Why did the Cold War start

100
Why did the Cold War start
J.V. Stalin, G. Truman and W. Churchill shake hands at the Potsdam Conference. July 25, 1945


"Russian threat"


Washington and London, organizing the Second World War and using Germany and Japan as battering rams (Origins of World War II: USA vs. All), they planned that Russia-USSR would be destroyed. The Soviet Union was going to be dismembered and robbed, creating the Anglo-Saxon “eternal Reich”. Only at the head of the world slave-owning civilization (new world order) there should have been not Berlin, as Hitler wanted, but Washington and London.



However, the Soviet Union not only survived, but also emerged from the war not greatly weakened, which would have allowed Moscow to dictate the terms of the new world order, but, on the contrary, strengthened. With the best ground army in the world, which passed the terrible test that the Wehrmacht gave the Russians. With advanced science and technology, efficient economy. A people ready for any achievement. It was incredible, it was a real miracle! Despite the devastation and terrible human and material losses, the Union became a new superpower.

At the same time, Russia has strengthened itself not with wealth, not with capital, not with an increase in the standard of living. No, Russia during the war and for some time after it lived from hand to mouth, the country and people tightened their belts, denying themselves minimal pleasures. But Russia at that time was at the peak of the power of the spirit, the unity of civil society and the Stalinist elite, the people and the real leader. It was an amazing climb that allowed us to overcome any difficulties. Society and people were full of energy, dynamism, creation and creativity. The new society of knowledge, service and creation was bearing fruit.

Russia was striving for the stars, literally opening up a unique opportunity for humanity with a leap. This was a challenge to the Western project of a global slave-owning civilization (then under the guise of capitalism). The USSR was creating a new solar civilization, a world of the future, where man is not a slave, but a creator.

Thus, the plan to bring the United States to global, absolute dominance failed. Although The United States was able to accomplish a number of important strategic tasks:

1) Germany is destroyed, robbed and subjugated. But not all of it. Eastern part under Russians;

2) Western Europe is destroyed and subjugated. But the eastern part of Europe was moving into the sphere of influence of the USSR;

3) The Japanese Empire was destroyed, robbed, turned into a semi-colony, and then into the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” of the United States;

4) Chinese civilization has been drained of blood, robbed, and there is a bloody civil war going on. But in the end, the United States will lose the Celestial Empire. Stalin will outplay the Anglo-Saxons. This will be a blow to the West;

5) The British Empire is weakened and has become a junior partner of the United States;

6) the most important thing is Russia resisted and became even stronger. There were now two superpowers on the planet. The Russians gave the world an alternative to the Western global project of enslaving humanity. At the same time, the Red (Russian) project was very popular then. Social justice and ethics of conscience against the parasitism of the “chosen” slave owners. Many advanced, progressive people then supported the Soviet Union.


Allied forces parade in Berlin on September 7, 1945, marking the end of World War II. Column of 52 Soviet heavy tanks An IS-3 from the 2nd Guards Tank Army passes along the Charlottenburg Highway.

Saving the scientific and technical potential of the “black civilization”


Therefore, the USA and England delayed the opening of a second front in France until the last minute (The UK and US will wait "until Germany is mortally wounded by the Russian offensive"). So that the Russians and Germans bleed each other as much as possible.

The dying Third Reich brought gold and other valuables to Switzerland. In the spring of 1945, a few weeks before the collapse of Germany, the vice-president of the Reichsbank, Emil Puhl, went to Switzerland and negotiated with bankers about the fate of Nazi treasures that had been transferred to the country of banks. He reported to Berlin that the Swiss partners maintained their independence in matters of gold reserves. Another 3 tons of gold were transported to Switzerland. After the war, Swiss authorities announced a freeze on Nazi deposits. However, the secret of the deposits was maintained. This is the basis of the material and financial well-being of Switzerland.

The Nazis, with the support of British and American intelligence services and the Roman Catholic Church, established “rat trails.” Many escaped to the United States, Latin America and the Middle East. The masters of the West, and primarily the United States, could not abandon the valuable personnel of the Third Reich to arbitrariness and death. The Americans needed them for their world domination. What was needed was the invaluable experience of employees of the German special services, the SS, the Wehrmacht, scientific, technical, and ideological personnel (Why did the US cover up Nazi criminals?).

At the end of the war, the functionaries of the Third Reich themselves, the SS men, the military, collaborators, etc., rushed to the West, to territories that fell under the control of British and American troops. They considered themselves fighters against the Bolsheviks and wanted to avoid deserved punishment for the crimes they had committed. And many turned out to be right.

The Americans themselves also sought to seize the military and technical secrets of the Reich, and to acquire leading military scientists and engineers. Even before the defeat of Nazi Germany, the United States, with the help of German physicists, significantly accelerated its atomic program. After the defeat of Germany, American intelligence conducted Operation Paperclip. In 1945–1959 As part of this special operation, the Americans transported 1 Nazi scientists, physicists and rocket scientists to the United States.

German scientists who worked in the military-industrial complex, in Himmler’s “Ahnenerbe” system (German: Ahnenerbe - “Heritage of the Ancestors”), managed to get into the western zones of occupation in time. Their research went to the Americans and the British.

Along the way, archives, traces of crimes, and the transfer of Reich treasures looted from Europe and Russia to the West were destroyed. Almost all documents related to the financing of the Nazi Party disappeared without a trace, and the main archive of the Nazi Treasury, headed by Reichsleiter Franz-Xaver Schwarz, disappeared. The archive of the Economic Assistance Fund named after. A. Hitler." The tracks were covered.

Ends in the water


Westerners also tried to avoid a full investigation stories formation and crimes of the Third Reich. Thus, Nuremberg in the American zone of occupation was chosen for the meeting of the International Tribunal, created to punish the main perpetrators of the war. The Americans were the masters, organizers and controllers of the process. To carry it out, the norms of Anglo-American judicial law were adopted. The Westerners introduced a clause into the tribunal's charter that prohibited touching on issues that could discredit the winners. Soviet representatives had to agree.

therefore the involvement of the then collective West in the creation of the “Third Reich” project - Hitler, remained behind the scenes. Connections between German industry and American and Western companies and banks too. The defendants also followed the “rules of the game.” The main banker of the Hitler regime and the father of the mobilization economy of the Reich, Hjalmar Schacht, could joke with the prison psychiatrist that Americans “must judge ourselves.” But at the trial itself, he did not allow himself such revelations. Therefore, he was acquitted, as were the leading Nazi propagandist Hans Fritsche and the prominent politician and diplomat Franz von Papen.

It is interesting that the new German authorities had already opened cases against Schacht, Fritsche and Papen and wanted to arrest them and put them on trial. But the Americans took them out under their protection. The US did not surrender its people. Subsequently, Fritsche, like Schacht and von Papen, were convicted of other crimes by the German denazification commission. They received 8–9 years each, but were soon released. Schacht founded the banking house Schacht GmbH (Dusseldorf).

Hitler's chief banker, Kurt von Schroeder, was also handed over to the German court. And he received three months in prison for “crimes against humanity”! He spent this time under investigation and therefore immediately received his freedom.

Also, the leaders of German concerns were to be tried at the Nuremberg Tribunal. They were to be represented in the dock by Gustav Krupp. This German industrialist and financial tycoon provided significant material support to the Nazi movement. However, the international medical commission that examined Krupp found that for health reasons he could not stand trial. The patient was released without trial.

They decided to separate the charges against industrialists into a special trial. Then, instead of one process, carry out a series across different concerns. And make it not international, but only American. Washington instructed its tribunals: “Take as a precedent the verdict by which Schacht was acquitted.”

However, it was difficult to get rid of the criminals. For example, his son Alfred and 9 directors were responsible for the Krupp concern. Not to mention the militarization of the Third Reich, the concern widely used the labor of prisoners of war and other concentration camp prisoners. On July 31, 1948, the American military tribunal in Nuremberg (“Krupp Case”) found Alfred Krupp guilty of plundering industrial enterprises of other states and using slave labor. He was sentenced to 12 years in prison with confiscation of property. They planned to dismember the concern. In 1951, Krupp was pardoned and his property was returned. The concern was saved.

The affairs of other concerns ended in a similar way.

On the whole, large German capital was not particularly affected. Now the United States needed the industrial and other resources of West Germany to fight the USSR.

Operation Unthinkable


Already in the spring of 1945, the Western allies began preparations for confrontation with the USSR. The head of Britain, Winston Churchill, concluded:

“The destruction of Germany's military power entailed a fundamental change in relations between communist Russia and Western democracies. They lost their common enemy, the war against which was almost the only link connecting their alliance. From now on, Russian imperialism and the communist doctrine did not see or set a limit to their advancement and desire for final domination.”

Churchill believed that

"Soviet Russia has become a mortal threat to the free world."

Therefore, it is necessary to create a new front against it, including the remnants of the German armies. Occupy Berlin, Prague and Vienna ourselves. Churchill instructs the War Cabinet's Joint Planning Staff to present its views on a possible military campaign against the USSR, codenamed Operation Unthinkable (How the “allies” of the USSR in the Anti-Hitler Coalition wanted to do the “Unthinkable”). The start of hostilities was planned for July 1, 1945.

The project was ready on May 22, 1945. The plan for the land campaign envisaged two main attacks in North-Eastern Europe in the direction of Poland. The rest of the front was supposed to be defended. Despite the fact that the Allies were numerically inferior to the Russian forces, they have hope of achieving success thanks to the factor of surprise and superior command and control aviation. In this case, the Anglo-Americans could reach the common Danzig-Breslau line.

The plan was sent by Churchill for consideration by Britain's highest staff body, the Joint Chiefs of Staff. On June 8, the latter’s conclusion was drawn up. The British military wisely noted that rapid military success was extremely doubtful due to the superiority of Russian forces (except fleet and strategic aviation). The operation will lead to a new long-term total war. Britain was not ready for it.

As a result, the British military, at Churchill’s suggestion, prepared a new, defensive plan that retained the old code name “Unthinkable.” It was ready on July 11th. The Allies were about to retreat from Europe, concentrating their forces to defend the British Isles.


Winston Churchill shows the "V" sign. 1943

To be continued ...
100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +12
    16 January 2024 04: 25
    It’s unclear what kind of ram they made from Japan, if it hit in the wrong direction, the Japs had no less problems with the USA than with the USSR, and Germany, after Poland, shoved the cradle on the Britons and did not push it to the east.
    1. +9
      16 January 2024 04: 43
      Quote: Buhach
      It’s unclear what kind of ram they made from Japan if it hit in the wrong direction

      The author is definitely worth reading at least something. You can even use a school textbook. wink
      1. +6
        16 January 2024 14: 49
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        The author is definitely worth reading at least something. You can even use a school textbook.

        The author writes for those who have passed the Unified State Exam and for housewives, so he does not need to read anything extra. True, he doesn’t know that housewives don’t read VO, but that doesn’t matter.
      2. +1
        16 January 2024 19: 23
        It is harmful for an author to read a lot; the author “writes as he hears.” bully
    2. +2
      16 January 2024 15: 03
      It’s unclear what kind of ram they made from Japan, if it hit in the wrong direction, the Japs had no less problems with the USA than with the USSR, and Germany, after Poland, shoved the cradle on the Britons and did not push it to the east.

      And the German ram first hit France and England....
      1. +1
        16 January 2024 23: 06
        Quote: Arzt
        And the German ram first hit France and England....

        More precisely, France and England attacked Germany just when it was about to establish a common border with the USSR. Moreover, with full mutual understanding with the latter.
    3. -2
      17 January 2024 13: 01
      That's it. If Germany had won the war with the USSR, the fate of the Anglo-Saxons would have been unenviable. Germany and Japan would have crushed all of Eurasia, the Middle East, and, together with Italy, part of Africa. Let’s not forget about South America and Antarctica. This is 80% of world oil production and all trade routes. After winning such a war, Hitler would invade Britain, or through an ultimatum he would achieve such a status for them that they would have to forget about imperial and financial ambitions. Well, the striped ones would sit behind a puddle and do self-service. That is why the Anglo-Saxons could not allow the collapse of the USSR. With all the hate. And when the USSR played its great role, Churchill immediately happened in Fulton.
      1. +2
        18 January 2024 00: 49
        Quote: Glagol1
        If Germany had won the war with the USSR, the fate of the Anglo-Saxons would have been unenviable.

        Let me remind you that the USSR joined the Anglo-German war almost two years after it began. On the initiative of the German side. And somehow Britain wasn’t exactly on its last legs at that moment.
        1. -1
          18 January 2024 04: 06
          Well, how can I say, you know about Churchill’s delight when he learned about Germany’s attack on the USSR? As he himself wrote: “England was saved!” Agree that this is an indicator of far from rosy prospects for Britain in the event of a further one-on-one duel with the Germans The USA stood on the sidelines at that time, the isolationist positions were strong there and the fate of the British could well have been disastrous if June 22 had not happened.
          1. +3
            18 January 2024 07: 51
            Quote: Buhach
            Well, how can I say, you know about Churchill’s delight when he learned about Germany’s attack on the USSR?

            It's quite funny how Soviet propaganda made the enchanting impudence of Comrade the norm. Stalin. Should Churchill have cried over this? When did the two great geopoliticians who shared the “British inheritance” come to blows with each other in November? And somehow things turned out ugly with the inheritance...

            By the way, I don’t remember Churchill being enthusiastic in June. The reaction was in the spirit of “the hedgehog was waiting.” In December, yes, he was euphoric.
            Quote: Buhach
            The fate of the British could well have been disastrous if June 22 had not happened.

            And what is the “deplorable fate of the British”, excuse me? Personally, Churchill, yes, could have been asked to leave.
            1. -1
              20 January 2024 03: 48
              If you are in the know, you should know about the capabilities of the military-industrial complex of Germany and England, they won the air war, but if there had been an amphibious operation, everything could have been different, just don’t talk about the naval power of the Britons, this is only one of the components. And, yes, occupation for the British could really be a blessing, as for the Czechs, for example, Hitler valued them very much from a racial point of view.
              Quote: Negro
              It's quite funny how Soviet propaganda made the enchanting impudence of Comrade the norm. Stalin. Should Churchill be crying?

              Do you see Soviet propaganda everywhere and that’s all? There’s no other way for you, apparently, to exist in nature. Was Stalin supposed to cry when the imperialist predators fought among themselves in the 40s? I suspect that he didn’t even cry once after Pearl- Harbour. By the way, the Japanese also laid claim to the British inheritance, and quite significantly, as subsequent events showed.
              Quote: Negro
              By the way, I don’t remember any enthusiasm from Churchill in June

              Are you so old!? Just a joke, if anything. Let there be joy or relief, as you wish, the wording doesn’t matter to me personally, this is for diplomats.
              1. +1
                20 January 2024 08: 56
                Quote: Buhach
                If you are in the know, you should know about the capabilities of the military-industrial complex of Germany and England,

                Yes, I heard something. For example, the production of armored vehicles during WWII in Britain was approximately the same as in the USSR. The number of armed forces of the Empire as a whole was greater than the number of spacecraft.
                Quote: Buhach
                if there had been a landing operation and everything could have been different

                The British could have been in trouble in the summer of '40 when they abandoned almost all their weapons at Dunkirk. But in 40, the Sea Lion was impossible, and then they made a new weapon.
                Quote: Buhach
                Was Stalin supposed to cry when the imperialist predators fought among themselves in the 40s?

                The war in Europe started in '39, my friend. No, specifically in 39 he had a lot to do. But in the spring of 40, when at the same time it became clear that he was alone on the continent with Hitler, and that he did not have an army, of course he became a little better.
                Quote: Buhach
                The Japanese also laid claim to the British inheritance, and quite significantly, as subsequent events showed.

                The Japanese also received a bill. Of course, 10 times less than the USSR, but still.
                Quote: Buhach
                The wording doesn’t matter to me personally, it’s for diplomats.

                That's because you haven't read Churchill. Hitler ensured victory for Britain only in December 41, having thought of declaring war on the United States as well. On the other hand, as far as I know, in the USA Churchill was not charged with anti-Americanism for his enthusiasm at that time.
                1. 0
                  20 January 2024 14: 06
                  Leave your manner of speaking through your lip, the argumentation is not far from the Soviet agitprom. Why were you so scared that you left the topic of how capable England was of resisting Germany alone
                  The British could have been in trouble in the summer of '40 when they abandoned almost all their weapons at Dunkirk. But in 40, the Sea Lion was impossible, and then they made a new weapon.
                  That’s all I wanted to say, and you yourself admitted it. But they wouldn’t have had problems, but the kirdyk would have come, if not at 40, then at 41. They made weapons, yeah, but again, time appeared after the attack on us and still without The USA didn’t get around to it, about numbers, armored vehicles, etc., I don’t understand, do you seriously believe that the Britons managed to do it themselves? In general, I don’t understand your logic and I leave you the right to once again stroke your vanity with your deep thoughts, communicate with your friends, I I’m not one of them.
                  1. 0
                    20 January 2024 14: 18
                    Quote: Buhach
                    Leave your way of speaking through your lip,

                    If you try to talk without slogans.
                    Quote: Buhach
                    kirdyk came, if not at 40, then at 41.

                    No chance. The Reich was not capable of Overlord. No one other than the alliance of Britain and the USA was capable of Overlord.
                    Quote: Buhach
                    I didn’t get around to talking about numbers, armored vehicles, etc., I don’t understand, do you seriously think that the Britons managed to cope on their own?

                    Actually, Britain fought alone with the Reich for a year, from the summer of ’40 to the summer of ’41. The USSR was never in such a situation, and we will not remember what it did this year. And nothing, I was in no hurry to capitulate. Naturally they expected to win one way or another.
                    Another thing is that the British strategy did not involve an assault on Berlin - there was no assault on Berlin in 1918.
            2. 0
              22 January 2024 04: 35
              //And what is the “deplorable fate of the British”//
              Loss of colonies, shrinkage of industry, and severe hunger of the population. I won’t speak for the military results, but in other respects it’s ABSOLUTELY AWESOME.
              1. 0
                22 January 2024 07: 15
                Quote: skifs
                Loss of colonies, shrinking industry

                How is this possible? This is how it happened in reality in the 40s and 50s, or what?
                Quote: skifs
                severe hunger of the population

                Why would it suddenly?
                Quote: skifs
                I won’t speak for the military results, but in other respects it’s ABSOLUTELY AWESOME.

                Even before December 41 there were no hints. And even more so after that.
  2. +5
    16 January 2024 04: 38
    "Soviet Russia has become a mortal threat to the free world."

    Stalin's USSR was like a bone in the throat of world imperialism...
    1. -4
      16 January 2024 12: 19
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      Stalin's USSR was like a bone in the throat of world imperialism...

      That’s why the imperialists first built industry in the USSR, and then launched it “from Stetsin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic.” Apparently there wasn't enough adventure.
    2. -1
      16 January 2024 22: 04
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      "Soviet Russia has become a mortal threat to the free world."

      Stalin's USSR was like a bone in the throat of world imperialism...

      Yeah ...
      Only here’s the paradox: the capitalists sold Stalin’s USSR both before the war and after - they sold factories and technologies. Even after the start of the Cold War...
      А capitalist RF - they don’t sell. The unfortunate "Opel" ("Every car someday becomes an Opel" (c)) - even that one was not sold.
      Several hundred sanctions against the USSR and 16 sanctions against the Russian Federation

      A bad feeling arises - that they were much less afraid of the Stalinist USSR than the Russian Federation
    3. -1
      20 January 2024 20: 12
      Well, yes, the pacifists. They tore Poland and the Germans apart, they wrested the shores of the Baltic states from the Finns, they nullified... and yes, they are peaceful and fluffy
  3. +3
    16 January 2024 08: 19
    The USSR posed a threat with its ideology, which contradicted the entire Western world. However, the fear of the bourgeoisie quickly passed and there could not have been any global and real plans to destroy the USSR, as the Author writes, due to the nature of the West itself. The political forces there are heterogeneous and there are contradictions between them.

    Some forces there wanted to push the Axis countries against the USSR, some did not, the USSR itself was one step away from an alliance with Germany. There is not and has not been any global center for the fight against the USSR, Germany, or the pandemic. Moreover, there is no real center for the fight against Russia, since the main threat - ideological - does not come from Russia.
    1. +2
      16 January 2024 08: 52
      Quote: S.Z.
      There is not and has not been any kind of global center of struggle, even with the USSR, even with Germany

      There was no world center; there was an understanding of the threat posed by the USSR and Germany to all the world's bankers and capitalists. Both the USSR and Nazi Germany had their own views on property, something like “take everything and divide it”
      1. +5
        16 January 2024 10: 43
        Not for everyone, but for most. The ideas of communism were so attractive that even some bankers and capitalists became infected with them. We should not forget that, although power certainly belongs to the capitalists, this power is not absolute, and in the West they were forced to take this into account.
        Stalin had a fifth column in Western countries.
        1. -2
          16 January 2024 12: 24
          Quote: S.Z.
          Even some bankers and capitalists became infected

          Marxism was invented by Marx, an academic scientist, and Engels, an industrialist. Among practitioners, people usually remember Lenin, a lawyer, publicist, publisher, and Mao, a professional slacker.

          One way or another, any “ideas” are spread among the university intelligentsia and educated people who have fallen into bad company, so to speak. Including, naturally, entrepreneurs and especially their heirs: they have a higher education, but in general they don’t need to work, and they don’t want to. Why not start transforming the world.
      2. -1
        16 January 2024 22: 15
        Quote: Dutchman Michel
        Germany had its own views on property, something like “take everything and divide it”

        But trouble-neutral Switzerland supplied watches to both the Reich and the Suzniks.
        Moreover, I understand how the Reich - but I don’t understand how it went through the WARring Axis countries located around Switzerland??
        The only option is for a percentage of the Reich's profits.
        And here the question about “take away and divide” somehow hangs in relation to the Reich
        1. -1
          16 January 2024 23: 09
          Quote: your1970
          how did this pass through the warring Axis countries around Switzerland??

          Nothing complicated. Neutral Vichy Republic - neutral Spain. Study the map.
          1. -1
            16 January 2024 23: 54
            Quote: Negro
            Quote: your1970
            how did this pass through the warring Axis countries around Switzerland??

            Nothing complicated. Neutral Vichy Republic - neutral Spain. Study the map.

            Product batches of watches? From three times neutral France/Spain, a ship sailing to England? Oh well...
            1. 0
              17 January 2024 01: 28
              Quote: your1970
              From three times neutral France/Spain, a ship sailing to England?

              Exactly. What surprises you?
  4. +5
    16 January 2024 08: 35
    The USSR could give people an alternative, that’s why they were afraid. And now they are afraid, though not of Russia, but of those red stars that remind them of the USSR. That is why the central channels are pouring on us about how bad it was then, people who hated the Russian people are now cited in the Kremlin, we are erecting monuments to traitors, that Look, Vlasov will be made a hero, although there have already been attempts. The red star was torn off from the army and a new, white one was attached. Now they want to return the streets and cities to their old names, and so they are slowly working. Why? Yes, because to be afraid, to be afraid of the “Red Menace” and there is someone to be afraid of, and there will be no iPhones and tiramisu, at best there will be soap and a rope and a pole.....
    1. 0
      16 January 2024 22: 32
      Quote from turembo
      The USSR could give people an alternative, that’s why were afraid.

      Who was afraid?
      In 1946, Churchill proclaimed a campaign against the USSR and immediately negotiations began on the sale of military jet engines to us by England. In 1947, the engines were sold with documentation and other things.
      Is this fear??? Or did Churchill go alone to the “Crusade against the USSR” (c) “Pravda”???
      Now it’s like “don’t be afraid” - but they didn’t even sell the unfortunate Opel, not to mention military technologies/factories
  5. +6
    16 January 2024 09: 48
    The Wehrmacht fought not with the Russians, but with the Soviets. The author continues the modern fashion in Russia, which claims to be an ideology, to identify Russia with the USSR. This can be understood from the lips of a foreigner, but from the lips of a Russian citizen it sounds Jesuitical. Yes, there were a majority of Russians by nationality in the Red Army. Yes, the concept of “Russian” can also include nationalities living on the territory of the Russian Federation. But what about people of other nationalities from the rest of the republics of the Union? Did they fight only for their republics or for a single socialist Motherland? Shall we forget about them? Or maybe we’ll change history, as we did in Ukraine, which was stricken by the brown plague?
  6. +3
    16 January 2024 09: 52
    I finally understand that Samsonov is from a parallel world and writes about its history))) that’s where Samsonovism comes from))) But seriously, it wouldn’t hurt for the author to educate himself, read something other than Anglo-Saxon conspiracy theories.
    I can’t wait until there are articles on how the Russian pyramids were built and the Chinese were taught to read and write)))
    1. +1
      16 January 2024 11: 38
      Given the growing concentration of capital in the world, why shouldn’t there be conspiracies?
      And if politicians clearly understand their interests and those they have in common with others, there is no need for a conspiracy. They will work in harmony anyway.

      This is in Russia, where the direction of politics regularly changes to the opposite direction - there can be no conspiracy or even sense for a time period of more than 10 years.
    2. +1
      16 January 2024 14: 53
      Quote from Tim666
      I can’t wait until there are articles on how the Russian pyramids were built and the Chinese were taught to read and write

      Russian forks (apparently they invented them themselves) were brought to England and the English were taught to use them, so anything can happen))
    3. 0
      18 January 2024 20: 17
      I can’t wait until there are articles on how the Russian pyramids were built and the Chinese were taught to read and write)))[/quote]
      , etc.
      So Nosovsky and Fomenko have already written something similar...
  7. +1
    16 January 2024 12: 07
    The USSR was creating a new solar civilization, a world of the future, where man is not a slave, but a creator.

    If you have read this paragraph, you can say that you have read the entire article. wink
    Sometimes Mr. Samsonov writes good, useful things, and sometimes I even agree with him - but that’s all, well, it’s just a stream of nonsense. Eggs, horses, sandals and parrots mixed together.

    It is not explained why “controlled” Japan, instead of coordinating with Hitler, rushed not to the USSR but to the USA and the colonies of the West, why there was lend-lease and not sitting on the butt with developments and developments in strategic aviation and atomic bombs to finish off the winner.

    Well, about the “solar civilization” - the fig world of the future was mixed in, with the Gulag, executions and political sentences of 15-20 years, communal services and collective farms. I don’t know, somewhere in developed countries a person was less of a “slave” than he was in fact in the USSR in the 1930s-1940s, because all your benefits stupidly depended on what the state gave you and on whether you were useful to the state or not.
    This is slavery, when you have no choice “to work or not to work” - everything you have belongs to the owner and he considers you as a slave force, as a “unit”. You can even call it “builder of communism”; the essence is the same - personal variability of actions breaks through the bottom. In the West, you could live like a bourgeois, you could start your own business, start farming - the state didn’t care what you did, as long as you paid taxes. But not in the USSR - because there they looked at you as a “servant of God” with all that it entails.

    So I don’t know what was built there according to Mr. Samsonov’s fantasies, but firstly it was not completed, and secondly, at the intermediate stages there was something like this...

    As for the Cold War, the West became more consolidated the more territories the USSR actually occupied. It's logical - it's physics. Pressure, compression. After BB2, they faced a very real threat, somewhat forgotten since the Polish campaign of the Red Army - and they consolidated, because there were not many who wanted to build a “solar civilization” then somewhere near Magadan.
    1. +2
      16 January 2024 12: 56
      Quote: Knell Wardenheart
      Well, about the “solar civilization” - the fig world of the future was mixed in, with the Gulag, executions and political sentences of 15-20 years, communal services and collective farms. I don’t know, somewhere in developed countries a person was less of a “slave” than he was in fact in the USSR in the 1930s-1940s

      Heh...heh...so we were freed from slavery by Yeltsin and Chubais? Monument to the liberators to the sky!
      As for the “solar civilization” - of course, the author’s liberty.
      But to clarify, in the USSR the legislation was more democratic than we have in the Russian Federation today. Today the State Duma does not even have the opportunity to convene an All-Russian Congress...For 23 years now the country has been governed by a non-party president who is not subordinate to any party existing in the Russian Federation.. And Nabiullina is involved in domestic politics, who in work according to the Constitution is not subordinate to either the president or the government . In fact, it reports only to the IMF.

      And in the USSR, the elected body of power - the Supreme Council - had enormous rights. “Red Emperor” - Stalin in the 30s worked only in elected and accountable positions.

      “Communal apartments” are not a sign of bad legislation, but a consequence of low resources. The communal apartments were not due to the fact that Stalin did not want to give the people the luxurious apartments that he had hidden away. Collective farms or agricultural cooperatives are a progressive form of agriculture that appeared in England in the first third of the 19th century. If it were like this in Russia, collective farms in the USSR would not evoke bad emotions.

      Finally, “slaves” are not only a legal concept. This is a mental state formed over 4 centuries of serfdom. We are still slaves today. Today we “elect” a president for life, just as Mikhail Romanov was elected at the beginning of the 17th century. We are still today under any legislation We live in practice according to the laws of the Autocracy.

      Even today, a political slogan that is absolutely inappropriate to reality is considered normal; “and for whom else?” At its core, this stupid slogan is a self-recognition of the mental inferiority of an entire society, in which supposedly, out of 100 million, there is not a single leader to replace the current one..... Hitler, with his theory of inferior peoples, is simply resting. and what do the USSR and the GULAG have to do with it? The GULAG is a consequence, not a cause.
      1. 0
        16 January 2024 13: 28
        Heh...heh...so we were freed from slavery by Yeltsin and Chubais?

        Partly yes (with regard to the rejection of state paternalism), although the attempt was extremely, ahem...unsuccessful. But it was worth expecting this from the fruits of a system that, in general, never stood on ceremony with people. The fruit is from the same apple tree, only green.
        And partly, it is worth recognizing that the most odious elements of “slavery” were smoothed out over time because the standard of living and technological equipment reached a point at which the costs of maintaining “slavery” of the 1930-1940 (50s) type began to outweigh its benefits. The person has become more beneficial to the economy as a consumer. Totalitarian systems can also develop, and even quite successfully. However, their dogmatism and supra-legal tools create “walls” beyond which movement is impossible - and either everything stops, or one or another analogue of a revolution occurs.
        The expansion of the variety of activities in the USSR hit this “wall” - at this point, various rudiments of “slavery” remained, like what Andropov tried to cling to (like catching people in cinemas during working hours), but issues of property, activity and property rights copyrights and, in general, rights of many types - froze somewhere halfway between the current understanding and the understanding of the era of serfdom. And the further movement of the evolution of this stupidly got into a configuration that was not the most favorable, to put it mildly.
        The fact that something had to cut this wall, this “Gordian knot” is the logic of history, and not an incredibly unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, as leftists often think.

        But to clarify, in the USSR the legislation was more democratic than we have in the Russian Federation today

        You must understand that, just like today, there is a big problem associated with the “peculiarities of implementation” of this legislation. It is difficult to believe in the independence of the judiciary when the judge is from the same party as the prosecutor.

        "Red Emperor" - Stalin in the 30s worked only in elected and accountable positions

        That didn’t stop him from calling Sudoplatov and “ordering” Mikhoels. Paper rules are one thing, but “in fact” is something else entirely. And Stalin was the same “nominal and accountable” as Putin is today - a non-party self-nominated candidate.
        1. -2
          17 January 2024 05: 46
          It was you, the enemies of the USSR, who captured the USSR, who turned the Soviet people into your low-paid, wordless, powerless slaves under your spells about “freedom”.
      2. -3
        16 January 2024 13: 38
        Collective farms or agricultural cooperatives are a progressive form of agriculture that appeared in England in the first third of the 19th century.

        ...and they probably drove there by force, taking away the land and property?) Now you see a fairy fairy in the mosquito and I’m racking my brains - is adjusting the facts more important to you than the essence or is this some kind of “small lie for the sake of”?
        So you write about communal apartments - people, damn it, had their property taken away FUCKINGLY. And they housed some devils in batches. Do you understand?:) You have an extra room - how would you react to the fact that a stranger is moved in there, and they tell you that the hut is no longer yours and they won’t give a damn for it?
        Come on, tell me how great, progressive and fair this is!

        Finally, “slaves” are not only a legal concept. This is a mental state formed over 4 centuries of serfdom. We are still slaves today

        Today I can raise a couple of dozen money from blogging, collect money and dump it across the border into any other madhouse. They don’t force me into the party with a whip, they don’t keep me on a collective farm without a passport, they don’t discuss my immoral lifestyle at work meetings - I have some property that I can sell, and I have the opportunity to buy everything that my money is enough for, and no one will dig into why the hell I needed some foreign thing.
        But I agree with you about the subordinate and system-dependent state - the degree and form have changed, but not the essence.

        Even today, a political slogan that is absolutely inappropriate to reality is considered normal; "Who else? "

        If you read me from time to time, you will not see that I praise the present time or the 90s, or especially the leftists. From my point of view, our society is already very good. It’s been painful for a long time and if there was a good life, it was not long and a long time ago. I’m not here to cover everything with feces - my task is to isolate the objective and periodic prerequisites for the collapse and, on the basis of this, try to justify why our system comes to it over and over again.
        1. -2
          17 January 2024 05: 49
          Yes, you are enemies of the USSR, both under the USSR and after you captured the USSR - not the slightest benefit to the country and people, you have always parasitized and are parasitizing at the expense of other people's labor.
        2. -2
          17 January 2024 18: 10
          Is socialism more progressive than capitalism? I think yes, loyalty to Stalin’s political course means victory in the Second World War. From 1946 to 1953, bread fell in price by 3 times, meat by 2,5 times. After the resignation of Malenkov, the decline of the USSR under Khrushchev began, and this continued further. The party apparatus took power not only over business executives, but also over organs; otherwise, the USSR would have survived. In England, under Cromwell, a lot of blood was shed. Tukhachevsky's Polish campaign was preceded by Pilsudski's campaign against Kyiv; Trotsky dreamed of a world revolution. Stalin reassured Europe with a statement about the possibility of building socialism in a single country. “My task is to find out the objective... prerequisites for the collapse”, Gaidar and his team have already found out this, but they have not received a positive answer.
      3. 0
        16 January 2024 16: 24
        “Even today, a political slogan that is absolutely inappropriate to reality is considered normal in our country; “and for whom else?” “At its core, this stupid slogan is a self-recognition of the mental inferiority of an entire society, in which supposedly out of 100 million there is not a single leader to replace the current one.”

        If this is the case, then the current situation is much better than what we deserve and we should expect things to get worse. We simply don't deserve the life we ​​live.
        1. -1
          17 January 2024 05: 50
          We do not deserve this nonsense that in the Russian Federation, alone in world history, only one person is capable of ruling the State.
          1. +1
            17 January 2024 07: 38
            They didn't deserve it, they earned it. And this is not the only case in world history.
            1. 0
              17 January 2024 12: 06
              Many leftists, like Tatra, are engaged in ostentatious denial and, in addition to the fact that it is funny, it is also very reminiscent of the ostentatious denial of the Russian peasantry. In that environment, even during serfdom, it was traditional to believe that the land belonged to no one, it was “God’s.” But the funny thing is that those who actually owned this land and the peasants on it, even though it was a minority, were I really don't care on such views and on those who deny. They simply did what they wanted and this position of the peasantry with all their ideas was of no use to them at all.

              There is exactly no use in denying the leftists, with their non-recognition of “predatory privatization,” “the actual irremovability of the guarantor,” and so on. It doesn’t matter how you see things - in order to change them, you first of all need to see them as objectively as possible.
              It is unlikely that we would have achieved such success in technology if, from religious or traditional ideas, we tried to explain everything by the spirit of God or magic, demonstrably denying attempts at rational explanation and the “scientific method”.

              In general, arguing with dogmatists is an empty matter - a dogmatist is a looped principle, he is comfortable existing in a torus of his own ideas.
              1. 0
                17 January 2024 12: 36
                “In general, arguing with dogmatists is an empty matter - a dogmatist is a looped principle, he is comfortable existing in a torus of his own ideas.”

                Don’t tell me, arguing with dogmatists allows you to test your own ideas.
                1. +1
                  17 January 2024 12: 41
                  It’s better to test ideas in conversations with smart and creative people, and not with Uncle Suslov’s identical twins.
                  A good dialogue is a dialogue in which you and your interlocutor have something to emphasize, and competition over who has the strongest forehead will not be useful. There are now more than enough cast iron heads.
              2. 0
                17 January 2024 18: 22
                “Predatory privatization” is a repetition of the dispossession of middle peasants, only earlier they were given the opportunity to survive by forming collective farms, and having ruined and bankrupted the factories, the workers were not given the opportunity to survive; they were thrown out onto the street, and no one took responsibility for their future fate. And dogma this is that Russia will be saved by raw materials, not development, but you are a blogger, and you are far from that.
          2. 0
            17 January 2024 22: 08
            Quote: tatra
            We do not deserve this nonsense that in the Russian Federation, alone in world history, only one person is capable of ruling the State.

            Well, if the communists are not able to nominate a decent candidate, one billionaire is enough to discredit the idea to the point of indecency.....
    2. +4
      16 January 2024 13: 35
      The shitty world of the future was mixed up with the Gulag, executions and political sentences of 15-20 years, communal services and collective farms.

      And where did you postulate the above by theorists, ideologists, and those holding power in the USSR, as a necessary element along the entire path to creating this “world of the future”?
      I will not say anything about the fact that the above mentioned existed quite well in the same USA during the mentioned period. Even the Gulag and collective farms.
      because all your benefits stupidly depended on whether you were useful to the state or not.

      Is there any difference here from capital countries?
      This is slavery when you have no choice “to work or not to work”

      A person has no choice “to work or not to work.” The desire to eat motivates to choose the first option. Even to rob you will have to commit a certain set of labor costs.
      could start their own business, start farming

      You could have done this in the USSR during the period you mentioned (or the late 80s, but that’s a different story).
      1. 0
        16 January 2024 22: 42
        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
        could start their own business, start farming

        You could have done this in the USSR during the period you mentioned (well, or the late 80s, but that’s for another story

        Mmmm....is this when people hammered copper nails into apple trees at night or poured boiling water on them so that the apple trees would disappear and they wouldn’t have to pay taxes for them?! Are you talking about this period?
        1. 0
          17 January 2024 09: 36
          Mmmm....is this when people hammered copper nails into apple trees at night or poured boiling water on them so that the apple trees would disappear and they wouldn’t have to pay taxes for them?!

          What less intelligent people do is not the subject of conversation.
          1. +1
            17 January 2024 18: 34
            Quote: A vile skeptic
            Mmmm....is this when people hammered copper nails into apple trees at night or poured boiling water on them so that the apple trees would disappear and they wouldn’t have to pay taxes for them?!

            What do people are not very smart not a subject of conversation.
            - so you don’t know? However-o-o-o-o......belay belay laughing laughing
            1 September 1939 years
            UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
            LAW
            ABOUT AGRICULTURAL TAX
            Chapter I
            GENERAL
            Article 1. Agricultural tax is imposed on:
            a) personal income of collective farmers - members of agricultural artels and communes, mixed commercial agricultural artels (industrial collective farms) and fishing artels, as well as members of partnerships for joint cultivation of land (TOZ);
            b) income of individual farmers and other non-members of collective farms, obtained in rural areas from field cultivation, livestock farming, vegetable gardening, horticulture and other branches of agriculture.
            Article 2. The tax is calculated from each farm on income from the following sources:
            a) from field cultivation, from livestock of all types, haymaking, gardening, melon growing, tobacco growing, sowing of industrial and oilseeds, gardens, berry fields, vineyards and other plantings, beekeeping, sericulture;
            b) from uncooperative handicraft and craft activities and other non-agricultural earnings not subject to income tax.
            Income from uncooperative handicraft and handicraft activities and from other non-agricultural earnings earned in the offing are subject to income tax.

            Chapter three
            PROCEDURE FOR CALCULATING TAX FROM PERSONAL INCOME
            FARMS OF COLLECTORS
            Article 8. From the farms of collective farmers with income from personal plots of land, livestock and non-agricultural earnings, agricultural tax is calculated on the annual amount of taxable income of the farm (Articles 5 - 7) according to the following table of rates:
            Chapter VII
            RESPONSIBILITY OF TAX PAYERS
            Article 33. Tax payers are subject to criminal liability for concealing sources of income.
            Article 34. In cases of failure to pay taxes on time, collection measures are taken against arrears:
            a) for late payment, a penalty of 0,2 percent is charged for each day of delay;
            b) after the deadline for paying the tax, an inventory of the property of the arrears is compiled and the case of non-payment of the tax is transferred to the people's court, by decision of which the property of the defaulter is confiscated in the amount necessary to repay the arrears;
            c) if there are repeated cases of non-payment of taxes, arrears are brought to criminal liability.

            It was because of this law that peasants began to have goats en masse (the rate of return was 40 versus 600 per cow) and to massively destroy apple trees and other fruit trees (by simulating their natural death, otherwise for concealing taxes they could have gone all the way to Solovki)
            1. 0
              18 January 2024 11: 26
              - so you don’t know? However-o-o-o-o......belay belay laughing laughing

              Laughter for no reason is a sign...
              I am aware that the law on agricultural tax, 1931, 1939, etc. has nothing to do with my phrase that you quoted before meaninglessly copying the text of the law. Why did you copy and paste this text if it is not related in meaning to mine?
              It was because of this law that peasants began to have goats en masse (the rate of return is 40 versus 600 per cow) and to massively destroy apple trees and other fruit trees

              Don't you like that nature designed a cow so that it is more profitable than a goat? Or don’t like the fact that the state collects taxes? This is purely your personal matter. The majority of the population at all times has only one thought - I don’t owe anything to the state, they only owe me, because I’m so good. Therefore, I would rather receive less than give more.
              1. -1
                18 January 2024 13: 07
                [quote = Vile skeptic] others have nothing to do with my phrase that you quoted before meaninglessly copying the text of the law. [/quote]
                It’s strange - it wasn’t you who put forward false theories about starting your own business or farming under the USSR
                [quote = Vile Skeptic]could start their own business, start farming
                You could have done this in the USSR during the period you mentioned[/quote]
                And after that they blurted out
                quote=vile skeptic]What people do not with great intelligence is not the subject of conversation.[/quote]...
                “From the small mind” of the matter, the scope of the destruction of everything and everyone was such that the issue was raised in the Central Committee
                1. 0
                  18 January 2024 14: 08
                  It’s strange - it wasn’t you who put forward false theories about starting your own business or farming under the USSR

                  And what does the law establishing the taxation procedure have to do with the question of the possibility/impossibility of starting to engage in farming individually or in another type of activity as part of a cooperative? No, it doesn’t reach?
                  P.S. By the way, quoting implies using the words of the quoted person. wassat
                  1. 0
                    18 January 2024 19: 22
                    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                    And what does the law establishing the taxation procedure have to do with the question of the possibility/impossibility of starting to engage in farming individually or in another type of activity as part of a cooperative?
                    -extremely high level taxation this law is established. Therefore, it has become more profitable to slaughter a cow - driving it into gullies so that its leg is broken - and get a goat.

                    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                    P.S. By the way, quoting implies using the words of the quoted wassat
                    -ah sorry -I quoted you crookedly, the parentheses are lost
                    Quote: your1970
                    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                    others have nothing to do with my phrase that you quoted before the meaningless copying of the text of the law.

                    It’s strange - it wasn’t you who put forward false theories about starting your own business or farming under the USSR

                    Quote: your1970
                    Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                    could start their own business, start farming
                    You could have done this in the USSR during the period you mentioned
                    1. -1
                      19 January 2024 12: 42
                      This law establishes an extremely high level of taxation.

                      The law establishes the level of taxation, and not a ban on conducting activities. Don't you understand the difference? Or are you just pretending?
                      Therefore, it became more profitable to slaughter a cow - driving it into gullies so that it would “break” its leg - and get a goat.

                      You have already been answered - “What people do not with great intelligence is not the subject of conversation. The majority of the population at all times has only one thought - I don’t owe anything to the state, they only owe me, because I’m so good. Therefore, I would rather receive less than give more."
                      It did not become more profitable to slaughter a cow, for example, at 41 than at 38 (that is, before and after the law of 1939). It has become less (not not) profitable to keep bulls. And their population actually decreased significantly (by a quarter). But the number of cows decreased slightly (a couple of percent), just as the number of goats increased slightly (a couple of percent).
                      No one denies that being an individual owner was harder and this was a state policy implemented through tax policy. But “harder” does not equal “impossible.”
                      1. 0
                        19 January 2024 13: 20
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        But “harder” does not equal “impossible.”

                        Do you seriously think so?
                        In 1960, my father-in-law went into the store and bought himself a single-barrel Izhevka from his payday - without medical examinations, training, hunting societies, vouchers and other things.
                        Now I’m thinking about selling mine, because there’s talk again about making an alarm system mandatory. Plus everything else...
                        But there is no ban - it’s just problematic....
                        Same with your statement.
                        Nominate your candidacy for president, the VO will support you (even I) - there is no prohibition for you, I hope?

                        By the way, our citizens got goats after the war; before the war there were none at all, and on collective farms there were never any
                      2. 0
                        19 January 2024 14: 12
                        Do you seriously think so?

                        What is “harder” not the same as “impossible”? That’s what you think: “But there is no ban - it’s just problematic.”
                        Nominate your candidacy for president, VO will support you (even me)

                        Well, you can only speak for yourself, can’t you? And the second - why? After all, within the framework of our conversation, this does not mean anything - the presence of any candidate, and not some specific one, is already confirmation that it is “possible” and not “impossible” to nominate a presidential candidate. Otherwise, there simply wouldn’t be even a single candidate.
                        By the way, our citizens got goats after the war; before the war there were none at all, and on collective farms there were never any

                        That is, the presence of 6 million goats on January 1, 1941 on the personal farms of collective farmers - these were not goats. About which a document was even provided above. OK.
                      3. -1
                        19 January 2024 15: 06
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        That is, the presence of 6 million goats on January 1, 1941 on the personal farms of collective farmers - these were not goats. About which a document was even provided above. OK.

                        Quote: your1970
                        goats we
                        appeared after the war
                        didn’t notice? I didn’t write that there were no goats anywhere - I don’t need too much
                      4. 0
                        24 January 2024 10: 26
                        did not notice?

                        I didn’t notice where before this there was talk about “us-particular”, if it was about “us-general”. And you understood it:
                        Quote: your1970
                        1 September 1939 years
                        UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS
                        LAW

                        Quote: your1970
                        and it wasn’t you who put forward false theories about starting your own business or farming with the USSR

                        I am familiar with your ultima ratio - “but specifically for me or specifically for him.” I have already caught you at a level of productivity that has not changed for “you” in 30 years, according to the words of a “familiar farmer”.
                        Remind me what “your” region is and I will give you data on the availability of goats among collective farmers on private farms in your region request
                      5. -1
                        24 January 2024 12: 29
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        Remind me what “your” region is and I will give you data on the availability of goats among collective farmers on private farms in your region

                        Saratov region, Trans-Volga region.
                        It's strange that you don't remember, although"took me at my word on the level of yield in my region."
                        I'm waiting for the numbers.
                      6. 0
                        24 January 2024 13: 17
                        It's strange that you don't remember

                        What is so strange here?
                        I'm waiting for the numbers.

                        For 1941, you can choose any of two numbers - either 533 thousand (January 1) or 445 thousand (October 1). In 1936 (as of June 1) - 307 thousand
                        But this is with sheep.
                        PS In 1936, there were 100 sheep and goats per 335 households in the Saratov region.
                      7. -1
                        24 January 2024 13: 39
                        Quote: Nefarious skeptic
                        PS In 1936, there were 100 sheep and goats per 335 households in the Saratov region.

                        If I write that this is the other bank of the Volga - they were there, yes - you won’t believe it. If I write that my grandfather brought my mother a kid from Saratov in 1950 and my mother told me that the neighbors went to look at him as if it were a miracle - you will again say that this is “my position".
                        If I write that our main position is still sheep and there was even a large breeding farm nearby, you will again say that this is my personal position
                        If I write that in the regional center, God forbid, there are 10 goats now, even though their milk is extremely profitable - 150 rubles 0.5 liters - again, you won’t believe it.
                        You and I are in a loop - I believe in what I saw/I know, you are citing facts - that this is all a lie.
                        You won't convince me, I'll...
                      8. -1
                        24 January 2024 14: 22
                        You won't convince me, I'll...

                        Why not? I fully agree that among the many “particulars” that make up the “general”, your “particular” has its place. In these cases, I am just trying to convey that the point of view in which the general picture is ignored (or denied) in favor of a particular case is not correct.
      2. 0
        17 January 2024 18: 33
        Timur! I also answered a couple of times, but the person writes that he would like to start blogging and advises reading it, so his intentions are clear as day. In essence, what he writes about, I will say that before writing it would be a good idea to read.
  8. AB
    0
    16 January 2024 13: 09
    ..unity of civil society and the Stalinist... elite?
  9. +1
    16 January 2024 16: 37
    The discussion turned into the most interesting form, as usual - what is better than the USSR or the Russian Federation, that is, when life was better.

    IMHO, there are several answers to this question - depending on what was better and depending on who was better - well, or worse.

    Taking into account the state of the art, it is possible to answer specific questions quite clearly, but it will not be possible to answer in general, since the result is not the sum of the terms. And you should also take into account who exactly.

    Was life more just? Of course, everyone was relatively equal.
    Did people live richer on average? No, now they live much more well-fed.
    Were there more opportunities for self-realization - no, entrepreneurship was prohibited, for example, borders were closed.
    When it was easier for an ordinary person to earn money for an apartment, it was easier then, especially if he had the health to do hard work.
    When there was more crime - of course now - the streets were safe.


    Well, there are many specific questions to which people can give different answers, but these answers cannot distort the truth.

    But the answer to the question - when is it better - does not exist. And there can be no return, so disputes are, in general, useless.
    1. +1
      16 January 2024 18: 08
      Were there more opportunities for self-realization - no, entrepreneurship was prohibited, for example, borders were closed.

      The opportunity for self-realization must be determined by the amount of free time available to a person. And not because your borders are closed or whether you can start a business.
      1. 0
        17 January 2024 07: 53
        “The opportunity for self-realization should be determined by the amount of free time available to a person.”

        IMHO, both parameters are important. However, I cannot determine when a person had more free time.

        On the one hand, life was calmer, after work - realize yourself, even until you’re blue in the face. Therefore, in the evenings, self-actualizers often sat at tables and played dominoes.

        On the other hand, there were very few days off, on New Year's Day - 1 day, March 8 - 1, on May - 2 days, November - 2 (or 1, I don't remember), and also Constitution Day. That's all - plus a vacation. However, days that fell on weekends were not transferred.

        In general, I find it difficult to answer.

        True, in my personal years of youth I did not have a lot of time - I worked two jobs, studied at night, got married, gave birth to a child, and I personally had little time. But I acquired the useful skill of falling asleep at the first opportunity in almost any conditions - but that's another story. :)
    2. -1
      16 January 2024 23: 29
      Quote: S.Z.
      Was life more just? Of course, everyone was relatively equal.

      They were so equal that Yeltsin’s main slogan was “Down with privilege.” Modern man cannot even imagine until what time degrees were not equal to people in the USSR.
      Quote: S.Z.
      When it was easier for an ordinary person to earn money for an apartment, it was easier then

      No. Now many people can get married and take out an apartment on a mortgage, if we are not talking about the center of Moscow. In the USSR, what awaited you was, at best, a dorm room. "Small Family" to be more precise. During the late Soviet period, the topic of “cooperative houses” appeared, but it was not for everyone.
      Quote: S.Z.
      When there was more crime - of course now - the streets were safe.

      This is how insolent you have to be to say something like that. The well-known “Word of a Boy” already shows the end of the Soviet Union, but the same Kazan youth groups appeared already in the 70s.
      1. -3
        17 January 2024 05: 58
        The USSR was a State for the majority of the people, the Russian Federation was a State for 20-30% of the people who wander around the world, buying apartments, houses, expensive foreign cars.
        1. 0
          17 January 2024 07: 15
          Quote: tatra
          The USSR was a State for the majority of the people,

          Pensions for collective farmers of 7-10-12 rubles? Not?

          In general, if he were a people’s man, then the people would defend him, and would not say, “Oh, that’s where they decided something in Moscow!! We didn’t receive an order to defend the USSR, and we ourselves can’t do it without an order!!”
      2. +1
        17 January 2024 08: 13
        “They were so equal that Yeltsin’s main slogan was “Down with privilege.” Today’s people cannot even imagine to what extent people in the USSR were unequal.”

        This was exactly what the slogan was - the privileges of that time cannot be compared with the current inequality. It's a bit like fighting flashing lights.

        “No. Nowadays, many people can get married and take out an apartment on a mortgage, if we are not talking about the center of Moscow. In the USSR, at best, a dorm room was expected. “Small Family,” to be more precise. During the late Soviet era, the topic of “cooperative houses” appeared, but not very much for all."

        A mortgage is not your apartment, the comparison doesn’t work. Yes, you could wait in line for years, but you could earn money - either for a cooperative, for this you had, of course, to enlist and work somewhere on the seas for a year or two. Secondly - economically, since the beginning of the 80s this has definitely worked. You leave the enterprise for a construction job, the enterprise pays you on average, and even at a construction site - there is little, but they pay, as a rule, there is no profession. The house is built - the apartment is yours. They built houses for a year or two, but not for 25 years.

        “It’s to what extent you have to be insolent to say this. The well-known “Word of a Boy” already shows the end of the Soviet Union, but the same Kazan youth groups appeared already in the 70s.”

        :) I didn’t live in Kazan, but in Voronezh, and not on TV. On the next street you could get punched in the face by the neighboring boys - that's true. But my friends and I spent all our free time on the streets and no one worried about us. What kind of boys are these without fights? In later years we walked around the city until dawn - there was no fear.

        An example from life. One boy from our house left his bicycle near the store and it - the bicycle, not the boy - was stolen. The boy’s parents and other ladies from our yard, full of indignation, turned to the police - what is this, you can’t even leave a bicycle at the store! The cops returned the bike! True, different, but no worse - I don’t know where they got it. Well, the “key under the mat” and only one lock on the door is a daily practice.
        1. -1
          18 January 2024 00: 43
          Quote: S.Z.
          This was exactly what the slogan was - the privileges of that time cannot be compared with the current inequality. It's a bit like fighting flashing lights.

          Khe khe.

          You underestimate that inequality. From the current height it seems that it doesn’t matter whether there are one boots or five. In general, the difference is five times.

          You are used to abundance, you do not notice it. Now the only question is money, the universal equivalent of value. Soviet people lived in a different coordinate system.
          Quote: S.Z.
          A mortgage is not your apartment, the comparison doesn’t work

          A mortgage is your apartment, which is pledged. In any case, I you live in it all this time.
          Quote: S.Z.
          You leave the enterprise for a construction job, the enterprise pays you on average, and even at a construction site - it’s not much, but they pay, as a rule, there is no profession

          It would seem that if a qualified worker is used as a laborer on a construction site, then something has been seriously misunderstood. But no, it turns out some are happy.
          Quote: S.Z.
          But my friends and I spent all our free time on the streets and no one worried about us. What kind of boys are these without fights?

          Yeah. Despite all the shortcomings of the current Russian Federation, the level of violence then and now is incomparable. This is not so much the democratic government, of course, tried, but the computer and the Internet. There are almost no punks on the streets, everyone stays at home.
          Quote: S.Z.
          Well, the “key under the mat” and only one lock on the door is a daily practice.

          There are no keys at all in the barracks, as well as doors. For the same reason. There is nothing to steal.

          Although they find something to steal, of course.
          1. 0
            18 January 2024 10: 47
            “You underestimate that inequality. From the current height, it seems that it doesn’t matter whether you have one boots or five. But in fact, the difference is five times.”

            Please don’t fantasize, the difference in property and income back then was negligible compared to what it is today - either in pieces or in times.

            “A mortgage is your apartment, which is pledged. In any case, you have been living in it all this time.”

            Pawned means it's not yours. several non-payments - and it’s gone, don’t be mistaken.

            “It would seem that if a qualified worker is used as a laborer on a construction site, then something has been seriously misunderstood. But no, it turns out that some are happy.”

            No one is happy and then they weren’t happy - you’re distorting, I was talking about what was POSSIBLE, and not about the fact that it was so right.

            “Yeah. With all the shortcomings of the current Russian Federation, the level of violence then and now is incomparable. It’s not so much the democratic government, of course, that tried, but the computer and the Internet. There are almost no punks on the streets, everyone is sitting at home.”

            There are no punks, but there is crime and banditry, which could not even be imagined then, and the number of scammers is off the charts. The crime rate today is incomparably higher, this is absolutely indisputable.

            "There are no keys at all in the barracks, just like there are no doors. For the same reason. There is nothing to steal."

            I'm talking about facts, nothing more.

            I see that you simply hate the USSR, that is, your emotions do not allow you to look at least a little objectively at what was and what is. You probably have a reason for this; someone offended you or your loved ones.

            I lived part of my life there and then, and part - here and now, this life went differently, but it’s strange for me to see the denial of the obvious.
      3. 0
        17 January 2024 09: 27
        and take out an apartment on a mortgage, if we are not talking about the center of Moscow. In the USSR, what awaited you was, at best, a dorm room. "Small Family" to be more precise.

        What a blatant lie.
        1. 0
          17 January 2024 09: 46
          Khe khe.

          Optionally, the apartment was a bonus during the “distribution”. But not for everyone, of course.

          And I saw these Soviet “studio apartments”. I still get to visit, fortunately. I don’t need to tell you amazing stories about free Soviet housing.
          1. 0
            17 January 2024 10: 08
            I don’t need to tell you amazing stories.

            Of course you don’t have to, you can do a great job of composing them yourself.
          2. +1
            17 January 2024 12: 51
            Twice we received housing absolutely free. The end of the 80s and then in the 90s. In the current Russian Federation, I had to pay a very hefty amount for an apartment.
            1. 0
              17 January 2024 13: 38
              Quote: azmt
              End of 80's

              Most likely, “free” means that housing was provided to you by your employer as part of your benefits package. Then the good capitalists allowed it to be appropriated as property.
              Quote: azmt
              then in the 90s.

              Very interesting.
              1. 0
                25 January 2024 10: 01
                Then the good capitalists allowed it to be appropriated as property.

                This cannot be called property in the full sense, given that it can be taken away for non-payment of some payments or for something else.
    3. -2
      17 January 2024 05: 55
      The anti-Soviet Russian Federation has been simply parasitizing for 32 years due to what was created and built in the USSR, which is why the enemies of the USSR have such an inadequate ideology - anger against everything that the Soviet people did, and bragging about how much they had after they captured the USSR, but They all had “nothing to do with” the seizure of the USSR.
  10. 0
    16 January 2024 21: 04
    An interesting point, self-realization is different for each person, for some it is a company, for others it is a department, or even these two paths can be further divided, well, these are variables that suit each group of people. . with similar desires.
    1. -3
      17 January 2024 06: 00
      Self-realization among the enemies of the USSR is mainly embezzlement and speculation. In no industry have they, with their highly paid work and business, achieved the performance indicators of the communists and their supporters 40-50 years ago.
    2. +1
      17 January 2024 09: 50
      Of course, you are right, someone realizes themselves by achieving perfection in the game of dominoes. Another thing is how wide the opportunities are - namely free time, boundaries of movement, access to information and others.
  11. 0
    16 January 2024 22: 26
    I answer the question about why the Cold War began: it is the result of the West's FEAR of the USSR, its military power... This is my short answer.
    1. 0
      16 January 2024 23: 30
      Quote: Sergey Nikolaev_3
      the result of the West's FEAR of the USSR and its military power

      Are you talking about the USSR in 46? Is this some kind of joke?
  12. -1
    16 January 2024 22: 53
    The reasons for the Cold War are obvious - after the end of World War II, the United States laid claim to world domination, on the path to which the USSR and the so-called stood in the way. the “socialist” camp to which, to one degree or another, many state entities around the world were affiliated, which could not but lead to an arms race and confrontation.
    1. 0
      16 January 2024 23: 36
      Quote: Jacques Sekavar
      The reasons for the Cold War are obvious

      Yeah. The USSR was the enemy of every country in the world. Even when socialist countries appeared in the world, a dozen of them (more precisely, 8 I can remember) had problems with the USSR, up to and including the hostilities. Only before WWII did the USSR bother Finland and Poland, and after WWII did the USSR begin to bother the USA and Britain - mainly because of the mistakes made by Britain and especially the USA during WWII.
      1. -1
        17 January 2024 18: 48
        And what are you talking about “bothering”?, tickling your heels?, or committing some other actions incompatible with the morality of the Anglo-Saxons? Very informative.
        1. 0
          17 January 2024 20: 42
          Quote: Sergei Fonov
          or committed some other actions incompatible with the morality of the Anglo-Saxons?

          Yes, the leadership of the USSR has always been very restless.

          Having freed what the Americans had agreed upon for him, Comrade Stalin began to reach out to the pieces that had not been agreed upon for him: Trieste, Greece, Turkey, Iran, China. They slapped him everywhere except China, but he did not calm down. In 48, for better or worse, he blockaded Berlin along with the American garrison in it. In 50 he attacked the American zone of occupation of Korea. By the way, the Americans died there, almost half of the number of their losses in the European WWII campaign. Continue?
          1. -2
            17 January 2024 22: 01
            Are you that literate, or do you just hate Russians? Write on a piece of paper, on one side the USSR, on the other the USA, England, France, these are all allied countries, count the number of deaths. Perhaps the United States, even with Iraq alone, will be a record holder. Stalin was not invited to Greece, and Hitler did not invite him to Berlin. And the United States is everywhere by invitation, and with a UN mandate, like in Serbia. Before teaching others, it doesn’t hurt to study history yourself.
            1. 0
              18 January 2024 00: 34
              Quote: Sergei Fonov
              Are you that literate, or do you just hate Russians?

              I have many advantages. Why the question?
              Quote: Sergei Fonov
              Write on a piece of paper, on one side the USSR, on the other the USA, England, France, these are all allied countries, count the number of deaths

              I didn't understand the point of the exercise. Iraq was also remembered in some strange way.
              Quote: Sergei Fonov
              Stalin was not invited to Greece, and Hitler did not invite him to Berlin either

              Berlin is a separate matter. But Berlin was approved for him.
              1. -1
                18 January 2024 17: 51
                Your Answers: “I have many advantages”; “I didn’t understand the meaning of the exercise”; Berlin is a separate conversation."
                There may be many advantages, but knowledge of history is not one of them. Didn’t understand the meaning of the exercise, and this despite many advantages? Immediately, faith in the advantages and abilities to evaluate facts disappears. Berlin is a separate conversation, and Stalin is a separate conversation. One Soviet scientist, an ardent anti-Stalinist who left for permanent residence in the United States, subsequently wrote, “A person who hates Stalin is either an outright ignoramus who does not know the history of his country, or an ordinary scoundrel.” More precisely on the Internet. The history of any country has dark and light, but it needs to be written with evidence, at least at the school level.
  13. -1
    17 January 2024 06: 04
    The enemies of the USSR, both on the territory of the USSR and in the world, are evil totalitarians who fiercely hate dissidents. And therefore, since October 1917, they fiercely hated the Soviet people. And the period of World War II among the enemies of the USSR in the West was simply a necessary measure, otherwise, without the USSR, Hitler would have captured them.
    1. +1
      19 January 2024 20: 39
      evil totalitarians who fiercely hate dissidents


      In my opinion, it’s just the opposite - socialism is totalitarian and intolerant of dissent.

      The simplest proof of this is:

      In many capitalist countries, communist parties were allowed and operated legally. For example, in the USA, the Secretary General of the American Communist Party was legally nominated for the post of President of the USA four times (in 1972, 1976, 1980 and 1984)! In Italy, France and Great Britain, members of the Communist Party were members of the country's parliaments.

      And at the same time, no party with a program for building capitalism has ever been allowed in any socialist country.
  14. +1
    18 January 2024 00: 56
    Russia at that time was at the peak of the power of the spirit, the unity of civil society and the Stalinist elite, the people and the real leader...


    "Leader" is found among the Papuans and other wild peoples.
    Or in fascist dictatorships - the Fuhrer, Duce, caudillo, conductor, poglavnik...
    Self-respecting people do not have leaders.