diasporas from understanding what was happening, the general reputational damage to the concept, a split in the theoretical environment, the growth of scientific and technical conceptual lag.
      It was Stalin who killed the development of ideas within the party and thoroughly cut down, in principle, the development of ideas within society - by founding an environment that was powerless against foreign ideas seeping through the imperfect iron curtain "from the outside."

      So the "delight of pink slobber" on the part of the Stalinists is not clear to me - put yourself with your habits and lifestyle in the place of any pawn at that time and ask yourself the question - how soon would you fall into the "millstone"? And to what animal state you would be brought there.

      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      I start reading and immediately thought "this is Samsonov .." and that's right - Samsonov.
      No offense, of course, but to paint the Stalinist time in such a way that people salivate and the dystopia becomes a utopia - you need to be able to, damn it!)))

      Damn, they broke people on the knee! They were tied to the ground like serfs, they took away the penny property that they had inherited from their ancestors or that they managed to amass. They were driven to the collective farms. In the cities they were driven to fucking communal apartments. they encouraged squealing and generally did not stand on ceremony either with human property, or with life, or with rights - from the word "absolutely". There were no alternatives at all - either you are the bolt that the state needs, or die.
      How many great people were then bludgeoned in prisons or marinated in "sharashkas"? How many of them died, how many were not allowed to develop their breakthrough ideas by Stalin's hangers-on like Trofim Lysenko?

      Which is true - Stalin really got the country "at the bottom". And that meant that you had to be a Yeltsin-level goofball to make things even worse. Of course, he made the country stronger - but at WHAT COST? This price may not have been very noticeable because it was masked by the population explosion and the lack of independent statistics in the USSR, but it was huge.
      In essence, "Stalin's Rush" can be compared to an athlete who is drugged with hard anabolics and at the same time survives - but his success and results come at the cost of everything that is beyond the boundaries of this success and results. The damage to the original culture, national identity, religion, traditions, legal framework (actual) was enormous. The consequences of such a breakthrough and, in general, short-sighted policy of Stalin were not long in coming - they surfaced a generation after his death, resulting in many things, such as the shock of society and diasporas from understanding what was happening, the general reputational damage to the concept, a split in the theoretical environment, the growth of scientific and technical conceptual lag.
      It was Stalin who killed the development of ideas within the party and thoroughly cut down, in principle, the development of ideas within society - by founding an environment that was powerless against foreign ideas seeping through the imperfect iron curtain "from the outside."

      So the "delight of pink slobber" on the part of the Stalinists is not clear to me - put yourself with your habits and lifestyle in the place of any pawn at that time and ask yourself the question - how soon would you fall into the "millstone"? And to what animal state you would be brought there.

      Again, the same stupid, illiterate liberal nonsense.
      Solid stamps. Not tired? The laurels of Novodvorskaya, Gozman, Svanidze and others do not give rest.?
      1. -6
        4 January 2023 19: 30
        "It's all not true, you're all lying" - a typical soviet element of a refutation of something.
        Where exactly am I wrong?) The fact that they built a "camp economy"? Maybe scientists and specialists were not imprisoned and not muzzled on fake cases? Maybe the villagers had some real alternatives not to join collective farms? And then maybe have passports in your hands, ride around the country, do everything that you are doing now, considering things that go without saying, without which there is no freedom? Maybe people weren’t forced to give up their relatives, they didn’t give their relatives and themselves horse terms for outright garbage? In our country now, not every maniac is imprisoned as much as under Stalin it was possible to please "politically".
        Well, or maybe Iosif Vissarionovich did everything according to the precepts of Ilyich, without bringing the discussion in the party environment to zero?
        Show me where I'm wrong!
        P / s And there was no "Lysenkoism" either? And such dirty little people as Yezhov Stalin also did not put, giving them absolute powers?

        If you decide to answer and there will be something - a big request not to breed traditional leftist pathos.
        1. +4
          4 January 2023 20: 26
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart
          "It's all not true, you're all lying" - a typical soviet element of a refutation of something.
          Where exactly am I wrong?) The fact that they built a "camp economy"? Maybe scientists and specialists were not imprisoned and not muzzled on fake cases? Maybe the villagers had some real alternatives not to join collective farms? And then maybe have passports in your hands, ride around the country, do everything that you are doing now, considering things that go without saying, without which there is no freedom? Maybe people weren’t forced to give up their relatives, they didn’t give their relatives and themselves horse terms for outright garbage? In our country now, not every maniac is imprisoned as much as under Stalin it was possible to please "politically".
          Well, or maybe Iosif Vissarionovich did everything according to the precepts of Ilyich, without bringing the discussion in the party environment to zero?
          Show me where I'm wrong!
          P / s And there was no "Lysenkoism" either? And such dirty little people as Yezhov Stalin also did not put, giving them absolute powers?

          If you decide to answer and there will be something - a big request not to breed traditional leftist pathos.

          I will not comment on all your nonsense.
          Few examples.
          The total working-age population in the USSR was about a hundred million at that time. Between two and three million prisoners.
          This is to yours that all the prisoners built.
          A lot has already been said about the notorious passports of the peasants, and I gave an example from the history of my family. Which of the peasants. So you can not tell me the tales of Novodvorskaya and Gozman.
          And look how many scientists, generals, famous doctors, etc. came out of the peasants.
          It's about perspective.
          I think that's enough. You really lie and sculpt with liberal clichés.
          Yes, I'm from the Soviets, the very ones that built a great country, won the Great Patriotic War, and so on. What about people like you? Only eat and shit.
          Vlasovites.
          Better to be a Soviet than Vlasov.
          That's it, the examples I have given are enough.
          1. -1
            5 January 2023 03: 48
            If you decide to answer and there will be something - a big request not to breed traditional leftist pathos.

            And voila
            Yes, I'm from the Soviets, the very ones that built a great country, won the Great Patriotic War, and so on. What about people like you? Only eat and shit.
            Vlasovites.
            Better to be a Soviet than Vlasov.
            That's it, the examples I have given are enough.

            After all, he asked, what kind of leftists you are, predictable people ..

            The total working-age population in the USSR was about a hundred million at that time. Between two and three million prisoners.

            What a cute deceit! Do not forget to add to this army Z/C of those who were shot or managed to die in the zones during these glorious 20+ years. There were more than enough of those.
            It is also worth adding to this company the deportees, who also died a lot, because they did it without "traditional Soviet humanism."
            But I'm talking about "damage from activities". From the point of view of the "G / K economy" the collective farms of that time (not everywhere, but as a rule - in the main climatic zones of the country) were in fact the same organization of forced labor with plans, restrictions and punishments. The public, by hook or by crook, poured into the cities from this cuteness, fell for a long time not at all from an itchy desire to join civilization and comfort - what kind of comfort is there in barracks, hostels or communal apartments. It was precisely from the "collective farm" that the former (at least under Stalin) was brought down by the second advent of serfdom. Of course, I understand that with the help of industrialization and MTO, as well as the organization of rural medicine, education, etc., the general level of the quality of life of the rural population (and often labor) was raised, but you must understand HOW THESE PEOPLE WAS NOT FREE. Perhaps you have heard about the "Law of Three Spikelets" - here, such an attitude towards people was more than the traditional attitude of that time towards the villagers. We're not going to deny that there were such laws, right?
            This is to yours that all the prisoners built

            I recommend that you familiarize yourself with the map of Gulag facilities. This is a very extensive network, people there were engaged in, let's say, the most rough and hardcore work, to plow for money in a country where depreciation of banknotes regularly occurs (at that time it was not something extraordinary) free workers were almost unrealistic, Yes, and they were busy in other areas. So the "camp economy" was not an absolute BUT the base of the Soviet economy under Stalin for a long time was served by forced labor in whole or in part. Completely - these are convicts, who, judging by the location of the GULAG facilities, were engaged in logging, mining and construction in difficult geographical conditions (Transarctic Highway, Belomor Canal, etc.). In part, these are peasants nailed to the ground and driven into collective farms. Since in the Civil War a significant part of the industry was destroyed or morally obsolete, the main share of the USSR's exports was "raw", both food and resource. And again, the main share in this export was played by the product of the labor of completely or partially unfree people. Later, of course, this proportion changes as industrialization progresses, but for most of the reign of the IVS (what a coincidence!) It was just that.
            You see, these are facts - it doesn't matter if you like them or not)

            And look how many scientists, generals, famous doctors, etc. came out of the peasants.

            If you are talking about the Stalin era - then a lot "came out of the peasants" because who was not stuffed in the Civil War and who did not rot in the camps later (and who did not dump) - there were minuscule specialists of all kinds and since a holy place is never empty, then it was occupied by those who were. It is possible to find something good in this sad logic only if you do not think about how many ALREADY ready-made and highly qualified specialists of all kinds were naturally merged (including abroad). Of course, a more efficient selective bureaucracy was built in the USSR (than under the tsar), but this achievement did not work for the country for so long - because the debatability was killed and this bureaucracy ossified in less than one generation (during the lifetime of Stalin himself). This was expressed in the fact that while there was a "manual regime" and a severe time pressure - a shortage of personnel, the bureaucrats were forced to fulfill their duties, as soon as the personnel niches were occupied - bureaucratic stagnation occurred, which was broken only by the Second World War (creating a rigid time pressure). Under the late Stalin, this began again and resulted in paperwork and red tape, which ultimately ruined everything in the union. Usually Stalinists like you claim that we owe this to Khrushchev, but no. The system of organization of the bureaucracy and its "habits" were launched under Stalin and required a regular "handbrake", "shakes" and "cleansings", since there were no other ways of SELECTION within it. They were plagued by Stalin himself, as a man who craved absolute control and power.
            As a result, the vast majority of Soviet "minds" fell into the "window of opportunity" having been born before the 1930s - and the bulk of the "giants" were 20+ at all during the period of the greatest "personnel hunger" of these same 1920s-1930s.
            All these people owed their success to the most severe meat grinder of personnel, combined with the fact that they often did not spare money for them.

            But I know perfectly well that logic and facts do not work on the Stalinists, so all this is "Sisyphean labor", for the soul.
  32. +2
    4 January 2023 15: 40
    They did not have time to fully prepare the country for war.
    The reason is banal, they simply did not have time because of the rapid defeat of France.
    Which, of course, no one in the world expected, and in the leadership of the USSR, too, given the equal potentials of the forces and means of the parties.
    This was one of the reasons for the failures of the 41st.
    All plans for the reorganization and rearmament of the Red Army and the military development of new territories provided for completion in the first half of the 42nd.
  33. +1
    4 January 2023 17: 14
    An excellent article, I did not live at that time, but the feeling of nostalgia could not be felt. But this paragraph is perhaps the key in the article "Therefore, the Russians won the most terrible war in their history, when they wanted to completely destroy them. They fought to the death, and they knew what they were dying for. The Soviet people believed in the future of their country." Thanks to the author for the article, the mood has risen.
  34. 0
    4 January 2023 20: 15
    Throughout my conscious life, I had to read and hear various kinds of opinions about Stalin all the time, in the 60s, 70s and 80s it was about the same thing - when discussing Comrade Stalin, people lowered the volume, but they always talked about him with deep respect, with very, very rare exceptions.
    When there were any reports about him in the press, or on TV, it was very strange to hear first about the cult of personality, that he was such and such, and then they showed the November 7 parade on Red Square, then the Victory parade and no one ever dared to under these shows to insert at least one bad word about him.
    My parents worked in the Soviet Atomic Project and although I was never talked about Stalin, I always felt their great respect for him and saw how warmly they looked at me when I put his portrait on my bookshelf.
    Later, when I myself came to work at the same enterprise in 1984, I heard many good words about him and about Lavrenty Pavlovich Beria.
    Thanks to the far-sightedness and talents of these people as leaders, our country has acquired a peaceful and military Atom, a powerful Soviet Army, missile forces, Peaceful Space and the Navy, and much more, despite the constant "concerns" of our enemies.
    Then the USSR became Russia and it was sold to these enemies, who suddenly became partners, for desecration, who, you yourself know.
    Now Russia is trying to return to itself, God forbid! And I believe it will come back.
    Further it would be possible to write a lot and for a long time, but this is the subject of another conversation.
    1. +1
      4 January 2023 21: 46
      On TV there was a program "Red Project".
      Author Kiselev.
      Of course, there are some questions, but for example, Khrushchev's assessment of this is generally objective.
      And I was surprised to hear from Kiselev - thanks to Stalin for the atomic bomb.
      I wondered if the pendulum had swung in the opposite direction.
      1. +1
        4 January 2023 23: 28
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        I wondered if the pendulum had swung in the opposite direction.

        No. This is just another version of the preservation of the system built in the 90s. wink
        Since the electorate is blushing en masse, it is necessary to lead this process in their own interests, without changing the existing system.
        What do we see? Again Kiselev, who recently proposed erecting monuments to Krasnov and others like him, now he is praising Stalin. laughing Lack of propagandists? laughing
        At the same time, Ilyin's ideology has not gone away and continues to be cultivated, while the policy of "pulling away from paternalism" quietly goes on as usual.
        Capitalism, it is so - eight-winged seven ...., moralism is alien to him. wink
      2. -4
        5 January 2023 00: 08
        On TV there was a program "Red Project".
        Author Kiselev.
        did not watch fully. Thanks for the reminder. We must see.
  35. The comment was deleted.
  36. -5
    4 January 2023 23: 58
    Everything is clearly presented. I will not argue, I agree with many. However, why did the most brilliant pissed off Lenin's case? Why were all sorts of Khrushchev-Gorbachevs able to get into power after him? Why was the party able to push such squalor out of its ranks, one more beautiful than the other? The wisest one simply ignored such a vitally important direction for the state... Everything crumbled like a house of cards. The corn jester was replaced by a team that unanimously wanted to enter the Kremlin wall in full force. The next bald jester was only puzzled by where and how to lick deep Bush, or Thatcher. This was the end of the history of the great state and the failed policy of party building. The Chinese, for now, will be smarter and far-sighted.
    1. -1
      5 January 2023 07: 28
      pissed off Lenin's case

      "This is the main reason for the Russian crisis, that our government is non-Russian, and for almost a century already. And even earlier, before the revolution, life leaned more and more in this direction." (Shafarevich). Our common grandfather Lenin (mother's surname Blank): "we have few wise men, a Russian wise man is almost always a Jew or a person with an admixture of Jewish blood", anti-Semites "outlaw" (i.e. shoot) - "a degenerate, a moral idiot from birth "(Bunin), despised Russia and the Russians: mother and brother terrorist, love to the grave Armand, friend Zinoviev, the only one whom the burry Ilyich called by name, and most of the accomplices, the spiritual teacher from the family of hereditary rabbis Marx - Jews (traditional Russian name in website is prohibited). Putin said well about him: "they planted an atomic bomb under Russia, and it exploded," "Ukraine named after Vladimir Ilyich."
  37. The comment was deleted.
  38. +1
    5 January 2023 09: 28
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    Happy New Year! I am not a monarchist. Nevertheless, I recognize the genocide programmed by Stalin.
    The monarchists were shot, rotted in the camps, killed in the civil war, the remnants were drowned in the Black Sea. Sad story and senseless cruelty.


    And all at the behest of Stalin. laughing
    And who were these same monarchists? Russian people? Maybe at least part of the Russian people?
    In relation to the Russian people, they were the same as the British colonizers were - for the majority of the population of India. And behave accordingly.
    There is no need to blame everything on Stalin and even on the notorious "Marxism". Nothing but a new Troubles, the essentially pro-Western "imperial project" will end and could not. Since the elite and the people in the Republic of Ingushetia were too far away ... not just different estates or classes, but different peoples, nations that understood each other with difficulty, often speaking different languages ​​​​(literally).
    If there were no Bolsheviks, there would be others. Or - Pugachevshchina 2.0. Pugachev rightly prophesied before his execution: "I'm not a raven, just a crow. A raven will fly after me."

    And they beat and imprisoned these monarchists - with great pleasure, ordinary peasants, remembering how even their grandfathers, these monarchists sold like cattle in the market.
  39. +2
    5 January 2023 11: 24
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    Where are they now, your collective farms and your USSR? After great people there should be no ruins.

    It is in this that the whole problem is that they (collective farms and the USSR) do not exist today. Is it possible that he won't notice?
    After Stalin, a great superpower remained, as far as I know.
    The ruins remain only after the destruction of Stalin's monuments. This is also impossible not to notice.
  40. +2
    5 January 2023 11: 54
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    I. V. Stalin

    1. Destroyed the NEP, depriving the country of small farms, cafes, restaurants, shops, entrepreneurs. Destroyed it all along with the owners. Thus, he programmed the collapse of the USSR in 1991.
    2. Destroyed the highest command staff of the Red Army, programming the highest losses in the Second World War.
    3. With completely inexplicable orders, he actually destroyed the cadre army of the USSR in 1941, sending unprepared conscripts to fight the Nazis, leaving the country without a population.
    4. He built plants and factories on the bones of builders (private entrepreneurs, scientists, doctors, military men, intellectuals), leaving the country without cultural, scientific and technical potential.

    You can continue for a long time.

    Do not.
    The leaders who said the same thing as you and destroyed the USSR and brought the superpower that the people created under the leadership of Stalin to the war of Russia and Ukraine.
  41. +2
    5 January 2023 13: 47
    Quote: Ulan.1812
    In 1913, the Republic of Ingushetia ranked sixth in economic development. After USA, Germany, England, Japan, France.
    As well as the pace of economic development.


    In what industries? 85% of the population lives in the countryside. Having good indicators in terms of the total volume of agricultural production, Ingushetia was inferior to Western countries in terms of per capita indicators, and in terms of labor productivity. Well, if now 85% of the population is driven into the villages and forced to work, the production of grain and other things will also skyrocket.
    The consumption of the same grain in Russia was lower than in England or Germany. Still, an export product. "We won't eat, but we'll take it out."
    However, industry is more important. It was sour in here. A significant part of the factories and factories - in the hands of foreigners. They had an excellent scientific school of chemists, but 90% of the chemical industry is in the hands of the Germans. What happened after the start of the First World War.
    They produced a lot of oil ... but the oil fields are in the hands of the Nobile brothers.
    Most of the major banks are also controlled by foreigners.
    The industry was militarized, but still could not provide the front with everything necessary in a big war. I had to buy a lot: from machine guns to cruisers and aircraft engines, and the airplanes themselves.
    So all this "rapid economic growth" is like in a fairy tale ... it flowed down the mustache, but did not get into the mouth.
    A typical country of peripheral capitalism, slightly above Turkey, but below Japan.
  42. +4
    5 January 2023 13: 59
    Quote: Knell Wardenheart
    Maybe scientists and specialists were not imprisoned and not muzzled on fake cases? Maybe the villagers had some real alternatives not to join collective farms? And then maybe have passports in your hands, ride around the country, do everything that you are doing now, considering things that go without saying, without which there is no freedom? Maybe people weren’t forced to give up their relatives, they didn’t give their relatives and themselves horse terms for outright garbage? In our country now, not every maniac is imprisoned as much as under Stalin it was possible to please "politically".


    Planted. But where did these scientists and specialists come from? Who made so many of them?
    In tsarist Russia, there were fewer engineers than in Belgium (which is not immediately found on the map).

    What alternatives did the villagers have? Become a city dweller, get an education and not twist the tails of cows, but engage in creative work. Even before the Second World War, the proportion of the urban population increased from 15 to about 50%. By whom? By chance, not at the expense of yesterday's peasants?
    It is indicative when compared with a very small increase in the percentage of townspeople and workers after the abolition of serfdom. Stalin's "liberation" turned out to be much more effective and provided millions with social lifts. Although from the point of view of the descendants of the former bar, this is definitely not an achievement.

    About repression. Social selection, generally with positive results. The Stalinist generation, subjected to a severe purge, won the most bloody war. When the “kingdom of freedom” came to us in the 90s, all public institutions were corroded by corruption and betrayal, as a result of which 150 million people actually knelt before a handful of Caucasian bandits in Khasavyurt.
    Capitalism is natural selection. Socialism is a selection. The selection can be more severe, but the result is faster.
    And there's nothing you can do about it. It is worth stopping - social entropy takes over and decomposition and decline begin.
  43. -1
    5 January 2023 14: 05
    All historical figures have light and shadows. Stalin is no different. Won the Second World War, turned Russia into an industrial center. But at what cost???? As far as I understand, reading the author and according to some of you, the end justifies the means. I would like to see which of you would be so conciliatory if he or his family went through the meat grinder of Stalin's purges. Even today, historians disagree on the exact death toll. Let's not forget that because of them, most of the best cadres of the Red Army were destroyed even before the start of the war. Of course, history is not written in “if,” so we don’t know if things would have gone differently. Let's not forget the deal with the devil Molotov-Ribbentrop. But, to be honest, the biggest mistake is the usual mistake of autocrats/dictators, failing to choose a future ruling class that is ready to take power into their own hands. The horror of being a figurehead makes us surround ourselves with a mass of idiots who, unfortunately, will come to power later.
  44. +1
    5 January 2023 14: 15
    Quote from Eugene Zaboy
    In the 1890s Railway construction continues to grow, and with it industry (an average of 7,6% per year), moreover, not only because of the demand for raw materials for the needs of construction, but due to increasing exports. In the period from 1906 to 1914, industry grew by an average of 6% a year. In general, for the period 1887-1913. industrial production in Russia increased by 4,6 times, the country takes 4-5 places in the world in terms of the absolute size of the extraction of iron ore, coal and steel smelting. Its share in world industrial production was 2,6 percent in 1913. In terms of total industrial production, it ranks 5th or 6th in the world.

    With the beginning of the exploitation of the Baku region, Russia in 1900 came out on top in oil production. After the end of the crisis of 1899, industrial production increased 1,5 times in 1909–1913, with heavy industry 174% and light industry 137%.

    In 1912, the national income per capita in Russia was 110 rubles. in gold, in Germany - 300 rubles, England - 500, USA - 720 [69]. In 1913, industry grows, but the country remains a peasant one (in the cities 16% of the population, the number of proletarians is almost 4.2 million people, when in Germany the population of the city is 43,7%, in England - 51,5%).


    There are no thoughts of your own, limited to copy-paste?
    Too bad, the old "Olgovich" was more original.

    1. High interest growth is due to the lightness of interest itself. By the way, in Japan, the percentage growth was even higher. And there and there - a very low start.
    2. Nevertheless, there was not enough steel, part of the Trans-Siberian Railway was made from Belgian rails. And according to these indicators, the USSR was not an outsider either.
    3. Oil production was in the hands of the Nobels. Nobe money earned in the oil fields in Baku
    whether they were taken to their native Sweden, they still pay bonuses.
    4. What the industrial potential of the Republic of Ingushetia was really worth - the First World War clearly showed. "Everything for the front - everything for the Victory!" And this "everything" was not enough, even taking into account external purchases.
    5. Income figures are not impressive, especially given the strong wealth differentiation. The middle class in the Republic of Ingushetia was not a mass phenomenon.
  45. 0
    5 January 2023 14: 25
    Quote: Knell Wardenheart
    In essence, "Stalin's Rush" can be compared to an athlete who is drugged with hard anabolics and at the same time survives - but his success and results come at the cost of everything that is beyond the boundaries of this success and results. The damage to the original culture, national identity, religion, traditions, legal framework (actual) was enormous


    And now try it all on the era of "Peter the Great". One to one.
    And there was no need to talk about any "original culture" and "national self-consciousness" after the apex westernization arranged by Peter and his associates. Traditions ... this is for ordinary men, the aristocracy in Paris-London was equal to what traditions there are. Felix Yusupov is a good example, a model of the elite... he is also gay: a really progressive type.
    The church... the replacement of the patriarch by the Synod, the forced informing of the priests after confession also caused enormous damage to the authority of the church.
    Stalin really could not destroy anything. Because everything was destroyed before him. Decay, decadence - already after the revolution of 1905. And the state of the so-called. "common people" - quite Papuan, culture - at the level of obscene ditties.
  46. +3
    5 January 2023 16: 26
    Won the Second World War, turned Russia into an industrial center. But at what cost????

    And what price suits you for victory and for defeat in this war? And at what cost can you win the war against the hitlerist Wehrmacht? Why didn't Western democracies win the war in 1938-40?
    I would like to see which of you would be so conciliatory if he or his family went through the meat grinder of Stalin's purges. Even today, historians disagree on the exact death toll. Let's not forget that because of them, most of the best cadres of the Red Army were destroyed even before the start of the war.

    The war was won by a generation that, if you believe it, went through the "Stalinist meat grinder". It went on the attack for Stalin.
    The war was won without the "best personnel".
    For comparison, the tsar, with the very best cadres of Russia, was defeated twice in the 20th century.
    Europe, with all the best personnel, was defeated and occupied for a year.
    Of course, history is not written in “if,” so we don’t know if things would have gone differently.

    On the contrary, we know very well. What the "best shots" did with the USSR at the end of the 20th century before my eyes.
    They wanted to arrange the same before the war with Germany.
    1. -1
      9 January 2023 13: 53
      I didn't mean war. But to the human costs associated with industrialization. After all, I don't understand what you mean??? I misunderstood, maybe the military cadres, cleared before the war, wanted to make a coup????
  47. +3
    5 January 2023 19: 56
    The scale of personality I.V. Stalin (Dzhugashvili) in the history of Russia is such that in comparison with him (especially today), all leaders look like pathetic idiots. They are trying to pour "stinking mud" on him. And there are still idiots who believe this "stinking dirt". Compare the results of his activities from 1933 to 1953. And today's "victories".
    1. +1
      6 January 2023 23: 18
      Agree! Comparing the incomparable is a thankless task! And so it is visible! People built hydroelectric power stations, icebreakers and airplanes, and now the launching of boats is like a "great" achievement ....
  48. +1
    6 January 2023 23: 15
    The history of "science" is so-so. People have a short memory, two or three generations later they won’t remember the truth, but everyone has their own during their lifetime. History after and can be rewritten (winners, enemies, starting a new life themselves, but anyone! Even crooks in power).
    And on the topic, you can look back (it was not so long ago) and draw a conclusion as a military one (this is the "Military Review"!?): Did the leadership solve the task? Definitely yes! Conclusion - The people, the Secretary General and the Party have completed the most difficult task! And do not tra-lyala that this is not done, it was not the right way / methods, etc.
    At that time we were not there and no one knows what would be more correct.
    One thing I know is that the country that was built was great! Maybe not ideal (but where is the ideal???). The great and strong that 30 years after her disappearance of wealth is used (scientific achievements, weapons, the basics of education) and fragments of former wealth still cannot be completely plundered .....
  49. +1
    7 January 2023 11: 49
    Pues nada, a disfrutar d Stalin, masoquistas. Parece que la emperatriz Alejandra esposa de Nicolas II tenía razón al decir a su marido durante los días de febrero de 1917: "Se duro Nicolás; A Rusia le gusta el escozor del látigo".
    Latigo con gusto no duele.
  50. +1
    7 January 2023 15: 15
    Sadly, only today we can appreciate the work of Stalin. In the team I was branded a Stalinist, it was not in a bad sense of the word. Stalin built modern Russia as the Emperor of the Roman Empire. People are calming down, the war is approaching. the biggest test for Russia. Stalin was ready that Russia had won the war, and Putin's campaign in Ukraine would certainly end victoriously for Russia. am
  51. +1
    7 January 2023 22: 49
    No, this is not Samsonov. Not his style. But whoever beat it - admiration to the author!
  52. The comment was deleted.
  53. +2
    8 January 2023 19: 59
    Or maybe, like the Chinese, declare that the activities of I.V. Stalin were 90 percent useful and thus reconcile his followers and opponents?
  54. +2
    8 January 2023 20: 50
    Great ruler. Just as lonely and slandered as Ivan IV. The only one comparable to them is Alexander III the Peacemaker. But we have very few such true Sovereigns who think only about Russia and sacrifice themselves for the sake of the Motherland!
  55. 2ez
    +4
    9 January 2023 11: 49
    You read the comments, and you are amazed... People, what is the argument about? About a person, or the role of a PERSON in the history of our COUNTRY?
    How can you evaluate the role of Personality? You can find negativity, inflate it, and present it to everyone, they say, this is what he is, the Caucasian ghoul... We went through this in the late 80s, early 90s.
    Or you can simply take the chronology of the construction of the country and try to compare it with... But there is nothing to compare with!!!
    Let's not remember the 30s. And we’ll bypass the War a little. In 1949, the Soviet Union tested its atomic bomb. Creating such a miracle of humanity is not whittling a wooden boat with a knife. These are the NECESSARY personnel that need to be trained. And there is no need to talk about Fuchs and other intelligence officers. Any information is subject to verification, this is understandable. The information helped, but that's all. I don’t think that Kurchatov and Co. were plagiarizing... Moreover, we tested the hydrogen bomb earlier! But they didn’t have a War... Someone will say that they worked under repression, sharashkas, etc. Can you create a person under pressure? A slave is not capable of creativity!!! "We are not slaves, slaves are not us!" Remember this?
    And then, 16 years after the War, Gagarin flew into space... AND THIS IS ALSO A LEGACY OF STALIN’S POLICIES!!! But the General Designer, Sergei Pavlovich Korolev, was imprisoned and almost died in the camps. But for some reason, even after Stalin’s death, he never cursed at his past... Did he understand something?!
  56. 0
    9 January 2023 13: 34
    https://www.marxists.org/espanol/trotsky/1932/abril/0001.htm

    Léase el artículo de Trotski escrito en 1932 titulado: "La victoria de Hitler significaría la guerra contra la URSS".
    A Trotski no le hubiera sorprendido la operación Barbarroja y probablemete la URSS se habría evitado 27.000.000 de muertos, y la destrucción y sufrimiento que todos conocemos, gracias a la INEPCIA del padrecito Stalin frenando el ataque que no hubiera cogido confi ada y desprevenida a la URSS.
    Resulta un fenómeno increíblemente asombroso el fanatismo con el que los adoradores del hombre de acero pasan por alto su irresponsabilidad, ignorancia, inepcia, y sumisión a Hitler, que tan cara costó a la URSS.
    No es el artículo citado, la única advertencia de Trotski a la socialdemocracia de la !!ª Internacional, ya los comunistas de la IIIº sobre el peligro que se cernía sobre Europa en general y la URSS en particular. Social democratas y comunistas se reían de Hitler incluso cuando este ya tenía el poder no dándole ni meses de vida. Todos lo pagaron muy caro.
    Y la injusticiA HISTÓRICA que aún no se reparó sobre el creador del Ejército Rojo y artífice de la victoria de la Guerra Civil rusa no deja en muy buen lugar al pueblo ruso, y la Historia así lo sancionará.
  57. +1
    9 January 2023 17: 25
    The people of that time had enormous potential, and this is what the Soviet Union was built on.
  58. +2
    11 January 2023 10: 26
    I believe my grandfather, born in 1900, he was the leader in those years, he told me they just didn’t touch anyone, there was no such thing... don’t believe about Stalin’s total repressions, and of course someone was unjustifiably convicted, and now everyone is behind bars business? This is a great leader who loved the Russian people. Glory to the leader of the peoples!
  59. 0
    11 January 2023 12: 51
    The article is harmful in many ways.
    Stalin - Emperor? What century are we living in?
    From 1923 to 1941, Stalin did not hold any position in the USSR government at all. He held elected positions and was regularly required to report. He was General Secretary of the Central Committee from 1922 to 1934 and Secretary of the Central Committee from 1934. He was also elected as a deputy to the Upper Council.
    The main thing is different... Why was he actually the Emperor? Because our society actually lives under a Monarchy, no matter what laws there are in the State! “The country of slaves is the country of masters” cannot exist otherwise. Today we elect a president for life in the same way as we elected Tsar Mikhail Romanov in 1613.
    This is a typical Cargo cult of the aborigines of the Polynesian islands..... Everything is like the white people! And the White House and the Senate and governors and elections and “primaries”..... and the Constitution lies on the shelf.... Only behind all the fake bells and whistles are the Tsar and his boyars. And the West laughs in our faces, pointing out all this.
    The country moved forward under Tsar Joseph for the same reason it fell apart under Tsar Boris.

    As the poet A. Maikov wrote in the 19th century?
    "Just a few families
    They own my country."

    Not a damn thing has changed!
    1. -1
      21 February 2023 16: 34
      Our president is elected for 6 years. Learn materiel.
      1. 0
        24 February 2023 07: 17
        Are you healthy? I wish you good health and remember how many years he has been in power.
        1. 0
          24 February 2023 10: 21
          That's how they choose. “Democracy” is not when the one you personally like is in power, but the one for whom the majority voted. Stupid Roosevelt was elected four times. Why not choose smart Putin? And they will choose him again, and rightly so.
          Why fools when there are smart people?
  60. -1
    17 February 2023 10: 31
    The basis of the PRC economy is the artel. The artel manages large factories and mines. In artels, the team appoints Top Management and participates in the distribution of profits. Real Leninist democracy is in action.
    Such artels (collective farms) once ensured the economic growth of the Stalinist economy. Later, Khrushchev destroyed these artels and replaced them with state-owned companies and state farms. People were no longer interested in the final result, they simply became hired workers
    1. 0
      24 February 2023 07: 25
      In developed countries under capitalism, hired workers are the main labor force. And nothing seems to work successfully.

      For some dancers, it's not just hired dancers, but their own balls that get in the way. That's the problem.

      If a country with a population of 200 or, as under Yeltsin, almost 300 million, can be destroyed by one half-fool, then this is not a country, but the heroes of K. Chukovsky’s fairy tale “The Cockroach” - a fantastic cluster of unknown creatures.
  61. 0
    23 March 2023 19: 05
    He said everything correctly, now the ignoramuses will come running to vilify the name of the leader