How the Soviet Union was killed

136
How the Soviet Union was killed
The Olympic bear as a symbol and protection of the 1980 Summer Olympic Games in Moscow


Information war


The Cold War was primarily an information war. A war of meanings and values. The collective West offered freedom. Deception in a beautiful wrapper. The basis of Soviet civilization was social justice. However, when the Soviet elite itself began to forget about social justice, became complacent, and replaced development with stability (Degradation of the USSR under Brezhnev), then the West won the culture war. The Red Project, Soviet civilization and the USSR perished.



The masters of the West are strong because they know how to play for a long time. In the 19th – early 20th centuries, the masters of London, Paris, Vienna, Berlin and Washington also rocked Russia and tried to destroy it. Informationally and culturally, they acted in several directions:

1) they treated the young aristocracy, the children of the elite. So that they, having replaced their grandfathers and fathers in government bodies, in the army, themselves, with their own hands, produce the appropriate policy. “Liberated” Russia. This was not difficult to do, since young aristocrats studied in Europe and lived for a long time in European cities. They absorbed Western culture, languages, all the latest in philosophy. For many of them, Latin, ancient Greek, German and French were closer and more native than the Russian language. They knew Greek mythology, not Russian. And Russian history studied the processing of Germans and Westerners;

2) Western ideas, philosophy, meanings and values ​​infected the emerging Russian intelligentsia, the “brain of the nation,” the guardian and producer of Russian culture. Therefore, by the beginning of the XNUMXth century, most of the Russian intelligentsia was against “tsarism”, was pro-Western and liberal. She dreamed of turning Russia into “dear Holland or France”;

3) in Russia itself any opposition movements of any kind were supported. From nationalists and socialist revolutionaries to the Basmachi. The fifth column was preparing. At the same time, revolutionary ideological and organizational centers were being prepared abroad. Thus, London already in the XNUMXth century became the capital of various kinds of oppositionists, revolutionaries, saboteurs and terrorists.

Soviet civilization was broken according to the same scheme


In the second half of the 20th century, the USSR was broken according to the same scheme. Only instead of the aristocracy there were already children of the Soviet nomenklatura, young party functionaries, and Komsomol members. They no longer believed the mossy dogmas of Marxism-Leninism, the slogans and ideals of communism. They knew the whole kitchen from the inside. We grew up spoiled and greedy. Golden youth.

They already have communism - better education, all material benefits. They studied in elite schools for the elite, from which they entered higher party schools, institutes of international relations and other elite higher educational institutions. There was the opportunity to travel abroad - countries of the socialist camp, the friendly third world. But I wanted more. What's the point of having everything, but using it only in your own circle, behind closed doors. Conventions had to be followed.

The golden youth had the opportunity to read foreign literature and watch films without censorship. Been abroad. And she envied the “freedom” that reigned even in European socialist countries, compared to the more strict Soviet Union. I envied the Western material level and way of life. I wanted taverns and brothels. “Live beautifully,” like the Western elite. Open and free. So that it can be seen who is the master of life and who stinks.


Girls assemble cabs for ZIL-130 trucks

The disintegration of Soviet society


At the same time, the decomposition of Soviet society was in full swing. The USSR adopted the standard of the consumer society dominant in the West. The society of knowledge, service and creation, which was built under Stalin, was systematically subjected to destruction, decay, and dismantling.

Russian oil and gas flowed ever more widely to the west. The broad modernization of Soviet industry and Kosygin's reforms were rejected. The material base is outdated. Soviet industry was losing its ability to produce competitive goods. Except weapons, atom, space industry, etc. In the 1960s, there was a sharp increase in the quality of life of Soviet people; in the second half of the 70s, the situation noticeably worsened. Prices went up. A number of consumer goods have become in short supply. People stood in lines for several years to buy cars, and people started buying TVs and refrigerators by appointment.

The food supply has gotten worse. The shops were empty. Behind the scenes, cities were divided into categories: only the allied capitals were fully supplied. The phenomenon of “sausage trains” arose - residents from the region and neighboring regions came with backpacks and bags to Moscow, Leningrad, Kyiv to stock up on food. Things were better in the national Ukrainian outskirts, personal farms were not restricted there, and opportunities for gardening and livestock farming were wider.

The Soviet gerontocracy followed a simple path. The problem was solved by importing. Imported goods began to conquer the Soviet market. People began to chase after better quality things - jackets, blouses, boots, tights, household appliances. Even imported furniture began to displace domestic ones. Merchants in such conditions became important people.

Imported things became for the Soviet consumer, the new tradesman, an example of an ideal world. It is not surprising that later the crowd will surrender to the USSR for 100 varieties of sausage, cheese, jeans and chewing gum. And she won’t even understand what she lost.

What’s worse is that the Soviet government even tried to carry out modernization and renewal of industry at the expense of Western equipment and technology. They bought not only equipment and machines abroad, but entire automated lines and even factories. Similar or more advanced developments of Soviet research institutes and design bureaus remained unclaimed and gathered dust in the archives of the military-industrial complex.

Trade turnover with Western Europe in the 1970s increased 5 times, with the USA - 8 times. Russia gave the West billions of “petrodollars,” rubles backed by gold. The vicious practice of purchasing provisions, launched under Khrushchev, who dealt a fatal blow to the Russian countryside, continued. And such fashion has also expanded. This is despite the simply endless possibilities for the development of agriculture in Russia.

However, it is worth keeping in mind that these negative phenomena have not yet assumed the character of total dependence on the West, as they have since the 2000s. The Soviet Union maintained educational, scientific and technological, industrial and food (for example, the seeds were its own) independence and security. The USSR produced not only galoshes, but also the entire line of products - from nails and tanks to spaceships and tractors.


Soviet anti-alcohol poster

Development of the criminal world


Theft became another serious problem of the Brezhnev USSR. As soon as Stalin's strictures were abolished, theft took on such proportions that already under Khrushchev in 1961 it was necessary to pass harsh laws on economic crimes. Punishments for theft on an especially large scale were provided for, including the death penalty.

However, during the Brezhnev era, new princes, bais and khans began to establish themselves in the capitals and national republics. The basis for a new feudalism is being created. Party and state dignitaries became almost absolute masters of their estates, contacted each other, and established connections with the shadow world. They were not averse to extracting additional profits from their position. Various specialists were attached to their hand, who made gesheft in construction, using funds allocated for industry and agriculture. Thieves and swindlers began to contact the relevant officials, buttering them up so that no one would interfere with them.

Soviet law enforcement agencies could only punish petty crooks, or “scapegoats,” or when the case was made public, there was a struggle between various clans. Persons belonging to the nomenklatura were inviolable.

Entire branches of the shadow economy are emerging, especially in the national outskirts. The swindlers resold scarce goods and organized the production of counterfeit products from state-owned raw materials, often on state-owned machines. According to some estimates, in the mid-1980s, up to 15 million people worked in the shadow economy.

With the collapse of the USSR, the criminal world and shadow economy businessmen will play their negative role. And then a direct merging of the criminal world with representatives of the authorities will begin. The landmark film “Blind Man’s Bluff,” when the surviving “brothers” became power. Or “Cop Wars” - when the role of organized crime groups is played by different power structures.


Bus convoy to the pioneer camp

Preparation of the fifth column


While the Brezhnev elite enjoyed peace and stability, the masters of the West did not sleep and gradually prepared the collapse of the USSR. The dissident movement was still cultivated in the USSR. Various committees were created abroad to protect dissidents in the USSR, and corresponding pickets and demonstrations were held.

In fact, there were only a few thousand dissidents in the USSR, and several hundred active ones. Almost no one in the country knew them. But they acted precisely in order to create information noise around themselves and a corresponding information agenda in the world. So, in August 1968, several people staged a rally on Red Square against the entry of the Soviet army into Czechoslovakia. Who could they persuade? They were immediately tied up. The only spectators were foreign journalists, who had been warned in advance. So we have material for the world media.

The dissidents who clustered around Sakharov acted in the same way. They called several foreign journalists in Moscow and posted some negative things about Soviet reality.

Human rights activists worked in the same spirit. In 1968, Khodorovich, Kovalev and Velikanova began publishing the underground “Chronicle of Current Events,” collecting materials about violations of “human rights” in the USSR. They created a hidden network of informants. When the USSR signed an obligation to comply with the “Declaration of Human Rights” in Helsinki, they took advantage of this.

In 1976, the “Group for Assistance to the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements in the USSR” arose in Moscow, headed by Orlov, Sharansky, Amalrik and Ginsburg. She took upon herself the mission of checking and reporting abroad how human rights are respected in the Union.

Denunciation is all that the “human rights activists” were capable of. Knock abroad. Let good foreigners help. Although in the West, “human rights” were far from ideal.


Andrei Sakharov and US President Ronald Reagan, 1988

To be continued ...
136 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    22 February 2024 04: 55
    The Khrushchev-Brezhnev communists never understood that the history of their own country is a skin, not a dress. That’s why they published a textbook on the history of Russia as thin as a herring, and studied the history of the USSR-CPSU from thick textbooks. Even then, they dressed in a “dress” so that it would not be visible on what foundations the Great “Statesmen” created Princely-Tsarist-Imperial Russia and why it collapsed after standing for a thousand years. Moreover, under this “dress” they even hid the history of very recent times, in order to erase the merits of the Great Stalin from the skin of the country, by wearing a dress with a “print” of Brezhnev’s “Little Earth” on the history of the country. Lenin's commissars and Stalin's political commissars fell in the Civil War and the Great Patriotic War, but Brezhnev's political officers were "formed" and proudly proved by how many tons, centners, hectares and percent the Brezhnev USSR of 1973 overtook Romanov's Russia of 1913. If you think that these balabols cared about fashionable clothes for young people or about fashionable music to “produce” in the USSR, then you are deeply mistaken, because these political balabols took their woman from under the counter and still got guipure panties and a denim skirt and tights, and even records by Suzi Quatro and Status Quo.
    You say that this is why there was stability in the country. Unfortunately, a bicycle without movement is also stable. He lies stable.
    1. +7
      22 February 2024 05: 27
      Quote: north 2
      but Brezhnev’s political officers were “formed”, proudly proving how many tons, centners, hectares and percent...

      It all starts from the top, and began immediately, in the summer of 1953, and then more... The party was turned into a springboard for careerism, a temple of demagoguery and parasitism.
      Quote: north 2
      You say that this is why there was stability in the country. Unfortunately, a bicycle without movement is also stable. He lies stable.

      Unfortunately, he did not lie down, but rolled down, rolled, uncontrollably picking up speed and threatening the person sitting on the trunk, because the “geeks” were already behind the wheel...
      1. -2
        22 February 2024 06: 10
        and before ’53 there was nothing like that
        1. +6
          22 February 2024 06: 34
          It was, but they fought against it.
          After 53, the struggle began to be replaced by appearances...
          1. +2
            22 February 2024 06: 37
            Well, yes, they destroyed honest communists and old Bolsheviks, and the number of scum and opportunists in the party and leadership continued to multiply and, in addition, they also evolved into the most dangerous and hidden forms
      2. +7
        22 February 2024 06: 36
        The articles are boring, monotonous....
        There won't be any fuss....
        1. +9
          22 February 2024 08: 44
          Quote: your1970
          There won't be any fuss....

          Already... winked

          Quote: your1970
          The articles are boring, monotonous....

          Not boring, but monotonous, both articles and comments. The eternal struggle of black and white... And it is extremely rare to read a balanced opinion, either “everything in the USSR is bad”, or “everything in the USSR was good, but here are the enemies”...
          1. +7
            22 February 2024 09: 28
            Quote: Doccor18
            And it’s extremely rare to read a balanced opinion, either “everything in the USSR is bad”, or “everything in the USSR was good, but here are the enemies”...

            The anti-adviser label sticks faster than a barcode....
            Moreover, anti-Soviet activists have recently begun to sculpt labels faster than before - they are improving their skills.
            In general, another 20 years and the “USSR” will become something like the Battle of Kulikovo - somewhere far away and no one really knows. Something historical there...
            1. +3
              22 February 2024 15: 14
              Quote: your1970
              In general, another 20 years and the “USSR” will become something like the Battle of Kulikovo - somewhere far away and no one really knows

              With a school history course, perhaps, though... modern life will force you to return to the past over and over again, looking for answers to the present... Not for everyone, of course.
              1. 0
                22 February 2024 18: 43
                Quote: Doccor18
                Quote: your1970
                In general, another 20 years and the “USSR” will become something like the Battle of Kulikovo - somewhere far away and no one really knows

                With a school history course, perhaps, though... modern life will force you to return to the past over and over again, looking for answers to the present... Not for everyone, of course.

                It won’t. For those who didn’t catch it, it will be abstract.
                That’s why I referred to the Battle of Kulikovo - it seems like it happened, but somewhere in the abstract......
          2. +2
            22 February 2024 12: 45
            Quote: Doccor18
            Not boring, but monotonous, both articles and comments.

            It will go to the jingoistic patriots, who are office plankton, IP officers and traders of all stripes.
    2. -13
      22 February 2024 06: 14
      Quote: north 2
      in order to wipe out the merits of the Great Stalin from the skin of the country

      and what were these merits of Stalin? Maybe it’s because he and the Bolsheviks distributed the Russian lands of Poland, Finland, Manchuria, which immediately became enemies of the Russians? Or is it that a Russian village was robbed and it was slyly called “collectivism”? Or maybe it’s because they clumsily created an industry that was destroyed by the Nazis in the first days of the war? Or maybe it’s that Stalin replaced Russian culture with “Soviet” culture, or that the patchwork USSR, the main merit of the Bolsheviks, collapsed after Stalin?
      What is Stalin's merit? He has merits, but not to the Russian people, but to the non-Russian people, for he was the pope of nations. For example, the “Ukrainian” people, which he created as People’s Commissar of Nationalities?

      Stalin's speech at the 10th Party Congress, 1921.
      Further, I have a note that we, communists, seem to be implanting Belarusian nationality artificially. This is incorrect, because there is a Belarusian nation that has its own language, different from Russian, which is why it is possible to raise the culture of the Belarusian people only in their native language. The same speeches were heard about five years ago about Ukraine, about the Ukrainian nation. And recently it was said that the Ukrainian republic and the Ukrainian nation are an invention of the Germans. Meanwhile, it is clear that the Ukrainian nation exists, and the development of its culture is the responsibility of the communists. You can't go against history. It is clear that if Russian elements still predominate in the cities of Ukraine, then over time these cities will inevitably be Ukrainized.


      and what is happening now with these very “Ukrainian” people?
      1. -3
        22 February 2024 06: 41
        in fact, this is an erroneous point of view, because all over the world there is an assimilation of underdeveloped and small peoples and it is pointless to resist this. by this he most likely expressed his hidden petty-bourgeois nationalism.
      2. +9
        22 February 2024 09: 38
        That is, the Bolsheviks sat bored and had nothing to do, so let’s distribute the land. You don’t know about the Giazdan war and the dominance of the interventionists. Then tell us why yours gave the Norwegians a part of the sea with an area larger than Crimea?
      3. +8
        22 February 2024 12: 12
        Quote: Trinitrotoluene
        Maybe it’s because he and the Bolsheviks distributed the Russian lands of Poland, Finland, Manchuria, which immediately became enemies of the Russians?

        The Polish issue was resolved back during WWII - the Entente allies put pressure on Nicholas, and he agreed after the war to recognize the broadest autonomy of Poland. Taking into account the magnitude of the Empire's debt to its allies, the decision would have been accurately implemented.
        The Finnish question was resolved by von der Goltz's expeditionary force - the Soviets could not afford to get involved in a war with Germany again. In general, this general has left a significant legacy in the history of independent Finland and the Baltic region. smile
        As for Manchuria... say thank you that you managed to part ways with the Japanese along the old borders at least in Primorye. By paying them for this with concessions for fishing and oil production on the Soviet part of Sakhalin.
        Quote: Trinitrotoluene
        Or is it that a Russian village was robbed and it was slyly called “collectivism”?

        When others did the same, it was called industrialization and the industrial revolution. It was just necessary to do this in the eighteenth or nineteenth century.
        Quote: Trinitrotoluene
        Or maybe it’s because they clumsily created an industry that was destroyed by the Nazis in the first days of the war?

        Seriously? And then how did the Red Army fight?
        Yes, industry during the first two five-year plans was created for the most part in places with the greatest concentration of personnel and the best infrastructure. Otherwise this industry simply would not exist. But already during the Third Five-Year Plan, a transfer of industrial construction to the East was planned - backup factories and evacuation sites were created there. Plus, throughout the interwar period, the USSR perfected its fixed idea: the evacuation of industry from border areas. And the further it went, the deeper the “border region” became and the more factories fell into the program.
        Quote: Trinitrotoluene
        Or is it that the patchwork USSR, the main merit of the Bolsheviks, fell apart after Stalin?

        Hello, alien from a parallel reality. In which either the USSR collapsed in 1953, or Stalin ruled until 1991. smile
        Quote: Trinitrotoluene
        He has merits, but not to the Russian people, but to the non-Russian people, for he was the pope of nations. For example, the “Ukrainian” people, which he created as People’s Commissar of Nationalities?

        Do terms like this mean anything to you? party discipline и democratic centralism? It was possible to discuss before Lenin consecrated with his name the decision “there will be national republics.” That’s all, then just take the lead and carry out the party’s decisions.
        1. -4
          22 February 2024 22: 12
          The Finnish question was resolved by von der Goltz's expeditionary force - the Soviets could not afford to get involved in a war with Germany again


          I haven’t heard that Nikolai promised anyone anything. Link.

          The Finnish question was resolved by von der Goltz's expeditionary force - the Soviets could not afford to get involved in a war with Germany again


          The Bolsheviks should have not taken the initiative on the sovereignty of Finland, which was done a month after the October pre-revolution. This would be enough for no one to recognize Finland as a state anymore. But the Bolsheviks did this and the Russian people made themselves a new enemy, because of the Bolsheviks, Leningrad lost a MILLION civilian population in 1 year of the blockade, because of Stalin who refused to take Finland back, Russia now has more one NATO country on the borders.

          the same to Manchuria... say thank you that you managed to part ways with the Japanese along the old borders at least in Primorye. By paying them for this with concessions for fishing and oil production on the Soviet part of Sakhalin.


          don't know history?
          Japan was hit in the teeth in the battles for Lake Khasan in 38, in the battles for Halkingol Japan was thrown back to Manchuria. And in 45 the USSR defeated Japan and occupied Manchuria. This is what I’m talking about, Stalin could have taken Manchuria with Port Arthur back, but Stalin How non-Russians preferred to distribute Russian lands.
          1. 0
            26 February 2024 11: 05
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            I haven’t heard that Nikolai promised anyone anything. Link.

            The achievement by Russia of the goals created by the war - the possession of Constantinople and the straits, as well as the creation of Poland from its three now separate regions - is not yet ensured...
            © Order of the Sovereign Emperor on the army and navy of December 12, 1916.
            S.I. Velepolsky, during his reception by the emperor on December 23, asked for clarification on how the words “freedom of Poland” should be understood. Nicholas II replied that Poland would be given “its own political system with its own legislative chambers and its own army” and allowed this statement to be published

            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            The Bolsheviks should have not taken the initiative on the sovereignty of Finland, which was done a month after the October pre-revolution. This would be enough for no one to recognize Finland as a state anymore.

            Yeah... especially Sweden, with its phantom pains about lost territories, and the Reich, on whose territory the backbone of the future Finnish army was trained.
            Yes, Finland was the same abscess on the body of the Empire as Poland. Even worse, because the VKF, even in imperial times, had everything necessary to function as an independent state - government bodies, a set of laws, an education system, police and its own armed forces. And she reacted extremely nervously to attempts to unify any of this with the Empire - Bobrikov is an example of this.
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            don't know history?
            Japan was hit in the teeth in the battles for Lake Khasan in 38; in the battles for Halkingol, Japan was thrown back to Manchuria.

            So Manchuria was given away earlier - in the early 20s. And it couldn’t be otherwise - besides the Japanese, there was also an all-Chinese mess with warlords, in which we had to take part in 1929.
            And as for 1939... it was not Japan that was thrown back to Manchuria, but two divisions of the Kwantung Army IJA. While the rest of the Kvantung residents pretended to be standing on the Ugra River with OKDVA. And this conflict was an internal affair of the Kwantung people.
            And no one wanted to turn this conflict, as well as the Khasan conflict, into a war for Manchuria - because in this case not only the Kwantung group, but also the Expeditionary Forces with the Metropolis would have acted against the USSR. The USSR in the fall of 1939 was missing only a big war in the Far East.
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            And in 45, the USSR defeated Japan and occupied Manchuria. This is what I’m talking about, Stalin could have taken Manchuria and Port Arthur back

            Gorgeous. And we immediately get a united front of the Kuomintang and Mao with the support of the United States: The Russian imperialists have shed their sheep's clothing and shown their bestial appearance. Let's take back Chinese lands!
        2. -1
          22 February 2024 22: 21
          When others did the same, it was called industrialization and the industrial revolution. It was just necessary to do this in the eighteenth or nineteenth century.


          Stalin's collectivization and industrialization are two different things. There is no need to drive them away.

          Seriously? And then how did the Red Army fight?


          Many production facilities were lost in the first years of the war as a result of Stalin’s bad and inept leadership.

          Seriously? And then how did the Red Army fight?


          saying after it means not before, Is that clear?
          The main reason for the collapse of Russia within the borders of the Republic of Ingushetia was the adoption of the USSR by the Bolsheviks Lenin and Stalin.


          Do such terms as party discipline and democratic centralism mean anything to us?


          when your party members begin to trade in the sacred - THEIR LAND, a normal Russian person doesn’t give a damn about party discipline, but the non-Russians acted differently.
          1. +1
            26 February 2024 11: 17
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            Stalin's collectivization and industrialization are two different things. There is no need to drive them away.

            This is one and the same thing - obtaining personnel for industry from the village by destroying the existing peasant economy. It’s just that for some it lasted for a couple of hundred years - fencing, vagrancy laws, workhouses...
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            Many production facilities were lost in the first years of the war as a result of Stalin’s bad and inept leadership.

            Already early years? But they were just early days of the war.
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            Or maybe it’s because they clumsily created an industry that was destroyed by the Nazis in the first days of the war?

            The vulnerability of Soviet industry, built in places with the best availability of labor and available infrastructure, was well known. But there was no choice - with the labor legislation of the 30s, factories built in strategically advantageous places would quickly be left without personnel. Because until 1940, to quit a job you could simply stop going to work - after which automatic dismissal followed. And after that, getting a job was not a problem for an experienced worker - the shortage of qualified personnel was such that they turned a blind eye to the documents. For plan is law.
            And the awareness of this vulnerability gave rise to a program of strategic evacuation of industry, which was generally carried out.
            Quote: Trinitrotoluene
            The main reason for the collapse of Russia within the borders of the Republic of Ingushetia was the adoption of the USSR by the Bolsheviks Lenin and Stalin.

            The foundations of the USSR were laid by Lenin and the group behind him. Stalin was forced to submit to pressure from above - otherwise he would have lost everything.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. 0
              26 February 2024 20: 57
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Already the first years? But these were just the first days of the war.


              in the first days, most of the factories were lost, and in the first years of 42-43, a smaller part of the industry was lost. For example, the Donbass mines, which were blown up by the retreating fascists.


              Quote: Alexey RA
              Once again, the USSR was founded by Lenin and the group behind him. Stalin was forced to submit to pressure from above - otherwise he would have lost everything.

              I've already heard this somewhere: "the king is good, the boyars are bad"
        3. 0
          22 February 2024 22: 22

          Alexey RA
          (Alexey)
          +8
          Today, 12: 12


          Great answer, to the point and right on target. Only your opponent and others like him still won’t accept it, the blinders won’t allow it, or the training manual.
      4. 0
        April 5 2024 07: 25
        Mr. Trinitro, okay, under Soviet power you apparently went hungry and in 1990 you were in the Gulag, that is, you are offended by Soviet power. Well, now what is preventing our state, led by the smartest leaders since Yeltsin, Medvedev, Putin, from being reborn from the ashes and get up from your knees, taking into account the mistakes of the past. 30 years have already passed since the collapse of the USSR, just think about 30 years, and things are still there. We compare everything with the USSR.
    3. +7
      22 February 2024 06: 25
      Quote: north 2
      You say that this is why there was stability in the country. Unfortunately, a bicycle without movement is also stable. He lies stably.

      Something in your reasoning is wrong and does not add up at all. That bicycle (USSR), as you say, was consistently the second economy in the world both at par and at parity (PPP). Very cool for"recumbent"Bike!
    4. +18
      22 February 2024 07: 21
      What's the point of discussing ancient times? Please now
      The Russian Culture Center and the unique Children's Folk Singing School were destroyed in Moscow.
      under the leadership of People's Artist of Russia, popular performer of Russian folk songs Vladimir Devyatov.
      Devyatov himself was fired due to redundancy. The school’s teachers, specialists from leading Russian universities and with unique experience, were also fired. Children who have been studying Russian folk singing for many years and were planning to enter the Russian Academy of Music. Gnesins, ended up on the street.
      And at the court hearing, a representative of the Moscow Department of Culture officially stated in plain text that Moscow does not have premises for the Center of Russian Culture and the School of Russian Folk Singing.
      Immediately, the Moscow mayor's office announced that it would transfer a building with an area of ​​5000 m² in an elite quarter on Tverskaya-Yamskaya to Tajikistan for free use to create a “Cultural and Representative Center of the Republic.”

      We can also talk about gerontocracy. But all discussions boil down to what I see here and what I don’t see here.
      1. +3
        22 February 2024 08: 27
        under the leadership of People's Artist of Russia, popular performer of Russian folk songs Vladimir Devyatov.
        This is the father of Marina Devyatova, famous a real singer. Please do not confuse me with various singers and singers with your mouth, of which there are many on TV.
    5. 0
      27 February 2024 11: 10
      What do we understand? They simply brought the Dallas Doctrine to life, the Mansion read it to us at graduation in ’64, warning that it was chipboard, and we just laughed without delving into the essence, we didn’t believe that a country like the Union could be destroyed. Then they didn’t believe it, but now we are reaping the benefits, the text meaning is something like this.
      The USA and NATO countries do not for a moment abandon their sinister plans to destroy the USSR and our allies in the Warsaw Pact. Their plans are insidious and cruel and can take different forms. They have never abandoned and are not abandoning the idea of ​​destroying the Soviet Union.
      To prove this, I want to give you the text of the speech.
      former CIA Director Allen Dulles, spoken by him back in 1945
      year shortly before the end of the Second World War and in anticipation of
      the third - the so-called "Cold War", no less destructive,
      than "hot". Here is this speech: “The war will end, everything will somehow settle down,
      get settled. And we will give up everything we have, all the gold, all the material
      power to deceive and fool the Soviet people. Having sowed chaos there,
      we will quietly replace their values ​​with false ones and force them into these
      false values ​​to believe. How? We will find our like-minded people,
      their allies and assistants in the USSR itself. There will be episode after episode
      the tragedy of the death of the
      rebellious people on earth, its final, irreversible
      degeneration. We will gradually eradicate them from literature and art.
      social essence, we will wean artists, we will discourage them from
      engage in depiction, study of those processes that
      occur in the depths of the masses. Literature, theater, cinema - everything
      will depict and glorify the basest human feelings.
      We will support and raise the so-called artists in every possible way,
      who will plant and hammer into human consciousness a cult
      sex, violence, sadism, betrayal - in a word, every
      immorality. We will create chaos in government management and
      confusion. Honesty and integrity will be ridiculed and not
      will become necessary, will turn into a relic of the past. Rudeness and impudence
      lies and deception, drunkenness and drug addiction, animal fear of each other
      and shamelessness, betrayal, nationalism and enmity of peoples,
      first of all, enmity and hatred of the Russian people - - all of this is us
      Let us cleverly and imperceptibly cultivate, all this will blossom into full bloom
      color. And only a few, very few will guess that
      is happening. But we will put such people in a helpless position and
      Let's turn them into a laughing stock, find a way to slander them. We will
      consider generation after generation. We will take on people with
      childhood and adolescence, we will always place the main emphasis on
      youth, we will begin to corrupt, corrupt, and corrupt them. We will make out
      them young cynics, vulgarities, cosmopolitans. This is how we will do it!
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,en
      Here's the slogan - man is a wolf to man.
      Here are its roots. "Democratic" values, otherwise called -law
      jungle: “every man for himself”, they told us extremely competently.
  2. +20
    22 February 2024 05: 01
    Someone’s favorite pastime is blaming the West for the collapse of the USSR.
    I will say this, no one did more for the collapse of the USSR than the leadership of the CPSU...ordinary communists were deprived of any leverage on what the CPSU Central Committee was doing and there was no one to cleanse the ranks of the highest echelons of the Communist Party from rotting...Stalin remained in the past.
    And the West simply took advantage of this situation for its own benefit.
    So they destroyed everything themselves...they destroyed it themselves and failed to build anything new in its place.
    1. +1
      22 February 2024 18: 59
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      I will say this, no one did more for the collapse of the USSR than the leadership of the CPSU

      Yeah... Kravchuk, Nazarbayev, Shevardnadze, Mutalibov - the Central Committee became simply a forge of personnel for new states.
    2. 0
      23 February 2024 18: 19
      Well, what do you want? After Stalin, the Politburo of the Central Committee began to elect some kind of dullness as a leader so that it would not interfere. I should ask Vissarionich why he didn’t transfer power?
  3. +8
    22 February 2024 05: 13
    In 1968, Khodorovich, Kovalev and Velikanova began publishing the underground “Chronicle of Current Events”

    Why go so far into history when there is a very recent example. The Ekho Moskvy radio station, which was closed after the start of the Northern War, almost completely moved to the YouTube channel and from there they crow about human rights and some kind of universal values. The funny thing is that half of them are Israeli citizens, and the other half have unknown citizenship. It is absolutely clear that someone is financing this filthy scumbag. Or do you think that they are crowing there solely out of love for our country?
    1. +3
      22 February 2024 06: 58
      Quote: Dutchman Michel
      after the start of the SVO, the radio station “Echo of Moscow” almost completely moved to the YouTube channel

      I think you greatly exaggerate the influence in modern times of all sorts of “Echoes of Moscow”... in the USSR, yes, they promoted capitalist values, “forbidden fruit” and therefore were popular.. now their popularity is dust, compared to the times of the USSR.. and Why? but because we are now also a capitalist state... how to attract people now - chewing gum, jeans, rock and roll? therefore, when talking about the USSR, everything is correct, but modern times? no... not an analogy at all..
      1. 0
        2 March 2024 04: 04
        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
        Now their popularity is dust, compared to the times of the USSR.

        In the USSR, their popularity was also questionable. But these were correct oppositionists, authorized by the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs. At the same time, the dissidents who had served time later said that there were very few such political ones, the overwhelming majority were communist workers or nationalists from the republics, and few people in the country cared about Sharansky.
    2. +3
      23 February 2024 11: 23
      And where do they crow from? We have no freedom of speech, no sane opposition, no freedom of choice, no right to rally. Not everyone is ready to come to mother Russia and rot in prison like Mr. Navalny, tea is not democracy.
  4. -10
    22 February 2024 05: 24
    The USSR was initially built on a dictatorship in the 20s and its destruction was a matter of several decades.
    I wonder what the fate of the country would have been like had a Russian been in power then.
    1. -4
      22 February 2024 05: 36
      .............or Jew.
    2. -1
      22 February 2024 18: 46
      The USSR was initially built on a dictatorship in the 20s and its destruction was a matter of several decades.
      I wonder what the fate of the country would have been like had a Russian been in power then.

      They would have eaten it. Like Khrushchev. Fuck it, we’re building a world revolution, and he’s giving away apartments to Russians! Already settled every fourth! angry
    3. +3
      22 February 2024 19: 10
      Quote: VZEM100
      I wonder what the fate of the country would have been like had a Russian been in power then.

      You mean Great Russian chauvinist, essentially a scoundrel and rapistand keep it up © VIL ?
      So to become Russian in Lenin's way it was not necessary to be Russian by blood. For Ilyich awarded the above characteristics to Ordzhonikidze, Dzerzhinsky and Stalin. smile
      So for Ilyich, Comrade Dzhugashvili was a truly Russian person.
  5. +7
    22 February 2024 05: 31
    The masters of the West are strong because they know how to play for a long time. In the 19th – early 20th centuries, the masters of London, Paris, Vienna, Berlin and Washington also rocked Russia and tried to destroy it.


    Thank you for the article! I would like to focus on one important point. Is the West really that much to blame for all the problems of the Russian Empire and Russia? Maybe the West was simply trying to pump out maximum profits from the Russian economy, and our administrative apparatus was not able to resist this. Of course, the West provided resources for the collapse of Russia, but behind this was, first of all, the internal opposition, which was striving for the levers of control at any cost. To increase their own incomes, the stratum of the population engaged in exports and imports themselves sought support in the West, presenting Russia as an easy waste. In fact, for hundreds of years, state leaders could not provide the population with effective control levers that would allow them to achieve priority economic progress in comparison with the West. Against this background, people were eager to go to the West.
  6. -10
    22 February 2024 05: 42
    The fifth column was preparing.

    who prepared you? Who are these arrangers of pieces on the chess field? It must be said specifically, the old men of the Politburo came from the people, peasants and workers, the same Khrushchev was from working miners, but Brezhnev was from peasants, although he himself writes that he is from proletarians, i.e. There’s a contradiction here: I was born in a village, and my father is a metallurgist, how’s that? Did your father go to work from the village to the factory? It doesn't happen that way. Usually in the villages they were engaged in agricultural work, and the workers lived in cities, in workers' settlements. Most likely, Brezhnev’s origins are not the same as he himself writes in his memoirs, apparently his family had some kind of property in the form of land and this left an imprint on his character and behavior for the rest of his life.
    But Marxism-Leninism defined the peasant as a “petty-bourgeois owner” and the peasant environment constantly gave rise to private property manifestations in the form of a market on which it was always necessary to sell agricultural products of their production, bread and everything else. And in exchange, the necessary production goods for working with land and livestock - livestock farming. And the Bolsheviks fought against this order and won by taking away ALL property from the peasants, and outsiders were appointed to manage this “collective” property, people who knew nothing about peasant labor. This was not socialism, it doesn’t even have a name , not capitalism and not socialism, but TYRANOCRACY - the destruction of the centuries-old foundations of the Russian people.
    Managing through the market was the CORRECT order of things, for centuries this order, which came to us from our fathers, was determining the relationship between the city and the village. Between the city and the village there was a MARKET.
    But the Bolsheviks destroyed the market and commodity-money relations and called this their way of life - let's say, socialism, i.e. the power of the people. In fact, there is only ONE power - the power of money. The Bolsheviks were unable to destroy the money.
    Brezhnev and his accomplices slept and saw themselves on their own land in their own peace and right.
    Galya Brezhneva came to Gokhran with an empty bucket and collected as many diamonds as she wanted, and this was, of course, with the knowledge and approval of HIMSELF, and not without permission, otherwise the authorities would have quickly covered it up.
    But Brezhnev slipped into a direct betrayal of the interests of the country - this is a recognition of the American lunar scam, a betrayal of the computer program, and a limitation - stagnation in the development of mechanical engineering, for decades they produced the same car models and the birth of the ugly Brezhnev phenomenon of DEFICIT, which destroyed all ideals " socialism".
    1. +1
      22 February 2024 06: 12
      Khrushchev was a worker for at most six months a year, and so were everyone else. This entire contingent is clingy and slacker by nature.
      As for Brezhnev’s father, he could well combine metallurgy with agriculture by practicing otkhodnichestvo.
      1. -3
        22 February 2024 06: 18
        Quote: VZEM100
        Khrushchev was a worker for at most six months

        Khrushchev was from a family of miners.
        Brezhnev's father was a metallurgist, how could he live in the village?
        1. +1
          22 February 2024 06: 24
          what another family of miners. he was from a family of peasants (with Jewish admixture) of peasants in the village of Kalinovka in the Kursk province, and his dad, just like many others then, went or went to work in the Donbass.
          1. -2
            22 February 2024 06: 25
            Well, this is a new story from you.
            1. -2
              22 February 2024 06: 28
              Most likely some cantonist visited his grandmother there.
          2. 0
            22 February 2024 23: 31
            Kalinovka is a purely Russian village.
            1. -1
              23 February 2024 01: 49
              Ukrainians made up a significant part of the population in those places but gradually mixed with the Russians.
              1. 0
                23 February 2024 19: 41
                You were there? A purely Russian village.
                1. 0
                  23 February 2024 19: 55
                  My ancestors are from one of the villages nearby. What kind of cleanliness can we talk about if there is a border with the former USSR nearby?
                  My father’s first wife was a Ukrainian (they got married while still living in the village) and she did not come there from Lvov, but was born there like her parents and grandparents.
                2. 0
                  23 February 2024 20: 03
                  By the way, do you know that Kursk was at one time part of the Kyiv province?
                3. 0
                  23 February 2024 20: 09
                  In the spring of 1918, the southern and western parts of the province were occupied by German troops and until the end of 1918 they were part of the Ukrainian state, which was under the protectorate of the German Empire.
                4. 0
                  23 February 2024 20: 16
                  Kaganovich used his influence in the interests of the territorial expansion of the Ukrainian SSR at the expense of the territories of the RSFSR, the annexation of which was one of the priorities of the Ukrainian party elite for most of the 1920s. Thus, a draft of Kaganovich’s letter to Stalin has been preserved, in which he raises “the question of transferring to Ukraine the Ukrainian districts of the Voronezh and Kursk provinces”12. However, in comparison with Belarus, which in 1924 and 1926. received from the RSFSR 18 “Belarusian” districts with a population of more than 2 million people, the successes of the Ukrainian leadership turned out to be much more modest. In 1925, the Ukrainian SSR ceded a number of territories to the North Caucasus region, and in return a small part of the Kursk province and one volost each from the Gomel and Voronezh provinces were transferred to it. In 1926, the Ukrainian SSR received more volosts from the Bryansk and Voronezh provinces, and, finally, several more small villages in 1928.

                  The resulting territories were significantly smaller than those claimed by the Ukrainian leadership: for example, out of 44 volosts of the Kursk province with “continuous Ukrainian settlement”, the Ukrainian SSR managed to achieve the annexation of only 1014. Ukrainizers noted that in the Russian regions adjacent to the Ukrainian SSR, three large Ukrainian enclaves remained - in the former Kursk province (the share of Ukrainians among the population is 19%), in the former Voronezh province (32,6%) and the North Caucasus region (37,2%)15. Former
            2. 0
              23 February 2024 20: 19
              even the surname Khrushchev is Russified from the Khokhlyat word Khrushch-May bug
    2. +4
      22 February 2024 06: 34
      Quote: Trinitrotoluene
      the birth of the ugly Brezhnev phenomenon of DEFICIT

      If by deficit we mean Difficulty in purchasing Western brands (at that time they were the ones who were being chased and harassed), then this ugly deficit, as you say, is still quite present. Agree.
      1. 0
        22 February 2024 06: 40
        I lived at that time and I know what I'm saying
        - there was a shortage of TOTAL meat, meat products, there was no decent clothing, there were no household goods, all this was not on FREE sale, it was from under the counter and this gave rise to ugly phenomena - speculation and the creation of a new class of speculators and black marketeers their covering organs.
        Remember the movie "Beware of the Car"
        1. +3
          22 February 2024 06: 46
          Quote: Trinitrotoluene
          I lived at that time and I know what I'm saying

          That's how I lived. And somehow I didn’t feel any particular shortage! Wholesome food and clothing were available in stores.

          Of course, there was a line for the sausage (I stood there for two hours). Well, can you find good sausage in stores now? If you find it, at what price? Expensive? Well, then it was more expensive and freely available in co-op stores and on the market! But for some reason you didn’t buy there, preferring to pretend that it wasn’t there.
          1. -2
            22 February 2024 06: 49
            the fact that full-fledged food was free is a lie, nothing was free

            Why are you poking me with THIS time? Now everything is also upside down, the class of parasites exists due to the huge difference between the cost and the retail price.
            1. +9
              22 February 2024 07: 00
              Quote: Trinitrotoluene
              Now everything is also upside down, the class of parasites exists due to the huge difference between the cost and the retail price.

              I ate black caviar in the Union. It was sold in buffets. And under the new “blessed” power of the capitalists, I never tried black caviar. Now there seems to be no shortage, but many things are so expensive that a normal person cannot buy them with his salary.

              Then there was a shortage of things, and now there is a shortage of money. And this is worse.
              1. -2
                22 February 2024 07: 04
                Quote: Stas157
                I ate black caviar in the Union. And it was sold in buffets.

                Tskov buffets? I haven’t seen black caviar in our factory buffets.

                Now the parasites have grown up children and grandchildren, they are multiplying and they also want to live at the expense of the people and this is how they do it - PRICES CONSTANTLY RISE.
                1. +4
                  22 February 2024 07: 34
                  In ordinary canteens you could sometimes see sandwiches with black caviar, but there was not much demand for them. A little expensive, such a sandwich cost about one ruble, which is the cost of a full lunch.
                  1. -5
                    22 February 2024 07: 35
                    stop lying, stop lying
                    1. 0
                      April 25 2024 22: 51
                      It seems that I am older than you in age, I remember Latvia after the war, my father came there to restore the fishery after the war, in 1955, at the strict insistence of my mother, we went back. As long as I live, I don’t remember hunger or bad life in the USSR. My father is an ordinary fisherman; after the Baltic, he worked on the Volga and in the Caspian Sea. At that time there was a lot of fish, eat from the belly, red fish, black caviar. I received a free, excellent higher education in the USSR, a favorite job, enough money for a happy life and all without cronyism. For me, the happiest life was in the USSR. I can compare how we lived abroad in the 1980s, how we lived in the USSR, how we lived in the 1990s and 2000s. For me, the worst time was during Yeltsin’s reign. Yeltsin left, but left behind chicks who continue his work.
                2. +6
                  22 February 2024 07: 35
                  Quote: Trinitrotoluene
                  Tskov buffets?

                  I don't know what it is. In ordinary buffets - in the park, in the theater.
                3. +2
                  22 February 2024 23: 35
                  In railway buffets, at least in regional centers, sandwiches with black and red caviar were sold.
              2. -6
                22 February 2024 09: 52
                Quote: Stas157
                I ate black caviar in the Union. It was sold in buffets. And under the new “blessed” power of the capitalists, I never tried black caviar. Now there seems to be no shortage, but many things are so expensive that a normal person cannot buy them with his salary.

                Then there was a shortage of things, and now there is a shortage of money. And this is worse.

                Well, as they say, from each according to his ability... I also ate pressed black caviar. They got it through the worst kind of cronyism. Everything was through cronyism and for triple the price! But if you lived in the Kremlin or were a submariner on a nuclear-powered ship, then yes, I believe you ate black caviar at the buffet... hi . And now my children quietly travel around the world (well, almost! Because it’s a war now) to relax. They eat oysters in Crimea. Real grown in the Black Sea. They have two cars in the family, they work a lot, but they also get paid a lot. Other times. We need to take the best from the past and think about the future.
                1. +3
                  22 February 2024 10: 03
                  Quote: 30 vis
                  And now my children quietly travel around the world

                  Turkey, Thailand, Maldives, United Arab Emirates, Egypt... Where else do our planes fly? Small choice! And these are all southern countries. Why are your children not happy with the Black Sea and Crimea? Crimea is dear to me. But you live there.
                  1. +1
                    23 February 2024 08: 39
                    Quote: Stas157
                    Why are your children not happy with the Black Sea and Crimea?

                    Everyone is happy with the Black Sea and the city of Hero Sevastopol. But in youth, and not only young people, look at the life, culture, customs of other people. It is useful to travel to other countries of the world. When I was young, I managed to visit abroad. In the military uniform of the SA in Czechoslovakia. And you won’t believe it.. I was also interested in what kind of country, what kind of people, how they live, what customs... So, what
                2. +2
                  22 February 2024 10: 14
                  Quote: 30 vis
                  They got it by the most terrible connections .Everything was done through connections and for triple the price!

                  I have never gotten anything from my connections because I didn’t have any connections (like most people). I bought everything in Soviet stores and canteens for a fair price. Black caviar appeared from time to time. Everyone (I know) ate it back then. And there was no queue for it!
              3. +1
                26 February 2024 10: 25
                Quote: Stas157
                I ate black caviar in the Union. It was sold in buffets.

                And I ate. In Leningrad.
                And in Vladimir, when the mother went into the meat department, they looked at her as if she were a wonderful miracle, a wondrous marvel - why did she come, there was no meat, there is no meat and there never will be.
            2. +1
              23 February 2024 15: 22
              Everything was in stores until 1983, then in 85 perestroika began and problems began...
              1. 0
                26 February 2024 10: 23
                Quote: ziqzaq
                Everything was in stores before 1983

                Even before 1980, cities in the USSR had coupons for meat and milk.
                We, workers of the Ural Chemical Plant, cannot buy anything in our stores. There is absolutely nothing to feed the family. Is it really impossible to somehow improve the nutrition situation in our time? We demand to improve the supply of food products and be sure to introduce coupons for meat and dairy products, as was introduced in the cities of Sverdlovsk, N. Tagil, Kizel, Gubakha, Gorky, Izhevsk and others.
                © Letter from workers of the Ural Chemical Plant to the CPSU Central Committee and local party bodies with a request for the introduction of food stamps. May 1979
        2. +6
          22 February 2024 10: 43
          Quote: Trinitrotoluene
          I lived at that time and I know what I’m saying - there was a shortage of EVERYTHING ............ Remember the movie “Beware of the Car”

          Yes! It was a terrible time! ( crying sarcasm) Books that are affordable, songs with lyrics, for different ages and themes, artists, films that are still being watched. Somehow it was created nonetheless. Not to mention the creation of a world Socialist system. There were expenses for this. These were long-term investments that would pay off 100 times over time. There were long-term programs for different sectors of the economy. Incl. and MEDICINE. Now, the bourgeoisie don’t want long-term benefits for the country, only for their loved ones
    3. 0
      26 February 2024 10: 21
      Quote: Trinitrotoluene
      but Brezhnev is from the peasants, although he himself writes that he is from the proletarians, i.e. There’s a contradiction here: I was born in a village, and my father is a metallurgist, how’s that? Did your father go to work from the village to the factory? It doesn't happen that way. Usually in the villages they were engaged in agricultural work, and the workers lived in cities, in workers' settlements.

      And for you the village is a must khatynki, sadochka and bdzhols are buzzing? wink
      The village of Kamenskoye, where Brezhnev was born, was located “wall to wall” with the Dnieper Metallurgical Plant. And the village itself could be called a city in modern times - at the end of the 18th century. it had 000 inhabitants. But formally it was listed as a village, becoming a city only under the Republic, in 1917.
  7. +4
    22 February 2024 06: 04
    Maybe the leadership of the CPSU played a role in the collapse of the USSR. But still, the main reason was excesses, or rather perverted internal policies aimed at supporting party, trade, and nationalist clans. Whoever came to power in the 70s - 80s, the result by the 90s would have been the same.
    Unfortunately, many of the diseases of the old party elite were inherited by the current one.
    1. -1
      22 February 2024 06: 16
      These are not diseases but their natural state
  8. +5
    22 February 2024 06: 28
    Quote: VZEM100
    The USSR was initially built on a dictatorship in the 20s and its destruction was a matter of several decades.
    I wonder what the fate of the country would have been like had a Russian been in power then.

    and Gorbachev and Yeltsin, perhaps non-Russians, ended up in power... and not even in a dictatorship.
    1. -6
      22 February 2024 06: 43
      We are not talking about the end of the USSR, but about its beginning, when revolutionaries and reformers still had power and not the degenerates who leaked this project.
  9. -1
    22 February 2024 07: 04
    Back in August 1917, when Lenin wrote “State and Revolution,” he understood that if the Bolsheviks took power, it would be “seriously and for a long time,” but not “forever,” as the party sycophants later began to trumpet....

    He assumed that the struggle for socialism would be a series of successes and defeats, just like the struggle for a republic in 19th-century France. And it is very possible that he was too much of an optimist.
    1. -5
      22 February 2024 07: 12
      Quote: ivan2022
      he understood that if the Bolsheviks took power, it would be “seriously and for a long time”, but not “forever”


      Yes, it’s funny what they won’t write now, but then, like Marx created a world theory of socio-economic formations, and somehow it doesn’t say that this history can turn back, after socialism capitalism will come again, but this history has come.
      However, Marx and Lenin are talkers.
      1. +6
        22 February 2024 07: 44
        Lenin is just the founder of the RSFSR and the USSR, and he cannot compare with such a genius as you....unfortunately, we have only one - geniuses... But you just can’t find mentally normal people in the daytime.
        1. 0
          22 February 2024 07: 49
          The USSR arose in 1922, and Lenin was the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, and do you think that Lenin stood aside from the creation of the USSR?
  10. +10
    22 February 2024 07: 14
    Russian oil and gas flowed ever more widely to the west.
    Now, it’s better, they got off the oil and gas needle, the fifth in the world and the first economy in Europe, Portugal, probably left far behind in terms of GDP, they achieved what they were striving for. And here’s another gift, for re-elections. Volodin said: Putin gave us back a fish that the British ate for 68 years. There was no cod in stores for 68 years, but now it will appear in large quantities.
    1. -3
      22 February 2024 07: 21
      The British returned it, and now it will appear?
      Don't you think the times are different?
      You missed the present tense.
      1. +2
        22 February 2024 07: 37
        I mean that life has improved now, not like then, complete darkness and hopelessness.
    2. +4
      22 February 2024 09: 00
      Quote: parusnik
      Europe, Portugal, are probably left far behind in terms of GDP

      How can I say this, unfortunately recourse bad luck, we barely caught up, 35 thousand and 37 thousand damned foreign pieces of paper per capita...
      Quote: parusnik
      Cod has not been in stores for 68 years, but now it will appear in large quantities

      But salmon and salmon are lying around, come on...
      1. +4
        22 February 2024 10: 05
        But salmon and salmon are lying around, come on...
        Yes, I wouldn’t refuse the Azov anchovy... it’s so fatty, not like the Black Sea one, and I wouldn’t refuse our Azov gobies, and our flounder and herring weren’t bad either, and I would cook fish soup from the belly of a beluga, and from the insides of pies would be baked, and the pike perch in batter.... mmmmm.. Ram with beer or with local shrimp, that goes without saying.. But this fish and shrimp are no longer in the sea, from the very word.. Only memories remain.. Probably gone to a distant cordon..But yes, salmon and salmon are piling up, just like in the Far East..Apparently, the Sea of ​​Azov has been stocked with it.But now cod will appear..
      2. +4
        22 February 2024 11: 52
        "But salmon and salmon are lying around, come on..."
        the cod will be stored the same way, and the price will be the same, well, a little less
    3. 0
      22 February 2024 23: 41
      According to what GDP? Total or per capita? In terms of GDP, both at par and in PPP, Russia is many times greater than Portugal. We have a population 15 times larger than Portugal.
  11. +7
    22 February 2024 07: 46
    How the Soviet Union was killed

    Comrade Samsonov is developing a gold mine, endless empty disputes and gossip are guaranteed.
    1. +3
      22 February 2024 08: 02
      Shpakovsky explained to me that this is how the author’s rating is created. True, I didn’t find where exactly the number that determines this author’s rating is shown?
      1. +4
        22 February 2024 08: 09
        And the more comments, the better the author’s comments are taken into account. And regarding the author, the topic has been discussed for a long time, an entire team works under this name, every day there is an article. And on various topics.
    2. -1
      22 February 2024 08: 11
      Samsonov develops a gold mine
      I've already mastered it. Not a day without a line.
  12. -4
    22 February 2024 08: 02
    how things would have turned out had Lenin not left so early.
  13. +5
    22 February 2024 08: 21
    The broad modernization of Soviet industry and Kosygin's reforms were rejected.
    The author does not know the essence of the Kosygin-Liberman reform. Then the main criterion for the operation of the enterprise became profit, which later served as the basis for the transition to capitalism. It is clear that for some time this reform was probably necessary to clear up the consequences of the experiments of Khrushchev Kukuruzny (analogous to the NEP), but then economic thought quietly died. Joseph the Terrible also wrote that “Without theory we are dead.” And so it happened.
  14. +2
    22 February 2024 08: 24
    The Soviet Union killed itself. It followed the exact scenario of the fall of all empires: the hungry create, grow fat, and collapse. Only now the top got fat, and the cattle believed in fairy tales about the happy west.
    1. +4
      22 February 2024 08: 48
      You are mistaken, the USSR collapsed precisely because the elite believed that Soviet laws did not allow them to get fat.
      So they destroyed these laws, and then, yes, they became no worse fat than in the West.

      And the lower classes in our blessed fatherland have always perceived power as a phenomenon of Nature, something like the arrival of winter or summer, which occurs regardless of them.

      The Slavophile K. Aksakov wrote about this to Tsar Alexander the 2nd: “The Russian people do not have a political element in themselves... And they themselves never demand anything from the State. That’s why our State is so big.”
  15. +3
    22 February 2024 08: 28
    Ultimately, the USSR was killed by a weak economy that drove the people to extremes.

    The author thinks rather strangely about ideology - most ordinary people at all times thought primarily about a calm and well-fed life, and this is the normal state of a normal person.

    Issues of social justice were of interest to well-fed people - no one canceled Maslow’s pyramid.

    By the end of the 80s, the shortage of everything brought people to the idea that “sausage is more important than ideology.” To put it simply, if the authorities had managed to maintain the consumption of at least basic food products, the USSR would still exist.

    By the way, the Author stubbornly refuses to listen to his own idols, who argued that materialism is primary.
    1. +5
      22 February 2024 08: 56
      As for the “weak economy of the USSR” - not convincing. Our society is weak. It can hunker down and go wherever they send it, but it is not able to protect itself from thieves and traitors. And the economy of the USSR was strong.

      At the beginning of 1992, Gaidar immediately “saved the country” and eliminated the Soviet deficit... Where did “what did not exist in the USSR” suddenly come from?

      In the USSR, from 1960 to 1980, car production doubled every 10 years. And the Gegkovs are even faster, since AvtoVAZ was built in the early 70s.
      And now AvtoVAZ gives out the same 400 thousand a year as under Brezhnev... After 50 years!
      And Rosstat admits that meat production in the Russian Federation reached the level of 1989 in the RSFSR only in 2015.
      What do you mean, “strong economy”?
      1. -1
        22 February 2024 10: 00
        “Our society is weak. It can hunker down and go wherever they send it, but it is not able to protect itself from thieves and traitors. But the economy of the USSR was strong.”

        Society in those years supported the transition from the USSR and from socialism to any direction where food could be bought. I myself was part of this society and saw how everything happens from the inside.

        The economy in the USSR was so weak that it could not provide the population with food - what was its strength? We are still the fifth largest economy in the world. But these are just words.
      2. +2
        22 February 2024 11: 55
        “And now AvtoVAZ gives out the same 400 thousand a year as under Brezhnev... In 50 years!”
        under Brezhnev, AvtoVAZ produced 650 thousand cars, and sometimes even more - social competition, increased productivity, etc. 650 thousand - design capacity of the plant
      3. The comment was deleted.
  16. +6
    22 February 2024 08: 31
    The masters of the West are strong because they know how to play for a long time.

    They are still playing like this. And the Kremlin is losing or playing on their side, judging by how the quality of life of Russians is deteriorating.
  17. +4
    22 February 2024 09: 47
    Capitalism and socialism. Let's dig into history; feudalism also did not immediately surrender to capitalism. Take the history of France. The passion-bearer Louis was executed. And suddenly citizen Napoleon became emperor. And so the entire 19th century was either a monarchy or a republic.
    As for the USSR, there was a socialist society for the first time. In the end, the feds are lovers of migrants, loving money more than their homeland, also still 30 years old.
    1. +2
      22 February 2024 22: 41
      And so the entire 19th century was either a monarchy or a republic.


      do not confuse the socio-economic formation and forms of government.
      Under Napoleon, the bourgeoisie had already seized power and it was already capitalism.
  18. -1
    22 February 2024 11: 19
    Often, in our country, the work of the laws of physics is perceived as elements of some third-party, mega-insidious and sophisticated plan. Whereas these were precisely the consequences of the laws of physics - although, of course, our opponents also did not sit on their butts and used this pressure. But exactly what used but not created. Even if they had used it to a lesser extent, what happened would have happened, just a little later and differently.
    You see, what a thing - if the pressure from the inside does not compensate for the pressure from the outside and the body is not strong enough to maintain this difference - a collapse occurs, and quite sharp and destructive.
    An analogue of pressure was pressure from outside the Product and Freedoms (meaning total freedoms, including freedom of activity, self-expression, movement, freedom of conscience, etc.) on the masses, even more precisely on each participant in the regulatory system.
    If the USSR were spherical in a vacuum and lived on a separate planet, which it occupied entirely, in a galaxy far, far away and there would be no one around except the USSR - I have no doubt that we would still be pulling that strap in one form or another. Because there is no external pressure from competitive systems - but here you need to understand that this is NOT ONLY military pressure, it is TO A GREAT EXTENT the pressure of simply successful and more spectacular models.

    It’s a paradox, but at one time socialism-communism and the USSR itself very actively attracted people with the Idea, the Image - that is, there probably should have been an internal understanding of the extreme effectiveness of these tools. But instead, for some reason, they decided that these were not separate instruments, but an inseparable part of the entire structure. This was an extremely erroneous point of view, because perfect organisms differ from imperfect ones in qualitative terms by high-quality tools and not by some kind of engineering coolness. Birds have an excellent brain, but they have no arms and therefore they remained just animals, while bags of flesh with two arms took over the planet and put everything at their service. The virus does not have a cell - but it has a tool for penetrating strangers and it easily captures and uses them.
    By choosing and developing the right Tool, you can gain an advantage - we were too fixated on ideological antagonism with the West, so much so that we rejected the evolution of competitive Tools. And in the end, the inevitable happened - he, using his own (cinema, product, further flagship in the development of Freedoms, global architecture, technological policy) outplayed us, not so much in a direct game, but in an indirect one.
    The global environment at the end of the USSR had a configuration beneficial to the West - it dragged ions from the social bloc to the West and pumped back ideas and products that were lacking on the “other side”. Ions are people who did not find a place in social systems, who wanted more and (many, not all) were ready for more for more.

    The end of this was inevitable, like the end of a submersible that has too many leaks.
    1. -1
      22 February 2024 12: 01
      It’s difficult, they won’t understand you (c)

      The external environment forced people to compare their lives with what was “out there” - and this comparison was very unfavorable to us. You say correctly, if “there” didn’t exist (or if they didn’t know “here”), they would live the same way for a long time. This is precisely why information about how it is “there” was isolated so that they would not know. Today propaganda does the same, but not so successfully yet. However, give it time, and she will do it.

      And the economy, alas, was limping, while other values ​​lost their meaning in the eyes of people.

      Now put before people a choice, which is better - equality in general poverty or comfortable inequality - how many will choose the first?

      And who will answer the question - which of these two options is fairer? I'm afraid the answers will be different.
      1. -1
        22 February 2024 12: 24
        From the point of view of how everything works in nature, everyone receives according to their abilities, activity and kinship. You were born an elephant - you eat like an elephant, you spit on jackals, you hang out wherever you want. If you were born a hare, know that you should cut the grass and run away from every bug. But unlike nature, in human society a hare can become an elephant - IF he has enough abilities and activity. Here it will be limited by the factor of flexibility and perfection of the system and, yes, the objective presence of these qualities.
        In the West, a conventional “hare” could theoretically grow into an elephant - there were plenty of examples of this. It was difficult and strained, but possible. And you could grow to be a whale, if you wanted. But it was not easy to grow (due to competition, market, etc.)
        In the USSR, “ZaichEg” could grow more easily, because he was encouraged (free education, medicine, could be given a hut from the enterprise, actually find a job, etc.), but the limits on his growth were set very strict - “ZaichEg” could not grow higher than the Horse , For example. The system directly told us need not There are so many Elephants, we don’t need Whales at all - but we need a lot of Horses.

        But the bad hare is the one who does not want to become an Elephant - after all, he sees Elephants, knows about their existence. When he runs and eats the spoils, afraid of everything, he envyes the way the Elephant imposingly thrusts his trunk into the top of a tree and picks up everything he wants there and is in no hurry, and is not afraid of anything. Even if ZaichEg turns into a Horse, he will still envy the Elephant, because he did not want to become a Horse, he likes Elephant.
        How “relatively easily” he could become a Horse whips up his appetite - he says to himself “I became so easily,but the system limits my potential". Isn't it true, you could hear this from many who left the USSR? :) They could not evaluate their potential objectively in a system that was a hybrid of a Petri dish and a closed aquarium.

        The advantage of the Western system (of those years) was that there were few artificial obstacles - you want to grow and you can grow. No, not at all am
        And in our case, the “hare” was first accelerated, and then slowed down “up the wall”.
        I see it all so “specifically” laughing
        1. -1
          22 February 2024 12: 53
          “I see it all in such a specific way.”

          I think this problem is typical for Russia today. In the West, a kitten who became a tiger managed to give benefits to a large number of kittens or built a new chicken coop.

          But it was not this that destroyed the USSR, but the lack of food for everyone.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. 0
              24 February 2024 22: 05
              And the State Duma under Tsar Nicholas in 1916 established food appropriation also artificially? Did Kerensky artificially declare a grain monopoly in March 1917?
              And the peasants - "good Samaritans" - speculated in grain so much that they starved Russian cities just because there was nothing to do?
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. 0
                  26 February 2024 10: 32
                  Quote: Trinitrotoluene
                  yes, the surplus appropriation system was introduced under the tsar, but there were no such destructive results and such a BLOODY conflict between the authorities and the peasants under the tsar.

                  It's just that the Empire fell earlier. Otherwise, we would now be told how irresponsible peasants hid strategic goods, due to the lack of which the Empire could not pay for arms orders abroad - and how because of this food detachments had to fleece villages under the laws of war.
                  1. 0
                    26 February 2024 21: 03
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    It's just that the Empire fell earlier. Otherwise they would tell us now,


                    Well, of course, if only, if only...You need to write novels about people who get caught.
                    The history of bloody clashes between tsarism and the peasantry did not wait, but the bloody clashes between Bolshevism and the peasantry did.
  19. +4
    22 February 2024 12: 01
    After the Stalinist command, the government became less and less communist; there were people in power who called themselves communists, but in fact they became more and more opportunists hiding behind slogans.
    1. 0
      24 February 2024 22: 09
      Even after the Ascension of Christ to Heaven, people declared themselves Christians, but became less and less Christian..... Ну и что? The main question is whether Christ is to blame or the people themselves? The question is relevant because in the end they will have to burn......

      Likewise, for the betrayal of all the ideas of justice “in a single country” and all the conquests of the Russian people for 500 years... in the end, they too will have to burn, and not Marx and Engels...
  20. +1
    22 February 2024 12: 02
    IMHO, these are all just templates. Tailored to the worldview of modern kitchens.

    All of the above simply indicates that in terms of intelligence, education, and intelligence, the Soviet elite began to yield to the Western elite.
    Like, they came up with something, and we...
    But it turns out that they couldn’t come up with anything... One party, no competition, only intrigues, often technologies exported from the West, imported and re-sung music, ideas, feudal clanism...
    Everything has slipped into a closed small-town swamp...

    Everything collapsed on its own, and the West... no, yes, it took advantage of what it had, just like we did with their failures...
  21. +2
    22 February 2024 15: 03
    Quote: Trinitrotoluene
    Or is it that a Russian village was robbed and it was slyly called “collectivism”?

    The name is unfortunate. Does not reflect the essence of the process. Well, let it be... Rather, this process should be called “de-peasantization,” i.e. squeezing out surplus workers from agriculture, and redirecting them to the cities to factories and factories, which, by the way, still had to be built with these very hands.... And, by the way, what else could be robbed from the Russian village? :)
  22. +6
    22 February 2024 15: 13
    Until 1957, the Soviet Union was developing at a cosmic pace. A real social state (which was called socialism) was built in the country, based on a mixed economy. But after 1957, various “miracles” happened, namely all kinds of reforms. And, in 1961, they generally announced that in 1980 the economic base of communism would be built. (no one knew what it was, but they said there would be “full chocolate” for everyone, HURRAY!!!). In 1975, when everyone saw that there were problems with "full chocolate". It was announced that instead of “full chocolate” we had built developed socialism. And whoever doesn’t believe in this is a bastard and.... As a result, everything began to be “painted, varnished” and lies from every iron. (About the same as now). Although, for the sake of fairness, it must be said that the standard of living of the people has increased significantly. Free apartments, almost free housing and communal services, free healthcare and education. Consumption of cheap 100% natural meat and dairy products, fish, etc. by the population. But the development of the country began to be deliberately hampered by the ruling elite. Everyone can see how it ended. We are going into the Middle Ages with all the ensuing consequences. We blame the Pechenegs, Polovtsians, V.I. for all the troubles. Lenina, I.V. Stalin, commies and further down the list.
  23. 0
    22 February 2024 15: 20
    The USSR was doomed from the very beginning of its formation. And there is no need to look for external enemies, liberals, Lenin, Khrushchev, Goryachev (further added if desired). Borders drawn with a finger, an elite that appeared back in the 20s, a complete discrepancy between ideology and management system. And don’t blah blah blah about space, the atomic bomb and free education. It remains to pay tribute to the margin of safety that allowed the country to exist for 70 years. And bow to the lives that our grandfathers and great-grandfathers laid down for its existence. Unfortunately, all this well-fed elite easily changed their shoes and entered capitalism. You can't argue with the author here.
  24. -4
    22 February 2024 15: 20
    A pathetic, pathetic attempt to whitewash the USSR. Nobody needed him, neither the elites nor the people.
  25. +1
    22 February 2024 15: 46
    Quote: Trinitrotoluene
    The fifth column was preparing.

    who prepared you? Who are these arrangers of pieces on the chess field? It must be said specifically, the old men of the Politburo came from the people, peasants and workers, the same Khrushchev was from working miners, but Brezhnev was from peasants, although he himself writes that he is from proletarians, i.e. There’s a contradiction here: I was born in a village, and my father is a metallurgist, how’s that? Did your father go to work from the village to the factory? It doesn't happen that way. Usually in the villages they were engaged in agricultural work, and the workers lived in cities, in workers' settlements. Most likely, Brezhnev’s origins are not the same as he himself writes in his memoirs, apparently his family had some kind of property in the form of land and this left an imprint on his character and behavior for the rest of his life.
    But Marxism-Leninism defined the peasant as a “petty-bourgeois owner” and the peasant environment constantly gave rise to private property manifestations in the form of a market on which it was always necessary to sell agricultural products of their production, bread and everything else. And in exchange, the necessary production goods for working with land and livestock - livestock farming. And the Bolsheviks fought against this order and won by taking away ALL property from the peasants, and outsiders were appointed to manage this “collective” property, people who knew nothing about peasant labor. This was not socialism, it doesn’t even have a name , not capitalism and not socialism, but TYRANOCRACY - the destruction of the centuries-old foundations of the Russian people.
    Managing through the market was the CORRECT order of things, for centuries this order, which came to us from our fathers, was determining the relationship between the city and the village. Between the city and the village there was a MARKET.
    But the Bolsheviks destroyed the market and commodity-money relations and called this their way of life - let's say, socialism, i.e. the power of the people. In fact, there is only ONE power - the power of money. The Bolsheviks were unable to destroy the money.
    Brezhnev and his accomplices slept and saw themselves on their own land in their own peace and right.
    Galya Brezhneva came to Gokhran with an empty bucket and collected as many diamonds as she wanted, and this was, of course, with the knowledge and approval of HIMSELF, and not without permission, otherwise the authorities would have quickly covered it up.
    But Brezhnev slipped into a direct betrayal of the interests of the country - this is a recognition of the American lunar scam, a betrayal of the computer program, and a limitation - stagnation in the development of mechanical engineering, for decades they produced the same car models and the birth of the ugly Brezhnev phenomenon of DEFICIT, which destroyed all ideals " socialism".

    And Brezhnev did not recognize the indisputable fact that the earth is flat.)))
  26. +2
    22 February 2024 16: 30
    The authorship is clear, for me the main reason for the collapse is the paralysis of leadership and the paralysis of ideology, remember the “garage” when they called for living according to Soviet rules and everyone laughed, how is this possible?? The West offered understandable things - jeans, video, cigarettes, chewing gum, but what did the party offer? - the victory of communism in the world - who needed it in the 80s? as shown by 91 - seven shaking people who, at most, manage a collective farm.
  27. -1
    22 February 2024 16: 47
    How Lenin would have changed the USSR if he had lived to see 1944

    History does not know the subjunctive mood, but analysis of the past is impossible without it. Fortune telling of this kind associated with Lenin became especially widespread at the beginning of “perestroika.” Then they were associated with exposure of Stalin's atrocities. In them, the “good” Lenin was usually contrasted with the “evil” Stalin.
    How Lenin would have changed the USSR if he had lived to see 1944

    The authors of such comparisons wanted to show that if not for his serious illness caused by injury in 1918, then Lenin, remaining longer at the leadership of the Communist Party and the Soviet state, would have been able to put a barrier to Stalin’s ambitions. Then, they say, there would be no mass violations of “socialist legality.” As evidence, they cited Lenin’s “Letter to the Congress” (December 1922), in which he recommended considering the issue of removing Stalin from the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks.

    Now that much more information has been published about both Lenin and Stalin than in the late 1980s, it would be interesting to take a fresh look at this historical alternative.

    Long-livers in Lenin's family
    Let's start with the rationale for why Lenin, in fact, could have lived longer. After all, his father, Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov, died at almost the same age (a year difference) for the same reason (if the diagnosis is correct in both cases) - from a stroke. However, Lenin also had long-livers in his family. There can hardly be any doubt that his death was hastened by illness, the causes of which will not be discussed here. If not for her, it is unknown how much more health Ilyich might have had. Moreover, people who knew him always noted his very good health before the revolution.

    Lenin's paternal grandfather died at 68, his grandmother at 71, his mother Maria Alexandrovna died at 81, his older sister Anna at 69, his younger brother Dmitry at 68, his niece Olga at 89. Lenin could well have there may be a chance of living to 70-75 years, in any case, to Stalin’s age (74 years). And if this were so, then Lenin would have died only in 1944, that is, he would have found the beginning and most of the Second World War as the head of the Soviet state. Or would you not have found it? Perhaps under him such a war would not have happened at all?

    Let's try to imagine what the policy of the Soviet state could have been, and how the situation in the world could have developed if Lenin had led the USSR, at least until the mid-1930s.
    Obvious differences from the Stalinist course

    The internal party struggle would have taken place under Lenin, but it could not have reached such ferocity if Lenin had maintained a position above the fray. Consequently, mass repressions in the party and state apparatus would not have arisen under him. There would not have been numerous trials of “enemies of the people” and “counter-revolutionaries” from the intelligentsia. Moreover, not only Lenin, but also Trotsky, appreciated this layer, since before the revolution they themselves belonged to it.

    A specific model for the structure of the USSR with equal rights for the union republics was adopted at the end of 1922 at the insistence of Lenin, contrary to Stalin’s plan for the “autonomization” of the union republics, that is, their inclusion in the RSFSR. It can be assumed that if Lenin had continued to rule, then the real structure of the USSR would have been closer to a genuine federation. The independence of the union republics from Moscow would be much stronger than it was under Stalin. The formal division of the USSR into union and autonomous republics would differ insignificantly, but in content it would be a different model of relations between the union center and the republics.

    Lenin disliked the forms of the old regime. He would not have begun to restore the names of officer ranks and shoulder straps in the Red Army, and would not have appealed to the “great historical past.” Although Lenin was not alien to his own understanding of patriotism (remember the decree “The Socialist Fatherland is in Danger!” dated February 21, 1918), he would hardly have appealed to the images of Peter the Great, Ivan the Terrible, Alexander Nevsky, and tsarist commanders. Stalin began to implement this policy even before the war. It’s hard to imagine it under Lenin.

    It is also difficult to imagine Lenin giving any importance to the conservative Orthodox Church and helping to restore its institutions. Rather, he would have allowed Lunacharsky to continue experimenting with the renovationist version of Orthodoxy.

    But a lot depended on the general course in the construction of socialism both within the country and outside it.
    NEP as an anticipation of modern Chinese socialism

    Lenin’s statements could be adapted, as Stalin and his opponents later did in the struggle for power, to justify literally any turn in the “general line of the party.” In Lenin one could find arguments both for the continuation of the new economic policy (NEP) with its market relations and limited private enterprise, and for its curtailment, both for cooperation with bourgeois states and the construction of socialism in one country, and for the world revolution. Lenin was a flexible tactician. In addition, he, like no one else in the party, could come up with and justify some new course literally out of nothing.

    The continuation of his rule would have such an important advantage over the battles of his epigones: he did not require sharp political turns in the struggle for power, because his authority within the party was unquestionable. Lenin would have responded only to those signals that dictated changes in political course in order to maintain communist power.

    In this regard, the continuation of NEP after 1928 represented favorable conditions for the Bolshevik Party. It is unlikely that Lenin would have curtailed it at this time. And at the end of 1929, the great economic crisis of the capitalist system broke out. In real history, the USSR could not use it, since even earlier Stalin had started a ruinous alteration of the entire socio-economic system of the country. But if such a decisive leap had not taken place, the USSR would have been in an advantageous situation, especially in terms of propaganda, compared to Western countries.

    True, in this case there could be a possibility of temptation to bring revolution to Western Europe on the bayonets of the Red Army, as was already the case in 1919-1920. And further historical scenarios branch out so widely and variedly that they can no longer be reviewed in one article.

    However, if Lenin had been able to come up with a course of “soft power” in relation to the West, while maintaining the strategy of “peaceful coexistence,” then it is very likely that the USSR would have been able to occupy the position of the same dominant position in a significant part of Europe earlier than it did under Stalin , and at the cost of millions of victims of the Soviet peoples. The economic model of the Soviet Union itself could show similarities with the model of modern China, and again without excessive shocks.
  28. +2
    22 February 2024 19: 24
    It was necessary not to fight with the whole world, but to build a paradise in one’s own country.
    Then everyone else would have overthrown their governments out of envy and built communism in their own country. hi
    1. +2
      22 February 2024 22: 14
      Quote: Arzt
      It was necessary not to fight with the whole world, but to build a paradise in one’s own country.
      Then everyone else would have overthrown their governments out of envy and built communism in their own country. hi

      Of course, you are smarter than Stalin, Lenin and Karl Marx combined....you know better..

      But I remember during the Second World War, the USA and Britain did not fight against us...... Not like now. hi
      1. +1
        22 February 2024 22: 48
        Of course, you are smarter than Stalin, Lenin and Karl Marx combined....you know better..

        But I remember during the Second World War, the USA and Britain did not fight against us...... Not like now. hi

        I even mean the Cold War. We've gone too far into weapons. But we should think about the little people.
        What kind of the best society of materialists is this if there is no home, no normal pants, no sausage.
        Dissonance however... wink
        1. +1
          23 February 2024 00: 04
          And during the Cold War, the USSR had allies. The whole Warsaw Pact and the CMEA countries.
          There was no need to betray them, there would be no need to fight now.

          It’s just curious, where did everything come from right away in 1992 when “Gaidar saved the country” that “did not exist in the USSR”?

          And the dissonance, oh, how great it is, you correctly noticed... All the peoples of the World have problems and troubles from thieves and traitors, and one nation has them from materialism and other "... isms..", from the State Planning Committee.... from the ideas of justice....

          Amazing people who “knew how to make rockets, but didn’t know how to make sausage,” and then Gaidar immediately taught them in a week in 1992...
          You see, special people have special problems...... hi
          1. 0
            26 February 2024 10: 39
            Quote: ivan2022
            And during the Cold War, the USSR had allies. The whole Warsaw Pact and the CMEA countries.
            There was no need to betray them, there would be no need to fight now.

            There was no need to betray them? Yes, the socialist camp was the first, all as one person, to rush to the West. Rallies, strikes, demands for the removal of communist parties from power...
            What should the USSR have done? Send in troops like in 1956 and 1968? What next?
        2. 0
          23 February 2024 00: 22
          As I understand it, many are unhappy that our blessed people got the bad country of the USSR?
          Well, of course, the ancestors overlooked it, besides, all the neighbors are bad, the brothers are not brothers at all, and... their eggs, too, you know, interfere with the best people in the world, judging by their demographics...

          No luck, in a word!
          1. 0
            23 February 2024 02: 00
            As I understand it, many are unhappy that our blessed people got the bad country of the USSR?
            Well, of course, the ancestors overlooked it, besides, all the neighbors are bad, the brothers are not brothers at all, and... their eggs, too, you know, interfere with the best people in the world, judging by their demographics...

            No luck, in a word!

            The USSR is not a country. This is the Union of Republics. And the republics always remembered this, unlike the RSFSR.
            Not to mention the CMEA countries and other Warsaw residents. They never considered us theirs, because our garrisons were stationed there.
            Just imagine the situation - Hitler reached Lake Baikal, and the Chinese took him and drove him back to Berlin. Yes, they stayed here. wink
        3. +1
          26 February 2024 10: 35
          Quote: Arzt
          I even mean the Cold War. We've gone too far into weapons. But we should think about the little people.

          So Khrushchev tried to think. As a result, he is still blamed for “the collapse of the strongest army.” And the fact that an army of five million devoured the USSR from the inside - few people think about this.
  29. +2
    22 February 2024 22: 15
    The masters of the West are strong because they know how to play for a long time. In the 19th – early 20th centuries, the masters of London, Paris, Vienna, Berlin and Washington also rocked Russia and tried to destroy it.

    Forgot Tokyo, Sydney (or Canberra), Ottawa, Rome, Istanbul. And the center of hatred for Orthodoxy: the Vatican.
  30. 0
    25 February 2024 08: 26
    The communists and ordinary party members were for the most part honest and decent people. They did not plunder the country, but sincerely developed it. And it’s not their fault that the top is rotten and there was no person who could stop this chaos.
  31. 0
    25 February 2024 08: 35
    In general, if at the end of the existence of the USSR there would have been a strong leader who would have brought order to the country with a strong hand. The USSR would have followed the path of China and would now be a superpower; it is not known whether the USA and NATO would still exist.
  32. +1
    28 February 2024 10: 42
    The union was doomed. And neither the enemies nor the West are to blame for this, but the commies themselves, who, within the framework of one single state, decided to play with independence and form, like, union republics. Well, we got it. The union was doomed from the start. Because, either a single country - the Gulag, supported by fear and repression, or collapse. Which is exactly what happened. The guards on the towers, the camps, repressions, executions, the enslaved peasantry, the lack of basic freedoms kept the union together. And as soon as people understood “who am I, that is, I am trembling or I have the right,” and the desire for basic independence from the general secretaries led to collapse. You can blame Gorby, Yeltsin and the rest as much as you like, but you can’t see the queues of republics rushing back. And peoples do not want to unite. If no one wants to, what does Gorby have to do with it? All these revolutionary scum first destroyed the Great Empire, and then destroyed what they had created. So don’t blame the West or some traitors.
    1. 0
      1 March 2024 08: 23
      Absolutely right. An empire based on fear and the limitations of the individual is incapable of development. As soon as the reins of fear and the whip weaken, the empire collapses. And by the way, the article generally ignores the role in the collapse of the USSR of the organization that was supposed to guard this state - the KGB. How did it turn out that this organization still stands in the shadow of the events of the collapse of the USSR? But I think thinking people know the reason. wink
  33. 0
    2 March 2024 06: 35
    "How they killed the Soviet Union"?????
    If they said KILLED, then the Question is, which of the murderers suffered PUNISHMENT?
    And “Moon-Faced” thinks it’s not a pity. There was no sense in the USSR, they only knew how to make galoshes.
    But the “killers” who climbed the peak of Power are “geniuses”. And most likely - "genitals"....
  34. +1
    12 March 2024 08: 35
    I think I saw the author at the 1990 demonstrations.
    Down with the CPSU.
    Yeltsin is our president.
    We need a market.

    The results of the intellectual activity of the vast majority of the population are described in detail in Krylov’s fable “Quartet”.
  35. 0
    20 March 2024 08: 19
    Immediately after the revolution and civil war, the new owners wanted to “eat deliciously and sleep sweetly,” and the further the worse, even the Second World War created a split in the minds of citizens who visited enslaved Europe, and both Khrushchev and Brezhnev helped stratify society
  36. AB
    0
    April 1 2024 13: 03
    They no longer believed the mossy dogmas of Marxism-Leninism, the slogans and ideals of communism.
    After this phrase I didn’t see any point in reading.