"Black Baron" Wrangel. Denikin's successor.

11 420 204
"Black Baron" Wrangel. Denikin's successor.

In the previous article (Faces of the Civil War) We discussed how the White movement's leaders, who maintained a "no-predeterminism" stance, had virtually nothing to offer the Russian people. They offered only vague promises to address the accumulated gaps following the victory over the Bolsheviks—while Lenin and his comrades offered everything at once. Only in the final stages of the civil war did P. Wrangel come up with a program that was more or less understandable to the people. He agreed to transfer the landlords' land to the peasants (albeit for a "fair" payment), recognize and legalize the peasants' seizures of landlords' land, develop laws guaranteeing workers' rights and at least some social guarantees, and promised to grant self-government to the national outlying areas. But he again delegated the decision on Russia's state structure to the Constituent Assembly, whose deputies would again have to be elected. And in his "Appeal to the Russian People," he incautiously declared that the people must choose their "master"—and even the "volunteers" began to suspect that Wrangel not only wanted to restore the monarchy, but wanted to become emperor himself. And P. Gorenstein and S. Pokrass wrote a march with a formula that was timeless:

White Army, Black Baron,
They are preparing the royal throne for us again.

Remember?



Let's return to Wrangel's reforms: some believe that if the "Whites" had immediately come up with this or a similar program, the civil war might have taken a different course, but this is unlikely. Now, however, it was too late, and the "Black Baron" was doomed to defeat. In these articles, we will discuss Wrangel's origins and career, his participation in the civil war, his emigration, and his death abroad.

The Wrangel family


The man discussed in this article was a member of the Danish noble family of Tølsburg-Ellistfer, whose origins can be found in documents dating back to the early 13th century. The Wrangel family's motto was the Latin phrase "Frangas, non flectes" – "You can break, but you cannot bend." The first known ancestor of the "Black Baron" was a certain Dominus Tuki Wrang ("Lord Tuki Wrang"), who in 1219 was stationed in the garrison of Reval Fortress among the "men of King Valdemar II of Denmark." "Wrang" was likely a family nickname: it could mean "iron," "steadfast," but also "cruel."


The coat of arms of the Wrangel family, known since 1314, with a motto and images of a crest, eagle wings and two crenellated walls

The children of "Mr. Tuka" were called de Wranghele, and later, in Russia, they became Wrangels. Their estates were Ellistfer and Ludengoff. But in the 16th century, the Wrangel family split into 20 independent lines.

The first to receive the baronial title from Queen Christina of Sweden was Colonel Herman von Wrangel in October 1653. In the mid-18th century, other members of the family became barons of Livonia and Estonia.

As one might guess, the main occupation of the Wrangel family men was military service: they served in the armies of Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Austria, Holland, and even Spain. Seven members of the family became field marshals, more than thirty became generals, and another seven became admirals. Some members of the family became bishops, four women became abbesses, and seven became ambassadors to neighboring states.

In Russia there is some German Denis Vladimirovich Vrangelev He appeared in 1629—he is mentioned as the owner of an estate in the Nizhny Novgorod district. And in 1709, 22 officers with the surname Wrangel were killed in the Battle of Poltava. You probably guessed that they served in the Swedish army.

The first Wrangels appeared in the Russian army during the final stages of the Seven Years' War, and they later fought in the Russo-Turkish Wars of the 18th century. The name of one of the family's members can be seen on the 15th wall of Moscow's Cathedral of Christ the Savior—he is mentioned among those wounded in the Battle of Borodino. Alexander Yevstafievich Wrangel joined the history as the man to whom the famous Imam Shamil surrendered in the village of Gunib on August 26, 1859.


Adjutant General A. E. Wrangel, engraving from the late 1850s – early 1860s.

An island between the East Siberian and Chukchi Seas bears the name of Admiral Ferdinand Petrovich Wrangel.


F. P. Wrangel in a portrait by A. Pershakov, 1892. In 1840-1847 he was the director of the Russian-American Company and opposed the sale of Alaska to the United States.

In the mid-19th century, by decree, the State Council of the Russian Empire recognized the baronial title of the Wrangels, who owned Ellistfer and Ludenhof.

By the beginning of the 2th century, it emerged that the Russian lines of the Wrangel family were the most numerous of all (the Swedish Wrangel families were second, and the Prussian ones third). By this time, 18 Russian Wrangels had risen to the rank of general, and two had become admirals. One Wrangel held the post of minister, another became a member of the State Council, two members of the family each became senators and governors, and one held a professorial chair.

The youth and early military career of Pyotr Wrangel


The future general and Denikin's successor as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Southern Russia was born in the city of Novo-Aleksandrovsk (now Zarasai, Lithuania) in the Kovno Governorate on August 15 (27), 1878. His maternal father was a descendant of Peter the Great's famous "Blackamoor," Hannibal. Unlike many members of the Wrangel family, he chose civil service and enrolled his son first at the Rostov Real School and then at the St. Petersburg Mining Institute, from which he graduated in 1901. Young Pyotr Wrangel was also passionate about music and sometimes conducted the orchestra at social balls.

The father also intended a civilian career for his youngest son, Nikolai, who became an employee of the Hermitage and editor of the magazine “Old Years” (he died in 1915).

After graduating with a degree in mining engineering, Pyotr Wrangel volunteered for the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment. A year later, having passed the exam at the Nikolaev Cavalry School with first-class honors, he was promoted to cornet of the guard and enlisted in the reserves. His next career move was as a special assignment official to the Irkutsk Governor-General. Pyotr Wrangel re-entered military service after the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese War: on February 6, 1904, he became a cornet in the 2nd Verkhneudinsk Regiment of the Transbaikal Cossack Host, but on February 27 of that year, he was transferred to the 2nd Argun Cossack Regiment.


Ensign P. Wrangel is fourth from the left in the front row among the officers of the Second Agrun Cossack Regiment

During the Russo-Japanese War, he rose to the rank of centurion by December 1904, receiving the Order of St. Anne, 4th Class, with the inscription "for bravery," and the Order of St. Stanislav, 3rd Class, with swords and bow. After the war, he remained in service and on January 6, 1906, became a staff captain in the 55th Finland Dragoon Regiment, but was assigned to the Northern Detachment of Major General I. A. Orlov's Retinue. As part of this unit, he participated in suppressing rebellions in the Baltics, where he drew attention to his brutality—under his orders, 13 people were shot and two hanged in the Valisburg volost.

In March 1907, he was transferred as a lieutenant to the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment. Either in August or October 1908, 30-year-old Pyotr Wrangel married his maid of honor, Olga Mikhailovna Ivanenko, who was five years his junior. She bore him four children, his last son, Alexei, born in exile in 1922, at the age of 39.


Olga Mikhailovna Wrangel

Olga outlived her husband by 40 years and died in New York in 1968.

In 1910, Pyotr Wrangel graduated from the Nikolaev Military Academy, and in 1911, he completed the Officer Cavalry School. In 1914, we see Wrangel as a captain and squadron commander in the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment. A few days after the start of World War I, he turned 36.


Captain Wrangel, 1914

P. Wrangel during World War I


The baron fought quite well. On August 6, near Causeni, at the head of the Guards Horse Regiment, he attacked a German battery, capturing two guns and four ammunition boxes. He was awarded the Order of St. George, 4th Class. During this battle, his horse was killed.


A. Sheloumov. Attack of P. N. Wrangel with a squadron of the Life Guards Cavalry Regiment on a German battery on August 6, 1914.

The losses among the officer corps of the imperial army were very high, and the situation could be characterized by the words of Griboyedov's Colonel S. Skalozub:

Vacancies are just open;
Then the elders will be turned off by others,
Others, you see, are killed.

Already in December 1914, P. Wrangel became a colonel and aide-de-camp of the Retinue.

On February 20 of the following year, he captured a crossing over the Dovinė River (in the south of modern Lithuania), and then drove two German companies from their positions, capturing 12 enemy soldiers and seizing a supply train. In June 1915, he received the St. George's Cross. weapon.

In October of that year, Wrangel became commander of the 1st Nerchinsk Regiment of the Ussuri Cavalry Brigade (later division) under General A. Krymov. Upon transfer, he received the following character reference:

Outstanding bravery. He grasps the situation quickly and perfectly, and is very resourceful in difficult situations.

Jumping ahead a bit, we note that after the end of the civil war, General Yakov Slashchev, who had returned to Soviet Russia, said in a conversation with Dzerzhinsky about the baron, whom he knew well:

A coward by nature, but professionally brave in battle.

At that time, Baron Robert Nikolaus Maximilian von Ungern-Sternberg, who later became famous for his ideas of restoring the Mongol empire of Genghis Khan, and the infamous Grigory Semenov, whose gangs during the Civil War, according to the testimony of the American General Graves, served in Wrangel's regiment.

Under the protection of Japanese troops, they roamed the country (Siberia) like wild animals, killing and robbing people.

In 1916, the Nerchinsk Regiment participated in the offensive operation of the Southwestern Front, which went down in history as the Brusilov Offensive, and received a commendation from the Emperor. Then, at the end of 1916, Wrangel was transferred to the Romanian Front, where in mid-January of the following year he became commander of the 2nd Brigade of the Ussuri Cavalry Division and was subsequently promoted to major general. His career in the Imperial Army had reached its pinnacle.

After the February Revolution


The news of Nicholas II's abdication reached Wrangel in Bessarabia. A staunch monarchist, he wrote about the events in Petrograd:

With the fall of the Tsar, the very idea of ​​power fell; all the obligations that bound the Russian people disappeared from their understanding, and power and these obligations could not be replaced by anything corresponding.

He was particularly shocked by the notorious "Order No. 1," issued by the Petrograd Soviet on March 1 (14), 1917, which he attempted to ignore. Nevertheless, his service continued, and in July 1917, he became commander of the 7th Cavalry Division, and then of the Combined Cavalry Corps. He even received the St. George's Cross, 4th Class, with a laurel branch for the successful retreat of infantry units to the Sbruch River, which took place from July 10 to 20, 1917. But the army was rapidly deteriorating and disintegrating before our eyes, and Wrangel's "old-regime" leadership methods irritated his superiors in Petrograd. All this led to his resignation, after which Wrangel and his family moved to Yalta, where he was arrested in late 1917 but soon released. After this, he went to Kyiv, where he failed to find common ground with Hetman Skoropadsky. Finally, in August 1918, he found himself in Yekaterinodar (present-day Krasnodar), where he began his service in Denikin's Volunteer Army.

White Guard General Pyotr Wrangel


Wrangel's first assignment in Denikin's army was as commander of the First Cavalry Division, which included Kuban and Terek Cossacks. From this time on, he invariably appeared in public wearing a black Cossack Circassian coat with gazyrs, earning him the nickname "Black Baron." He took part in the Second Kuban Campaign, soon rising to corps commander and the rank of lieutenant general. Wrangel sought not to disperse his forces across the entire front, but rather to consolidate them into a single "fist," throwing his cavalry into breakthroughs. It was the actions of his cavalrymen that largely determined the White Guards' success in the battles in the Kuban and the North Caucasus.

In May 1919, he found himself at the head of the Kuban Army, which pushed the 10th Red Army back to Tsaritsyn, and then, at the end of June 1919, managed to capture this strategically important city.


Wrangel in Tsaritsyn

And this wasn't the only White success. V. Mai-Maevsky's army captured the Donbass, Kharkov, and Yekaterinoslav (Dnepropetrovsk). Lieutenant General V. Sidorin, with his troops and the rebels from the Upper Don stanitsas who had joined them, occupied the Don Cossack Host region and part of the Voronezh Governorate. Inspired by this success, Denikin decided to lead his troops toward Moscow, while Wrangel, with a more realistic assessment of the situation, proposed going on the defensive on the Kharkov sector of the front and advancing troops toward Saratov and then on to Moscow—anticipating the possibility of assisting Kolchak and perhaps even joining forces with him. However, the bloody admiral's army had already suffered defeat, lost Ufa, and was retreating beyond the Urals. Another option was to launch an offensive from Kharkov, going on the defensive on the Tsaritsyn sector. In early July 1919, Denikin issued an order known as the "Moscow Directive," which called for an offensive in all directions: three White armies were to advance along a 1000-kilometer front. Wrangel later called this "Moscow Directive." "a death sentence for the troops of Southern Russia"He wrote:

All principles of strategy were forgotten. The choice of a single main operational direction, the concentration of the bulk of forces on that direction, and maneuver—all of this was absent. Each corps was simply assigned a route to Moscow.

On September 20, 1919, Denikin’s troops captured Kursk, on October 13 – Orel, and on September 28, Yudenich began his offensive on Petrograd – and by the 20th of the same month he had come close to the city.

But in the autumn of 1919, the White Guard's march on Moscow ended in disaster, and Wrangel, due to disagreements with Denikin, was removed from command on December 20, 1919. Yudenich suffered defeat and retreated to Estonia by the end of the year. Infighting among the Whites continued, and Denikin, who clung to power to the bitter end, dismissed Wrangel and Generals Lukomsky and Shatilov, commander of the Black Sea Fleet, from the army in early February 1920. fleet Vice-Admiral Nenyukov and the Chief of Staff of the Fleet, Rear Admiral Bubnov. This caused outrage among the troops, and Captain Nikolai Orlov even staged a mutiny in Crimea, demanding Denikin's resignation and the appointment of Wrangel as commander-in-chief. Denikin's government was accused of "embezzlement and inefficiency"However, Wrangel did not support this rebellion and even left for Constantinople for a while.

Denikin's reputation was finally ruined by the catastrophic and inept evacuations of White Guard units and White civilian supporters from Odessa (February 2-8, 1920) and Novorossiysk (March 1920). This will be discussed further in articles devoted to A. Denikin.


English Tanks, abandoned by the White Guards in Novorossiysk. Incidentally, in November 1920, 12 more tanks would become trophies to the Red Army in Crimea – 5 in Feodosia and 7 in Sevastopol.

In Novorossiysk alone, approximately 22 White Guards were captured. Just recently, on January 4, Kolchak ceded the title of Supreme Ruler of Russia to Denikin. And already on April 4, the disgraced Denikin resigned and left Russia that same day on a British destroyer.


Denikin in a photograph taken on the day of his resignation – April 4, 1920.

And on April 4, Wrangel arrived in Sevastopol on the battleship Emperor of India.

In the following articles, we will continue our story and talk about the desperate attempts at reform undertaken by Baron Wrangel, about the agony of the White Guard Crimea and the declared “model” evacuation of November 1920, about Wrangel’s life in exile.
204 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    4 October 2025 06: 10
    White Army, Black Baron,
    They are preparing the royal throne for us again.

    But from the taiga to the small British seas, the Red Army is the strongest of all! good Will not wait soldier
  2. +6
    4 October 2025 06: 16
    The Wrangels served the Russian Empire for generations. And yet, one of the Wrangel clan became an enemy. And not even immediately, after the fall of the Monarchy, but some time later. And not the bloodiest enemy of the new state, but one of the last to fight against it.
    The devil is not as black as he is painted?!
    This is my personal opinion after reading the publication.

    Thanks to the author for the part of the publication concerning the history of the Wrangels!
    But if you remove the ratings (bloody admiral), the material would not become worse.

    Personal opinion...
    Tsars, presidents, and generals are not divided into bloody, kind, and benevolent.
    Their retinue makes them this way. And the victors preserve them in their memory.
    1. VLR
      +14
      4 October 2025 06: 21
      "Bloody Admiral* Kolchak is not an exaggeration, but a statement of fact. Even under Yeltsin in 1999, the Transbaikal Military Court declared him "a man who committed crimes against peace and humanity, and is not subject to rehabilitation." And General Graves, who commanded the American intervention corps, called Kolchak's army a "retreating band"—nothing more, nothing less.
      1. +3
        4 October 2025 07: 25
        The Transbaikal Military Court declared it
        - not in defense of Kolchak, but the reference to our courts makes me smile....
        1. +13
          4 October 2025 08: 20
          The trial took place not under the Communists, but under the anti-Communist and anti-Soviet Yeltsin, when everyone was rehabilitated. So, no smiles.
        2. -3
          9 October 2025 11: 33
          A smile without a reason is a sign of foolishness.
      2. -7
        4 October 2025 08: 27
        The last thing you should trust is Grevs and other Anglo-American scum! They'll try to tarnish all Russians.
        And if we're talking about the "bloody" White generals, then it would be fair, like a man, to talk about the "bloody" Red Committees too! Otherwise, it seems like we're playing here, not playing there, and then wrapping up the fish here.
        1. +8
          4 October 2025 08: 35
          Have you read the article "Faces of the Civil War"? It describes who started the civil war and how the Bolsheviks tried to rule before the assassination attempt on Lenin and the murder of Uritsky.
          1. -10
            4 October 2025 14: 01
            IMHO, Moisei Solomonovich Uritsky shed so much Russian blood that he could compete with Himmler.
            1. VLR
              +10
              4 October 2025 14: 20
              What blood?! Uritsky was a principled opponent of the death penalty and even, together with Zinoviev, harshly suppressed attempts in Petrograd to avenge Voldarsky's murder. Uritsky's murder benefited only extremist Bolshevik leaders like Sverdlov and Trotsky—just like the assassination attempt on Lenin. It was this double act of terror that enabled Sverdlov to rescind the decree of October 28, 1917, abolishing the death penalty and announce the beginning of the Red Terror.
          2. -1
            10 December 2025 14: 07
            The civil war began with the Bolsheviks' shameful Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. For almost a year and a half, the entire country more or less recognized the new Bolshevik government, but the outright surrender of half the country to the enemy was nothing short of treason. It was only in the summer of 18 that intelligent people realized that such shady leaders should be driven out with their piss-paws.
        2. +9
          4 October 2025 08: 42
          By the way, why not believe Graves, who didn't care which Russians he vilified—the Reds or the Whites? Moreover, he went "against the grain": after all, the Entente supported the Whites, and the United States subsequently refused to recognize Soviet Russia for a long time. So, such horrors truly occurred under Kolchak that he couldn't remain silent.
      3. -14
        4 October 2025 09: 30
        Quote: VlR
        "Bloody Admiral* Kolchak is not an exaggeration, but a statement of fact. Even under Yeltsin, in 1999, the Transbaikal Military Court declared him "a man who committed crimes against peace and humanity, and is not subject to rehabilitation."

        Once again, Alexander Vasilyevich does NOT need rehabilitation, because there was no trial against him.

        By the decision of the Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg, chaired by Judge T.P. Matusyak from January 24, 2017 year in case No. 02a-0185/2017
        The execution of Kolchak A.V. should be qualified as an extrajudicial execution, his execution – This was an extrajudicial killing, committed with gross violation of the procedural rules in force at the time.
        The basis for the execution was a secret telegram from V. I. Ulyanov (Lenin)

        Lenin is a banal criminal here too.

        decision of the Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg (federal judicial body in light of the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Judicial System of the Russian Federation") of January 24, 2017 in case No. 02a-0185/2017 - an act illustrating the official legal position of the Russian Federation on the issue of the execution of the Supreme Ruler of Russia, Admiral A.V. Kolchak...N.

        the decision on the state structure of Russia was again transferred to the discretion of the Constituent Assembly, whose deputies I would have to choose again.

        Well, yes, it's "hard" work. It's better not to choose anyone anywhere for 70 years, and to submit to the wild, uncontrolled decisions of "leaders" who were not elected by anyone.

        P.N. Wrangel is an example of a true Russian patriot-officer, a front-line soldier, and a trench soldier. He fought for Russia in three wars.
        , wounded, awarded for bravery.

        Where were the great leaders in these terrible times? They fought for...defeat of Russia , drank beer in the Swiss and slept with youngsters in the chicken coops, while in the rear, the natural Russians, the Hornsteins, "fought" with the Pokrasses.

        Where, by the way, are the descendants of the Pokrasses, the "leaders"? In that damned Western capitalism, while they were building us... communism...
        1. VLR
          +14
          4 October 2025 09: 38
          The Transbaikal Military Court's decision to declare Kolchak "a person who committed crimes against peace and humanity and is not subject to rehabilitation" was upheld by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in November 2001, and the lower Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg simply had no right to overturn it. This is simply an anti-Soviet and anti-communist commentary.
          1. -12
            4 October 2025 10: 41
            Quote: VlR
            November 2001

            You have already been provided with a federal court decision 2017 years.

            Perhaps for you, the decision of the 1937 "trial" against Tukhachevsky is also in effect?
            Quote: VlR
            I simply had no right to cancel this decision.

            Are you the Supreme Court? No? And he didn't object.
            Quote: VlR
            This is simply an anti-Soviet and anti-communist comment.

            it's simple anti-Russophobic comment.

            You haven't answered the question: in which Kurei trench did your "leaders" defend Russia from the Japanese and German invaders in 1905 and 1914, while the Wrangels shed blood for it?

            In which Western countries are there descendants of Khrushchev, Dzhugashvili, Blank, Andropov, Suslov, etc.?
        2. +10
          4 October 2025 10: 08
          The crucible has started singing a new song. I wish I could change the lyrics, it's disgusting.
        3. +2
          4 October 2025 12: 56
          Once again, Alexander Vasilyevich does NOT need rehabilitation, because there was no trial against him.

          - It wasn't necessary then. For example, the Poles shot prisoners without trial. And the Whites, for example, the book "Confession of a Cossack" - 4 mobilized soldiers were shot by the Reds.
          - the basis was Smirnov's order. Lenin was not to say anything in the telegram.
          - The army should serve the state, which was not the case; such a small, marginal party of 24 thousand in February 1917 had to clean up and save Russia.
        4. +2
          5 October 2025 05: 07
          Decision of the Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg

          Under no circumstances can it overturn a decision of the SUPREME COURT. It's a lapdog and an elephant. And even more so, a civil DISTRICT court cannot overturn a decision of the MILITARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT.
          1. -3
            5 October 2025 10: 55
            Quote: vet
            Under no circumstances can the decision of the SUPREME Court be overturned.

            The Supreme Court in NO WAY overturned the decision of the federal court of St. Petersburg and the decision of St. Petersburg - the LAST - and the murder of Kolchak - a flagrant extra-judicial crime of forms against the Law and Russia.

            PS Kolchak's name has finally been returned to his island forever - the truth has triumphed and will undoubtedly continue to triumph over 70 years of lies.
            1. VLR
              +3
              5 October 2025 13: 39
              Lower courts simply have no right to review decisions of higher courts, much less the Supreme Court. Therefore, the decision of the Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg is legally null and void, has no effect, and there is no need to overturn it.
              1. -5
                5 October 2025 16: 09
                Quote: VlR
                Therefore, the decision of the Smolninsky District Court of St. Petersburg is legally null and void, has no force, and there is no need to overturn it.

                The attempts of amateurs to challenge the decisions of the Smolninsky District Court are insignificant vessels St. Petersburg 2017, court decisions in action and now..
                1. +2
                  6 October 2025 09: 56
                  My God, Andrey, you are so stubborn.
                  Just look at what is officially said about the Supreme Court's decisions:
                  The decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is final and binding on all authorities.

                  Who can challenge the Supreme Court's decision and where to apply:
                  To appeal, you must contact a higher authority - the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

                  And that's it. No district court can even come close to appealing or overturning the Supreme Court's decision. Such a possibility simply doesn't exist.
                  1. -5
                    6 October 2025 12: 10
                    finally understand that the decision of the St. Petersburg court is has been in force and mandatory for 8 years now from the moment of adoption, it no one canceled.
                    1. +2
                      6 October 2025 12: 17
                      Why overturn a fundamentally unlawful decision that contradicts Federal Constitutional Law No. 3-FKZ of February 5, 2014, meaning it is legally null and void from the outset? This is simply a ridiculous legal anecdote, nothing more.
                      1. -5
                        6 October 2025 12: 42
                        Quote: vet
                        has no power

                        It has been in effect since the moment of adoption, the appeals board also upheld it, that's all.

                        For you, Tukhachevsky is still a spy...
                        ...
                        ,
                      2. +2
                        6 October 2025 12: 53
                        See the post below for the solution. the same Smolninsky court on the memorial plaque to Kolchak in St. Petersburg. It was removed by decision of Smolninsky Court нbased on the decision of the Transbaikal Military Court of 1999.
                        All these messages about the all-powerful DISTRICT court, which can easilyviolates federal law And overturning the decisions of the Supreme Court is simply a joke. Only the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation can overturn a Supreme Court decision in exceptional cases. Anything else is sheer nonsense. Lower courts don't even have the right to raise questions about reviewing a case after a Supreme Court decision. The decision of the Transbaikal Military Court and the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court district court cannot be cancelled in principle. They are mandatory for execution.
                      3. -1
                        6 October 2025 13: 12
                        Quote: vet
                        about the decision of the same Smolninsky court

                        I've been talking about this decision for THREE days now - and it has admitted that
                        execution of A.V. Kolchak should be classified as extrajudicial execution, his execution is Extrajudicial execution committed with gross violation procedural rules in force at that time

                        Therefore, he does not need rehabilitation, because there was no trial.
                      4. +2
                        6 October 2025 13: 30
                        It turns out that January 24, 2017 Smolninsky District Court changed my mind, since he made the decision to dismantle the memorial plaque to Kolchak in St. Petersburg, citing the fact that Kolchak was shot in 1920
                        by court order, and the Transbaikal Military Court in 1999 refused to rehabilitate the admiral, since his involvement in war crimes was not refuted.

                        The decision was made by Judge Tatyana Matusyak.
                        The court's decision was appealed to a higher court by the Culture Committee, which pointed out that Kolchak's name had already been immortalized in several Russian cities. However, the St. Petersburg City Court upheld the ruling on April 25.


                        https://www.rbc.ru/society/05/07/2017/595cadca9a79472a242a7148?ysclid=mgezn6u9n0539666230
                      5. -4
                        6 October 2025 15: 35
                        Quote: vet
                        It turns out that on January 24, 2017, the Smolninsky District Court

                        It turns out that we need to quote not the RBK retellings, but the COURT DECISION directly:
                        , which I do again with pleasure:

                        The execution of A.V. Kolchak should be classified as an extrajudicial execution, his execution was an extrajudicial execution, committed with a gross violation of the procedural rules in force at that time

                        And the name of the Russian officer, front-line soldier, Ruler of Russia is today borne by islands, ships, museums, monuments and memorials.

                        Compare this to the situation 40 years ago. WHAT is not visible?
                      6. +1
                        7 October 2025 09: 26
                        The situation is irreversibly shifting toward historical truth, and all these pseudo-heroes foisted upon us after Yeltsin's coup d'état will sooner or later be given a clear and unambiguous assessment, one you won't like. This issue will be finally resolved after Putin leaves power—because he is too grateful to Yeltsin and too closely tied to the notorious "Family" through the shady turncoat Sobchak.
                      7. +3
                        7 October 2025 09: 35
                        It's the next president who will see this through – deal with the Yeltsin Centers and the monuments to Kolchak and Solzhenitsyn, and force the oligarchs to work not for themselves, but for the country. Otherwise, Russia, alas, will no longer exist in this world.
                      8. -4
                        7 October 2025 10: 58
                        Quote: vet
                        The situation is irreversibly changing towards historical truth.

                        Of course, that's why, in recognition of this, monuments to Kolchak, Kornilov, Markov, Wrangel, Denikin, Kappel, and others stand on RUSSIAN soil, which they defended from foreign and domestic invaders, and islands and ships are named after them.
                        What "historical truth" from the Bolsheviks are you talking about? WHAT didn't they lie about? About everything and everything—famines, victims, repressions, executions, personalities, wars, losses, and so on and so forth.

                        To study history according to the Bolshevik model is dont know the history of their country and people.
                    2. +3
                      8 October 2025 12: 57
                      You, sir, have obviously never been to Siberia, but I served there. Surprisingly, they still call dogs Kolchak there. And when Kolchak was complained about excessive cruelty, he said it was like the War of the Roses in England—it was either us or them. Captured, naked Red Army soldiers were herded into freight cars and driven slowly to the next station. They were unloaded.
                      Icy corpses. And don't forget the execution of former deputies of the former State Duma.
        5. -1
          9 October 2025 11: 34
          Yes, yes. And Kolchak was a scientist, an explorer of the north, not an executioner. What does your propaganda say about the atrocities committed by Kolchak's men?
          1. -3
            9 October 2025 11: 47
            Quote: fuffi
            And Kolchak is a scientist, an explorer of the north, not an executioner.

            exactly
            Quote: fuffi
            Do your propaganda pieces talk about the atrocities committed by Kolchak's men?

            DOCUMENTS speak of unprecedented atrocities against the Russian people from 1917 to 1953, see Historical Materialism
      4. Aag
        +2
        5 October 2025 19: 19
        Quote: VlR
        "Bloody Admiral* Kolchak is not an exaggeration, but a statement of fact. Even under Yeltsin in 1999, the Transbaikal Military Court declared him "a man who committed crimes against peace and humanity, and is not subject to rehabilitation." And General Graves, who commanded the American intervention corps, called Kolchak's army a "retreating band"—nothing more, nothing less.

        And in 2004, a monument to Kolchak was erected in Irkutsk...
        1. +1
          6 October 2025 12: 20
          And in 2004, a monument to Kolchak was erected in Irkutsk...

          We still have plenty of Fifth Column liberals. But in St. Petersburg, the very same Smolninsky District Court that Olgovich constantly cites, on January 24, 2017, upheld a lawsuit against the city authorities demanding the removal of a memorial plaque to Russian Admiral Alexander Kolchak, installed in November 2016.
          And do you know what motivated this decision? Special attention for Olgovych!
          That
          In 1920, Kolchak was executed by court order, and in 1999 the Transbaikal Military Court refused to rehabilitate the admiral, since his involvement in war crimes was not refuted.

          !!!
          On April 25 of that year, the St. Petersburg City Court upheld the ruling of the Smolninsky District Court.
      5. +3
        7 October 2025 06: 15
        And how many people did the gang of three Khrushchevs, the hunchbacked one, the marked one, the white and fluffy ones, destroy??????
  3. +14
    4 October 2025 06: 29
    Everything changes. The Wrangels perished at Poltava. Schlippenbach was captured. And then his descendants served Russia.

    The topic is almost certain to spark heated debate. The Civil War can be debated endlessly. It's impossible to find the truth when so much blood is being spilled. Maybe it's not over yet.
    1. -10
      4 October 2025 14: 14
      Quote from Korsar4
      There is no truth to be found when so much of one's own blood is being shed.

      I disagree - compare the situation with the interpretation, assessment and objective knowledge about the US, VOR and GV 40 years ago and today - it's simply night and day, the truth has broken through 70 years of blatant lies, slander and oblivion.

      A few more years of this movement and true will triumph.fully
      1. +1
        4 October 2025 14: 21
        True, namesake, everyone has their own, but we will never know the truth.... hi
      2. +7
        4 October 2025 15: 36
        It's more complicated than that. With all due respect. Just today we were remembering Boris Lavrenev, "Forty-first." He also went over from the White Movement to the Red. It's a tragedy for the country. You can't find the right. You can find martyrs.
        1. -4
          4 October 2025 17: 42
          Quote from Korsar4
          The country's tragedy. There's no one on the right.

          There are basic principles:

          -human life is priceless,

          - no idea is worth the millions of destroyed, broken lives of our fellow citizens and the destruction of the country,

          - EVERYTHING must be decided in the elected parliament, and not on the battlefield, its decisions are binding on everyone.


          That's it!

          Who is against something like this? sound mind? Nobody. That's why they're right.
          1. +10
            4 October 2025 18: 24
            Do you really believe in the elected parliament?
            For example, today.

            And how much they fussed over the Constituent Assembly.

            One can endlessly go over the advantages and disadvantages of any system.

            No one disputes that life is priceless. The commandments were not given by chance.

            But the views of the ruling and subordinate classes can be very different.
            1. -3
              5 October 2025 09: 26
              Quote from Korsar4
              Do you really believe in the elected parliament?

              Do you really believe that millions of mutually broken heads in the GW give birth to... truth?

              Humanity has not come up with anything other than debates in parliament or the Civil War.
              Quote from Korsar4
              And how much they fussed over the Constituent Assembly.

              Is it easier to run around the fields after your opponent with checkers?
              Quote from Korsar4
              But the views of the ruling and subordinate classes can be very different.

              Naturally. The majority wins elections and passes its laws while respecting the minority:

              The People's Assembly managed to express the will of Russia's citizens—it recognized it as a republic and adopted a land law. And it would have resolved everything else, but...
              Who was against this? No one. Except the bandits.
              1. 0
                5 October 2025 13: 45
                Civil war is an absolute evil. The problem is that over the millennia, completely different forms of government have been devised.

                But has the world become less bloodthirsty? I'm not sure.
                1. -1
                  5 October 2025 16: 20
                  Quote from Korsar4
                  Completely different forms of government were invented.

                  Over time, they become more and more sophisticated - I think this is undeniable.
                  Quote from Korsar4
                  But has the world become less bloodthirsty? I'm not sure.

                  In any case, war is recognized as evil and a crime, which was not the case before, there is a ban on weapons of mass destruction, etc.

                  It seems idealistic, I understand, but few people want to go back to devouring the enemy...
    2. P
      +3
      4 October 2025 15: 28
      Of course it didn't end, the Whites organized the Russian cross and a series of separatist wars, including those going on right now
    3. +10
      4 October 2025 18: 26
      Imagine the former leadership of some country concentrating in a couple of regions and talking about how good things would be someday, but who knows how. Then, from lower-ranking leaders, they would assemble several regiments, and these regiments would kill the residents of the surrounding areas, based on their vision of a homeland where they had everything and suffered nothing in return. Add to this an alternative government that abolished enslaving mortgages, provided social welfare, and showed the way to a real future, as well as the interventionists. This is the situation our ancestors found themselves in. They made a clear choice. Everything else is just the songs of the perestroika intelligentsia. The Reds had a goal, they had objectives, and they had a plan. The Whites only had high-minded ideas.
      1. +3
        4 October 2025 18: 31
        Our present: Moscow and the Moscow region, St. Petersburg, Krasnodar Krai.

        But I suspect that few people would like the food tax and the food requisition even now.

        When there is an enemy, there is no time for doubt.
        It's impossible to give a definitive answer. As much as I'd like to, it's not mathematics.
        1. +2
          4 October 2025 18: 46
          Even now, few people would like the food tax and the food requisition.

          ,,,and now who will we take them from?
          1. +3
            4 October 2025 19: 17
            Who should we dispossess? Whoever comes along.

            Of course, one can imagine how the banking system is being shaken.

            But, alas, tidying up often turns into a new division. Creating is more difficult.
          2. 0
            5 October 2025 09: 36
            Even now, few people would like the food tax and the food requisition.

            ,,,and now who will we take them from?
            From Tsapkov and others like them.
            1. +2
              5 October 2025 09: 39
              "There are so few of them. Even the food tax is small; everything belongs to the agricultural holdings, i.e., those who will be imposing the food tax. They won't collect it themselves, will they?"
              good afternoon hi
              1. +1
                5 October 2025 09: 59
                take the food tax
                carry out surplus appropriation
              2. +1
                5 October 2025 12: 52
                Good afternoon. The owners of agricultural holdings are the ones who need to be clamped down on. The problem is, they're the ones in charge at the top.
                1. 0
                  5 October 2025 12: 59
                  Another thing is that they themselves are in charge at the top.
                  "Yeah, bees against honey, that won't happen."
  4. +8
    4 October 2025 06: 37
    And, forgive me, Valery. The phrase "his father on his mother's side" is mind-boggling.
    1. -2
      4 October 2025 08: 20
      In my opinion, this is an insignificant nitpick.
      1. +4
        4 October 2025 08: 30
        So, you think that such a combination is acceptable?
    2. ANB
      +2
      5 October 2025 00: 50
      "His father on his mother's side" breaks the mind.

      Uh. His father's mother (paternal grandmother) was a descendant of Hannibal. Seems logical and clear enough.
      1. -1
        5 October 2025 03: 39
        It all seems logical and clear enough.

        Exactly. Why bother being clever in the comments?
      2. 0
        5 October 2025 03: 47
        Paternal grandmother—that's perfectly understandable. But you'll agree, they're far from the same thing.
  5. +5
    4 October 2025 06: 41
    Quote: VlR
    "Bloody Admiral* Kolchak is not an exaggeration, but a statement of fact. Even under Yeltsin in 1999, the Transbaikal Military Court declared him "a man who committed crimes against peace and humanity, and is not subject to rehabilitation." And General Graves, who commanded the American intervention corps, called Kolchak's army a "retreating band"—nothing more, nothing less.


    You're right. The army was like a retreating band.
    But you're not writing about the atrocities of the Whites, but about a man who has survived in history. He was no less cruel in his treatment of personal enemies. Probably.
    ...Maybe I'm wrong. I accept Bloody Nicholas, who shot at a peaceful march in 1905, as a fact. And he stood up for Kolchak.
    Perhaps it's a cliché that's already ingrained in our memory. The division into us, them, and those we don't know what to call.
    1. +3
      4 October 2025 07: 11
      Quote from Fangaro
      I accept Bloody Nicholas, who shot at a peaceful march in 1905, as a fact.

      You know, in our time, all this shouting about peaceful protests isn’t even funny.
      And Gapon's admission that if the Tsar had come out to the people, he would have been killed has also long been no secret.
      1. VLR
        +4
        4 October 2025 07: 21
        Oh, come on, Gapon did everything he could to prevent that from happening. He placed only trusted people in the front lines, people who swore an oath to protect Nicholas and literally shield him with their bodies. Gapon himself promised to commit suicide if anything happened to the Tsar.
        1. +4
          4 October 2025 12: 28
          Quote: VlR
          Gapon himself promised to commit suicide if anything happened to the tsar.

          Promising doesn't mean marrying. And how they would protect him.
        2. +5
          4 October 2025 15: 19
          Quote: VlR
          Gapon himself promised to commit suicide if anything happened to the tsar.

          And Pihas Rutenberg didn't promise anything?
      2. -2
        4 October 2025 08: 34
        The people were made up of exactly petition. Women and children participated. It was a purely peaceful march with a request, which was prohibited by law. By law, lower-ranking officials had to submit their petitions from the very bottom of the bureaucratic ladder. This is what Nicholas II meant when he later said, "I have forgiven you."
        1. +2
          4 October 2025 12: 29
          Quote: Reptiloid
          The people were actually composing a petition. Women and children participated. It was a truly peaceful march with a request.

          In no country and under no government would anyone allow a crowd of people into the residence of the head of state, especially given the rampant terrorism in the country.
          1. +7
            4 October 2025 12: 35
            Why not let in a delegation from Gapon and five unarmed peaceful workers? Nicholas would have listened to them, shaken their hands, accepted their petition, maybe even offered them tea, made meaningless promises to "sort things out," and then waved to the crowd from the balcony—and everyone would have gone home happy. People came to him not with weapons, but with icons and his own portraits, singing "God Save the Tsar."
            1. -5
              4 October 2025 12: 53
              I wouldn't let him in, I don't believe in fairy tales about everything good versus everything bad...
              1. +7
                4 October 2025 13: 03
                I wouldn't let you in

                And you would have ended up like Nicholas – in the basement of the Ipatiev House. You should be thinking about the state, not worrying about your own skin. Besides, what would several unarmed people (thoroughly searched upon entry) have done to you? With armed guards?
                1. -3
                  4 October 2025 13: 07
                  And they would have ended up like Nicholas - in the basement of the Ipatiev House
                  - Well, that's very unlikely, we have very different characters.
            2. -1
              4 October 2025 15: 00
              Quote: vet
              Why not let in a delegation from Gapon and five unarmed peaceful workers?

              The problem is that such a crowd gathered there that it was impossible to ensure any acceptable level of security.
              1. +2
                4 October 2025 15: 03
                Things couldn't have been worse. Even if some "foreign agent" provocateurs had wanted to harm both Russia and the Romanov dynasty, they couldn't have acted more effectively on January 9, 1925.
                1. +3
                  4 October 2025 15: 07
                  Quote: vet
                  Even if some “foreign agents”-provocateurs wanted to harm both Russia and the Romanov dynasty, it would be more effective to act

                  And that's how it was. Honestly, all these tactics have long since become commonplace. The problem is, no one knew about them back then, and the authorities simply didn't know what to do, while units like the riot police, capable of stopping a crowd without weapons, simply didn't exist.
                2. +4
                  4 October 2025 20: 01
                  On May 18, 1896, during the public festivities at Khodynka Field dedicated to the coronation of Emperor Nicholas II, in a crush for royal gifts, according to official figures, 1,389 people died and another 1,500 were injured in just half an hour.
                  Word of the royal gifts had spread long before the celebrations. One of the souvenirs—a white enamel mug with the imperial monogram—was put on display in Moscow stores beforehand. By the morning of May 18, more than 500,000 people had already gathered in the field, which covered just over one square kilometer.
                  Internet
        2. -5
          4 October 2025 22: 44
          Quote: Reptiloid
          The people were drawing up a petition.
          But the revolutionaries (SR-s) had their own plans. They effectively seized control of the march. And the secret police shamefully screwed up, even though it seemed they had the power, they knew everything (Gapon was their man). So shooting was inevitable. And they would have killed the Tsar, had they had the chance.
          1. +6
            4 October 2025 23: 16
            No one was planning to kill the Tsar. Gapon carried out such a propaganda campaign that literally everyone believed that the Tsar would agree to all demands. Because Russians have always had a strange belief that
            The Tsar is good, the boyars are bad
            Such naive monarchism. And the massacre was planned in advance. People couldn't even imagine it.
            1. -3
              4 October 2025 23: 19
              Quote: Reptiloid
              Nobody was planning to kill the tsar.
              The SRs were getting ready.
              Quote: Reptiloid
              Gapon carried out such a propaganda campaign that literally everyone believed that the Tsar would agree to all demands.
              SR-am don't care.
    2. P
      +7
      4 October 2025 15: 31
      This isn't a cliché, but the reality outside the window. Some eat oysters in warm countries and are "patriots" on all sides, while others are robbed by taxes and the exchange rate, some are in the trenches, some are unemployed with loans and "not patriotic enough."
  6. +7
    4 October 2025 06: 43
    Quote from Korsar4
    Everything changes. The Wrangels perished at Poltava. Schlippenbach was captured. And then his descendants served Russia.

    The topic is almost certain to spark heated debate. The Civil War can be debated endlessly. It's impossible to find the truth when so much blood is being spilled. Maybe it's not over yet.


    Truth cannot be found when blood is being shed. And when the bloodshed is a thing of the past, "the truth will be written by the survivors."
    1. +10
      4 October 2025 07: 46
      More than a hundred years have passed. And yet the truth is still being debated. And it's not as if the bitterness diminishes with each passing year.
      1. +12
        4 October 2025 11: 52
        Quote from Korsar4
        More than a hundred years have passed. And yet the truth is still being debated. And it's not as if the bitterness diminishes with each passing year.

        As for me, it's less so, because the younger generations' interest in all this is waning exponentially. Only those who lived through the Soviet Union and can compare "before and after" still debate it passionately. But another 20 or 30 years will pass, the last Soviet people will be gone, and all this "hype" about the revolution and civil war will fade away, becoming a purely professional topic for historians...
        1. +6
          4 October 2025 15: 41
          New events cover the time of the civil war layer by layer.

          But we haven’t forgotten 1812 yet.
          1. +2
            4 October 2025 19: 20
            Quote from Korsar4
            But we haven’t forgotten 1812 yet.

            "Not forgotten" and "heated debate" are not the same thing.
            1. 0
              4 October 2025 19: 23
              I agree.

              Then another example: the Great Schism is also not over. And a considerable amount of time has passed since Nikon's time.
              1. +1
                4 October 2025 19: 33
                So, do you often hear heated debates about church schism? Even among believers, it's not exactly a topic that excites thousands.
                The final role was also played by the fact that there are very few Old Believers left, and they, for obvious reasons, are extremely low-profile.
                1. 0
                  4 October 2025 19: 40
                  I hear you. Maybe because the topic isn't foreign. But even the 1905 Decree on Religious Tolerance didn't lead to agreement.
                  1. +3
                    4 October 2025 19: 57
                    Quote from Korsar4
                    I hear you. Maybe because the topic is not foreign.

                    Possible.
                    I've interacted with both groups, and there's never been much intolerance or aggression towards each other. They're all on their own, living and believing...
                    1. +1
                      4 October 2025 20: 10
                      Aggression is already a human trait, even among football fans.
                      1. +3
                        4 October 2025 20: 17
                        Quote from Korsar4
                        Aggression is already a human characteristic.

                        Of course, but when the issue is fundamental, "live," so to speak, and reconciliation is impossible, then aggression often escalates from zero to unimaginable levels, even among those who previously would have been unthinkable to suspect...
                      2. +1
                        4 October 2025 20: 37
                        Abstract questions are not a question of survival, nor are they a question of dividing resources.

                        And the discussion on the topic: what is good?

                        Another issue is that all the events mentioned still influence our lives.
          2. ANB
            +2
            5 October 2025 00: 56
            But we haven't forgotten 1812 yet.

            We don't. The new generation already does. 25 years ago, I asked a 15-year-old: who fought the Patriotic War of 1812? The answer was: the Germans and Hitler.
            1. 0
              5 October 2025 03: 49
              It remains to be seen what percentage of such teenagers there are. After all, they study "Borodino" and "War and Peace" in school. Not to mention history.
      2. -3
        4 October 2025 12: 16
        The enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people have no truth. They themselves are primitive, and their justification for seizing the USSR to enrich themselves by robbing the country and its people is primitive: they slandered those from whom they stole the country, and they automatically side with those who opposed those from whom they stole the country, and those who opposed those.
        I'm writing so abstractly because they've proven they don't care at all who those from whom they stole the country were or what they did. Their anti-Soviet template could be used to slander any government in the world.
        And all the enemies of the Bolsheviks and Communists are the same—from those who unleashed the Civil War to overthrow the Bolsheviks to those who seized the USSR. They all shared the same obsessive goal of taking the country from the Communists and their supporters, while they had and still have nothing or no one useful to their country and people.
        1. -2
          4 October 2025 15: 01
          Quote: tatra
          and justification for their seizure of the USSR

          Are you talking about communists (Gorbachev, Yeltsin, etc.)?
  7. +4
    4 October 2025 07: 05
    General Slashchev's characterization of Wrangel is curious. The Bolsheviks themselves called him a bloody murderer. For example, D. Furmanov described him as a hangman, an executioner. History has stamped his name with these cliches (end of quote).
    And he never became one of them, they took revenge, something like that cannot be forgiven.
    What else can be said? Both Crimean generals were brave both by nature and in battle. Slashchev clearly overdid it with the aforementioned characterization of Dzerzhinsky.
    1. VLR
      +9
      4 October 2025 07: 22
      Probably professional jealousy. Both generals were popular among the troops, but Slashchev clearly considered himself superior in talent and gifts to Wrangel. Incidentally, he called Kutepov a sergeant major with a general's epaulettes.
    2. +6
      4 October 2025 07: 26
      I think that Slashchev was familiar with Turenne’s statement that he was a coward, but brave in battle, and most likely encountered such cases.
      1. +2
        4 October 2025 20: 09
        He is a coward, but he is brave in battle and has most likely encountered such cases.

        Adrenaline addiction in psychiatry. This diagnosis is now frequently made among extreme athletes.
        https://www.israclinic.com/nashi-publikatsii/zavisimosti/adrenalinovaya-zavisimost-v-psikhiatrii/
  8. +3
    4 October 2025 07: 25
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote from Fangaro
    I accept Bloody Nicholas, who shot at a peaceful march in 1905, as a fact.

    You know, in our time, all this shouting about peaceful protests isn’t even funny.
    And Gapon's admission that if the Tsar had come out to the people, he would have been killed has also long been no secret.


    I'm not talking about the truth, but about the fact that "what you heard in childhood remains in your brain."
    You didn't learn about "peaceful" protests and Gapon this year. It was a long time ago. Then you heard and read a lot more. And now you have your new opinion and your old opinion. But if someone started filling your ears, brain, and memory with information in 2024... There would only be new information.
    This applies to me as well.
    1. -1
      4 October 2025 15: 05
      Quote from Fangaro
      But if someone started filling your hearing, brain and memory with information in 2024... There would only be something new.

      No, not really. By 2024, the technology of luring people to marches and putting them at risk had long been known. Yes, we didn't know anything about it before, but now such expressions...
  9. +2
    4 October 2025 07: 38
    Quote from Korsar4
    And, forgive me, Valery. The phrase "his father on his mother's side" is mind-boggling.


    Why did they give you minuses?
    A livestock farm has reported the start of peat extraction at a poultry farm in the depths of a lake located on the high mountain slopes of the Orenburg steppes?
    1. +6
      4 October 2025 07: 48
      I don't know. Maybe they'll explain. You'll agree, this isn't a cause for concern.
  10. +9
    4 October 2025 08: 18
    The article is written in a neutral tone; the author is clearly trying to be objective. I'm eager to read the rest, but I hope the editors don't drag it out.
  11. +8
    4 October 2025 08: 22
    I never thought I'd have to thank Denikin for his military ineptitude, manifested in the "Moscow Directive." The obviousness of a counterattack against Kolchak, emphasized by Wrangel, passed him by.
    And so, my grandfather Semyon survived and continued the offensive to the East in the ranks of the Red Army.
    1. +1
      4 October 2025 13: 03
      Quote: Victor Leningradets
      I never thought that I would have to say “thank you” to Denikin for his military incompetence, which was demonstrated in the form of the “Moscow Directive”.


      This is not mediocrity, but the understanding that the fight against Bolshevism is lost. A desperate push, out of desperation. The Germans, having observers according to the Brest Peace Treaty, understood this back in August 1918.
  12. +11
    4 October 2025 08: 46
    Why does interest in articles about the White Guards persist?
    History, as we know, is written by the victors. For decades, Soviet historiography created a canonical image of the "White Guard"—a "counterrevolutionary," "the bitterest enemy of Soviet power," and "a mercenary of the Entente." The works of White leaders and thinkers were inaccessible to the general reader. For many, the military analysis is also of interest.
    The Civil War is, above all, a tragedy for millions of people. The articles and memoirs of the Whites are personal stories filled with pain, loss, and moral anguish.

    Drama and choice: these are stories of how the familiar world collapsed, how brother turned against brother, how an intellectual or officer faced an unbearable choice. It's a dramatic human experience that always resonates.
    The White generals were brilliant officers, but they lost the war. In their works, they themselves attempt to analyze the reasons for their defeat.
    Many of the issues raised by White Guard thinkers remain relevant for modern Russia.
    The question of Russia's development path: What is better for the country—a "great and indivisible" empire or a federation? How can strong government and freedom be reconciled?
    National question: How do different peoples coexist in one state?
    Attitude to revolution: Is the violent overthrow of the state system an acceptable method?
    Patriotism and its Limits: Can someone who fights against the current government be considered a patriot?

    Auto RU hi
    1. +7
      4 October 2025 08: 55
      For decades, Soviet historiography created a canonical image of the “White Guard” – “counter-revolutionary”, “the worst enemy of Soviet power”, “mercenary of the Entente”.

      Yes, on the contrary, in the post-war years, a wave of romanticization of the Whites began. Remember the film "Adjutant of His Excellency." And what about "The New Adventures of the Elusive"? The Whites in Crimea created a veritable paradise on earth, with a clean, well-fed public and polite counterintelligence officers. An officer sings a beautiful song, "Russian Field"...
      1. +5
        4 October 2025 09: 03
        ,,,yes, Ivashov played the role of an officer who sincerely loves his homeland superbly.
        1. +5
          4 October 2025 09: 27
          an officer who loves his homeland

          In the third part (unsuccessful in my opinion) it is not so noticeable! laughing
          1. +3
            4 October 2025 09: 42
            I, on the contrary, love this dashing and heart-pounding parody. The scene of the epic battle between the contenders for the throne in the restaurant is simply superb. laughing
            1. +4
              4 October 2025 09: 44
              battle of the contenders

              Well, the defrocked pop was still more epic!!! laughing
              1. +3
                4 October 2025 09: 51
                Is this from the first episode? The philosopher father?
                1. +3
                  4 October 2025 09: 52
                  A philosopher father?

                  Yes, of course! He's a very colorful character! bully
                  1. +1
                    4 October 2025 09: 59
                    And in some places in "The Crown," it's so bad that it becomes good. Just like in Hollywood movies all the time. laughing
                    For example, the scene of Anka chasing a train on a handcar laughing
                  2. +2
                    4 October 2025 10: 11
                    Yes, of course! He's a very colorful character!

                    Father-Philosopher:
                    "Why are you disturbing me while I'm resting, Christ-seller?"

                    laughing
                    1. +4
                      4 October 2025 10: 16
                      "Why are you disturbing me while I'm resting, Christ-seller?"

                      *We are all weak, for we are human...*From there. laughing
                    2. +6
                      4 October 2025 10: 21
                      colorful character!

                      To sum it up, there's certainly a whole constellation of great actors from the past!!! It's even hard to name a single *passable* character, and were there any? hi
              2. +2
                4 October 2025 12: 56
                The pop-rastrega was still more epic

                I would still stage the scene of the fight between the contenders and their supporters in a higher-class restaurant, with both the masses and the courage, and before that, Gurchenko's chansonette "The Colonel Took Me Away Abroad" - and the entire fight to this cheerful, wild music.
                1. -2
                  4 October 2025 13: 17
                  Incidentally, I was immediately struck by and surprised by the second candidate's slight resemblance to Lenin—and yet, it was cleared by the censors. The anti-Soviet Fifth Column was already beginning to operate at a high level.
                  1. +1
                    4 October 2025 13: 40
                    with Lenin -

                    But Roland Antonovich didn't get to play Lenin in real life. He was offered the role, but... he refused.
            2. VLR
              +9
              4 October 2025 10: 04
              The scene of the epic battle between the contenders for the throne in the restaurant is simply superb.

              The second time we saw such a fight between famous Soviet film actors was probably in "The Man from Boulevard des Capucines." wink
              1. +4
                4 October 2025 10: 25
                Second time

                The hand-to-hand combat at the *State Border* left a very strong impression. Remember the battle between our border guards and the Germans? It was terrifying! Thanks for the series, Valery! hi As always very interesting. good
                1. VLR
                  +3
                  4 October 2025 11: 39
                  The hand-to-hand combat at the *State Border* left a very strong impression. Do you remember the battle between our border guards and the Germans?

                  I was, of course, referring to an exaggerated, parodic comedy of a mass brawl. One might also recall the orchestra rehearsal scene in the film "Jolly Fellows."
          2. +5
            4 October 2025 10: 46
            "Makar the Pathfinder" can be placed in the same genre as "The Elusive".
      2. +6
        4 October 2025 09: 12
        Remember the film "Adjutant of His Excellency." What about "The New Adventures of the Elusive"?

        And *Forty-first*? Izvitskaya and Strizhenov? A girl from the people and a brilliant representative of the nobility. By the way, I wonder where this *wave of romanticization* of whites came from? hi
        1. +8
          4 October 2025 09: 22
          I think it's been since the time of Khrushchev, who, in order to denigrate Stalin, allowed slander against the Soviet past and encouraged the dissident movement, which was allied with him in this regard and was founded during those years. And also the nationalists—after all, it was Khrushchev who, in 1955, in honor of the 10th anniversary of their victory, granted amnesty to all Banderites and the Baltic "green brothers." And since then, their crimes have been hushed up. The only exception is the surprisingly honest Lithuanian film "Nobody Wanted to Die."
          1. +8
            4 October 2025 09: 43
            I think since the time of Khrushchev.

            What about Borozdin from *Chapaev*? bully Smart, seasoned, but... an enemy! I think it's much more complicated. If you portray the enemy as blatant idiots, then defeating them will be somewhat different, right? However, this is still true today, if you skim through the resource's articles from 22, for example. hi
          2. ANB
            0
            5 October 2025 01: 03
            The only exception is the surprisingly honest Lithuanian film "Nobody Wanted to Die."

            Long road in the dunes.
            From the modern ones - Hannibal Rising.
            1. +1
              5 October 2025 05: 25
              Long road in the dunes.

              This is an anti-Soviet film released in 1982, whitewashing the "forest brothers"!
              But "Nobody Wanted to Die" is an honest and truthful film about terrible scumbags who brutally kill people of the same nationality who disagree with them.
              1. ANB
                +1
                5 October 2025 11: 15
                whitewashing the "forest brothers"

                I watched it as a kid. It didn't seem whitewashing to me. Bandits and bandits.
        2. +7
          4 October 2025 09: 29
          "The Forty-First" is good even in book form.

          A hero and a bright image can be molded from any person.

          "The Kid in Milk" is a prime example.
          1. +5
            4 October 2025 09: 33
            "The Forty-First" is good even in book form.

            God forbid they make a remake of the film, if of course someone comes up with that idea!
            A hero and a bright image can be molded from any person.

            A bit of a controversial statement. bully There are some downright negative individuals.
            "The Kid in Milk" is a prime example.

            Wow! It's been so long since I read it. Back in *Youth*! hi
            1. +5
              4 October 2025 09: 47
              And who knows about these negative ones, except for the inner circle?

              This is if you become completely mired in villainy.
              And if 50 years pass, or a hundred?

              "What is Hecuba to them?" (c).
              1. +4
                4 October 2025 09: 49
                And who knows about these negative ones, except for the inner circle?

                Well, the whole world knows Hitler! laughing It's a difficult task to *mold* him into something *white and fluffy*. You can still find some figures from the past.
                1. +5
                  4 October 2025 09: 55
                  For now, yes. But there are plenty of Napoleon fans.

                  A few more generations of dictators will pass, and from a consciousness unclouded by information, you can mold whatever you want.

                  The Soviet Union was friends with Amin.

                  “I will lose true faith -
                  It hurts me for our USSR:
                  Take the order from Nasser -
                  “Not suitable for the Nasser order!” (c).
              2. +4
                4 October 2025 10: 29
                And if 50 years pass, or a hundred?

                Oh, Sergei! For example, they'll make a film, and they definitely will, about "Gorbachev." laughing
                1. +4
                  4 October 2025 10: 45
                  Easy. First of all, which authority will commission the film?

                  He received the Nobel Prize. So, no doubts.
                  1. 0
                    4 October 2025 10: 47
                    what kind of power

                    Well, which one? The current one, naturally, or their descendants.
                    1. +6
                      4 October 2025 10: 51
                      Count how many times our exchange rate has changed over the past hundred years.

                      And how many respected people “wavered with the general party line.”
                      1. +2
                        4 October 2025 10: 55
                        "wavered with the general party line."

                        Today, there is only one general line and the person who determines it is also...one! laughing You can't see the ones swaying above. Below? That's already funny.
                      2. +3
                        4 October 2025 11: 01
                        ,,the current position of the state:
                        There are no reds or whites - there is one Russia.
                      3. +2
                        4 October 2025 11: 27
                        Tell me, has the exchange rate remained the same for 25 years? Like the joke about the Chinese and the English, it'll only make sense to come and see in 200 years.
                    2. +2
                      4 October 2025 10: 57
                      their descendants.

                      More precisely, receivers. laughing
                  2. ANB
                    +2
                    5 October 2025 02: 04
                    Firstly, which authority will commission the film?

                    + + + + +
                    Brigade, MMM.
    2. +4
      4 October 2025 09: 24
      Attitude to the revolution:

      Excellent comment, Sergey! good More than a hundred years have passed, but the Great Patriotic War still continues, albeit in the mind. hi
    3. -2
      4 October 2025 12: 20
      Yes, the enemies of the USSR have proven that for you, collaborationism - both in the Soviet period and in your evil anti-Soviet period - is not considered a crime against your country and people.
    4. +1
      4 October 2025 16: 58
      All the questions you raise are clearly not welcomed today... And by definition, they cannot be welcomed by any government.
      For the main motive of any power is to retain this power in its hands, and here no doubts are allowed, and various scholarly discussions about options become mortally dangerous for the power...

      What's so bad about the "Whites"? And what's so good about the "Reds"? And does the prosperity and formal power of one class—the proletariat—justify the physical destruction of other classes and estates?

      Isn't there a classic case of immorality here - "the end justifies the means"?

      "In order for my children to have a better life, I am ready to kill anyone and everyone who doesn't like it" – so where is the morality here? The ideology (unless you consider simple brutality to be an ideology)? And how beautiful it all sounded: "Freedom! Equality! Fraternity!"
      How many years did it last? Barely 70-odd... and how many people did they kill? But the dream remained just a dream... and then we were told that you can't build a just society on injustice (how many lecture notes were written on Marxist-Leninist philosophy and scientific communism back then)....
      I foresee a lot of slippers flying in my direction, but I still consider civil war completely immoral...
      My respects to the author...
  13. +3
    4 October 2025 10: 10
    The Red Army is coming,
    Presses menacingly;
    Wrangel with his gang
    He runs away shamefully. (c)
  14. -4
    4 October 2025 11: 04
    White Army, Black Baron,
    They are preparing the royal throne for us again.

    Remember?
    We remember, but what about you?

    So let the Red
    Compresses powerfully
    Your bayonet with a calloused hand
    With a detachment of naval
    Comrade Trotsky
    He will lead us to a mortal battle
    !
    lol

    As Shmuli Gorinshtein-Pokars wrote
    We inflate the fire of the world
    Churches and we will raze the prisons to the ground

    The Shmuls were fed up with Russian churches, yes.
    1. 0
      4 October 2025 12: 16
      With a detachment of naval
      Comrade Trotsky
      We will be led to a mortal battle!

      What's wrong? He led and won.
      The Shmuls were fed up with Russian churches,

      Peter I openly blasphemed and mocked the Church and faith at the All-Jewish Council, deprived the Church of its independence, and robbed churches.
      1. -5
        4 October 2025 12: 58
        Quote: vet
        What's wrong? He led and won.

        But it's not like that, he won.
        chief bandit Trotsky, who had been spying for German intelligence since 1918 and who sold out to British intelligence in 1926
        Great Soviet Encyclopedia of the USSR
        and threw Comrade Trotsky out of the Red Army anthem
        Quote: vet
        Peter 1

        did not blow up thousands of monuments to the Russian people's culture
        1. +3
          4 October 2025 13: 11
          Okay, the tsars destroyed plenty of churches. For example, the Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist on Bor, known since the 12th century, was built in stone by the Italian Aleviz Novy in 1508. It was demolished in 1847 by order of Nicholas I. The Church of St. Nicholas of Gostun, founded in 1506 by Ivan the Terrible's father, where the first printer, Ivan Fedorov, served as a deacon, was demolished by order of Alexander I, and a parade ground was established in its place for the reception of the Prussian King, William III.
          Alexey Tolstoy writes to Alexander II:
          "Before my very eyes, about six years ago, the ancient bell tower of the Passion Monastery was torn down in Moscow, and it collapsed onto the pavement like a fallen tree, so that not a single brick broke off, so strong was the masonry... The same fate befell the Church of St. Nicholas the Revealed on Arbat, dating back to the reign of Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible and built so solidly that even with the help of iron crowbars it was barely possible to separate the bricks one from another."

          And there are plenty of such examples. The famous Church of the Intercession on the Nerl was ordered to be dismantled under the tsars, but they couldn't, it was too strongly built.
          1. -4
            4 October 2025 13: 57
            Quote: vet
            The Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist on Bor, known since the 12th century.

            You are comparing the incomparable - the city, the Kremlin - a living organism and something gradually, over the course of CENTURIES , being rebuilt, completed, destroyed - and so the Church was demolished in 1847 by personal order of Nicholas I due to dilapidation.

            Russophobic communists demolished more than HALF of the Kremlin buildings and monuments in a couple of years, for example, the oldest demolished church of the Moscow Kremlin was the Transfiguration Cathedral (or the Cathedral of the Savior on Bor), built in 1330 and existed on Cathedral Square until 1935,,

            They demolished the Chudov Monastery, the Ascension Monastery, the Small Nikolaevsky Palace, etc.

            In Suzdal, Vladimir, and throughout the country, unique monuments of Russian architecture are visible. In Moscow, hundreds of churches were destroyed, including the Cathedral of Christ the Savior; in Veliky Ustyug, the churches of John the Baptist, Trinity, and others were demolished; of the 11 churches in Borovsk, 5 were destroyed, and in Velizh all existing churches were lost etc. etc. - what ENEMY has walked across Russia?
            1. +3
              4 October 2025 14: 16
              The entire country appreciates unique monuments of Russian architecture

              Christ the Savior Cathedral in Samara
              1. -1
                4 October 2025 14: 45
                How could anyone raise their hand against this Russian miracle?!
            2. 0
              4 October 2025 17: 07
              It must also be added that the Bolsheviks destroyed the church not only as architecture, but as an institution, and not for the purpose of improving urban architecture, but with the goal of trampling and humiliating the foundation of the inner world of the people, and first and foremost, the peasantry...
              And it doesn't matter here that among the people there were always anti-church ditties and jokes about priests - but there was no hatred of the church among the people. This is precisely the task that the Bolsheviks were solving - to sow the seeds of hatred and fear in the people, to break the core on which the inner world was based, and to replace it with another slogan - the slogan of freedom and equality, the essence of which they immediately distorted...
              1. +8
                4 October 2025 17: 11
                Russian fairy tales about priests are very evil. Priests, priest's wives, and priest's daughters are greedy and stupid. Even Pushkin made his mark.
                1. +3
                  4 October 2025 17: 18
                  and often very fair
                  and yet, these tales did not abolish religion, nor did they even attempt to do so...
                  And "The Tale of the Priest and His Workman Balda" - by the way, wasn't really encouraged in Soviet schools, even though it was studied - such a dichotomy..., since it was very easy to build a bridge to modernity )))
                2. +3
                  4 October 2025 17: 20
                  Incidentally, the traditionally huge bellies of priests, which in no way align with the need to fast for up to 212 days a year, have always caused particular surprise and ridicule among the people.
        2. +5
          4 October 2025 14: 36
          Chief Bandit Trotsky, who had been spying for German intelligence since 1918,

          What kind of German spy was he if he came from the US and had the closest ties to American Jewish bankers? He just deceived everyone. No one could have forced Trotsky to act differently from his own wishes. He was a 100% man of ideas.
          1. -6
            4 October 2025 14: 49
            Quote: vet
            What German spy?

            also Abwehr and SS agent -read the Chief Prosecutor of the USSR, Jaguariy Vyshinsky Yes
            1. +3
              4 October 2025 14: 54
              Trotsky physically couldn't be anyone's agent. He didn't have the right personality. He could take money, but then say, "Whoever I owe it to, I forgive everyone." Because he took it from suckers for a good cause, not for himself.
              1. -7
                4 October 2025 17: 52
                Quote: vet
                Trotsky physically could not be anyone's agent.

                How is he better than other Politburo spy members?
                1. +4
                  4 October 2025 17: 57
                  "Other Politburo members who were spies" is in the same vein as Peter the Great, who was substituted abroad. For some reason, he acted in the interests of Russia, not Europe. And these "Politburo members who were spies" also somehow created a great country by "bending over" their supposed masters.
                  1. -5
                    4 October 2025 18: 08
                    Quote: vet
                    "Other members of the Politburo are spies" - this is from the same series

                    What are you saying, they are from the series real MOSCOW trials 36-38 - Zinoviev, Kamenev, Ryko, Rudzutak, etc.
                    Quote: vet
                    And the "Politburo spy members" also somehow created a great country by "bending over" their supposed masters.

                    Yes, I can just imagine how wonderful the country would be even without them.
              2. +1
                4 October 2025 21: 32
                Quote: vet
                Trotsky was physically incapable of being anyone's agent. He wasn't the right character. He could take money, but then say, "Whoever I owe money to, I forgive everyone."

                To be fair... why did they finish him off? Someone was bad - either he or those who gave the order... so who?
                1. +3
                  4 October 2025 21: 37
                  Because he was too principled and therefore unwilling to compromise and incapable of reaching an agreement. They tried to reach an agreement with him, but it was no use. It was precisely this man of ideas, for the sake of which he had lost his position in the party and government, that was exiled and then killed.
                  1. +1
                    4 October 2025 22: 04
                    Quote: vet
                    Because he was too principled and therefore unwilling to compromise and incapable of reaching an agreement. They tried to reach an agreement with him, but it was no use. It was precisely this man of ideas, for the sake of which he had lost his position in the party and government, that was exiled and then killed.

                    That is, can you call yourself a Trotskyist? And was world revolution possible?
                    1. +1
                      5 October 2025 03: 41
                      Why on earth would I be a Trotskyist? I was writing about the uncompromising Trotsky, not about myself.
                      1. +1
                        5 October 2025 08: 49
                        Did you admire Trotsky or not? And why couldn't he have been anyone's agent? This is the first time I've heard of someone with a personality that doesn't allow him to be an agent—have you come to your own conclusion?
                      2. +2
                        6 October 2025 10: 02
                        I didn't admire anything. It's a statement of fact. If Trotsky collaborated with some foreign organization, it was for his own ends, and he was using them, not them. If he'd been thinking about himself and his position, he wouldn't have been so eager to take risks after his victory: he would have compromised, retained his position, his position in the party, his comfort level, etc.
                  2. -3
                    5 October 2025 10: 47
                    Quote: vet
                    He's not inclined to compromise and is incapable of negotiating. They tried to negotiate with him, but it was no use.

                    and his completely destroyed family was also incompetent?

                    And what about the completely destroyed, along with their families, opposition of 27-28, COMPLETELY repentant - too?

                    the other side was incapable of negotiating, as is evident from the innocent, unhealed victims
  15. +1
    4 October 2025 12: 02
    a march with a precise (for centuries!) formula:
    White Army, Black Baron,
    They are preparing the royal throne for us again.
  16. -3
    4 October 2025 12: 23
    The enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people, “liberated” by Gorbachev, have proven that they are capable of any meanness and crimes, therefore their “history” of our country and people is a justification, and even a glorification of the criminals of the Soviet period.
  17. +4
    4 October 2025 13: 04
    Quote: tatra
    Yes, the enemies of the USSR have proven that for you, collaborationism - both in the Soviet period and in your evil anti-Soviet period - is not considered a crime against your country and people.


    Enemies of the USSR... And you're a friend of the USSR? You built the Baikal-Amur Mainline...
    In Kazakhstan, fields were plowed...
    A long time ago, there was a plant near Tashkent...
    A little later, people were weighed down by bricks and wheelbarrows of sand at the construction sites of Leningrad and Stalingrad...
    And this is all about you?!
  18. +4
    4 October 2025 13: 09
    Quote: tatra
    The enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people, “liberated” by Gorbachev, have proven that they are capable of any meanness and crimes, therefore their “history” of our country and people is a justification, and even a glorification of the criminals of the Soviet period.


    Send all your thoughts by registered mail to the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation or the State Duma of the Russian Federation and the Federation Council of the Russian Federation.
    Then you will stop being a hidden enemy of the USSR.
  19. P
    0
    4 October 2025 15: 19
    Where is the acquisition of weapons from the occupiers and the trade in land, mineral resources, rights, and state functions? Wrangel, like the other Whites, the Februaryists, and their heirs today, is a fascist, a traitor to the people, a separatist, and a hanged man.
    1. VLR
      +6
      4 October 2025 15: 30
      Where is the receipt of weapons from the occupiers and the trade in land, mineral resources, rights and state functions?

      We will talk about this later.
      1. P
        -3
        4 October 2025 15: 35
        Why gloss over the executions with some family history? There was such-and-such a guy who organized and led an uprising against the only legitimate authority in the country (the UCH SO had no quorum at the start of the civil war, the monarchy simply dissolved). He escaped trial and execution, committed petty mischief, and died. That's all.
        1. +2
          4 October 2025 15: 55
          Read an encyclopedic dictionary if you don't want family stories and a story about the personality of the article's hero.
          1. P
            -4
            4 October 2025 16: 00
            A dictionary is a good thing, distinguished by its rigorous, practical content. Unlike panegyrics and their lovers
            1. +1
              4 October 2025 16: 01
              A dictionary is a good thing.

              Well, eat "crackers", but we want "pies", and even "cakes". wink
  20. +2
    4 October 2025 15: 48
    Quote: Pandemic
    Where is the acquisition of weapons from the occupiers and the trade in land, mineral resources, rights, and state functions? Wrangel, like the other Whites, the Februaryists, and their heirs today, is a fascist, a traitor to the people, a separatist, and a hanged man.


    You know, maybe you're right.
    But for me, a "Fascist" is an enemy of the diversity of the people, both in his own country and in neighboring ones.
    "A traitor to the people" is someone who tries to make a country with many different people (of different nationalities) part of another country with different nationalities.
    A "separatist" is someone who tries to divide a country into parts among the nationalities of one country, without giving it to other countries.
    "The Hanged Man" is someone who deserves such an execution.
    And these 4 definitions do not go together.
  21. +4
    4 October 2025 15: 52
    You know, I was also surprised by the appearance of Wrangel's wife—a thoroughly modern woman. Women of that era typically look different—their figures, their hairstyles, their facial expressions. They weren't peasants, but rather middle- or upper-class women. It's immediately obvious—a different generation. And you could post a photo of Wrangel's wife on your social media profile—no one would be surprised.
    1. +1
      4 October 2025 16: 59
      And you can put a photo of Wrangel's wife on your social media profile—no one will be surprised.

      And what do you think of this lovely lady?
      1. +1
        4 October 2025 17: 00
        Honestly, I don't recognize him. Who is this?
        1. +2
          4 October 2025 17: 03
          Who is this?

          This is *Miss Unsinkable*. Violet Constance Jesopp, stewardess from *Titanic*, *Olympic*, *Britannica*. bully
  22. +3
    4 October 2025 15: 55
    Quote: Pandemic
    Where is the acquisition of weapons from the occupiers and the trade in land, mineral resources, rights, and state functions? Wrangel, like the other Whites, the Februaryists, and their heirs today, is a fascist, a traitor to the people, a separatist, and a hanged man.


    And one more thing... Personal opinion...
    Lenin had the idea. Uritsky had the idea. Autocracy as such had the idea.
    Wrangel, Denikin, Kolchak, and, excuse me, Trotsky and Dzerzhinsky all had their own ways of pursuing ideas. How to achieve goals.
    1. +3
      4 October 2025 17: 15
      A very interesting observation about the idea...
      It seems, however, that it (the idea) was generated not only by Lenin and Uritsky (although Uritsky as a generator of the idea is a bit weak...) Trotsky is also a co-author, actually...
      And I agree that the military leaders of the White movement are, of course, only a tool in preserving the old idea...
      And they were unable to achieve their goals due to entirely objective circumstances; they were no longer able to stop the historical flywheel...
  23. +1
    4 October 2025 22: 48
    Let's return to Wrangel's reforms: some believe that if the "Whites" had immediately come out with this or a similar program, the civil war could have followed a different scenario, but this is unlikely.
    And if the Reds had recognized the officers as a socially close element (95% have no estates, live on salaries - practically proletarians), then the civil war could have also gone according to a different scenario, but what happened, happened.
    At the same time, he attracted attention to himself with his cruelty - on his orders, 13 people were shot and two people were hanged in the Valisburg volost.
    Hmm. In a dozen years, this will be considered "eating a siskin" rather than "particular cruelty."
  24. +1
    5 October 2025 19: 44
    Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
    A very interesting observation about the idea...
    It seems, however, that it (the idea) was generated not only by Lenin and Uritsky (although Uritsky as a generator of the idea is a bit weak...) Trotsky is also a co-author, actually...
    And I agree that the military leaders of the White movement are, of course, only a tool in preserving the old idea...
    And they were unable to achieve their goals due to entirely objective circumstances; they were no longer able to stop the historical flywheel...


    I may be wrong about Uritsky.
    The few things he read about him offered explanations for his enemies' cruelty. He didn't propose blanket pardons, but he also didn't propose wiping them out.
    Personal opinion... Officers and generals of the Russian Empire, and engineers in the service of the Tsar, and factory owners, and many of the people's bloodsuckers, were dissatisfied with the order in the Russian Empire.
    Here, in my opinion, Uritsky was trying to separate the enemies of the new state from those dissatisfied with the old state.
    Don't chop off heads without asking, what's in the heads.
  25. 0
    5 October 2025 20: 01
    Quote: bk0010
    Let's return to Wrangel's reforms: some believe that if the "Whites" had immediately come out with this or a similar program, the civil war could have followed a different scenario, but this is unlikely.
    And if the Reds had recognized the officers as a socially close element (95% have no estates, live on salaries - practically proletarians), then the civil war could have also gone according to a different scenario, but what happened, happened.
    At the same time, he attracted attention to himself with his cruelty - on his orders, 13 people were shot and two people were hanged in the Valisburg volost.
    Hmm. In a dozen years, this will be considered "eating a siskin" rather than "particular cruelty."


    Do officers consider themselves equal to workers and wealthy peasants?
    Or do workers and wealthy peasants recognize officers as their equals?
    1. +3
      6 October 2025 10: 29
      if the Reds recognized officers as a socially close element

      Officers, as a rule, treated the "lower ranks" with undisguised contempt: slaps and cuffs were the order of the day. As far as I recall, even Denikin wrote about this when he was abroad—he lamented it, saying that if only the soldiers had been treated with more respect... But the soldiers and sailors universally hated the officers. So there was no way to declare officers "socially close."
  26. 0
    6 October 2025 17: 06
    Wrangel said: "We need some other flag.
    - Just not a monarchical one..."
    I wonder why this is so?
  27. +2
    7 October 2025 06: 16
    This is our HISTORY! We must know and respect it! And not repeat the mistakes of our ancestors!
  28. -2
    9 October 2025 15: 53
    The Whites and the Reds differed from each other not in their social composition (among them were representatives of different classes - nobles, Cossacks, peasants, workers, intellectuals), but in their attitude towards tradition and traditional society. The whites were more traditional, focused on the glorious past, and were proud of their ancestors. The future seemed vague to them. The Reds, on the contrary, wanted to erase the past; they were in the grip of a utopian project (which first manifested itself in the West in the Münster Commune); they imagined the future as a “brave new world.” The White elite consisted primarily of the new aristocracy that emerged during the Peter the Great era and continued to grow and develop in the 19th century. Let us remember the generals Denikin and Alekseev, second-generation nobles. The old hereditary aristocracy, for the most part, withdrew from participation in the conflict (with the exception of some nobles of foreign origin - Kolchak, Wrangel, Baron Ungern). They were men of honor, for whom word and deed were inseparable concepts. The so-called "non-predetermination" was an unwillingness and inability to lie. They didn't want to promise something they couldn't deliver. But they couldn’t fulfill it because in traditional Russian society they were part of the military class, which was closed to politics. The revolution happened so unexpectedly for them that only towards the end of the civil war did they begin to realize the futility of their previous tactics (Wrangel). The Bolsheviks, unlike the Whites, were formed in the conditions of underground work, for which the fundamental principles were the ability to hide their true intentions, the ability to act secretly and without regard for morality. Lenin wrote in a letter dated March 9, 1922: “One intelligent writer on state affairs rightly said that if it is necessary to resort to a series of cruelties in order to achieve a certain political goal, then they must be carried out in the most energetic manner and in the shortest possible time, because the masses of the people will not tolerate the prolonged use of cruelties.” Like a true Machiavellian, the leader of the revolution does not even mention the name of the “smart writer”, so accustomed is he to hiding everything: his true thoughts, plans. He is so accustomed to external censorship and self-censorship that in this case, being at the head of state, he resorts to self-censorship. For the Bolsheviks, words and deeds could, at best, coincide only when they were in their own party environment. And of course, all their promises to the common people were demagoguery. They promised “land to the peasants” when they realized that without this promise, power would go to the Socialist Revolutionaries. The same applies to some workers' rights. Being for the most part either intellectuals or outcasts of all classes by origin, they flaunted, and in a number of cases falsified, their “proletarian” origins in accordance with communist dogma. They were shining examples of the coming Iron Age, which was characterized by a disconnect between word and deed and an unknown concept of honor. Deception is now not only acceptable as an exception to the rule, but is becoming a hallmark of a modern political figure. This is the reason for the victory of the Bolsheviks.
  29. -3
    9 October 2025 15: 54
    General Graves began his career as a participant in the American-Philippine War of 1899-1901, in which American troops became infamous for the mass executions of prisoners and villagers who supported the rebels. The American Expeditionary Force, led by Graves, sent to Siberia in 1918, coincidentally consisted of soldiers from the 27th and 31st Regiments, previously stationed in the Philippines (plus volunteers who had joined them). Graves' official mission was to secure the Trans-Siberian Railway and evacuate the Czechoslovak Corps; his unofficial mission was to purge the Trans-Siberian Railway of Austro-Hungarian forces and their collaborators (whom the Allies considered Bolsheviks). A Bolshevik and Socialist Revolutionary sympathizer, Graves began to assist them, defying the orders of his superiors. He came into conflict with Ataman Semyonov, who accused Graves of supporting the Reds. In response, Graves began accusing Ataman Semyonov and Kolchak of banditry and cruelty. Graves's remarks about the "banditry" of the Whites can be considered demagoguery.
    1. -2
      9 October 2025 16: 08
      Was a victory for the Whites, advocating a "united and indivisible Russia," beneficial to the United States? No. A victory for the Reds, recognizing the independence of the national outskirts, would have been preferable. Or even better, a protracted civil war: "let them kill each other as much as possible" (as Harry Truman put it, on a different occasion).
  30. -3
    9 October 2025 16: 27
    I consider it unethical to erect monuments to "heroes" of the Civil War or to rename streets and cities in their honor. An exception is the installation of memorials at the sites of executions and other killings. These monuments, erected in memory of the dead, are actually part of the funerary cult. Another exception is when a monument commemorates not an episode of the Civil War, but the person's participation in other commendable historical events. For example, Kolchak as a participant in a scientific research expedition, or Denikin as a hero of World War I. Streets and cities named after people who didn't build them would be better off returning to their original names. Particularly egregious are cases of naming streets after controversial politicians who drenched Russia in blood.
  31. -3
    10 October 2025 11: 20
    1.The civil war was brutal on both sides.
    2. The Civil War gave rise to numerous historical myths created by unscrupulous historians. These myths were tolerated during the Soviet era, but in the era of the emerging New World Order, they threaten national existence.
    3. In favor of the created mythology, not only the history of the civil war, but also the entire pre-revolutionary period was distorted.
    4. The history of the Great War of 1914-1918 was edited. The anti-state subversive activities of some political parties (Bolsheviks, Left Socialist Revolutionaries, anarchists) were glorified, while the patriotic position of others was diminished.
    5. Facts of direct treason by political figures during the war were denied. Scientific research into certain historical moments (for example, contacts with the enemy by certain political figures and the financing of Russian political parties from abroad) was prohibited.
    6. Those who conducted investigations into political figures suspected of contacts with the enemy in the pre-revolutionary period were subject to repression. Example: P.A. Alexandrov, who initiated a criminal case against V.I. Ulyanov in April 1917, was not completed due to the October Revolution. The investigator himself was dismissed, arrested multiple times, and executed in 1940 for "unfounded accusations against the leader of the proletariat."
    7. In the post-Perestroika years, trials were held to rehabilitate victims of political repression. Some defendants were acquitted, while others, for various reasons, were not. However, there was no investigation into the anti-state subversive activities of several politicians during the First World War.
    8. Our times are analogous to World War I. Secret societies that seized power in the USA, Great Britain, and France in the 18th century engineered and launched the First and Second World Wars "under a false flag."
    9. The term "World War III" emerged in 1945 because not all intended goals were achieved. Based on indirect evidence, it can be said that the cold phase of the new global conflict began then, with the hot phase beginning in 2014.
    10. Just as in 1918, we are once again divided into "Reds" and "Whites." But we must unite in the face of the real enemy. We were all (Reds and Whites) deceived in 1917; we must not fall into the same trap again.