Military Review

How did the peasants live in Tsarist Russia? Analytics and facts

Unless in the imagination of citizens living in an alternative reality or in the descriptions of paid propagandists, the situation in “Russia that we have lost” seems almost paradise on earth. It is described in the following way: “Before the revolution and collectivization, who worked well, he lived well. Because he lived by his work, and the poor were lazy and drunkards. The kulaks were the most hard-working peasants and the best masters, and therefore lived better than anyone. "Then comes crying about" Russia-feeding-all-Europe-wheat "or, in extreme cases, half of Europe," while the USSR imported bread ”, Trying to prove in such a shuler manner that the path of Soviet socialism was less effective than the path of tsarism. Then, of course, about the "crunch of the French loaf," an enterprising and sharp-witted Russian merchants, a God-fearing, kind-hearted and highly moral God-bearing people, who were spoiled by the Bolshevik reptiles, "the best people killed and expelled by the Bolsheviks." Well, the truth is, how should you be an evil freak to destroy such an exalted pastoral?

Such tinsel fairytales, however, painted by unkind and dishonest people, appeared when it was overwhelming than those who remembered how it really was, died or left the age at which adequate information could be obtained from them. By the way, ordinary citizens could easily have been able to ponobalize about the beautiful pre-revolutionary times at the end of 30's, without any party committees, in a purely village-style “make a face”, so the memories of the “lost Russia” were fresh and painful.

A great number of sources reached us about the situation in the Russian village before the Revolution - both documentary reports and statistical data, as well as personal impressions. Contemporaries evaluated the surrounding reality of "God-bearing Russia" not just without enthusiasm, but simply found it desperate, if not terrible. The life of an average Russian peasant was extremely harsh, even more so - cruel and hopeless.

Here is a testimony of a person who is difficult to blame for inadequacy, non-Russianness or dishonesty. This is the star of world literature - Leo Tolstoy. Here's how he described his trip to several dozen villages of different counties at the very end of the 19 century [1]:

“In all these villages, although there is no mix with bread, as was the case in 1891, but bread, although pure, does not provide plenty. Welding - millet, cabbage, potatoes, even the majority, do not have any. The food consists of grass groves, whitened if there is a cow, and unbleached, if there is none, and only bread. In all these villages, most have sold and mortgaged everything that can be sold and mortgaged.

From Guschina, I went to the village of Gnevyshevo, from which peasants came two days ago asking for help. This village consists, like Gubarevka, of 10 courtyards. For ten yards are four horses and four cows; almost no sheep; all houses are so old and bad that they barely stand. All are poor, and all beg to help them. “If only the guys have rested a little bit,” say the women. “Otherwise, they ask for folders (bread), but there’s nothing to give, so they will not fall asleep without having dinner” ...

I asked me to exchange three rubles. There was no ruble money in the whole village ... Similarly, the rich, who make up everywhere around 20%, have a lot of oats and other resources, but in addition, landless soldiers' children live in this village. The whole settlement of these inhabitants does not have land and is always poor, but now it is at the price of expensive bread and at a meager delivery of alms in terrible, terrifying poverty ...

From the hut, near which we stopped, a ragged dirty woman came out and walked over to a handful of something lying on the pasture and covered with a tattered and skidded caftan everywhere. This is one of her 5's children. A three-year-old girl is ill in extreme heat with something like a flu. Not that there is no speech about the treatment, but no other food, except the crusts of bread that the mother brought yesterday, leaving the children and running with the bag for exhortation ... The husband of this woman left the spring and did not return. These are about many of these families ...

We, adults, if we are not crazy, can seemingly understand where the famine comes from. First of all, he - and every man knows this - he
1) from the shortage of land, because half of the land is from landowners and merchants who trade both land and bread.
2) from factories and plants with those laws under which the capitalist is fenced, but the worker is not protected.
3) from vodka, which is the main income of the state and to which the people have been accustomed for centuries.
4) from the soldiery who selects the best people from him in the best time and corrupts them.
5) from officials who oppress the people.
6) from taxes.
7) from ignorance in which government and church schools consciously support it.

The farther into the depths of the Bogoroditsky district and closer to Efremovsky, the worse and worse the situation ... Almost nothing was born on the best lands, only the seeds returned. Bread almost everyone with a quinoa. The quinoa here is not ripe, green. That white nucleoli, which usually happens in it, is not at all, and therefore it is not edible. Bread with quinoa cannot be eaten alone. If you eat on an empty stomach of one bread, it will throw up. From kvass, made on flour with quinoa, people freak out ”

Well, lovers of "Russia-lost", is impressive?

V. G. Korolenko, who lived in the village for many years, visited other hungry areas in the beginning of the 1890-s and organized dining rooms for the hungry and distribution of food loans there, left very characteristic testimonies of civil servants: “You are a fresh person, you come across a village with dozens typhoid patients, see how a sick mother leans over the cradle of a sick child to feed him, loses consciousness and lies above him, and no one to help, because the husband mumbles on the floor in rambling delirium. And you are horrified. And the “old warrior” was used. He had already experienced this, he was already terrified twenty years ago, had had a pain, had boiled over, had calmed down ... Tif? Why, it's always with us! Quinoa? Yes, we have this one every year! .. ”[2].

Please note that all authors are not talking about a single random event, but about a constant and cruel famine in the Russian village.

“I meant not only to attract donations in favor of the starving, but also to put in front of the society, and maybe even before the government, an amazing picture of the land disturbance and poverty of the agricultural population on the best lands.

I had a hope that when I succeed in announcing all this, when I loudly tell the whole of Russia about these people of Dubrovka, the Poles and Petrovtsy, how they became “non-adversaries”, how “bad pain” destroys entire villages, as in Lukoyanov himself, a little girl asks her mother to “bury her living in the Zemku”, then maybe my articles can have at least some influence on the fate of these Dubrovki, raising the question of the need for land reform, even the most modest at first. ”[2]

Interestingly, what will lovers of saying “the horrors of the famine” —the only famine of the USSR (with the exception of the war, of course) — say?

In an attempt to save themselves from hunger, the inhabitants of entire villages and districts "went with their souls around the world," trying to escape from starvation. This is how Korolenko, who witnessed this, describes it. He also says that this happened in the life of most Russian peasants.

Cruel sketches from nature of the western correspondents of the Russian famine of the end of the 19 century have been preserved.

How did the peasants live in Tsarist Russia? Analytics and facts

Hordes of starving people trying to escape in the cities

“I know many cases when several families joined together, chose some old woman, together supplied her with the last crumbs, gave her children, while they themselves wandered into the distance, where their eyes were looking, with anguish of uncertainty about the left guys ... As the last the stocks are disappearing in the population, - family after family goes on this mournful road ... Dozens of families, united spontaneously into crowds, who were driven to the main roads, fright and despair, to villages and cities. Some local observers from the rural intelligentsia tried to create some sort of statistics to take into account this phenomenon that had brought everyone's attention. Cutting a loaf of bread into many small pieces, the observer counted these pieces and, feeding them, thus determined the number of beggars who had been in a day. The numbers turned out to be truly frightening ... Autumn did not bring improvement, and winter moved in among the new crop failure ... In the autumn, before the loan issues began, again whole clouds of hungry and scared people just like that left the disadvantaged villages ... When poverty came to an end, poverty became stronger among these fluctuations and became more common. The family that served yesterday — today I went out with my bag ... ”(ibid.)

Crowds of hungry people from the village reached St. Petersburg. Near the doss house.

Millions of desperate people took to the roads, fled to the cities, even reaching the capitals. Distraught from hunger, people begged and stole. Along the roads lay the corpses of the victims of hunger. To prevent this gigantic flight of desperate people into the starving villages, troops and Cossacks were injected, which prevented the peasants from leaving the village. Often they were not allowed at all, usually, they allowed only those who had a passport to leave the village. The passport was issued for a certain period by the local authorities, without it the peasant was considered a vagabond and far from everyone had the passport. A person without a passport was considered a vagabond, subjected to corporal punishment, imprisonment and expulsion.

Cossacks do not give the peasants to leave the village to go with the bag.

Interestingly, lovers to speculate about how the Bolsheviks did not let out people from the villages during the “famine” would say about it?

About this terrible, but ordinary picture of "Rossi-that-we-lost" is now carefully forgotten.

The starving stream was such that the police and the Cossacks could not keep him. To save the situation in the 90 of the 19 of the century, food loans began to be applied - but the peasant was obliged to return them from the harvest in the fall. If he did not repay the loan, then they would hang it on the village community on the principle of mutual responsibility, and then how it could happen they could ruin it cleanly, taking everything as arrears, could collect it with the whole world and repay the debt, they could beg the local authorities to forgive the loan.

Now, few people know that in order to get bread, the tsarist government took tough confiscation measures - urgently increased taxes in certain areas, collected arrears, or simply took out the surplus by force - police officers with Cossack detachments, OMON of those years. The main burden of confiscation lay on the poor. Rural rich usually bought off bribes.

A conscript with Cossacks enters the village in search of hidden grain.

Peasants massively sheltered bread. They were whipped, tortured, knocked out bread by any means. On the one hand, it was cruel and unfair, on the other, it helped to save their neighbors from starvation. Cruelty and injustice were in the fact that bread in the state was, albeit in small quantities, but it was exported, and a narrow circle of “efficient proprietors” was fattening from export.

Hunger in Russia. In the starving village troops entered. A Tatar peasant on her knees begs the constable.

“Together with spring, the most difficult time was actually coming. His bread, which the “deceivers” sometimes knew how to hide from the watchful eyes of the non-commissioned officers, from diligent medical assistants, from “searches and seizures”, almost completely disappeared almost everywhere. ”[2]

Grain loans and free canteens really saved a lot of people and alleviated suffering; without this, the situation would have been monstrous. But their coverage was limited and inadequate. In cases where bread assistance reached the hungry, it was often too late. People have already died or received irreparable health disorders, for the treatment of which needed qualified medical assistance. But in tsarist Russia there was a catastrophic lack of not only doctors, even medical assistants, not to mention medicines and means of fighting hunger. The situation was terrifying.

Distribution of corn to starving, d. Molvino, near Kazan

“... a boy is sitting on the stove, swollen from hunger, with a yellow face and conscious, sad eyes. In the hut there is pure bread from an increased loan (evidence in the eyes of the recently dominant system), but now, to restore an exhausted organism, one, even pure bread, is no longer enough. ”[2]

Perhaps Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy and Vladimir Galaktionovich Korolenko were writers, that is, sensitive and emotional people, this was an exception and exaggerated the scale of the phenomenon and in reality everything is not so bad?

Alas, foreigners who were in Russia in those years describe exactly the same thing, if not worse. Permanent hunger, periodically interspersed with cruel hungry pestilence was the terrible ordinariness of Tsarist Russia.

Hut starving peasant

Professor of Medicine and Doctor Emil Dillon lived in Russia from 1877 to 1914 a year, worked as a professor at several Russian universities, traveled extensively in all regions of Russia and saw the situation at all levels at all levels - from ministers to poor peasants. This is an honest scientist, completely disinterested in the distortion of reality.

Here is how he describes the life of an average peasant of the tsarist times: “The Russian peasant ... goes to bed at six or five in the evening in the winter, because he cannot spend money to buy kerosene for a lamp. He has no meat, eggs, butter, milk, often no cabbage, he lives mainly on black bread and potatoes. Does it live? He dies of hunger due to their insufficient number. ”[3]

The scientist-chemist and agronomist A.N. Engelhardt, lived in the village and left a classic fundamental research of the reality of the Russian village - “Letters from the village”:

"Anyone who knows the village, who knows the situation and the life of the peasants, does not need statistical data and calculations to know that we sell bread abroad not from an excess ... In a person from the intelligent class, such a doubt is understandable, because they simply can not believe how is it that people live without eating. In the meantime, this is true. Not that they didn’t eat at all, but were undernourished, they live from hand to mouth, they feed on all sorts of rubbish. Wheat, good pure rye, we send abroad, to the Germans, who will not eat any rubbish ... Our peasant-farmer lacks wheat bread for a child’s nipple, a woman’s rye crust that she eats, puts in a rag - suck. 4]

Somehow very much at odds with the pastoral paradise is not it?

Perhaps at the beginning of the century 20 century everything was fine, as some "patriots of Tsarist Russia" are saying now. Alas, this is absolutely not true.

According to the observations of Korolenko, a person engaged in helping starving people, in 1907, the situation in the village did not change, on the contrary, it became noticeably worse:

“Now (1906 — 7 year) in starving areas, fathers sell daughters to merchants of living goods. The progress of the Russian famine is obvious. ” [2]

Hunger in Russia. Roofs dismantled to straw feed cattle

“The migration wave is growing rapidly with the approach of spring. Chelyabinsk resettlement office registered for February 20 000 walkers, most of the starving gubernias. Typhus, smallpox, diphtheria are common among immigrants. Medical care is insufficient. There are only six canteens from Penza to Manchuria. ” The newspaper "Russian word" from 30 (17) March 1907 year [5]

- This refers to the hungry immigrants, that is, refugees from hunger, which were described above. It is completely obvious that the famine in Russia did not actually stop, and, by the way, Lenin, when he wrote that under a Soviet government the peasant first ate bread to the full, he did not exaggerate at all.

The 1913 was the largest crop in stories pre-revolutionary Russia, but hunger was all the same. He was especially cruel in Yakutia and the adjacent territories, where he never stopped with 1911. Local and central authorities had practically no interest in the problems of helping the starving. A number of villages died out completely. [6]

Are there any scientific statistics from those years? Yes, there are, they were summed up and they even openly wrote about hunger in encyclopedias.

“After the famine of 1891, covering a huge region in the provinces of 29, the lower Volga region constantly suffers from hunger: during the 20th century. Samara province starved 8 times, Saratov 9. Over the past thirty years, the largest hunger strikes relate to 1880 (Lower Volga region, part of the near-lake and Novorossiysk provinces) and to 1885 (New Russia and part of the non-Chernozem provinces from Kaluga to Pskov); then, following the 1891 famine, the 1892 famine began in the central and southeastern provinces, the hunger strikes of 1897 and 98. approximately in the same area; in the XX century. 1901 famine in 17 provinces of the center, south and east, 1905 hunger strike (22 provinces, including four non-chernozem, Pskov, Novgorod, Vitebsk, Kostroma) opening a whole series of hunger strikes: 1906, 1907, 1908 and XNXX . (mainly eastern, central provinces, Novorossiya) ”[1911]

Pay attention to the source - clearly not the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party. So, the encyclopedic dictionary is trivial and phlegmatic about an event well known in Russia - regular hunger. Hunger once in 5 years was commonplace. Moreover, it is directly said that the people in Russia were starving and at the beginning of the 20th century, that is, there was no question that the problem of permanent hunger was solved by the tsarist government.

"Crunch French bread", say? Would you like to return to such Russia, dear reader?

By the way, where does the bread loan come from? The fact is that there was bread in the state, but it was exported in large quantities abroad for sale. The picture was disgusting and surreal. American charities sent bread to the starving regions of Russia. But the export of bread taken from the starving peasants did not stop.

The cannibalistic expression “Unable to eat, but we will take it out” belongs to the Minister of Finance of the Government of Alexander III, Vyshnegradsky, by the way, a major mathematician. When A. S. Yermolov, the director of the department of non-assembly charges, handed a report to Vyshnegradsky in which he wrote about the “terrible sign of hunger”, the intelligent mathematician then responded and stated. And then repeated more than once.

Naturally, it turned out that some were undernourished, and gold was exported and received from exports - quite different. The famine under Alexander the Third became a perfect commonplace, the situation became noticeably worse than when his father, “the Tsar-Liberator.” But Russia began to intensively export bread, which its peasants lacked.

This is what they called it, not at all embarrassed - “hungry exports”. In a sense, hungry for peasants. Moreover, it was not Bolshevik propaganda that invented all this. It was the terrible reality of Tsarist Russia.

The removal continued even when, as a result of a poor harvest, the net per capita harvest was about 14 pounds at the critical level of hunger for Russia - 19,2 pud. 1891-92 starved over 30 millions of people. According to the official sharply understated data, 400 thousands of people died then, modern sources believe that more than half a million people died, given the poor registration of aliens, the death rate can be much higher. But "not fed up, but taken out."

The grain monopolists were well aware that their actions lead to a terrible famine and the death of hundreds of thousands of people. They did not care.

“Alexander III was annoyed by the mention of“ hunger ”, as a word invented by those who have nothing to eat. He very commanded to replace the word "hunger" with the word "crop failure". The Main Press Administration Directorate sent out a strict circular immediately. ”- wrote a well-known cadet lawyer and an opponent of the Bolsheviks Gruzenberg. By the way, for violation of the circular could absolutely no joke to go to jail. There were precedents. [9]

Under his royal son, Nikolai-2, the ban was relaxed, but when he was told about the famine in Russia, he was very indignant and demanded in no case to hear “about it when she deigned to dine.” True, for the majority of the people who were delighted to have one, forgive Lord, the ruler was not so happy with the dinners and they didn’t know the word “hunger” from stories:

“The peasant family, where per capita income was below 150 rubles (average level and below), should have been systematically faced with hunger. Based on this, it can be concluded that periodic hunger was largely typical of the majority of the peasant population. ”[10]

By the way, the average per capita income in those years was 102 ruble [11]. Do modern guardians of Tsarist Russia imagine well what the dry academic lines mean in reality?

"Systematically collide" ...

“With an average consumption close to the minimum norm, due to statistical variation, the consumption of half of the population is less than the average and less than the norm. And although the country was more or less supplied with bread in terms of production, the policy of forcing the export led to the fact that the average consumption balanced at the level of the hungry minimum and about half of the population lived in conditions of constant malnutrition ... ”[12]

Photo Caption: Hunger in Siberia. Photogr. snapshots from life taken in Omsk 21 July 1911, a member of the State. Duma Dzjubinsky.

First picture: The family of the widow cr. D. Puhovoy, Kurgan. w., V.F. Ruhlova, going to the harvest. In the harness foal for the second year and two boys on the tie. Behind - the eldest son, who fell from exhaustion.

The second photo: Kr. Tobol. lips., Tyukalin. w., Kamyshinsky par., the village of Karaulnaya, M. S. Bazhenov with his family, going to the harvest. Source: ISKRY JOURNAL, ELEVENTH YEAR, with the newspaper Russkoye Slovo. No. 37, Sunday, 25 September 1911.

And this is all a permanent, “background” hunger, all sorts of king-hunger, pestilence, crop failures - this is optional.

Due to the extremely backward agricultural technologies, the growth of the population was “eaten up” by the growth of labor productivity in agriculture, the country surely fell into a loop of “black dead end” from which it could not get out of the Romanov tsarist state system.

The minimum physiological minimum for feeding Russia: at least 19,2 puds per capita (15,3 puds - to people, 3,9 pounds - the minimum feed for cattle and poultry). The same number was the norm for the calculations of the USSR State Planning Committee of the beginning of the 1920-s. That is, under the Soviet government, it was planned that the average peasant should have had no less than this amount of bread. Such questions worried the royal authority a little.

Although, since the beginning of the twentieth century, the average consumption in the Russian Empire was finally critical 19,2 puds per person, but at the same time in a number of areas, the growth of grain consumption occurred against the background of a fall in consumption of other products.

Even this achievement (the minimum of physical survival) was ambiguous - according to calculations from 1888 to 1913, the average per capita consumption in the country decreased by at least 200 kcal. [10]

This negative dynamic is confirmed by the observations of not just “disinterested researchers” - ardent supporters of tsarism.

So one of the initiators of the creation of the monarchical organization "All-Russian National Union" Mikhail Osipovich Menshikov wrote in 1909 year:

"Every year, the Russian army is becoming increasingly sick and physically incapable ... Of the three guys, it is difficult to choose one who is fully fit for service ... Poor food in the village, roving living, early marriages requiring enhanced work in almost youthful age - these are the reasons of physical exhaustion ... It’s scary to say what kind of hardship a recruit sometimes undergoes deprivation of service About 40 percent. recruits almost the first time ate meat after entering military service. In the service of the soldiers, besides good bread, he eats excellent meat soup and porridge, i.e. what many people don’t have a clue about in the village ... ”[13]. Exactly the same data was given by the commander-in-chief, General V. Gurko, at the call from 1871 to 1901, informing that 40% of peasant guys are trying to get meat in the army for the first time in their lives.

That is, even ardent, fanatical supporters of the tsarist regime recognize that the food of the middle peasant was very poor, which led to massive illness and exhaustion.

“The western agricultural population mainly consumed high-calorie products of animal origin, the Russian peasant satisfied his need for food with the help of bread and potatoes with lower calorie content. Meat consumption is unusually low. In addition to the low energy value of such nutrition ... the consumption of a large mass of vegetable food, compensating for the lack of an animal, entails severe gastric diseases ”[10].

Hunger led to severe mass diseases and violent epidemics. [14] Even in pre-revolutionary studies of an official body (department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Empire), the situation looks terrible and shameful. [15] The study shows the mortality rate for 100 thousand people. for such diseases: in European countries and individual self-governing territories (for example, Hungary) within countries.

Mortality in all six major infectious diseases (smallpox, measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough, typhoid fever) was firmly, with a huge margin, Russia was leading at times.
1. Russia - 527,7 people.
2. Hungary - 200,6 people
3. Austria - 152,4 people.

The lowest total mortality rate for major diseases is Norway - 50,6 people. More than 10 times less than in Russia!

Mortality by disease:

Scarlet fever: 1-place - Russia - 134,8 people., 2-place - Hungary - 52,4 people. 3-place - Romania - 52,3 people.

Even in Romania and dysfunctional Hungary, the mortality rate is more than two times less than in Russia. For comparison, the lowest death rate from scarlet fever was in Ireland - 2,8 people.

Measles: 1. Russia - 106,2 people. 2 Spain - 45 pers. 3-e Hungary - 43,5 people. The lowest mortality from measles is Norway - 6 people, in impoverished Romania - 13 people. Again, the gap with the nearest neighbor in the list is more than double.

Typhoid: 1. Russia - 91,0 people. 2. Italy - 28,4 people. 3. Hungary - 28,0 people The smallest in Europe - Norway - 4 people. Under the typhus, by the way, in Russia, which we lost, we wrote off hunger losses. It was recommended to do to doctors - write off hungry typhus (bowel damage during fasting and associated diseases) as infectious. This was quite openly written in the newspapers. In general, the gap with the nearest neighbor in misfortune - almost 4 times. Someone, it seems, said that the Bolsheviks forged statistics? Oh well. And here at least fake, though not - the level of a poor African country.

It is not surprising that further the picture is almost the same.

Whooping cough: 1. Russia - 80,9 people. 2. Scotland - 43,3 pax 3. Austria - 38,4 people.

Smallpox: 1. Russia - 50,8 people. 2. Spain - 17,4 people. 3. Italy - 1,4 people. The difference with rather poor and backward agrarian Spain is almost 3 times. It is even better not to remember the leaders in eliminating this disease. The impoverished, oppressed by the Irish Ireland, from where people have fled by the thousands across the ocean - 0,03 people. It’s even indecent to talk about Sweden to 0,01 people on 100 thousands, that is, one of 10 millions. The difference is more than 5000 times.

The only thing in which the gap is not so terrible, just a little more than one and a half times - diphtheria: 1. Russia - 64,0 people. 2. Hungary - 39,8 people 3 Mortality - Austria - 31,4 people. The world leader of wealth and industrialization, only recently got rid of the Turkish yoke of Romania - 5,8 people.

“Children eat worse than calves from a master who has good livestock. The mortality of children is much greater than the mortality of calves, and if the owner, who has good livestock, had the mortality of calves as great as the mortality of children in a peasant, then it would be impossible to manage ... If mothers ate better, if our wheat, which the German eats, stayed at home, then the children would grow better and there would not be such a death rate, all these typhus, scarlet fever, diphtheria would not be rampant. By selling our wheat to the German, we sell our blood, that is, peasant children ”[16].

It is easy to calculate that in the Russian Empire only because of the increased incidence of hunger, disgusting medicine and hygiene, just like that, by the way, about a quarter of a million people died without a trace of snuff. This is the result of the incompetent and irresponsible government of Russia. And this is only if it were possible to improve the situation to the level of the most unsuccessful country of “classical” Europe in this respect - Hungary. If we reduce the gap to the level of a Central European country, only this would save about half a million lives a year. For all the 33 years of Stalin's rule in the USSR, torn apart by the consequences of civilian, brutal class struggle in society, several wars and their consequences were sentenced to death by a maximum of 800 thousand people (enforced significantly less, but so be it). So this number easily overlaps the entire 3-4 years of increased mortality in "Russia-which-we-lost."

Even the most ardent supporters of the monarchy did not speak, just shouted about the degeneration of the Russian people.

“A population that exists half-starved, and often just starving, cannot give strong children, especially if we add to this the unfavorable conditions in which, besides the lack of nutrition, a woman is during pregnancy and after it” [17].

“Stop, gentlemen, deceive yourself and cheat with reality! Do such purely zoological circumstances as lack of food, clothing, fuel and elementary culture mean nothing to the Russian common people? But they are reflected extremely expressively on the human type mischief in Great Russia, Byelorussia and Little Russia. It is a zoological unit - the Russian people in a multitude of places are engulfed in grinding and degeneration, which made us remember to lower the norm twice when recruiting to recruits. Another hundred years ago, the tallest army in Europe (Suvorov's “miraculous heroes”) - the current Russian army is already the smallest, and a terrifying percentage of recruits has to be rejected for service. Doesn't this “zoological” fact mean anything? Doesn't our shameful thing mean, nowhere in the world can we see child mortality, in which the vast majority of the living mass of the people live to a third of the human age? ”[18]

Even if we question the results of these calculations, it is obvious that the dynamics of changes in nutrition and labor productivity in the agriculture of Czarist Russia (and this was the overwhelming majority of the country's population) were completely insufficient for the rapid development of the country and the implementation of modern industrialization they would have nothing to feed in the conditions of tsarist Russia.

Maybe it was a general picture for that time and it was everywhere? And how did the geopolitical opponents of the Russian Empire feed at the beginning of the 20th century? Something like this, data for Nefedov [12]:

The French, for example, consumed more grain in 1,6 than Russian peasants. And this is in a climate where grapes and palm trees grow. If in the numerical dimension the Frenchman ate 33,6 pounds of grain per year, producing 30,4 pounds and importing more 3,2 pounds per person. The German consumed 27,8 pounds, producing 24,2, only in the dysfunctional Austria-Hungary, which lived to the last years the consumption of cereals was 23,8 pounds per capita.

The Russian peasant consumed less meat in 2 times less than in Denmark and in 7-8 times less than in France. Milk Russian peasants drank in 2,5 times less than the Dane and in 1,3 times less than the Frenchman.

The Russian peasant ate eggs from as many as 2,7 (!) G per day, while the Danish peasant eaten 30 g and the French, 70,2 g per day.

By the way, dozens of chickens among Russian peasants appeared only after the October Revolution and Collectivization. Before that, feeding chickens with grain, which your children lack, was too extravagant. Therefore, all researchers and contemporaries say the same thing - Russian peasants were forced to fill their stomachs with all sorts of rubbish - bran, quinoa, acorns, bark, even sawdust, so that the hunger pangs were not so painful. In fact, it was not an agricultural, but a society engaged in farming and gathering. Approximately as in not the most developed societies of the Bronze Age. The difference with the developed European countries was just terrible.

“Wheat, good pure rye, we send abroad, to the Germans, who will not eat any rubbish. We burn the best, pure rye for wine, and the most bad rye, with fluff, bonfire, Sivec and all otboh, obtained when cleaning rye for distilleries - that is what a man eats. But not only does a man eat the worst bread, he is still undernourished. ... from bad food, people lose weight, they are sick, the guys grow tighter, quite similar to what happens with fool-containing cattle ... "

What it means in reality is an academic dry expression: “consumption of half of the population is less than the average and less than the norm” and “half of the population lived in conditions of constant malnutrition”, this is: Hunger. Dystrophy. Every fourth child who did not live to even a year. Fading children.

It was especially hard for children. In the case of hunger, it is more rational for the population to leave the necessary food for workers, reducing it to dependents, which obviously include children unable to work.

As the researchers frankly write, “Children of all ages who under all conditions have a systematic calorie deficit.” [10]

“At the end of the 19th century, 5 from 550 born children survived to 1000 age, whereas in most Western European countries more than 700. Before the Revolution, the situation improved somewhat -“ only ”400 children from 1000 died.” [19]

With an average 7,3 child birth, there was almost no single family for a woman (family) in which several children would not die. What could not fail to be deposited in the national psychology.

Constant hunger had a very strong influence on the social psychology of the peasantry. Including, - on the real relation to children. L.N. During the 1912 famine of the year in the Volga region, Liperovsky was engaged in organizing food and medical aid to the population, testifies: “In the village of Ivanovka there is one very nice, large and friendly peasant family; all the children of this family are extremely beautiful; Somehow I went to them in the trash; in the cradle the child screamed and the mother shook the cradle with such force that she threw up to the ceiling; I told my mother what harm such a child could have from such a swing. “May the Lord have tidied up at least one ... And yet this is one of the good and kind women in the village” [20].

“From 5 to 10 years, the Russian mortality is about 2 times higher than European, and up to 5 years - higher by an order of magnitude ... The mortality rate of children older than one year is also several times higher than that of Europe” [15].

Caption: Aksyutka, satisfying hunger, chews white refractory clay, which has a sweetish taste. (v. Patrovka, Buzuluk. y.)

Over 1880-1916 The excess mortality of children compared with more than a million children a year. That is, with 1890 under 1914, the year only because of the incompetent state administration in Russia died about a snuff of about 25 of millions of children. This is the population of Poland in those years, if it had died out completely. If you add to them an adult population that does not live up to the average level, then the total numbers will be simply terrifying.

This is the result of the management of tsarism in "Russia-which-we-lost."

By the end of 1913, the main indicators of public well-being, quality of food and medicine - life expectancy and infant mortality in Russia were at an African level. Average life expectancy for 1913 year - 32,9 year Melyantsev V.A. East and West in the second millennium: economy, history and modernity. - M., 1996. While in England - 52 years, France - 50 years, Germany - 49 years, Central European - 49 years. [21]

According to this most important indicator of the quality of life in the state, Russia was at the level of Western countries somewhere in the beginning and middle of the 18 century, lagging behind them by about two centuries.

Even rapid economic growth between 1880 and 1913. on not reduced this lag. Progress in increasing life expectancy was very slow - in Russia in 1883 - 27,5 years, in 1900 year - 30 years. This shows the effectiveness of the social system as a whole - agriculture, economics, medicine, culture, science, and political structure. But this slow growth associated with an increase in the literacy of the population and the spread of the simplest sanitary knowledge [12] led to an increase in the population and, as a result, a decrease in land plots and an increase in the number of “mouths”. An extremely dangerous unstable situation arose from which there was no way out without a radical reorganization of social relations.

However, even such a small life expectancy is only for the best years, during the years of mass epidemics and hunger strikes, life expectancy was even shorter in 1906, 1909-1911, as even biased researchers say, life expectancy “for women did not fall below 30, but in men, it is lower than 28 years. ” [22] What can I say, what is the reason for pride - the average life expectancy of 29 years in 1909-1911.

Only the Soviet authorities radically improved the situation. So just after 5 years after the Civil War, the average life expectancy in the RSFSR was 44. [23]. While during the 1917 war, it was 32 of the year, and during the Civil years it was about 20 years.

The Soviet Power, even without taking into account the Civil War, made progress compared with the best year of tsarist Russia, adding over 5 years more than 11 years of life per person, while Tsarist Russia over the same time during the years of greatest progress - just 2,5 years over 13 years. By the most unfair calculation.

It is interesting to see how Russia, starving itself, “fed the whole of Europe,” as some peculiar citizens are trying to convince us. The picture of "feeding Europe" is as follows:

With an exceptional combination of weather conditions and the highest yield for tsarist Russia, 1913, the Russian Empire exported 530 million pounds of all grains, which amounted to 6,3% of European countries (8,34 billion pounds). [24] That is, there can be no talk that Russia fed not only Europe, but even half of Europe. [25]

Grain imports are generally very characteristic of developed industrialized European countries - they have been doing this since the end of the 19 century and are not at all stiff. But for some reason, even there is no talk about inefficiency and agriculture in the West. Why is this happening? Very simple - the added value of industrial products is significantly higher than the added value of agricultural products. With a monopoly on any industrial products, the manufacturer’s position becomes exceptional at all - if someone needs, for example, machine guns, boats, airplanes or telegraph, and no one has them except for you, then you can wind up just a mad rate of return After all, if someone has such urgently needed things in the modern world, then there are none, it’s not a question of doing this quickly. And wheat can be produced even in England, even in China, even in Egypt, from which its nutritional properties will change little. Do not buy Western captain wheat in Egypt, no problem - buy in Argentina.

Therefore, when choosing what is more profitable to produce and export - modern industrial products or grain, it is much more profitable to produce and export industrial products, if, of course, you know how to produce them. If you do not know how and need foreign currency, then all that remains is to export grain and raw materials. What tsarist Russia was engaged in and the post-Soviet EEF, which destroyed its modern industry, deals with it. Simply, skilled workers give a much higher rate of return in modern industry. And if you need grain in order to feed a bird or cattle, you can buy it, for example, by exporting expensive cars. Grain can produce very much, but modern equipment is far from all and the competition is incomparably less.

Therefore, Russia was forced to export grain to the industrial West to get the currency. However, over time, Russia clearly lost its position as an exporter of grain.

From the beginning of the 90 of the 19 of the century, the United States of America, which was rapidly developing and using new agricultural technologies, ousted Russia from the place of the main wheat exporter in the world. Very quickly, the gap became such that Russia couldn’t make up what was lost already - 41,5% of the market was firmly held by the Americans, Russia's share dropped to 30,5.%

All this despite the fact that the population of the United States in those years was less than 60% of the Russian - 99 versus 171 million in Russia (without Finland). [25]

Even the total population of the United States, Canada and Argentina was only 114 million - 2 / 3 from the population of the Russian Empire. Contrary to the widespread misconception lately, in 1913, Russia did not exceed these three countries in the aggregate in wheat production (which would be unsurprising to have one and a half times the population employed, mainly in agriculture), but was inferior to them, and in the general collection cereal yielded even to the United States. [26] And this is despite the fact that while the agricultural production of the Russian Empire employed almost 80% of the country's population, of which at least 60-70 million people were employed, and in the USA only about 9 million. The USA and Canada were at the head of the scientific and technological revolution in agriculture, making wide use of chemical fertilizers, modern machines and new, competent crop rotation and highly productive grain varieties and confidently squeezed Russia out of the market.

In collecting grain per capita, the United States was ahead of Tsarist Russia by two, Argentina — by three, Canada — by four times. [24,25] In reality, the situation was very sad and the situation in Russia was getting worse - it was lagging more and more behind the world level.

By the way, they began to reduce the export of grain and the USA, but for another reason - before the First World War they had a rapid development of more profitable industrial production and with a small population (less than 100 million), workers began to move into industry.

Actively began to develop modern agricultural technologies and Argentina, quickly squeezing Russia out of the grain market. Russia, “which fed the whole of Europe”, exported grain and bread in general, almost as much as Argentina, although the population of Argentina was 21,4 times smaller than the population of the Russian Empire!

The USA exported a large amount of high-quality wheat flour, and Russia, as usual - grain. Alas, the situation was the same as with the export of raw materials.

Soon, Germany ousted Russia from the seemingly unshakable first place exporter of the traditionally main bread culture of Russia - rye. But in general, in the total amount of “classical five grain” exported, Russia continued to hold the first place in the world (22,1%). Although there was no question of any unconditional domination, and it was clear that the years of Russia as the world's largest exporter of cereals were already numbered and would soon be irretrievably gone. So Argentina’s market share was already 21,3%. [26]

Tsarist Russia lagged behind its competitors in agriculture more and more.

And now about how Russia fought for its market share. High quality grain? Reliability and stability of supply? Not at all - a very low price.

An agricultural economist-emigrant P. I. Lyashchenko in 1927 wrote in his work on the end of 19-beginning of 20 century devoted to grain exports in Russia: “The most good and expensive buyers did not take Russian bread. Russian clean and high-grade grains of monotonous high standards, American strict trade organization, supply and price exposure Russian exporters contrasted clogged grain (often with direct abuse), multi-grade, not corresponding to trade patterns, thrown out on the foreign market without any system and exposure at the least a favorable conjuncture, often in the form of goods, unsold and only in the way of a seeking buyer. ” [26]

Therefore, Russian merchants had to play at the proximity of the market, price polls, etc. In Germany, for example, Russian grain was sold cheaper than world prices: wheat for 7-8 cop., Rye for 6-7 cop., Oats for 3-4 cop. for pood. - ibid

Here they are, "beautiful Russian merchants" - "excellent entrepreneurs", nothing to say. It turns out that they were unable to organize the cleaning of grain, nor the stability of supply, could not determine the market conditions. But in the sense of squeezing the grains of peasant children, they were experts.

And where, I wonder, were the proceeds from the sale of Russian bread?

For a typical 1907 year, the income from the sale of bread abroad amounted to 431 million rubles. Of these, 180 millions were spent on luxury items for aristocracy and landowners. 140 of millions of Russian nobles left the crusty French bread left abroad - they spent at the resorts of Baden-Baden, prokutili in France, lost in the casino, bought real estate in "civilized Europe". Efficient owners have spent as much as one sixth of their income (58 million rubles) [12] from the sale of grain taken from starving peasants to modernize Russia.

Translated into Russian, this means that the “effective managers” took bread from a starving peasant, exported them abroad, and drank up the gold rubles received for human lives in Parisian taverns and blew them into the casino. It was to ensure the profits of such bloodsuckers that Russian children died of starvation.

The question of whether the tsarist regime could carry out the rapid industrialization necessary for Russia with such a control system did not even make sense here - this is out of the question. This is, in essence, a verdict on the entire socio-economic policy of tsarism, and not only agrarian.

How did you manage to pump food from an undernourished country? The main suppliers of marketable grain were large landowners and kulak farms, held at the expense of cheap wage labor of small-scale peasants who were forced to hire workers for pennies.

Exports led to the ousting of crops, traditional for Russia, that were in demand abroad. This is a classic sign of a third world country. In the same way, in all sorts of "banana republics" all the best lands are divided between Western corporations and local latifundist compradors, cheaply bananas and other tropical products, which are then exported to the West, for nothing. And the locals simply do not have enough good land for production.

The desperate situation of famine in the Russian Empire was completely obvious. It is now that there are peculiar gentlemen explaining to everyone how, it turns out, it was good to live in Tsarist Russia.

Ivan Solonevich, an ardent monarchist and anti-Soviet, thus described the situation in the Russian Empire before the Revolution:

“The fact of Russia's extreme economic backwardness compared to the rest of the cultural world is beyond doubt. According to 1912 figures, the per capita national income was: in the USA (USA - PK) 720 rubles (in gold pre-war terms), in England - 500, in Germany - 300, in Italy - 230 and in Russia - 110. So, the average Russian before World War I was almost seven times poorer than the average American and more than twice as poor as the average Italian. Even bread - our main wealth - was poor. If England consumed per capita 24 pounds, Germany - 27 pounds, and the USA - whole 62 pounds, then Russian bread consumption was only 21,6 pounds, including all this and for livestock feed (Solonevich uses somewhat overstated data - PK) At the same time, it is necessary to take into account that in the diet of Russia bread occupied such a place as it did not occupy anywhere else in other countries. In the richest countries of the world, like the USA, England, Germany and France, bread was supplanted by meat and dairy products and fish — fresh and canned ... ”[27]

S. Y. Witte stressed at the ministerial meeting in 1899: “If we compare consumption in Europe and us, then the average per capita in Russia will be one-fourth or one-fifth of what other countries recognize as necessary for normal existence” [28 ]

These are not the words of anyone, Minister of Agriculture 1915 – 1916. A. N. Naumov, a very reactionary monarchist, and not at all a Bolshevik and a revolutionary: “Russia does not actually emerge from the state of famine in one or another province, either before the war or during the war.” [29] And then it follows: “bread speculation, predation, bribery flourish; grain agents supply agents make a fortune without leaving the telephone. And against the background of complete poverty of some - the insane luxury of others. Two steps away from convulsions of starvation - orgy of satiety. Around the estates of those in power, the villages are dying out. Meanwhile, they are busy building new villas and palaces. ”

In addition to the “hungry” comprador exports, the permanent famine in the Russian Empire had two more serious reasons - one of the lowest yields in most crops [12] in the world due to climate specifics, extremely backward agricultural technologies [30], which led to a large area of ​​land, land available for processing by antediluvian technologies in a very short period of Russian sowing was extremely insufficient and the situation only worsened with the growth of the population. As a result, there was a shortage of land in the Russian Empire - a very small amount of peasant allotment.

By the beginning of the twentieth century, the situation in the village of the Russian Empire began to acquire a critical character.

So, just for example, on the Tver lips. 58% of the peasants had put on, as bourgeois economists call it elegantly, “below the subsistence minimum.” Are the supporters of Russia-who-we-lost understand well what it means in reality?

“Look in any village, where hungry and cold poverty prevails. The peasants live almost together with the cattle in the same living space. What are their allotments? They live on 1 tithing, on 1 / 2 tithing, on 1 / 3 tithing, and from such a small scrap you have to bring up 5, 6 and even 7 souls of the family ... ”1906 Duma meeting [31] Volyn peasant - Danilyuk

At the beginning of the twentieth century, the social situation in the countryside radically changed. If before this, even during the times of the cruel famine of 1891-92, there was practically no protest - the dark, downtrodden, completely illiterate, dumbfounded by the clergymen, the peasants dutifully chose the bag and starved to death, e years 57 century, then by 90 began mass peasant performances. Their characteristic feature was that it was necessary to protest the peasants of one village, as several nearby villages immediately flared up. [19] This shows a very high level of social tension in the Russian countryside.

The situation continued to deteriorate, the agrarian population grew, and the brutal Stolypin reforms led to the ruin of a large mass of peasants, who had nothing to lose, complete hopelessness and hopelessness of their existence, not least because of the gradual spread of literacy and the activities of revolutionary enlighteners, as well as a marked weakening of the influence of churchmen due to the gradual development of education.

The peasants tried desperately to reach the government, trying to tell about their cruel and hopeless life. Peasants, they were no longer wordless victims. Mass performances began, land squatting of landlords and equipment, etc. They did not touch the landlords, as a rule, they did not enter their homes.

The materials of the courts, peasant orders and appeals show the extreme degree of despair of the people in "God-saved Russia." From the materials of one of the first ships:

“... When the victim Fesenko appealed to the crowd who had come to rob him, asking why they want to ruin him, accused Zaitsev said,“ You have one 100 tithe, and we have 1 tithing * per family. Would you try to live on one tithe of land ... "

the accused ... Kiyan: “Let me tell you about our manly, unhappy life. I have a father and 6 minors (without a mother) children and have to live with a manor in 3 / 4 tithe and 1 / 4 tithe field land. We pay for the grazing of a cow ... 12 rubles, and for tithing under bread, 3 tithing of harvesting must be worked. We do not live like that, - continued Kiyan. - We are in the loop. What do we do? We, men, appealed everywhere ... nowhere they accept us, nowhere are we no help ”; [32]

The situation began to develop in an incremental manner, and by 1905, mass demonstrations had already captured half of the country's provinces. A total of 1905 peasant uprisings were recorded for 3228. The country was openly talking about the peasant war against the landlords.

“In a number of places in the autumn of 1905, the peasant community assumed all power and even declared complete disobedience to the state. The most striking example is the Markov Republic in the Volokolamsk district of the Moscow province, which existed from October 31 1905 on July 16 1906. ”[32]

For the tsarist government, all this turned out to be a big surprise - the peasants suffered, submissively starving for decades, and they suffered on you. It is worth emphasizing that the speeches of the peasants were, in the absolute majority of them peaceful, they did not, in principle, kill anyone and not kolech. Maximum - could beat the clerks and the landowner. But after the mass punitive operations, the mansions began to burn, but still they tried with all their might not to suffer from the bane. Frightened and embittered, the tsarist government began brutal punitive operations against its people.

“At that time, blood flowed exclusively from one side - the blood of the peasants flowed during punitive actions by the police and the troops, while executing the death sentences of the“ instigators ”of speeches ... The merciless reprisal of the peasant" self-government "became the first and main principle of state policy in the revolutionary village. Here is a typical order of the Minister of Internal Affairs P. Evil to the Kiev Governor-General. "... destroy immediately, by force weapons the rebels, and in the case of resistance - to burn their homes ... Arrests now do not reach the goal: hundreds and thousands of people cannot be tried. ” The instructions of the Tambov vice-governor to the police command were quite consistent with these instructions: “arrest less, shoot more ...” Governor-General in the Ekaterinoslav and Kursk gubernias acted even more decisively, resorting to shelling of the insurgent population. The first of them sent a warning on the volosts: "Those villages and villages, whose inhabitants allow themselves any violence over private economy and lands, will be fired upon by artillery fire, which will cause the destruction of houses and fires." In the Kursk province, a warning was also sent out that in such cases "all the dwellings of such a society and all its property will be ... destroyed."

Developed a specific procedure for the implementation of violence from the top while suppressing violence from below. In Tambov Governorate, for example, on arrival in the village, punitive men collected an adult male population for a gathering and offered to extradite instigators, leaders and participants in the unrest, to return the property of landowner economies. Failure to comply with these requirements often entailed a volley through the crowd. The dead and wounded were evidence of the seriousness of the demands put forward. After that, depending on the fulfillment or non-fulfillment of the requirements, the courtyards (residential and outbuildings) of the issued “guilty”, or the village as a whole, were burned. However, Tambov landowners were not satisfied with the improvised reprisals against the rebels and demanded the imposition of martial law throughout the province and the use of field martial law.

Widespread use of corporal punishment of the population of insurgent villages and villages marked in August 1904 was noted everywhere. In the actions of the punishers, morals and norms of serf slavery were revived.

Sometimes they say: see how little the royal counter-revolution killed in 1905 - 1907. and how much - the revolution after 1917. However, the blood shed by the state machine of violence in 1905-1907. it is necessary to compare, first of all, with the bloodlessness of the Peasant uprisings of that time. The absolute condemnation of the executions committed then over the peasants, which was so forcefully expressed in the article by L. Tolstoy "[32]

This is how the situation of those years was described by one of the most qualified specialists in the history of the Russian peasantry V.P. Danilov, he was an honest scientist, personally hostile to the Bolsheviks, a radical anti-Stalinist.

The new Minister of Internal Affairs in the government of Goremykin, and later - the pre-Council (head of Government) - liberal Pyotr Arkadyevich Stolypin thus explained the position of the tsarist government: "The government in order to defend itself has the right to" suspend all legal norms. [33] When the “state of necessary defense” comes, any means and even the subordination of the state to “one will, the will of one person” is justified.

The tsarist government, not at all embarrassed, “suspended all the norms of law”. Only on the verdicts of the field courts were hung from August 1906 to April 1907 1102 rebel. Extrajudicial massacres were a mass practice - the peasants were shot without even figuring out who he was, burying, in the case with the inscription “besfamilny”. It was in those years that the Russian proverb appeared “they will kill and no surnames will be asked”. How many such accidents have died - nobody knows.

The speeches were suppressed, but only for a while. The brutal suppression of the 1905-1907 revolution led to the desacralization and delegitimization of power. The remote consequences of this were the ease with which both revolutions of 1917 took place.

The failed 1905-1907 revolution did not solve either the land or food problems of Russia. The brutal suppression of the desperate people drove the situation deeper. But the tsarist government failed, and did not want to take advantage of the resulting respite, and the situation was such that emergency measures were already needed. Which, in the end, the government had to spend the Bolsheviks.

An indisputable conclusion follows from the analysis: the fact of major food problems, the constant malnutrition of most of the peasants and the frequent regular famine in Czarist Russia in the late 19th - early 20th centuries. no doubt. Systematic malnutrition of a large part of the peasantry and frequent outbreaks of famine was thoroughly discussed in the journalism of those years, with most authors emphasizing the systemic nature of the food problem in the Russian Empire. In the end, this led to three revolutions during the 12 years.

There was not a sufficient amount of cultivated land to provide all the peasants of the Russian Empire in circulation, and only agricultural mechanization and the use of modern agricultural technologies could give them. All together, this constituted a single, interconnected set of problems, where one problem was insoluble without the other.

The peasants were well aware of their lack of land on their own skin and the “question of the land” was the key, without him talking about all sorts of agricultural technologies would lose their meaning:

“It’s impossible to keep silent about that, - he said that the peasant / 79 / population was accused a lot here by some speakers, as if these people were incapable of anything, worthless and not suitable for anything at all, that their culture was the work is also seemingly excessive, etc. But, yrs., think; What should peasants use this culture on if they have 1 - 2 dess. There will never be any culture. ”[31] MP, Gerasimenko peasant (Volyn province), 1906 Duma meeting

By the way, the reaction of the tsarist government to the “wrong” Duma was unpretentious — it was dispersed, but the peasants did not increase the land and the situation in the country remained, in fact, critical.

That was common, the usual publications of those years:

27 (14) April 1910
TOMSK, 13, IV. In Sudzhenskoy parish in migrant villages hunger. Several families died out.
For three months now, the settlers have been feeding on a mixture of mountain ash and rot with flour. Food assistance is needed.
TOMSK, 13, IV. In the resettlement warehouses in the area Anuchinsky and Imansky found waste. According to reports from the field, something terrible is happening in these areas. Migrants go hungry. Live in the mud. Earn no.

20 (07) July 1910 of the year
TOMSK, 6, VII. Due to chronic hunger, in 36-ti villages of the Yenisei district among the migrants there is rampant typhus, as well as scurvy. The mortality rate is high. The settlers feed on surrogates, drink swamp water. From the composition of the epidemic squad, infect two nurses.

18 (05) September 1910 of the year
KRASNOYARSK, 4, IX. In the entire Minusinsk district at the present time, due to the poor harvest this year, famine. The settlers ate all their cattle. By order of the Yenisei governor, a consignment of bread was sent to the county. However, this bread is not enough, and half of the hungry. Emergency assistance is required.

February 10 (January 28) Year 1911
SARATOV, 27, I. Received the news of hungry typhus in Alexandrov Gay, Novouzensk district, where the population suffers terrible need. This year, the peasants collected only 10 pounds per tithing. After three months of correspondence, a nutritional point is established.

01 April (19 March) 1911 of the year
RYBINSK, 18, III. The village headman Karagin, 70- years, contrary to the prohibition of the foreman, gave the peasants of the Spasskaya parish a little extra grain from the grain store. This "crime" led him to the dock. At the trial, Karagin explained with tears that he had done this out of pity for the starving peasants. The court fined him three rubles.

There were no grain reserves in case of a crop failure - all the excess bread was swept away and sold abroad by greedy grain monopolists. Therefore, in the case of crop failure, famine immediately arose. Even a peasant-middle peasant did not have enough harvest for a small plot for two years, so if there was a crop failure for two years in a row, or an overlap of events occurred between a worker, a cattle, a fire, etc. and the peasant was ruined or fell into hopeless bondage to the kulak — the rural capitalist and the speculator. Risks in the climatic conditions of Russia with backward agricultural technologies were extremely high. Thus, there was a massive ruin of the peasants, whose lands were bought up by speculators and rich rural residents who used hired labor or rented out their livestock to the kulaks. Only they had enough land and resources to create the necessary reserve in case of famine. For them, crop failure and famine were manna from heaven — the whole village turned out to be due to them, and soon they had the necessary amount of completely ruined farm laborers - their neighbors.

A peasant who was ravaged by a poor harvest, left without everything, with only one plow. (p. Slavyanka, Nikol. at.) 1911

“Along with low yields, one of the economic prerequisites of our hunger strikes is the lack of land security for the peasants. According to the well-known calculations of Mares in chernozem Russia, 68% of the population do not receive enough bread from the allotment land for food even in good years and are forced to produce food by renting land and earning money. ”[34]

As we can see, by the year the encyclopedic dictionary was published - the last peaceful year of the Russian Empire, the situation had not changed and had no tendencies to change in a positive direction. This is also clearly seen from the statements of the Minister of Agriculture, cited above and subsequent research.

The food crisis in the Russian Empire was precisely systemic, intractable under the existing sociopolitical system. The peasants could not feed themselves, not only the cities that had grown up, where, according to Stolypin's idea, the masses of ruined, shabby and dispossessed people who agreed to any kind of work could rush to. The massive ruin of the peasants and the destruction of the community led to death and terrible mass deprivations, followed by popular demonstrations. A large proportion of the workers led a semi-peasant existence to somehow survive. This did not contribute to the growth of their qualifications, the quality of their products, or the mobility of labor.

The reason for the constant hunger in the socio-economic structure of tsarist Russia, without changing the socio-economic structure and management method, was the task of getting rid of hunger was unsolvable. The greedy pack at the head of the country continued its “hungry export”, filling its pockets with gold at the expense of Russian children who died of starvation and blocked any attempts to change the situation. The highest elite of the country and the most powerful landowner lobby of hereditary nobles, who had completely degenerated by the beginning of the 20 century, were interested in exporting grain. They were not interested in industrial development and technical progress. Personally, they had enough gold from grain exports and the sale of the country's resources for a luxurious life.

The sheer inadequacy, helplessness, venality and outright stupidity of the country's top leaders left no hope for resolving the crisis.

Moreover, no plans were even made to solve this problem. In fact, since the end of the 19 century, the Russian Empire was constantly on the verge of a terrible social explosion, resembling a building with spilled gasoline, where there was a sufficient spark for the catastrophe, but the owners didn’t care much.

An indicative moment in the police report on Petrograd from 25 on January 1917 was warned that "The spontaneous speeches of the hungry masses will be the first and last stage on the way to the beginning of the senseless and merciless excesses of the most terrible of all - the anarchist revolution" [10]. By the way, anarchists did participate in the Military Revolutionary Committee, which arrested the Provisional Government in October 1917.

At the same time, the king and his family led a relaxed sybaric life, it is very significant that in the diary of Empress Alexandra at the beginning of February 1917 she talks about children who “rush around the city and shout that they have no bread, and this is just for to cause excitement ”[10].

Just amazing. Even in the face of disaster, when only a few days remained before the February Revolution, the country's elite did not understand anything and did not want to understand it in principle. In such cases, either the country dies, or society finds the strength to change the elite to a more adequate one. It happens that turns and more than once. It happened in Russia.

The systemic crisis in the Russian Empire led to what should have led - the February Revolution, and then another, when it became clear that the Provisional Government was unable to solve the problem, then another - the October Revolution, which was held under the slogan "Land to the Peasants!" The new leadership of the country had to address critical management issues that the previous leadership was unable to resolve.


1. Tolstoy L.N. Complete Works in 90 Volumes, Academic Jubilee Edition, Volume 29
2. V. G. Korolenko “In the famine year” Observations and diary notes Collected works in ten volumes.
3. Emile Dillon
4. A.N. Engelhardt From the village. 12 letters. 1872 – 1887. SPb., 1999.
5. The newspaper "Russian word" from 30 (17) March 1907,
7. New Encyclopedic Dictionary / Pod obshch. ed. Acad. K.K.Arseneva. T.14. SPb .: F.A.Brokgauz and I.A.Efron, 1913. Stb.xnumx.
8. Nefedov "Demographic-structural analysis of the socio-economic history of Russia. The end of the 15th –beginning of the 20th century ”
9. O. O. Gruzenberg. Yesterday. Memories. Paris, 1938, p. 27
11. Vishnevsky A.G. Sickle and ruble. Conservative modernization in the USSR. 1998 p.13
12. S.A. Nefedov. "On the causes of the Russian revolution." Collection "Problems of Mathematical History", URSS, 2009
13. Menshikov M.O. Youth and the army. 13 October 1909 g. // Menshikov M.O. From letters to neighbors. M., 1991. C.109, 110.
14. B. P. Urlanis. Population growth in Europe (Experience of calculus). BM: OGIZ-Gospolitizdat, 1941. C. 341.
15. Novoselsky "Mortality and life expectancy in Russia." PETROGRADE Printing house of the Ministry of the Interior 1916
16. Engelhardt A.N. From the village. 12 letters. 1872 – 1887. SPb., 1999. C.351 – 352, 353, 355.
17. Sokolov DA, Grebenshchikov V.I. Mortality in Russia and the fight against it. SPb., 1901. C.30.
18. Menshikov M.O. National Convention 23 January 1914. // Menshikov M.O. From letters to neighbors. M., 1991. C.158.
19. Prokhorov, B. B. Russians health over 100 years // Man. 2002. No.2. C.57.
20.L. N. Liperovsky. Hunger trip. Notes of a member of the Volga Region starving relief squad (1912)
21. Rosset E. Duration of human life. M. 1981
22. Adamets S. Mortality crises in the first half of the twentieth century in Russia and Ukraine.
23. Urlanis B. U. Birth rate and life expectancy in the USSR. M., 1963. with. 103-104
24. Collection of statistical and economic data on agriculture of Russia and foreign countries. Tenth year. Petrograd, 1917. C.114 – 116. 352 – 354, 400 – 463.
25. I. Pykhalov Did Russia feed half of Europe?
26. In the 1082th century, Russia had a chance to become the world's largest grain exporter
27. I.L. Solonevich People's Monarchy M .: ed. Phoenix, 1991. C.68
28. Minutes of the speeches of Minister of Finance S. Yu. Vitte and Minister of Foreign Affairs M. N. Muravyov at a ministerial meeting chaired by Nicholas II on the grounds for the current Russian commercial and industrial policy.
29. A.N. Naumov Cit. MK Kasvinov Twenty-three steps down. M .: Thought, 1978. C. 106
30. Russia 1913 year Statistical and documentary reference. Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Russian History St. Petersburg 1995
31. Aron Avreh. P.A. Stolypin and the fate of reforms in Russia Chapter III. Agrarian reform
32. V.P. Danilov. The Peasant Revolution in Russia, 1902 - 1922
33. Aron Avreh. P.A. Stolypin and the fate of reforms in Russia Chapter I. Agrarian reform
34. New encyclopedic dictionary. Under total ed. Acad. K.K.Arseneva. T.14. SPb .: F.A.Brokgauz and I.A.Efron, 1913. Stb.41 – 42.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dimani
    Dimani 14 February 2013 08: 32 New
    pictures are mainly of foreign origin ... what
    1. Papakiko
      Papakiko 14 February 2013 09: 11 New
      How does the "administration" pass such nonsense !?
      Across the Urals, only DRESSERS and LITTLES could starve; the forest and taiga fed the people for more than a thousand years.
      Hunger in Russia. In the starving village troops entered. A Tatar peasant on her knees begs the constable.
      Next is the full TROLLING-FLUDDING and just p3 / 14. hi
      1. Dimych
        Dimych 14 February 2013 09: 30 New
        There at the end of the article is a list of literature, including pre-revolutionary. Read sometime at your leisure.
        1. Yoshkin Kot
          Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 38 New
          do you think the tojs have not yet been? yes, leva is a thick, well-known Russophobe, he has his own ocean of Russian blood on it, which will spill later

          It is enough to analyze the demographic statistics for the first half of the 1921th century and notice an extremely indicative moment for the truly "million" in terms of the number of victims of the Soviet Holodomors - 22-1931, 33-1946, 48-XNUMX - a complete cessation of the country's population growth, and then leaving growth indicators in minus + a sharp drop in life expectancy indicators.
          fromLegacy = true [/ img]
          1. Avenger711
            Avenger711 14 February 2013 12: 30 New
            First, you, as usual, are lying unscrupulously. And the number of victims is the so-called. famine in general can be near zero. Before releasing pearls about the millions of victims, I advise you to think about the same German occupation, when the German did not leave anything in the village. And life expectancy in the USSR never fell, as did population growth.

            Secondly, it makes no sense to deny that the regime swept away by the revolution has completely decayed. No foreign agents can destroy a healthy state.

            Thirdly, people like you have already zadolbali, get them any statistics they want, they will still keep repeating about "evil Bolsheviks".
            1. Trapperxnumx
              Trapperxnumx 14 February 2013 13: 05 New
              Quote: Avenger711
              Secondly, it makes no sense to deny that the regime swept away by the revolution has completely decayed. No foreign agents can destroy a healthy state.

              Then you yourself admit that what appeared later (the USSR) turned out to be even worse and "rotten", for the Empire "rotted" for 300 years, and the USSR "only" 70.
            2. Nicholas C.
              Nicholas C. 14 February 2013 13: 17 New
              Leo Tolstoy - Masons promoted and excommunicated. To put it mildly, a dubious source.

              And as communists, against the background of everything written, they explain a simple truth. Under the kings, almost every family raised 10 or more children. And somehow it was growing. The population of Russia grew at a gigantic pace.

              And under the Bolsheviks, a demographic catastrophe occurred.
              1. Prometey
                Prometey 14 February 2013 13: 28 New
                Nikolay S.
                The demographic catastrophe happened because of the First World War and the Civil War, and then during the Second World War - what does the Bolsheviks have to do with it? About 10 children in each family, you exaggerate - an average of 2 to 4 children. Families of more than 5 children were rare.
                1. fzr1000
                  fzr1000 14 February 2013 13: 43 New
                  Often ...
                2. Nicholas C.
                  Nicholas C. 14 February 2013 13: 47 New
                  Good. World War I, in which the Bolsheviks sought the defeat of tsarist Russia and the ensuing civil war. The Great Patriotic War, which began with huge losses, because they subjected the genocide to the officer class, Cossack, and tsarist technical intelligentsia. Indeed, the Bolsheviks have nothing to do with it. Nevertheless, the war did not affect everyone, and only for a few years. Why did they stop giving birth to almost everything and forever (compared to tsarist Russia)?
                  1. Nicholas C.
                    Nicholas C. 14 February 2013 14: 10 New
                    There is a wonderful book by V.V. Pokhlyobkin, a candidate of historical sciences, and not fake, as it is now, but also of the Soviet present. called "Served to eat!" In it, on 400 pages, he understands what they eat and drink in the works of Russian authors from the end of the 18th to the beginning of the 20th. Fonvizin, Krylov, Zagoskin, Griboyedov, Pushkin, Belinsky, Lermontov, Gogol, Turgenev, Mei, A.K. Tolstoy, Sukhovo-Kobylin, A. Ostrovsky, L. Tolstoy, Naydenov, Chekhov. In addition, the authors' diaries and other records of what they ate while traveling, incl. in Europe. With entourage. those. what in these Europe (and here) the people ate. The picture is different, if not the opposite of this article.
                3. Papakiko
                  Papakiko 14 February 2013 15: 17 New
                  Quote: Prometey
                  About 10 children in each family, you exaggerate - an average of 2 to 4 children. Families of more than 5 children were rare.

                  I personally, sixth my parents have a child, and they both have families in each six there were children. Grandparents from families four to seven children.
                  Now in families they are growing and raising from zero to three I emphasize of three (this is practically from the realm of fiction when they dare at the third).
                  Taki speak of the supporting edge of the state, the Urals.
              2. Sandov
                Sandov 14 February 2013 21: 25 New
                Quote: Nikolai S.
                A hundred and a few years ago, the tallest army in Europe (Suvorov “miracle heroes”), the current Russian army is already the shortest, and a terrifying percentage of recruits have to be rejected for service

                And now the situation is about the same.
                1. Che
                  Che 15 February 2013 08: 15 New
                  No wonder the power of Nicholas could not resist the pressure of the revolution, which was imported from the West by the way.
            3. fzr1000
              fzr1000 14 February 2013 13: 47 New
              Unfortunately, the number of victims of the famine is not equal to 0. But what I thought, it makes no sense to delve into the past. The early USSR, the USSR of the 50-60s and the late, different countries. You need to think about the future. No distractions.
          2. Nagaibak
            Nagaibak 14 February 2013 20: 50 New
            Yoshkin Kot "It is enough to analyze demographic statistics for the first half of the XNUMXth century"
            In Uzbekistan, demography is also in order. In the villages, a glass of tea and a tortilla sometimes — that’s the whole lunch.
        2. Yoshkin Kot
          Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 54 New
          weighted article on this topic

      2. Prometey
        Prometey 14 February 2013 09: 57 New
        Apparently the taiga is just the promised land. Can you tell us more fairy tales about "Siberian bread" and how butter was used to lubricate the wheels of railway cars.
      3. Avenger711
        Avenger711 14 February 2013 12: 24 New
        It can be seen. Not many people were willing to settle there. The climate is extremely harsh.
      4. Papakiko
        Papakiko 14 February 2013 15: 28 New
        To minusovers "merci" hi
        Apparently this is considered the most powerful argument?
    2. Yoshkin Kot
      Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 27 New

      ask these people about the famine in the Russian Empire

      or these
      all the tales of the millions who died of starvation under the Tsars were urgently needed by the Judeo-Bolsheviks in the 20th year
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 56 New
        I congratulate the minus one, in his ostrich’s desire not to see obvious facts, that it was precisely sovereign power that organized the genocide of the Russian peasant
        1. strannik595
          strannik595 14 February 2013 12: 42 New
          hunger periods were always and everywhere, in all countries ........... if, according to the author’s descriptions, they lived so poorly, why did the population increase many-fold over 20-30 years in the late XNUMXth and early XNUMXth centuries, from hunger or something? ..... lived a poor life, but enough for life
          1. strannik595
            strannik595 14 February 2013 12: 59 New
            By N.A. Rubakin, the population of Russia from 1800 to 1908 grew almost 4 times (from 39 to 153,5 million), England - less than 3 times (from 15,5 to 44,5), Germany - a little more than 3 times (from 20 to 62, 8), France - 1,5 times (from 27 to 39, 4 million). Russia only lagged behind the United States, where the population increased 16 times - from 5 to 85 million people. Europe, as Rubakin rightly concludes, “was far from keeping up with such a fast multiplication of the population in Russia” [4].

            According to B.N. Mironov, over the period from 1880 to 1913, the population of Russia increased 1,9 times (from 84 to 159 million) and in terms of the growth rate of this indicator, Russia was equal to the United States. There, the population increased from 50,2 to 97 million people. In developed European countries, and during this period, the population grew more slowly than in Russia. In England, it increased 1,2 times (from 35 to 41,5 million), in Germany - 1,5 times (from 45,7 to 67), in France - 1,07 times (from 37,4 to 39,8 million people). Based on the fact that Japan entered the world stage at that time and relations with this country became a significant factor in Russian foreign policy, I note that Russia was ahead of the population growth rate in it too. In Japan, during this time, the population grew 1,4 times (from 36,6 to 51,3 million people). An analysis of the demographic situation in Russia at the given time shows that Russia could win the competition with developed countries or at least not increase the lag behind them in terms of living, developing only at a pace that far exceeded the pace of development of these countries.
            1. Passing
              Passing 14 February 2013 17: 58 New
              Quote: strannik595
              for the period from 1880 to 1913, the population of Russia increased 1,9 times (from 84 to 159 million), and in terms of the growth rate of this indicator, Russia was equal to the United States.

              And where does the quality of life in tsarist Russia have to do with it? The Africans also breed at an accelerated pace, and so what? Ten were born, six died as a child, those who survived, mumble all their short life in poverty. Faster than all in those regions where they live poorly and poorly - high mortality and harsh living conditions include a certain biological mechanism for compensating for the loss of the biological species due to high fertility:

              And in tsarist Russia, the main share of the population was like flies, the average life expectancy of 30 years, this is just a terrifying indicator:
              1. Yoshkin Kot
                Yoshkin Kot 15 February 2013 09: 03 New
                nd, it is interesting to compare life expectancy before and after the invention of antibiotics wassat
    3. Mikhalych
      Mikhalych 14 February 2013 15: 46 New
      pictures are mainly of foreign origin

      And from the photo you can’t say that people are exhausted, and where there are naked corpses, this photo is probably from Buchenwald. I am 62 years old and I remember the stories of my grandfather and grandmother about how they lived before the 1917 coup. The contrast with the article is striking. Check out these photos:
      Or that
      1. Passing
        Passing 14 February 2013 18: 04 New
        Quote: Mikhalych
        And in the photo you can’t say that people are exhausted

        These are those people who have gained strength and arrogance to reach compassionate gentlemen with cameras, the remaining 99% lay in their shacks in the shops and quietly died of hunger and disease.
    4. Galina ...
      Galina ... 4 March 2016 01: 21 New
      Our photos of ourselves more and more, look how many photographs of "noble persons" ... Waste film on plebs?
  2. broker
    broker 14 February 2013 08: 34 New
    The author of the article is obviously starving, probably, he has already dashed off so much, for a long time there were none.
  3. 12061973
    12061973 14 February 2013 08: 35 New
    Svanidze and Mikhalkov love to tell how it was good before the revolution, and if not for the Bolsheviks ....
    1. Deniska999
      Deniska999 14 February 2013 08: 39 New
      Yeah, Mikhalkov - this is a wise gentleman wink . Well, the fact that they did not live so hot is for sure.
      1. valokordin
        valokordin 14 February 2013 08: 59 New
        Quote: Deniska999
        Yeah, Mikhalkov - this is the wise gentleman wink. Well, the fact that they did not live so hot is for sure.

        Ah, what is he in the role of the autocrat, such is he a great important good, and the peasants are so obedient, and the priests are so pious. These are they whom the people have offended, recoup for their defeat and put patriots in prison.
        But there is, there is God's judgment confidants of debauchery
        There is God's judge, he is waiting
        It is not available to call gold
        And he knows in advance thoughts and deeds
        then in vain do you resort to slander
        It will not help you again ........
        1. Deniska999
          Deniska999 14 February 2013 10: 25 New
          Actually, about Mikhalkov, this is irony.
    2. valokordin
      valokordin 14 February 2013 08: 53 New
      Quote: 12061973
      Vanidze and Mikhalkov like to tell how it was good before the revolution, and if not for the Bolsheviks ....

      Even now they are trying to instill this in us, greedy bourgeoisie, who used to be Komsomol members and pioneers, came to power, and the government works for them. Correctly, the Bolsheviks destroyed this abomination.
      1. baltika-18
        baltika-18 14 February 2013 10: 20 New
        Quote: valokordin
        Even now they are trying to instill this in us, greedy bourgeoisie, who used to be Komsomol members and pioneers, came to power, and the government works for them. Correctly, the Bolsheviks destroyed this abomination.

        I support you, Vladimir. The article is interesting and convincing. Although this is not news to me. The fact is that until I was 14 years old I lived with my grandmother (she was born in 1898), I remember her stories very well, how the people lived, lived all kinds, in the article, it’s true, it was often like that.
        1. Yoshkin Kot
          Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 31 New
          typical tales of Bonch-Bruyevich, the last time on a similar occasion I tried to post a response article admin claimed that it was not a format, apparently the tales of Bonch-Bruyevich were closer to them
          1. Banshee
            Banshee 14 February 2013 13: 07 New
            So, with regards to fairy tales.

            My grandmother, being until her death at the age of 97 years in a sound and firm mind, told me that the first time she tasted "pure flour bread" at the age of 9, when, according to the Stolypin reform, they moved from the Oryol province to Kazakhstan, "to free land ".

            Putting them on a family of 9 people was 12 dessiatines. And when there were rumors that "they give land as much as they want", they left in villages. They also left. The settlers were given a lift of 100 rubles and wagons for cattle and log cabins. They took everything there.

            He asked why so suddenly. The answer was: "And we as the people thought that we would die there, that here. What if we survive there." And they survived. "It was scary, especially in winter. But there was a lot of land, the land gave birth, that's why it remained. And there were those who came back, two brothers of my father's cousins. All died in 15 from hunger."

            So somehow ...
            1. Galina ...
              Galina ... 4 March 2016 01: 28 New
              Dear Stranger! Let me call you that! You practically described an episode from the life of my great-grandfathers ... Only they are from the Penza province ... The kingdom of heaven to all.
  4. Elliot
    Elliot 14 February 2013 08: 46 New
    Of course, I’ll write a banality now, but for some reason ordinary Russian people have never had a good life, but they always endured to a certain point ....
    1. klimpopov
      klimpopov 14 February 2013 09: 21 New
      It's like looking at life, and what to invest in the concept of "good life". We are used to thinking that we always live worse than anywhere else ...
    2. Yoshkin Kot
      Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 32 New
      heaven on earth is not possible, but with hell the earth becomes when they fight for heaven
  5. Strashila
    Strashila 14 February 2013 09: 07 New
    To this and goes again ... what remains in the countryside ??? The super-crusher optimization according to the standards imposed by the West destroyed all the infrastructure created during the Soviet era ... schools, medical institutions ... now the postal workers announced the possibility of closing their offices 2/3, it is clear that this is a rural area. The state is turning into wild territory two centuries ago .
  6. Hort
    Hort 14 February 2013 09: 15 New
    before the revolution, of course, the peasants did not live well, but somehow it was about the fact that on the collective farms they again turned out to be cattle and about the famine in the Soviet period, the author, apparently, was shy to write

    about the Soviet power, the savior of the peasants: two of my great-grandfathers were shot during "kolkhozivaniya", although they were not even fists - people of average income. The third got off with weaning in favor of the collective farm of livestock and part of the property. So that
    1. Prometey
      Prometey 14 February 2013 09: 55 New
      Do not tell fables, cattle were selected yes, about the executions - this is Svanidzian propaganda. My grandfather came under collectivization in Ukraine - they did not shoot anyone in the village and did not send them to camps. After the famine, they again allowed to have their own gardens and animals - turkeys and chickens.
      1. Yoshkin Kot
        Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 11: 33 New
        Nd, did he collectivize himself?
        1. Banshee
          Banshee 14 February 2013 13: 13 New
          What does collectivization have to do with it? The author took a specific time period. And he coped with the task of lighting from his point of view. You should not interfere all in one, not nekaska all the same ...

          Quote: Prometey
          My grandfather came under collectivization in Ukraine - they did not shoot anyone in the village and did not send them to camps.

          I sincerely rejoice for your grandfather. It’s good that it happened. But the elder brother of my grandfather in the Kherson region was even shot. For having a steam mill. And, which is characteristic of this period, the German mill was then burned, because he was the only one who could control it. They burned - in the sense, they killed it before the fire.
        2. baltika-18
          baltika-18 14 February 2013 13: 48 New
          Quote: Yoshkin Cat
          Nd, did he collectivize himself?

          The cat I apparently stopped calling you Moishe in vain. Your comments resemble the actions of the well-known provocateur of the priest Gapon. There is zero or minimum information, but there is a "wild desire to poison people." There are quite a lot of such "frames" on the site. Why would that be? ,what do you think?
          1. Prometey
            Prometey 14 February 2013 19: 30 New
            Quote: baltika-18
            There is zero or a minimum of information, but there is a "wild desire to poison people"

            Therefore, I see no reason to respond to such comments hi
          2. Yoshkin Kot
            Yoshkin Kot 15 February 2013 09: 04 New
            naturally in vain, because you, moysha, once you praise the Russian genocide carried out by the Jewish socialists
      2. Hort
        Hort 15 February 2013 14: 48 New
        fables? My great-grandmother told me this, the shot grandfathers were the brothers of her husband. The husband himself - my great-grandfather - was the third who was not killed.
        About Svanidze propaganda at that time they never heard.
        And mine was in Siberia, near Tomsk.
  7. Denis
    Denis 14 February 2013 09: 37 New
    I don’t know what Tolstoy was saying, but the grandfather and grandmother and their friends and relatives who still lived those days didn’t speak badly. Of course, not loudly, the times were not
    Aftara and I want to ask, are you an hour not a liberalist?
    1) from the shortage of land, because half of the land is from landowners and merchants who trade both land and bread.
    2) from factories and plants with those laws under which the capitalist is fenced, but the worker is not protected.
    3) from vodka, which is the main income of the state and to which the people have been accustomed for centuries.
    4) from the soldiery who selects the best people from him in the best time and corrupts them.
    5) from officials who oppress the people.
    6) from taxes.
    7) from ignorance in which government and church schools consciously support it.
    but how many of these points are about now?
    Yes, soldier, the war is not over! Information is in full swing
  8. Kaa
    Kaa 14 February 2013 09: 43 New
    The author forgot only two things:
    1) The vast majority of the provinces of Russia were in the zone of risk farming - that is, if you plant two bags of wheat, you will receive, maybe three, and even then, the fruitful years alternate with frost, droughts, locusts, etc.
    2) Agriculture in the whole world has ceased to be risky ONLY after the general mechanization of agriculture - in our country this is the end of the 30s.
    And what happened in the 20th century in the "enlightened" West?
    "In 1929-1933 the global economic crisis, dubbed the Great Depression, engulfed almost all capitalist countries and was accompanied by mass unemployment and, consequently - hunger. Unemployment benefits were occasionally issued in negligible amounts - $ 1-2 in the American newspaper "Ukrainian Schodenni Visti" more than 200 reports about hunger hikes workers and the unemployed in various states, more than 170 - about suicides due to the crisis, unemployment and hunger: bankers, entrepreneurs, farmers, workers and unemployed in Europe and the USA. In capital countries, unemployment and hunger reigned, higher prices and lower nominal wages. Workers and the unemployed, intellectuals and peasants organized strikes, hunger campaigns, demanded: “Work! Salary! Bread!" The government responded with massive repression, sent gendarmes against them, and even regular troops with machine guns. Courts raged. The USCHV newspaper cites MOPR data - terrible statistics of intensified repression: “ If in 1925 the number of those killed before the trial was 9,87%, then in 1931 - 33,9%. During this period, the proportion of death sentences increased significantly: in 1925 - 0,37%, in 1931 - 8,4%. The number of victims of white terror in 1931 amounted to 1090 thousand people; for the period 1925–31 - 3 million people ("USCHV" 08.11.32 p.). "In the Hutsul region the number of starving farms in 1932 reached 88,6%. Own Polish landowners during these years reached 37% in the Stanislavsky Voivodeship, 49% in Polesie. On landowner lands, even in lean years, peasants worked for the 16th or 18th sheaf. In March, about 40 villages of Kosivsky, 12 villages of Naddvirnyansky and 10 - of Kolomia counties were completely starving. ” The newspaper notes: "People swell all over and starve to death. Famine is especially fierce in the villages - Perekhresnya, Old Gvizdtsy, Ostrovtsy. Typhoid fever and tuberculosis quickly spread with hunger. ” (In "USCHV" 05.04.32 p., F.12.5.) Statements of deputies of opposition parties to czech parliament. “In the mountainous districts there are many villages where the food of children consists of a small amount of oat bread and several half-rotted potatoes. Pet and property prices are unusually low due to high taxes: a cow - $ 3, a horse - 20 cents. In a report by the director of the International Labor Office, A. Thomas, who was one of the institutions of the League of Nations, in April 1932 it was reported that in 1931, there were 20–25 million unemployed in the world. “And that means,” writes Thomas, “that 70 million people were deprived of livelihoods. ("USCHV" 27.04.32/12/2 p., Photo XNUMX. XNUMX.) Including 25 million people starved in the USA... ("USCHV", 25.08.32 p. Photo 12.3), in New York - 250 thousand. ("USCHV" 25.08.32) "
    Is that also Russian tsarism to blame?
    1. Kaa
      Kaa 14 February 2013 09: 55 New
      Quote: Kaa

      Negative P., with which they disagree, explain if this does not complicate you. Is your idea of ​​prosperity in the West collapsing? So I gave one link, offhand, google, their sea. When they are minuscule, they usually explain what they disagree with, maybe you can convince me ... and Denisperhaps it will be interesting that he wrote seditious, in your opinion. Arguments - to the studio! ...
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 14 February 2013 10: 02 New
        Apparently, this is a person who "did not have a life until the 17th," but not everyone is capable of facing the truth and admitting that there was both good and bad. I am not saying that under the Tsar everyone lived in chocolate, and under the Bolsheviks in Mr. But I will not argue the opposite either. There were pluses and minuses everywhere. Only the Empire lived for 300 years, and the USSR only 70
        1. Gur
          Gur 14 February 2013 15: 10 New
          Mlyn what did you fix "The empire lived 300 years, and the USSR only 70" Before the revolution, there was practically no other form of government, and even more so for Russia (I will omit the Novgorod veche, since Novgorod has a stigma in fluff, a lot of nasty things against the connection of Rus made for mercenary purposes) This is firstly, secondly, as the system and form of government, the monarchy was no different from the same forms of government in the world. Hence the wars only for the colonies, for brother George or whatever the hell, and liberation from the yoke. The USSR is a different system, a different form of government, a form of government that, God forbid, will show itself better than the form of government in the rest of the bourgeois world and thereby lay a seed of doubt in the vassals, and as a result of which will lead to the collapse of the bourgeois system itself. So the whole bourgeois world fought with the USSR, and in 70 years it was probably done in no less than 700. Thirdly, let's see how the new bourgeois system of Russia will end now and how long it will last, and the patient is already warming up and is about to burst. Since 20 years of reign, while continuous degradation. As for hunger, and "happy life" not when did not doubt that from a well-fed life a man would grab a pitchfork. And I won't even talk about participation in the revolution. And if people in the USSR would have prosperity (food simply did not rot at the bases, and milk was not poured into the canal, mean people are "bad guys"), then probably the USSR as a system would exist even now, although looking at these "redheads" and curly black muzzles begin to hesitate, since these would not have left the country so easily in their chambers without the NKVD.
        2. Papakiko
          Papakiko 14 February 2013 15: 34 New
          Quote: Trapper7
          Only the Empire lived 300 years, and the USSR only 70

          The empire bled twice with peasant uprising. (Pugachev and Razin)
          although it’s rather difficult to call them (Peasant) much from the Heirs of the Rurikovich to the Ottoman-English interests. hi
      2. baltika-18
        baltika-18 14 February 2013 14: 05 New
        Quote: Kaa
        Negative P., with which they disagree, explain if this does not complicate you.

        Wise Kaa. I am not "minus P.", but your comment is not entirely in the subject, I explain the reason. In the beginning of the article it is clearly written that the article is directed against the myth that everything was fine in tsarist Russia, and Soviet power brought the peasants hunger and suffering. What does the West have to do with it, which you mention in the commentary? Do you want to say that there was also starvation? But there was the same system as in Tsarist Russia, capitalism, someone in luxury, someone dies of hunger. Struggle of systems ...
    2. Prometey
      Prometey 14 February 2013 10: 00 New
      The author writes about pre-revolutionary Russia, and you cite facts for something from the late 1920s to the early 30s.
      1. Kaa
        Kaa 14 February 2013 10: 26 New
        Quote: Prometey
        You give facts for something of the late 1920s and early 30s

        Dear Prometey! I am grateful that you thought it possible to answer. I want to draw your attention to my point number 2 "Agriculture in the whole world has ceased to be risky ONLY after the general mechanization of agriculture - in our country this is the end of the 30s
        In tsarist Russia, especially about tractors and combines, electrification of animal husbandry, antibiotics and vaccinations against diseases, there could be no talk due to their absence. Therefore, I found it necessary to refer to a later time, when these gadgets were already in abundance in the West - and still, hunger, disease, riots, and where - even in the USA! There is no reference at hand about the famine in Germany after the surrender and the imposition of massive reparations on them - but believe me, inflation of millions (I did not make a reservation) percent is too much. I did not mention the discharge of milk into the sea, the burning of cattle in the United States for the purpose of maintaining high prices in the 30s. And the nature of usurious capitalism has not changed to this day. One example. In the USA, mass production of alcohol from corn has been established for 5% dilution of gasoline in order to improve the environment. By the way, the United States did not sign the Kyoto Protocol, which improves the environment much more effectively ... At the same time, the Americans themselves admit that "US Undersecretary of State for Economics, Business and Agriculture Josette Sheeran, who is also the Executive Director of the World Food Program (WFP) , reported that the total number of starving people in the world has overcome the mark of one billion“It will not be a mistake to admit that hunger is walking on the Earth. The food crisis is not over at all, ”she said. “At a time when the global recession led to lower prices in the world's largest food markets, the cost of staple foods in developing countries has risen.” According to Sheeran statistics, 80% of Asian, African and Latin American countries have food group prices increased, and the incomes of residents at that time only decreased. "As a result the number of hungry people on the planet over the past two years has increased by 200 million, and the total number of such people has reached the highest level and amounts to 1, 02 billion people", - she stated. For these people, corn would definitely not hurt ... Hunger is scary, but you can't constantly depict the imperial history of Russia in black. Although I, brought up in the 60s-80s, are more impressed by "developed socialism" hi
        1. Prometey
          Prometey 14 February 2013 11: 17 New
          Dear colleague! I answered before you put a minus. With your reasons: "Agriculture in the whole world has ceased to be risky ONLY after the general mechanization of agriculture - in our country it is the end of the 30s I totally agree, as with everything else.
          I did not see from the article that the author wanted to "denigrate" Tsarist Russia, but in fact he was right - we had hunger more often than in European countries and the fault was not only risky agriculture, but also the economic policy of the government. Yes, since the end of the 19th century, Europe was fed with bread, but at the expense of the internal poverty of the peasantry.
    3. Avenger711
      Avenger711 14 February 2013 12: 55 New
      It grew 3-4 times more than it was planted. This is abnormally small, and such a depletion of the soil reached as a result of "remarkable" management. So by the 1890s land shortages and hunger became chronic. In the west, by that time, there were already a lot of large farmers growing everything according to science and having more crops. Before the Great Depression, almost an annual famine in the United States somehow did not occur.
    4. revnagan
      revnagan 14 February 2013 21: 08 New
      Quote: Kaa
      Including 25 million people were starving in the USA.

      "And this despite the fact that, on average in Russia, the yield of plant biomass per hectare is more than 1 times lower than in Europe, and almost 2 times lower than in the United States! Only 5% of farmland in Russia has biological productivity per hectare. the level of the US average. "And then what to say about Russia?
      S. Kara-Murza, Soviet civilization. From the beginning to the great Victory. P. 27
  9. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 14 February 2013 09: 43 New
    Excuse me, but the article is not complete. The last phrase "All died" is clearly missing.
    And about the "whitewashed herbal cabbage soup" - even in the prosperous USSR in the villages the same was brewed. There was milk - whitewashed. Was not - so green and ate. Without meat. Meat only from late autumn. I don't need other people's stories. I trust my mother more than all the other "uchOny" put together. And she told me a lot about her country childhood (and was born in 50). Both good and bad. So to say that before the revolution they lived ... badly, but in 1917 bam, and immediately good - too much exaggerated.
  10. Cadets
    Cadets 14 February 2013 09: 46 New
    So I have a double feeling after reading the article. On the one hand, these facts, on the other hand, the stories of his own grandmother from the Vyatka province. In the seventies of the revolution there were eleven brothers and three sisters, there were a couple of horses, cattle. They worked from dawn to dusk, they did not keep laborers. They did not live happily, but fast, without starving. Like many Russian peasant families "fell under the distribution" during collectivization, although they were not kulaks. The whole family was divided and sent in different directions - some to the Arkhangelsk region, some to Siberia, after which the family lost its roots. My grandmother never remembered well about the revolution. Something like that.
    1. Banshee
      Banshee 14 February 2013 13: 19 New
      As if yes, in two ways. But still, there is a certain amount of truth. They did not grieve everywhere and not always. Somewhere better, somewhere worse. On the one hand, my ancestors "flooded" only after resettlement to Kazakhstan, because there was simply not enough land. And there everything was very good.

      And who remained in the Oryol region, and did not starve to death in 15-16 and 22-23, those in 41 are Germans of that ...
  11. Gogan
    Gogan 14 February 2013 09: 53 New
    I perfectly remember the memories of my grandmother about life in the village before the revolutionary events. Lived is not even bad.
  12. fzr1000
    fzr1000 14 February 2013 09: 59 New
    My ancestors, on the one hand, peasants, on the other hand, railway employees did not starve before the revolution. But at the end of the 20s, a famine occurred along Livny and those who did not die fled to relatives near Moscow.
  13. Gogan
    Gogan 14 February 2013 10: 03 New
    Please look at the names and surnames of the authors of the given list of references (the first group: Rosset, Adamets, Engelhardt, Medkovich, Aron Avrekh, Solonevich (no comment), the second group - the so-called "populists" are essentially terrorists).
    Pictures of the western agitation industry are also touching.
    1. Trapperxnumx
      Trapperxnumx 14 February 2013 10: 08 New
      I agree. Thanks. And L. Tolstoy was also a dissident of those times. It's like listening to the tales of Soviet dissidents about the "terrible USSR"
      1. wax
        wax 14 February 2013 11: 46 New
        Read about the village of Bunina - not a dissident and against the Soviet regime.
        Better yet, open the Russia encyclopedia of the pre-revolutionary publication and look at the statistics, compare with the data of the late thirties of the 20th century. The grain yield in Russia was at the level of natural soil fertility. Therefore, in Russia, famines occurred with enviable regularity (once every 10-15 years). By citing examples and basing only on them, one can prove anything. But a new fact remains - after the reforms of liberals and fans of tsarist Russia in the 90s, children in many cities did not even get a cup of milk.
        Debilitation has reached the level of members of the Government. Mr. Dvorkovich recently said that Russia can feed the whole of Europe, HOW RUSSIA WAS FEEDED UNTIL 17 (Encore!).
    2. Denis
      Denis 14 February 2013 10: 25 New
      Quote: Gogan
      first group: Rosset, Adamets, Engelhardt, Medkovich, Aron Avrech, Solonevich

      Oh yeah!
      "this is a payroll or synagogue visit list ..." - N.V. Starikov

      I got a feeling about the appearance of articles, like at school, they gave me a task, and I didn’t do any mind or desire. liberals and done
  14. kontrol
    kontrol 14 February 2013 10: 28 New
    it may have happened in some regions, but there is a clear exaggeration, the so-called. hyperbole in the literature. during these times in Europe, the common people also lived oh how unsweetened. As in other things and everywhere. The author -
  15. - = ALEX = -
    - = ALEX = - 14 February 2013 10: 36 New
    "I wonder what those who like to describe the 'horrors of the Holodomor' - the only famine of the USSR (except for the war, of course) - will say to this?"

    In Ukraine, there was never a famine, except for the artificial under the Bolsheviks. And the cited article only proves that the Russian Empire fell apart naturally, like the USSR.
  16. dmb
    dmb 14 February 2013 10: 39 New
    Which is funny. None of the opponents thought of saying that the author was lying. For in order to say so, one must at least cite counter-arguments with references to figures and specific documents. And apart from the stories of "nameless" grandmothers and Mr. Svanidze, who obviously never went hungry, they are not available. And if we also take into account that the notorious surplus appropriation system was introduced in 1916, when "Father Tsar Nikolai was sitting on the throne in St. Petersburg," then it becomes somehow completely uncomfortable. Of course, not all "healthy" forces have pulled up, and therefore I fully admit that in the next comments we will hear that L. Tolstoy and Korolenko are secret Zionists, and Gurko and Solonevich are paid Anglo-Saxon hirelings. Even more amusing is the fact that illiterate citizens, repeating Svanidze's liberal nonsense, call those who refute him "beloletochniki".
    1. Yoshkin Kot
      Yoshkin Kot 14 February 2013 12: 03 New
      there is a link above, there you have counter arguments and numbers
      1. dmb
        dmb 14 February 2013 12: 21 New
        Well, I told you to catch up. And just the "healthiest". The fact that the figures and facts set forth in the article in the link they mentioned do not refute, and in general do not refer to it in any way, "healthy forces" do not care. The main thing is to blur it out.
      2. Banshee
        Banshee 14 February 2013 13: 27 New
        Well, I kind of brought it. A lot of people left the Oryol province after a strip of crop failures in 1912-1914. Including my relatives. They settled in Kazakhstan, in the Petropavlovsk region, I know for sure two villages, Sergeevka and Korneevka, which were built and inhabited exclusively by "eagles".
        1. dmb
          dmb 14 February 2013 15: 04 New
          Roman, I carefully read all your comments, but found nothing to refute the article in them. On the contrary, only confirmation.
      3. Cheloveck
        Cheloveck 14 February 2013 19: 23 New
        Quote: Yoshkin Cat
        there is a link above, there you have counter arguments and numbers

        "Well, come on, of course, I know the case .... here you are!" (from) laughing
        This means that "it was smooth on paper ..."
        And you do not read carefully ...
        V.G. Korolenko, who lived in the village for many years, who was in other starving regions in the early 1890s and organized canteens for the starving and the distribution of food loans, left very characteristic testimonies of public servants:

        Those. the article does not deny the presence of assistance to the starving, the trouble is that there was not enough help.
        In addition, Russia is big.
        If I had no recollections of hunger from the Vyatka line, then from Tambov and Saratov, hunger was a constant occurrence.
        The world, you know, is not black and white, but consists of many halftones.
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 14 February 2013 14: 14 New
      Quote: dmb
      Even more amusing is the fact that illiterate citizens, repeating Svanidze's liberal nonsense, call those who refute him "beloletochniki".

      Dima, my applause. One clever man has already called Tolstoy a dissident. Original. good
  17. djon3volta
    djon3volta 14 February 2013 10: 48 New
    Yes, there are poor people in any country. You can write such a thing about any country. It’s just that the author wrote a negative about Russia and published. And what about the wealthy peasants didn’t create such an article? Everybody brains and brains, they want to make readers hate Russia, publicity.
    1. baltika-18
      baltika-18 14 February 2013 14: 52 New
      Quote: djon3volta
      everyone pours and brains, they want to make readers hate Russia, this is the goal of this article.

      The purpose of the article was written at the very beginning of the article. To refute the speculations of people like Svanidze, Parfyonov, etc., about how well everyone lived in tsarist Russia, and that the Soviet government brought only hunger and suffering. They don’t say anything about hatred, do not lie to myself.
  18. qwert
    qwert 14 February 2013 11: 05 New
    Great article. Justified by documentary backing. Three weeks ago there was an article about Israeli trolls. So here I look they are activated here. Well, so, of course, it is beneficial for anyone to know the truth about those times in Russia.
    By the way about Siberia. Well, a man came on foot with his family from the Volga region to Siberia. By the way, Papakiko try to do it yourself. Without grandmas in your pocket and with your family. And then here she is mother Siberia. Pasha, yes this one. Lepota. Yes, but we forgot that if the horse was there, it most likely fell on the way. And there wasn’t any grain at all, and therefore a man went. Although here it is furs nearby. Toko no Toko. So a boomerang can be cut and sable clicked with capercaillie. Probably the young man of an alternative story has read lol
    In general, yes. The Russian man is so, he will die of hunger, he will watch how small children are dying, but will not work. Well, something like this.

    I liked Bushkov. When one dude told him that a couple of hundred years ago he would have challenged him to a duel for his words. Bushkov knew his word of honor and that he was a descendant of a noble family. Because he answered simply "there would be no duel, you would simply be flogged at the kennel." Therefore, gentlemen, remember. The nobility was less than 1%. And your ancestors most likely were first serfs, and then just peasants. So, before you dream of how you would live ... consider this. I think every third person simply would not exist. Your grandfather or grandmother would not have been born or would have died before the age of 5. And so .. Eat French rolls and be glad that everything turned out exactly like this, and not otherwise
    1. Gur
      Gur 14 February 2013 15: 33 New
      It’s useless, I’ve already tried to convey this to people, there is every second one with blue blood, every third had his stud farm or candle factory, every fourth has his own mill. From where I took such a plant or a mill, it was only my great-grandfather’s brother who was your noble, I myself have only had 14 years of diploma for the harvest, and a bonus of 5 rubles. Probably lazy in his ancestors.
  19. Tartary
    Tartary 14 February 2013 11: 05 New
    He was an Octobrist, a pioneer, and a Komsomol member - everything in the USSR was then understandable at the genetic level, at the expense of two previous Soviet generations, it is so very clear that it didn’t even go into detail ...
    Almost enough there was a picture of a man in bast shoes on one leg standing inside the allotment of land the area of ​​a cartwheel ...

    I experienced a shock from the article !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a horror.

    Which of the more recent ones decided above or will decide afterwards to discuss that the article says that all this is nonsense, that they say that Nikolai was the holy king, and his sovereign’s service worked for the good of the people, Russia, but the revolutionaries were just the murderers of the Russian people - go to ... (well, whoever needs to understand), go-go and search the search engines, and read the literature that the author refers to ...
    And then come back and think like academics from history ...

    Good luck!

    And this ... Cons of the article do not have to put ..

    As for the deprivations that the Russian people suffer, or rather the Russian people for the last 200-300 years (the term of the Romanov dynasty), it really is not clear that in the projection on the life of the famous advanced peoples of Europe, America, HE (the people of Russia) lives in in the same regime - always lagging behind the average standard of living of the rest of the progressive people of the world ...
    Only the well-known elite, repeatedly changed, over and over again (su ....... ka), quickly manages to catch up with their counterparts from other countries, like a parasite, adapting on the slightly fat body of the people to get drunk on "blood", to eat meat, not forgetting between business (!) to bleed the organism on which it parasitizes ...

    Oh, I feel it can never be eradicated ...
  20. Alekseev
    Alekseev 14 February 2013 11: 18 New
    It was hard for the peasant in Russia under tsarism ... And now, and under the Communists. and always - always not easy request And everywhere ... Maybe, for a number of reasons, it’s harder here than in Europe.
    The author is not lying. Just collected the most flashy facts.
    And, these facts took place. There are no revolutions just like that. The truth is that the tsars and, in general, the so-called "elite" could not "steer" a great state without upheavals.
    Themselves, in general, and brought to power the Bolsheviks.
    And modern mankind is saving from hunger technical progress, not political systems
    Mentioned in the article by L.N. Tolstoy was surprised at the level of agricultural production in the USA: few people plow, and enough bread ... what
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 14 February 2013 11: 28 New
      There is an autobiographical book by the American writer "Little Farmer". It seems like a nursery, but it seems ... about the resettlement of ordinary people from the East to the West of America ...
      It tells about life am. farmers. How they worked in the summer, what they did in the winter. Everything is very similar to our peasant families of the early 20th century. But it describes the events of the 80s of the 19th century. What struck me was that even then they used fur. reapers and mowers. Moreover, they were taken for a while, as if for rent, paid with products.
      The book is also interesting in that it shows that they built modern America, just like Russia, simple hard workers. Like this.
    2. Cheloveck
      Cheloveck 14 February 2013 19: 31 New
      Quote: Alekseev
      Mentioned in the article by L.N. Tolstoy was surprised at the level of agricultural production in the USA: few people plow, and enough bread ...

      Damn, why doesn’t it reach anyone that the north of the states is our extreme south.
      Their climate is different and the risks of farming are much lower than ours.
      1. Alekseev
        Alekseev 15 February 2013 12: 34 New
        Quote: Cheloveck
        Their climate is different and the risks of farming are much lower than ours.

        This must be told to American farmers after the drought of 2012! lol
  21. consul
    consul 14 February 2013 11: 21 New
    1) from the shortage of land, because half of the land is from landowners and merchants who trade both land and bread.
    2) from factories and plants with those laws under which the capitalist is fenced, but the worker is not protected.
    3) from vodka, which is the main income of the state and to which the people have been accustomed for centuries.
    4) from the soldiery who selects the best people from him in the best time and corrupts them.
    5) from officials who oppress the people.
    6) from taxes.
    7) from ignorance in which government and church schools consciously support it.

    1.After the republican February and then October coups, the peasants did not have land at all, they made fun of the chickens that appeared; By 1916, in the hands of peasants and Cossacks in 50 provinces of European Russia (except for the Caucasus and the Kingdom of Poland) there were about 172.000.000 acres own land. Citizens of all other classes owned only about 85.000.000 acres, of which 18.000.000 acres belonged to small owners. cultivating the land with personal labor, without the help of hired force. Most of the remaining 67.000.000 acres were either under the forest or on lease from the peasants.
    Thus, on the eve of the February Revolution, the peasants, on the basis of property and leases, owned: 100% of arable land in Asian Russia and about 90% of the entire area of ​​European Russia.
    Here are a few lines written by V. Francois de Romainville:
    "The peasants fiercely resist collectivization. The first result of the latter was the mass destruction of livestock. Their number fell from 270.200.000 heads in 1929 to 118.000.000 in 1933. But what is even worse is the number of human casualties. Peasants were deported by whole families to the Arctic regions. , or to the desert steppes of Asia. From 1928 to 1934, 5 million peasant families perished, in other words, up to 20 million souls. "
    2.During the reign of Nicholas II in Russia, according to the future US President Senator Taft, the most advanced labor legislation for those times was provided, providing rationing of working hours, compensation for industrial accidents, compulsory insurance of workers against illness, disability and old age . By a decree on June 12, 1900, the reference to Siberia was abolished as a punishment measure. National and ethnic problems were resolved without violence, with wisdom and respect for local laws and customs.
    3. France-76 shtoffs, Italy-22 shtoffs, Germany-18 shtoffs, England-12 shtoffs, Russia-4 shtoffs, Norway-3 shtoffs - at that time alcohol was consumed per year per capita, shtof-1.23 liters.
    4. The term of service in the army of the Republic of Ingushetia is 3-4 years. Was there 1 to do?
    5. officials - a separate sore subject for any form of government;
    1. consul
      consul 14 February 2013 11: 23 New
      6. The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost four times less than in France, more than 4 times less than in Germany and 8,5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes in Russia was on average half that of Austria, France, Germany and England.
      the total tax per inhabitant in Russia was more than half that in Austria, France, and Germany, and more than four times less than in England.
      Total taxes (per inhabitant in rubles; 1 gold ruble is 2,67 gold francs or 51 US gold cent):
      Russia - 9,09
      Austria - 21,47
      France - 22,25
      Germany - 22,26
      England - 42,61
      7. everything that was built and manufactured before the Second World War was done by engineers who studied at the educational institutions of RI Questionnaire, produced by the councils in 1920, established that 86% of young people from 12 to 16 years old were able to write and read. Undoubtedly, they learned to read and write under the upheaval regime. Here are the topics for the works of those times:
      for children 12-13 years old:
      * Fading of our garden in the fall.
      * River on a moonlit night.
      * Meeting troops returning from the campaign.
      * Forest at its best.
      * Grandfather's garden.

      For elementary grades:
      * About what the bird saw in distant lands.
      * The history of building a house and cultivating a garden with it ...
      * Giants and pygmies of the forest kingdom.

      For senior high school students:
      * The word as a source of happiness.
      * Why is life compared to travel?
      * Homeland and alien side.
      * About the transience of life.
      * What items make up Russia's wealth and why?
      * The high dignity of the human word and letter.
      * The fragility of happiness based solely on material wealth.
      * On the manifestation of the moral principle in history.
      * What is the spiritual connection between ancestors and offspring based on?
      In general, there are a lot of emotions. There is no data on the losses from the famine of those years, but there are others — in 1894, at the beginning of the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, there were 122 million inhabitants in Russia. 20 years later, on the eve of the First World War, its population increased by 1 million; thus, in Tsarist Russia, the population grew by 60 per year. If the revolution had not happened in 2.400.000, by 1917 its population would have reached 1959. Meanwhile, the current population of the Soviet Union barely exceeds 275.000.000, so the bloody Soviet experience cost Russia no less than 215.000.000 human lives (of course, minus the loss from the Great Patriotic War).
      No one says that everything was fine at that time, but someone who was in the way was prevented by a peacefully developing state.
      1. consul
        consul 14 February 2013 11: 43 New
        At the same time, the king and his family led a relaxed Sybarite life, it is very significant that in the diary of Empress Alexandra in early February 1917 she talks about children who “rush about the city and scream that they have no bread, and this is just to to cause arousal "
        -A blatant lie, the sovereign was in Stavka, and his wife and daughters worked in the hospital as nurses, and the empress in surgery, participating in operations, including amputation.
        February very much reminded me personally of the beginning of the 90s when there were nothing in the stores and the warehouses were full of products (we lived with the neighbors as a neighbor, the store director). It is easier to inflate the situation by creating an artificial shortage.
        1. consul
          consul 14 February 2013 11: 49 New
          Statistics of peasant uprisings at the end of the 20s that were found.

          Mass demonstrations of peasants in 1929
          Total performances - 1 307
          Of them
          403 (30,7%) on the basis of grain procurements,
          307 (23,5%) on religious grounds,
          86 (6,5%) motivated by collectivization
          [from Krasilnikov's book "Sickle and Moloch"]

          Mass demonstrations of peasants in 1930
          Come comrade to our farm
          Total_Mass_Performances 13754
          of which 3712 were women
          Collectivization 7382
          Seizure and infringement of ASE 2339
          Closing churches, breaking bells 1487
          Sowing and harvesting campaign 544
          Bread and meat preparations 456
          Tax Campaign 41
          Difficulties 1220
          Lack of manufactured goods 27
          Other 258
          * ASE - anti-Soviet elements (fists, clergy, etc.)
          Published: Soviet village through the eyes of the Cheka-OGPU-NKVD 1918-1939. Edited by A. Berelovich, V. Danilov, Volume 1, p. 18
          Source: TSA FSB of the Russian Federation. Secret Political Department of the OGPU. A memo on the forms and dynamics of the class struggle in the countryside in 1930. S.32
          Of the 13 appearances, 754/2 came in January-March, while unlimited violence during collectivization and dispossession of the number of appearances by the end of the year was more connected with the impossibility of active resistance - the village was cleared of weapons, there were only 3 armed demonstrations.
        2. Gur
          Gur 14 February 2013 15: 59 New
          This raises a reasonable question - did the Empress personally amputate you ?? )))) If they were in the corps of sisters of mercy, this does not mean that they didn’t get enough of the poor, but they all led the sick, it’s good that they still didn’t crawl through the fields and carried the wounded on them. This is an exemplary tale about Medvedev’s son, who himself passed the exam.
          1. Denis
            Denis 15 February 2013 00: 09 New
            Quote: GUR
            Did the Empress personally amputate you?

            You’ll exaggerate in vain, about her and about her children too. In the organization of the medical service of that time, he’s not strong, but there were no nurses on the battlefield then (who knows more precisely, correct). This is already a sign of another Great War.
            They organized a sanitary train, which is not so little. They could, most likely it was, not nurses, but there’s no help in the hospital
            BUT THERE IS A MORAL COMPONENT, their presence alone, any indifferent presence, amid the pain and swearing of the hospital, there are already very, very many
            Who visited such gloomy places knows
  22. USNik
    USNik 14 February 2013 11: 26 New
    A question to the one who posted this "historically cocktail" here: What year are the French drawings presented in the majority? We took a walk ourselves, woke up and shed tears and let's agitate the neighbors ??
  23. mixa
    mixa 14 February 2013 11: 46 New
    I wouldn’t say that everything written here is not true, my grandmother was born in 1898 .... when he came in 1991 she said everything will come back to a bad life — our family was low-land and we all labored at the owners, husband and wife, and they had a lot of land .... but they paid little .... so the peasants lived poorly.
  24. Oleg1986
    Oleg1986 14 February 2013 11: 47 New
    As soon as Tolstoy surfaced, it immediately became clear where the ears were growing from. The author is as adequate as the "graph" itself. And the text seems to have been copied from some fascist propaganda leaflet. So it seems that this is the kind of Udaltsov who is about to put on a leather jacket, take his beloved Mauser and go to the village to eliminate illiteracy.
  25. konan
    konan 14 February 2013 12: 32 New
    Everything is correctly written, if such terrifying facts were not in tsarist Russia, then the peasants in their mass would not have supported the Bolsheviks.
    The main merit of the Bolsheviks of the early 20th century is the physical destruction of the nobility and merchants.
  26. ammunition
    ammunition 14 February 2013 12: 46 New
    Yes. It was difficult for the peasantry (and the common people) to live in the 19 century.
    But still better than now. .. I think so. Because you cannot measure everything only with material things. Better because there was an empire. There was a Tsar - Father.
    And do not roll a barrel on Emperor Nicholas 2. What country he received from birth, and served such a country. And did not betray.. And did not quit.
    And did not run away.. He went to the chopping block.
    I believe that under Brezhnev there was complete communism. Because any normal person could get (and got) everything you need for a normal life. - Decent housing, good nutrition, decent clothes. And much more. ... And the opportunity to create a family and raise quietly children. ... And the opportunity to work for the good of the motherland. Any work was respected.


    But what kind - 1) The king will not betray his people .. until death.
    2) The Soviet system of the empire's life management -
    the best. But the Secretary General can betray .. Because Marxism-Leninism has a fundamental vice. You can’t Believe in them.


    I seriously think so. repeat And as it will be, it will be so. With any life, you must serve your country.
    Do not consider what I say with slogans. winked
    1. baltika-18
      baltika-18 14 February 2013 14: 58 New
      Quote: ammunition

      Red monarchy. Original. Maybe it will work out. I, in principle, am also a supporter of something like that.
      Quote: ammunition

      A definite plus for a balanced approach.
      1. ammunition
        ammunition 14 February 2013 16: 05 New
        Quote: baltika-18
        Red monarchy. Original. Maybe it will work out. I, in principle, am also a supporter of something like that.

        Only for this it is not necessary to make a revolution .. People make revolutions, because they are sure that themselves They know how to do it.
        To do this, we must try our best to please God! And that’s a lot harder.

        The fact is that the Tsar is a sacred figure. The real King (and not an impostor) is given only by the Most High.
        And the Tsar .. and Vera are trying to "privatize" White emigres .. all sorts of things. That is, the "bourgeois" who overthrew the Tsar in February 17th.
        But if the Emperor will be granted to us .. I am sure that he nationalizes everything. But the economic and cultural .. and so forth. Life will be made on the basis of the Stalin experience. fellow
        1. Banshee
          Banshee 14 February 2013 16: 55 New
          Yeah ... our regiment arrived ...
        2. baltika-18
          baltika-18 14 February 2013 18: 36 New
          Quote: ammunition
          But if the Emperor will be granted to us .. I am sure that he nationalizes everything. But the economic and cultural .. and so forth. Life will be made on the basis of the Stalin experience.

          I’ll support the namesake again.
          Quote: ammunition
          The fact is that the Tsar is a sacred figure. The real King (and not an impostor) is given only by the Most High.

          And here I agree. Russia is with the guys who are there, at the forefront. Soon it means to appear. fellow
          1. ammunition
            ammunition 14 February 2013 20: 09 New
            Quote: baltika-18
            I will support again

            So people like us are getting bigger and bigger. smile And 10 years ago, this (probably) never occurred to anyone.
    2. Cheloveck
      Cheloveck 14 February 2013 19: 58 New
      Quote: ammunition
      The king will not betray his people .. until death.

      Is it nothing that Nikolai denied?
      As, however, and his brother, in whose favor was the abdication.
      1. ammunition
        ammunition 14 February 2013 20: 20 New
        Quote: Cheloveck
        Is it nothing that Nikolai denied?

        The text of the abdication of Nicholas 2 is extremely suspicious. stop And the "brother" ... most likely did not want to play the role of a pawn with the conspirators.
        The fact is that the history (and events) of 17 were greatly perverted in the 20s and 30s. In order to ascribe the greatest possible importance to the "leaders" of the red coup.
        And the Lord allowed the reds to exterminate the Februaryists (conspirators).
        And when they completed this task, they were already exterminated by Stalin. It was on Stalin that the struggle for the "world revolution" ended.

        If in present-day Russia you find at least one person who is ready to give his life for the "world revolution of the prolitarians" .. You can put a thousand minuses .. every day. smile
  27. EGO
    EGO 14 February 2013 12: 48 New
    This author’s article was taken from this resource.
  28. CM-90
    CM-90 14 February 2013 12: 51 New
    The article is not in the eyebrow, but in the eye. Therefore, such polar comments. My family has roots from the Smolensk peasants (moved to Siberia in 1907) and wealthy Siberians. So the Smolyaks told how they worked for the lady, how they lived with the cattle, how the crop failure, then hunger. Walked in bast shoes, boots - a luxury. Siberians also had land, horses, hired workers at the time of harvesting. And my Siberian grandmother remembered the old time well and did not really like the Soviet one. She said that those who were lazy or drank poorly. Smolyaks, after several years of working in the locals, earned money to cultivate their land received upon arrival in Siberia. Worked well, because 15 years later, my great-grandmother hid 50 gold rubles from white, although they lived in bestial conditions in the Smolensk region. This is because not all the poor are lazy and drunkards. And she always, when she heard reproaches towards the Soviet regime, said: Harvest, crop failure, and eat white bread.
    1. baltika-18
      baltika-18 14 February 2013 15: 00 New
      Quote: SM-90
      And she always, when she heard reproaches towards the Soviet regime, said: Harvest, crop failure, and eat white bread.

      That’s the essence. It's all a matter of the system, whatever one may say.
  29. SCS
    SCS 14 February 2013 13: 06 New
    Article plus! For a long time people need to open their eyes! I do not understand those who disagree with what is written. I think most members of the forum for over 20 years and many had the opportunity to know the truth is not known from where, but directly from the first, second lips! I don’t understand how you can glorify that terrible time (the time of monarchs and landowners)! is this endless propaganda really blinded your eyes! ???? needed from a good life such a fire broke out in the empire ?!
    compare how the peasants began to live 50 years after the revolution, and even after experiencing a terrible war! how can this be refuted ?!

    and literally 20 years after the collapse of the USSR, peasants, although they do not starve to death, are caught in the conditions of a market economy! and do not compare the quality of life of peasants in 70-80 of the last century and the present! No.

    and literally 20 years after the collapse of the USSR, peasants, although they do not starve to death, are caught in the conditions of a market economy! and do not compare the quality of life of peasants in 70-80 of the last century and the present! No.

    and literally 20 years after the collapse of the USSR, peasants, although they do not starve to death, are caught in the conditions of a market economy! and do not compare the quality of life of peasants in 70-80 of the last century and the present! No.
  30. wax
    wax 14 February 2013 13: 06 New
    So I wrote above, read Bunin, quite adequate. Better yet, open encyclopedic guides. And they began to minus me.
    I will add. The best integrating indicator of quality of life is its average duration (LSS). According to various estimates, in 1897 for men it was in the region of 30 years a year, in 1913 - 31 years. Women have a little more.

    Source: Encyclopedic Dictionary Russia, Brockhaus and Efron, St. Ptb, 1898
    The population statistics in Russia were calculated on the basis of metrics and were not comprehensive, but this cannot change the figures given. But the fact that only baptisms were reflected in the metrics can only lower the calculations of the average life expectancy, because children who died before baptism were not reflected at all.

    Source: Truth and fiction of Tsarist Russia (end of XIX - beginning of XX century)
    author Arin Oleg Alekseevich
    Table. LNG in Russia and other countries
    Country 1900 1913
    Men Women Average
    England / Wales 46,4 50,1 52
    France 45,3 48,7 50
    Germany 43,8 46,6 49
    Sweden 52,8 55,3
    USA 48,3 51,1 50
    Japan 42,8 44,3 51
    Austria 37,8 38,9
    Russia 29,4 31,7 33

    During the years 1880-1916, at least 158 ​​million children died. Over the same years, about 308 million people lost from starvation, disease, war, industrial injuries.
  31. SCS
    SCS 14 February 2013 13: 07 New
    and literally 20 years after the collapse of the USSR, peasants, although they do not starve to death, are caught in the conditions of a market economy! and do not compare the quality of life of peasants in 70-80 of the last century and the present! No.
    1. SCS
      SCS 15 February 2013 05: 14 New
      I did not invent it! He himself was born and raised in the village and I know the opinions of the villagers well, and I see everything perfectly!
      1. SCS
        SCS 15 February 2013 10: 46 New
        if anyone does not agree, please argue!
        I'm not trying to blame someone, but just stating a fact!
        if someone doubts, come to Altai, take you to your village, to the neighboring ones and you will see and hear everything yourself! it's stupid to deny!
        in a village where once there was a strong economy, in which more than one hundred people worked, now 15 people are working! people have not seen a salary of 4-5 thousand rubles for six months! animal husbandry is over, instead of 30-35 thousand hectares sown at best 5 !!!!!!!!!!!!! therefore, who wants to put - please comment!
        with respect hi
  32. Avenger711
    Avenger711 14 February 2013 13: 24 New
    To be honest, the lamentations about "Russia we have lost" most of all resemble a reflection on the lost paradise, which was somewhere there once and which was allegedly stolen from us either by the Bolsheviks or by foreign agents. And all this is multiplied by the absolute disbelief in the authorities, when any even the most useful undertaking with a really positive result is perceived as another way to rob the country. They believe only chernukha, and all at the same time the liberal lies about the billion people shot by Stalin personally and the fact that all the money is not enough for Putin.

    Well, since Russia was shaking in the 20th century, as never before, it surely arises that shocks could be avoided, and the Bolsheviks become somebody’s agents (after all, it’s easy to transplant a bunch of spies), either German or German whether it’s British (for conspirators like Starikov think that the least need for a warring Britain is a change of power in Russia, it’s already not enough), or it’s Martian, and Stalin allegedly believed Hitler, etc., etc.

    In general, this is a religion, and, apparently, all this population, brought up on myths and remembering only the times of the late USSR, perestroika and the collapse of the 90s should naturally die out so that they begin to look at the history of the 20th century more or less objectively.
    1. Gur
      Gur 14 February 2013 15: 44 New
      So we get it already stolen twice, and the third bite)))))
  33. wax
    wax 14 February 2013 13: 31 New
    If we consider that according to the same Brockhaus and Efron in the European part of Russia in 1897 there were 12.8% of the urban population, and in Siberia - 9,3%, then the assumption that the peasants rebelled at the beginning of the 20th century "with fat" receives undeniable confirmation.
    How Russia ruled over Liberal supporters of capitalism in the 90s can be viewed at the link below. Who is too lazy to read, look at the charts, there are many of them.
  34. Jack clubs
    Jack clubs 14 February 2013 13: 46 New
    I even signed up to comment on this brilliant piece of propaganda art.
    We must pay tribute to the author: he is right. In pre-revolutionary Russia, people lived terribly poorly and hungry, and the situation was rather getting worse (and the debts of tsarist Russia were growing).
    But in everything else, he is so wrong that he is just a guard.
    1. And who is to blame for the impoverishment of the population? King, priests or maybe the stupidity of the people of the God-bearer? The peasant reform is to blame, the introduction of those same market relations as a result of which there was nothing to eat even among the riches of Russia is to blame. Everything is right as it is now. But the author blames it is clear on whom.
    2. These arguments are ridiculous. especially such an "adequate" authority as Leo Tolstoy. He devoted his whole life to the cause of the struggle with his own country and at the end of his life was completely crazy and went to women.
    3. If you want to know the objective picture, read "History of Nutrition in Europe" by Massimo Montanari and learn a lot about chronic diseases from malnutrition that we have no idea about. It can be seen because they are simply stupid, and not because we simply did not have hunger, such as in civilized Europe, where rickets and scurvy were commonplace during the same period of time.
    4. And where did the famine come from? Yes, all the same speculation in the food market, all the swindling and crime of speculators. And Montanari describes the thousand-year history of such crimes. Russia entered this Mr. only in 1861.
    And the author so convincingly argues that the opposite is true, that in Europe people ate cutlets when we ate clay with herbs.
    In short, in the furnace !!!!!!!!!!
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 14 February 2013 14: 28 New
      Why is peasant reform to blame? Because it was held so that the landowner did not offend. That is, the regime did not allow dispersal of parasites.

      The fact that the greed of speculators will push them into the deliberate organization of hunger is clear to everyone except for the very PGMnut. Well, who should fight speculation? After the Holodomor, the Bolsheviks decided the question radically, speculators simply plopped, the tsarist government could not solve the problems for decades. Well, what for such power is needed if it is not able to improve the situation of the people ?? As a result, this power flew to hell.
  35. Black Colonel
    Black Colonel 14 February 2013 14: 05 New
    I am somewhat confused by the fact that the article is not even signed by a pseudonym. The literacy of the "compiler" is also in doubt. In my understanding, "hunger strike" is actually a voluntary refusal to eat, and "hunger" is a forced impossibility of taking food due to its absence. The "author", however, calls "hunger" entirely "hunger strike." "The villages were shot from guns" gives off the confusion of the times of collectivization of all the same Tambov peasants mentioned in the article. Apparently, they (the Tambov peasants) had something to compare, because not everyone died during the collectivization period who worked on the land before the revolution. By the way, before the revolution there was at least some land for a family ("1 tithe, 1/2 tithe"). Finally, the land was taken away for collectivization ("land - to peasants, factories - to workers!"). As one of the members of the forum noticed - sheer trolling. negative
    1. Kars
      Kars 14 February 2013 14: 17 New
      Quote: Black Colonel
      Apparently they (the Tambov peasants) had something to compare, because not all of them died during the collectivization period who worked on the land before the revolution. By the way, before the revolution there was at least some land for a family ("1 tithe, 1/2 tithe"). Finally, the land was taken away for collectivization ("

      When my grandmother recalled the hunger of 1933 she spoke.
      _ Was almost the same as in the eighth year ._
      Naturally, she could assess only by her place of residence. Zaporizhzhya region.
      1. igordok
        igordok 14 February 2013 14: 47 New
        My paternal grandmother in 1908 at the age of 2 years (naturally with family) fled from Latvia to the Bryansk region due to hunger.
        The maternal grandmother in the family of the railway worker did not talk about the famine. But she never allowed even the crumbs to remain on the table.
        So the article is a plus. The one who did not work did not eat, but even the one who worked could not relax.
  36. camcos
    camcos 14 February 2013 14: 08 New
    I remember well the great-grandmother's stories she married in the Urals, in the countryside in 1916, recalled that under the tsar it was bad and hungry, with the Bolsheviks several horses appeared prosperous and the cows were dispossessed, after a while everything was settled again, because of her memories the revolution definitely good.
  37. Dmitry 2246
    Dmitry 2246 14 February 2013 14: 16 New
    I am for any power. This is better than anarchy. My relatives from Tver peasants, supplied food to St. Petersburg. In front of me is a photo of 1919 taken in the city of Torzhok: grandmother (2 years old), great-grandmother, great-great-grandfather and great-great-grandmother. Of course the photo is "front". They were strict, strong, wealthy people. Solid outfits, jewelry and the unrealistically huge hands of the old man. Wheat did not grow here, but the family baked rye bread for weddings the best. There was no collective farm, and the peasant artel kept shops with salesmen in the capital. They were built "by the whole world", served the Fatherland honestly. And no one expected trouble, anarchy.
    The degradation of personality begins with a condemnation of power, then a betrayal of the motherland and the last of the family.
    Stop whining! Got moral. Do something useful.
  38. S_mirnov
    S_mirnov 14 February 2013 14: 18 New
    Great article! Many thanks to the author! Rarely lately are they telling the truth so reasonably. Modern hucksters cover up their greed and squalor with tales about "Russia we lost." But sane people will not believe in this crap!
  39. nemec55
    nemec55 14 February 2013 14: 37 New
    I can still write an unfortunate but ugly situation in Russian villages and it’s good that I have always lived in a village since Soviet times in Kazakhstan, now in Russia. It’s only from this.
  40. Khamsin
    Khamsin 14 February 2013 15: 03 New
    My grandfather is a son of a fist, a grandmother is a daughter of a fist. I know from their stories how it really was. Grandmother often says the phrase "the fist was the one who slept on the fist so as not to oversleep the dawn ... you have to work"

    Nicholas 2 was also canonized as a martyr. The question is for what ??? For the fact that Gorbachev ruined the country ???
  41. demandxy
    demandxy 14 February 2013 15: 05 New
    Article is nonsense! During my lifetime, my grandmother used to say (she was 29 years old during the revolution) that it was better in the countryside before the revolution. They didn’t live richly and always had enough for food, but there were 7-9 children in the family, and they lived like that and survived the revolution 3 war (World War I, Soviet Polish and the Great Patriotic War)! And now, try to feed the 4th one so you will only eat bread! Yes, and you can’t reach the pension!
  42. Khamsin
    Khamsin 14 February 2013 15: 10 New
    "from vodka, which is the main income of the state and to which people have been accustomed for centuries." - Someone always teaches Russians to something !!! Then they teach to drink, then they are lazy)))
  43. figvamforever
    figvamforever 14 February 2013 15: 28 New
    Quote: Papakiko
    Across the Urals, only DRESSERS and LITTLES could starve; the forest and taiga fed the people for more than a thousand years.

    I agree 100% of my ancestors lived in the Novosibirsk region. Families were very large, no one died of hunger, if they died, then from disease.
    And so there was a famine under kings and kings and Egyptian emperors, you can’t do anything against nature.
    But under the tsar, life in Siberia was better than under Putin, this is a fact. Villages and cities grew. and due to the growth of the local population and due to immigrants. Under Putin, everything is exactly the opposite. The outflow of the population, mortality, the destruction of the village. Make a conclusion yourself.
  44. Begemot
    Begemot 14 February 2013 15: 28 New
    The ruin and exodus of the peasantry to the cities is a worldwide and programmed process. First, labor productivity in the agricultural sector is growing and does not require as much labor force, and the city requires more and more labor force in industry. All industrialized countries went through this stage 200-300 years ago. Then they, too, shuddered from brutal repressions and from uprisings, they were lucky that there was no Marx-Leninist ideology and the proletariat did not support the uprising of the peasants, but they were suppressed not like more cruelly than in Russia. We, as always, had our own path, it all began much later, when the proletariat of the villagers who settled in the cities in the third or fourth generation became impoverished due to the inhuman face of Russian capitalism, recognizable even today, and rose up, calling the rioters of the peasants into its ranks. And, as is usually the case, this was immediately taken advantage of by the newly-made "proletarian" leaders who had never and in no way were either peasants or proletarians.
  45. Vinnipukh
    Vinnipukh 14 February 2013 16: 12 New
    Questions to commentators denying the information in this article:
    1 Have you studied the sources cited by the author of the article?
    2 Have you found inconsistencies, erroneous arguments, misinformation in them?
    3 If, according to individual comrades, the peasants (and the bulk of the workers) lived wonderful in tsarist Russia, there was no hunger, etc., why did peasant unrest, uprisings and a revolution take place almost constantly?
    As for large families of 10 or more children: “According to demographers, the Russian peasant woman of this period (the turn of the XIX - XX centuries - approx.) Gave birth on average 7-9 times. The average number of births among peasants in the Tambov province was 6,8 times, and a maximum of 17. Here are some extracts from the report of the gynecological department of the Tambov province provincial hospital for 1897, 1901:

    “Evdokia Moshakova, a peasant woman, 40 years old, married 27 years, gave birth 14 times”; “Akulina Manukhina, a peasant woman, 45 years old, married 25 years, gave birth 16 times.”

    In the absence of artificial birth control, the number of children in the family depended solely on the woman's reproductive capabilities.

    High infant mortality played the role of a spontaneous regulator of rural reproduction. According to surveys (1887-1896), the proportion of deceased children under five years of age on average in Russia was 43,2%, and in some provinces more than 50%. ”
    1. Jack clubs
      Jack clubs 14 February 2013 17: 26 New
      Dear VinniPukh! Nobody argues about the facts and sources, the conclusions made by the author are in doubt. More precisely, not even conclusions, but simply another throwing of negativity.
      Now about the facts. there is an article about time, which is still fresh in memory.
      So even here there are many mourners who talk about their material suffering at that time. To judge the beginning of the 20th century by the memoirs of such mourners is initially a disastrous business. Each time this is only personal experience and the opinion of a specific person. And the opinion of the Russian intellectual on this issue is the very last thing I would rely on.
      From the experience of my family I can say one thing - before the revolution, we flourished. After the revolution, from hunger and disease (but not repression), all my grandfathers-women became orphans. But before the revolution, there was no famine, moreover, they lived almost prosperously. (Region - Crimea)
  46. figvamforever
    figvamforever 14 February 2013 16: 17 New
    Quote: VinniPukh
    If, according to individual comrades, the life of peasants (and the bulk of the workers) was wonderful in tsarist Russia, there was no hunger, etc., why did peasant unrest, uprisings and revolution take place almost constantly?

    Well, if you like questions, then answer. And where was this in the Urals and in Siberia were peasant riots? Or the rebellion of the workers.
    1. Isk1984
      Isk1984 14 February 2013 16: 51 New
      You probably have not heard about the uprisings of workers in the mines?
  47. Isk1984
    Isk1984 14 February 2013 16: 22 New
    The point is not that yes, my grandparents lived well, it is completely possible that it was so, but how many such families were there? Statistics tell us that yes, nobles are good, but they are 1%, and among the peasants there were a lot of maximum 5 percent of the total number, and the idyll is that it’s nice to be a stupid class and someone by birth has everything, and you’re a soup eat grass ..... the bottom line is that, as a whole, the concept of power has outlived itself; the top people didn’t understand themselves, and didn’t want to understand the people somehow with a silver service, the main thing is to wear a dress for the ball, Yes and probably for the hundredth time it’s worth recalling that the revolution was not started by the Bolsheviks, February is still far from October ....
    Well, I’ll add on my own thank you livestock comrades, let it sound pathetic, but on the whole, the Soviet government gave everyone equal opportunities to make a person feel like something more than a draft unit in the field, who would you be today if it weren’t, and even in general, most of all they smelled like swineherds at the gufrehrer of a certain governorate, the USSR to study, to realize all its potential inherent in us by nature, the level of knowledge in the average person born in the USSR is higher in any other country (so far), many on this forum even does not realize what it means to live in a class society ,,,, hypocrites and hypocrites ....
  48. figvamforever
    figvamforever 14 February 2013 16: 54 New
    Quote: Isk1984
    You probably have not heard about the uprisings of workers in the mines

    I have not heard. Tell me.
    1. CM-90
      CM-90 14 February 2013 17: 26 New
      Хотя-бы это:
    2. Jack clubs
      Jack clubs 14 February 2013 17: 37 New
      This is during the first advent of Chubais.
      Do not let yourself be taken aside - they have good knowledge of the facts. But with the conclusions they always strained.
      Someone will answer me, what is the main conclusion of this article, besides the traditional "pissed-off-polymers", only in relation to tsarist Russia? Moreover, with a bashful departure from the indication of cause-and-effect relationships. As the character-concierge of Misha Galustyan, who first shit in the elevator, and then in thin voices is indignant "ay-ay-ay, who did it?"
      As for the fact that there were heaps of Mr. in Russia - we do not argue with a selection of facts. We argue that all of Russia was in the city. And we argue that all this is a direct consequence of the Chubais and "foreign investors", which were abound both before and especially after the revolution.
  49. albert
    albert 14 February 2013 17: 14 New
    Bushkov, in his historical investigations "Stalin", "Rasputin", cites the same facts and many references to documentary sources. It is completely incomprehensible why the article was minus.
  50. figvamforever
    figvamforever 14 February 2013 17: 33 New
    Quote: SM-90
    Хотя-бы это:


    Lensky executed - the tragic events of April 17 (4), 1912 at the mines of the Lena gold mining association located in the Bodaibo region on the Lena tributary of the Vitim and Olekma rivers. According to various estimates, between 250 and 500 people were injured in the strike and the subsequent execution of workers by government forces, including 107-270 people who died.

    The immediate reason for the strike was the “story with meat” at St. Andrew’s mine, retold in the memoirs of the participants in many versions:
    the worker of the mine (sometimes specific names are called) was given rotten meat [comm. 1];
    the workers' inspection found a horse leg in the cooking pot;
    a woman (the wife of one of the workers, or one of the “mothers” [comm. 2]) bought a piece of meat in the shop that looked like a horse's genitals.

    At present, the workers were weird. And now there is rotten meat in the canteens. Learned to process it only, so as not to smell. And in today's sausage, horse meat would look like a delicacy against the background of soy, rats, starch and sodium glucose.
    1. Kite
      Kite 14 February 2013 21: 09 New
      "Lena shot - tragic events ............."
      It is possible and simpler: advise you to search for information about the owners of these mines and their scams.
    2. Denis
      Denis 15 February 2013 00: 20 New
      Quote: figvamforever
      a piece of meat that looks like a horse's genitals.

      In Soviet history, events in Lena mines stood out as the first speeches led by the Bolsheviks. Even the chief bolshevik wrote about this
      True, there was a different, at that time almost blasphemous, interpretation - "The readiness of the masses, the revolutionary situation is all ... nya, it is important in whose hands that one falls"