The USSR's victory in the Cold War turned into defeat

14 606 216
The USSR's victory in the Cold War turned into defeat


The threat of a new Great Depression


As previously noted, by the 1980s, the United States, just as before World War II, faced the threat of a Great Depression II. This is a crisis of capitalism, the impossibility of endlessly expanding the financial bubble, living on credit, and plundering the planet. The United States then managed to unleash a world war, using fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and the Japanese Empire as dummies ("cannon fodder"). And emerged from the war as a superpower. Only with Russia did they miss the mark.Origins of World War II: USA vs. All).



By 1975, the United States and its allies had suffered a crushing military and political defeat in Vietnam. This had a profound impact on the psyche of Western and American society. Americans were demoralized. At the same time, the future globalists (the so-called "deep state") undermined public morale with their "sex, rock 'n' roll, and drugs" program. A massive drug addiction and cultural and moral degradation of the United States and the entire West began.

Meanwhile, the Arab and Muslim world struck the West with the energy "Pearl Harbor" of 1973. In 1975, Westerners signed the Helsinki Agreement with Moscow, recognizing the results of World War II and Russia's sphere of influence in Eastern and Southern Europe. This was a powerful diplomatic victory for Soviet Russia.

The arms race seemed pointless. The Russians were creating a constellation of wondrous inventions in space, rocketry, aircraft construction, and so on. The Russian "lefties" were creating weapon cheaper and better quality than in the West.

The West was losing ground in terms of science, education, and culture. The Soviet citizen of the 70s was head and shoulders above the average American or European. Russian schools were the best in the world, so they were copied in East Asian countries (and now they have the highest IQs in the world). Westerners were descending into alcoholism, drug addiction, and sexual perversion. Not as an exception, as before or in the USSR, but as widespread social diseases threatening the future of all civilization. This was the beginning of the involution (simplification), the degradation of civilization as a whole.

The American public and press, as if working for Moscow, constantly criticized and discredited the American authorities, intelligence agencies, and army (just like the Soviet public and press during the years of the late “perestroika” and “reforms”).

The dollar was depreciating. Serious analysts wrote that its days were numbered, that the petrodollar system was a bubble that would soon burst. The US economy was in decline. The national debt was growing rapidly. From 1975 to 1981, despite the USSR's active space program, the Americans did not conduct a single manned flight.

America was retreating. Vietnam, Laos, Ethiopia, and Nicaragua. The Islamic Revolution in Iran, which overthrew the pro-Western regime of the Shahs. The major Middle Eastern "oil barrel" became an enemy of the Western world.

The American elite feared that Brezhnev's peace-loving regime would be replaced by young, energetic communists—people with will and intelligence like Stalin, Beria, Korolev, and Chelomey. Then the "collective West," led by the United States, would be finished.

Washington understood that either they would overthrow the USSR and plunder the resources of Soviet civilization, prolonging the existence of the decrepit West, or they would plunge into a severe crisis from which they might never recover. Either victory in the Cold War (essentially World War III) or defeat and crisis. Either the dollar system and capitalism would be saved by seizing the vast resources of the USSR and the socialist bloc, plundering their treasure troves of natural resources, technology, brainpower, property, and labor, or the rapacious West would come to an end. Either the United States would retain power over the planet's most vital regions, including the "oil barrels," or they would pass into the Soviet sphere of influence.

The Western world, originally built on a predatory, parasitic platform, constantly needs fresh blood. Resources and energy. Like a vampire in Hollywood movies. As soon as the energy runs out, withdrawal symptoms begin, followed by agony. A constant influx of fresh blood and energy is essential for survival.

To prolong their comfortable, prosperous existence of the 60s and 70s ("the showcase of capitalism"), the "golden billion" countries needed to find a new source of resources and energy, and capture new markets. They needed to acquire hundreds of millions of new consumer-slaves for their global pyramid. And to do this, they needed to crush the socialist camp led by the Red Empire. They needed to seize, plunder, and develop the Soviet sphere of influence. They needed to plunder the planet's richest reserves of the Russian world.

The USSR's victory turned into defeat


According to the distinguished Soviet-Russian historian, philosopher, and analyst Andrei Fursov, by 1975 the Red Empire had already won the classic Cold War. The United States and the "golden billion" countries were retreating, suffering defeats in the military, diplomatic, and political confrontation with the USSR. Meanwhile, the so-called "Third World" was rapidly developing, beginning to compete with the Global North.

To gain the upper hand over Soviet civilization, the West had to undertake a kind of political and economic mobilization. Globalization, in which the military and economic might of the United States was reinforced by the technological, economic, and financial might of America's former satellites—Japan and West Germany. The United States itself became the "command center" of the globalists, the "deep state." Not only a state, but also a cluster (association), a matrix of transnational corporations and banks.

Global financial capital, closely linked to the military-industrial complex. When states and armies fight, the lives of millions of people are destroyed and ruined, while bankers and plutocrats enrich themselves. The most striking example is the current Ukrainian front. Millions of ordinary people, Russians (Great Russians and Little Russians) are dying, becoming crippled, refugees, entire cities that once flourished in the USSR are being reduced to ruins. Meanwhile, a few ghoul-like bankers, oligarchs, plutocrats, and politicians in Kyiv, London, Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Zurich, and Washington reap their profits.

Unfortunately, by this point, the USSR had already entered a systemic crisis. The leadership crisis was particularly pronounced. It was an internal crisis, a crisis of incompetence, and a psychological, moral, and willpower weakness at the top of the Union. As the saying goes, "a fish rots from the head." The Red Empire was mighty, invincible in war, and capable of withstanding any adversity. However, the Soviet superpower was led by people with a parochial, mercantile mentality. Not priests and warriors, but traders, petty bourgeois kulaks.

This was the beginning of Gorbachev's "new thinking." Gorbachev and his team began to surrender one position in the world after another, just to maintain power, just to be praised, just to be given a cookie.

It's all classic: "So the bourgeoisie are sitting there wondering what they should do? Suddenly they see Bad Boy crawling out from behind the bushes and heading straight for them.

- Rejoice! He shouts to them. - This is all I, Plohish, did. I chopped wood, I hauled hay, and I lit all the boxes with black bombs, white shells and yellow cartridges. It’s going to crash now!

Then the bourgeoisie rejoiced, quickly wrote down Malchish-Plohish into their bourgeoisie and gave him a whole barrel of jam and a whole basket of cookies.

"Bad Boy sits, eats and rejoices."

And from this bourgeois desire to “live beautifully,” maintaining personal and group consumption at the level of the “golden age” of the USSR, there followed direct betrayal, coupled with Moscow’s collusion with the “collective West,” with the surrender of not only all positions in the world, but also of Soviet civilization itself.

Added to this were the failures of the USSR's foreign policy. When Moscow, at the expense of the Russian state and the Russian people, was able to prop up various "friendly" regimes in Africa and Asia. Meanwhile, in the RSFSR itself (historical In many places (Great Russia), there were no good roads, and many cities and towns were drab and poorly maintained. Moscow, at the turn of the 70s and 80s, also managed to "fight" on three fronts: with the Western world; with Maoist China, which, under Deng Xiaoping, had established relations with the United States and begun the transition to a capitalist economy; and with the Muslim world.

At the same time, the Red Empire had every chance of outmaneuvering the collective West, led by the United States. Nothing irreparable had yet happened in the early 80s. Everything was in place: science and education, a people with enormous creative potential, the world's best army, and the KGB to suppress any "fifth column" in the outlying Ukrainian regions and in Moscow itself.

The Soviet Union had every chance of wearing down the United States in the arms race, relying on asymmetric responses and breakthrough technologies. It could have achieved an economic miracle and become the center of a new leap in scientific and technological development for all of humanity. It could have made the first flight to Mars (as Elon Musk now advocates, understanding the importance of this event for humanity), leaving the world 50–100 years behind.

However, the “rats” of that time gained the upper hand and simply destroyed the planet’s advanced civilization.


Alang (India). In the foreground is the flagship of the space fleet The Soviet Union's "Cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin," partially cut up for scrap, and behind it, the second-largest vessel in the space fleet, the "Akademik Sergei Korolev," awaits its fate. Let me remind you that the USSR had a unique Space Fleet, or Space Research Service of the Department of Marine Expeditionary Work of the USSR Academy of Sciences (SKI OMER)—a division subordinate to the USSR Academy of Sciences (formally) and the USSR Ministry of Defense (de facto), which had under its control research vessels designed to support the USSR's space programs. By the end of 1978, the SKI OMER fleet consisted of 11 vessels based in Odessa and Leningrad. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this unique fleet was destroyed. Why would savages need a Space Fleet?! Their destiny is to "pump oil."
216 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    26 December 2025 03: 37
    And a few ghoul-bankers, oligarchs, plutocrats, and politicians in Kyiv, London, Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Zurich, and Washington receive their gesheft profits.

    Forbes has updated its annual list of the world's richest people. The number of billionaires from Russia has reached 146. Of these, 15 of them entered the ranking for the first time.
    1. +2
      26 December 2025 05: 17
      The number of billionaires from Russia has reached 146, with 15 of them making the list for the first time.
      And Forbes didn't report how many people were born here and how many left forever? And how many businesses closed? And what's our life expectancy? Didn't report it either?
      1. +11
        26 December 2025 05: 29
        Quote: Schneeberg
        And Forbes didn't report it.

        He didn’t say this, but it didn’t make me feel any more proud of our nouveau riche!
        1. man
          0
          26 December 2025 12: 36
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          Quote: Schneeberg
          And Forbes didn't report it.

          He didn’t say this, but it didn’t make me feel any more proud of our nouveau riche!

          Really? No, to be happy for our thieves. fellow and you probably also consider yourself a patriot request
          1. +3
            26 December 2025 15: 46
            Quote: mann
            No, to be happy for our thieves

            We, in our joy, tore two accordions! drinks
      2. -1
        26 December 2025 13: 26
        Quote: Schneeberg
        What is our life expectancy?

        It's constantly growing, as reported by court statistics...
        Quote: Schneeberg
        How many people were born among us?

        Well, now abortions have been given the "last and decisive battle," with enormous support from current and future mothers, so the electorate will now be fruitful/multiplying...
  2. +3
    26 December 2025 03: 41
    The communists squandered such a great power! They couldn't find a Stalin or Beria!
    Those who were objectionable were killed (Masherov) or exiled (Polyansky)!
    1. +1
      26 December 2025 04: 57
      At present, there are enemies of Russia hiding abroad who must be eliminated.
      1. man
        +3
        26 December 2025 12: 38
        Quote: Taurus1983
        At present, there are enemies of Russia hiding abroad who must be eliminated.

        If only abroad...
        1. 0
          26 December 2025 15: 41
          Alexei Navalny's wife is one of Russia's enemies; she is hiding abroad.
    2. +5
      26 December 2025 05: 18
      The communists squandered such a state!
      By this time there were no communists left. wink
      1. +5
        26 December 2025 06: 38
        They remained, but Gorbachev meticulously purged them from the Politburo and especially from the ministers. He brought in all sorts of Vshivornadzes and Yakovlevs in their place.
      2. +1
        26 December 2025 20: 21
        Quote: Schneeberg
        The communists squandered such a state!
        By this time there were no communists left. wink


        There were still plenty of honest party members left. The middle party rank and file and ordinary communists. But there was party discipline. You couldn't utter a word against the Central Committee's policies. And all citizens of the USSR saw the decay at the very top, plus connections, shortages, and the shadow economy—a bartender at a dive called a bar earned more than the commander of a nuclear submarine. Perhaps some remember the saying, "If you want to live, you've got to be able to spin your wheels." But the director of a furniture store lived better than an academic. And they reaped what they sowed.
    3. +10
      26 December 2025 06: 33
      Frankly, it's a mediocre system if its well-being, and indeed its very existence, depend on the presence of a strong leader. A state must be stable, so that it can't be destroyed by someone who, by some twist of fate, happens to sit on the throne.
      1. -1
        26 December 2025 09: 06
        You, enemies of the USSR and the Soviet people, always oppose not only the truth, but also logic and common sense, and world history.
        All three of your "leaders", starting with your "Liberator" Gorbachev, acted in exactly the same way - having become the leaders of the State, they immediately began to replace people in the highest echelons of power with their own, and together with them and with all of YOU, they did to the country and the people what they did.
        1. -1
          26 December 2025 09: 38
          Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

          Quote: tatra
          All your three "leaders", starting with yours

          Why three? After Stalin's death, there were many more, and the destruction of the USSR began with Khrushchev:

          "Event:
          From 07 to 18 June 1953, the cruiser Sverdlov, under the command of Captain 1st Rank Olympius Ivanovich Rudakov, visited Great Britain to participate in the Royal Navy parade at the Speedhead Roads of the Portsmouth Naval Base on the occasion of the coronation of Her Royal Majesty Elizabeth II.

          Meaning:
          The USSR voluntarily renounces not only the pursuit of its own global policy, alternative to the GP, but even its own state sovereignty and accepts leadership from the British Crown.
          The voluntary surrender of the country was favorably received by the supranational administration, which gave the go-ahead to begin active actions to dismantle the USSR.

          Action
          The first event in this direction was the assassination on June 26, 1953 in Moscow of the Minister of Internal Affairs of the USSR, First Deputy Prime Minister of the USSR, member of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU L. P. Beria.

          From February 14 to 25, 1956, at the 20th Congress of the CPSU, First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N. S. Khrushchev delivered a secret report, "On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences," exposing the "cult" of personality of I. V. Stalin.

          And so on....".

          An excerpt from the three-volume work "War. State. Bolshevism." It fully describes how, after Stalin's death, subsequent leaders surrendered the USSR.
          1. +9
            26 December 2025 10: 23
            Quote: Boris55
            From 07 to 18 June 1953, the cruiser Sverdlov, under the command of Captain 1st Rank Olympius Ivanovich Rudakov, visited Great Britain to participate in the Royal Navy parade at the Speedhead Roads of the Portsmouth Naval Base on the occasion of the coronation of Her Royal Majesty Elizabeth II.

            Do not pull the owl onto the globe. The decision about the visit was made before Khrushchev, under Stalin. At the beginning of 1953 year The Soviet Navy received an invitation to participate in the Royal Navy Review at Speedhead Roads, Portsmouth Naval Base, to celebrate the coronation of Her Majesty Elizabeth II. This was the first official friendly visit by a Soviet ship to a Western European naval base since the war, and it was on such a crucial mission. The choice fell on the lead cruiser of the newest post-war "68-bis" class, the Sverdlov. Three months were spent preparing the crew and the ship for this voyage.

            https://flot.com/history/events/sverdlov.htm
            1. -2
              26 December 2025 10: 50
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              At the beginning of 1953 year

              In October 1952, at the XIX Party Congress, the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) was renamed the CPSU.

              The reason: The overwhelming majority of Bolsheviks were wiped out in WWII. Meanwhile, Trotskyists proliferated in the rear. To prevent Trotskyists from hiding behind the Bolsheviks' backs as they sought power, as they had at the beginning of the revolution, Stalin decided to rename the party, removing all references to the Bolsheviks.

              The decision to surrender the USSR to the West was made by the Trotskyists, and it was Khrushchev who carried it out.

              ps
              On January 29-31, 1924, the "Leninist recruitment" into the party was announced (later called the "Leninist draft"). "Workers from the machine tool" were called into the party. Initially, 100 newcomers were expected, but this number later increased. The membership of the RCP(b) roughly doubled in one year—from 386 to 780—and the proportion of workers in it increased from 44 to 60%.

              This recruitment to the party was carried out by vote, by a vote of all workers—party and non-party. Together, they decided whether a candidate was worthy of joining the RCP(b). As Stalin proudly remarked on this matter, "our party has become the elected organ of the working class."

              By freeing the bureaucracy from the control of the proletarian vanguard, the "Leninist recruitment" dealt a mortal blow to Trotsky's party."

              After the war, the Trotskyists did the same thing—they seized control. By early 1952, Stalin was no longer in charge of the country...
              1. +6
                26 December 2025 10: 52
                I'm not saying Khrushchev is a good guy, but that he wasn't the one responsible for the decision about the cruiser's visit, because you've built a whole theory around his supposed decision. hi
                1. -1
                  26 December 2025 10: 56
                  The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  You built a whole theory on his supposed solution.

                  It was him. It was he who led the Trotskyist faction.

                  ps
                  From modern world history – Biden. Did he govern the country or not? The answer is obvious to everyone – no. Just as Stalin didn't govern the USSR at the end of his life.
                  1. 0
                    26 December 2025 21: 08
                    Quote: Boris55
                    Likewise, Stalin did not rule the USSR at the end of his life.

                    Boris, could you provide evidence of Stalin's inadequacy? He wrote quite a few letters in 52, spoke at the Congress, and he was 73. Do you think that necessarily indicates mental infirmity? So, your idol is 73, after all...
                    1. +1
                      27 December 2025 08: 58
                      Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

                      Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                      Could you, Boris, provide evidence of Stalin’s inadequacy?

                      Biden also spoke...
                      Let me remind you: Stalin died on March 5, 1953.

                      Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                      he was 73- ... so your idol is 73 so and so...

                      Average life expectancy:
                      1. 0
                        27 December 2025 09: 05
                        Quote: Boris55
                        average life expectancy

                        And how is it related to intelligence and work ability? Brezhnev, for example, died at 75, and was already out of his mind around 70... How has brain aging changed over the entire graph you provided? A hundred years ago, almost no one lived to the point of senility... And there's plenty of evidence regarding Biden, but is there any evidence regarding Stalin's inadequacy in recent years? Or are these simply your assumptions that fit into your theory, and therefore accepted as an axiom?
                      2. +1
                        27 December 2025 09: 28
                        Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        And regarding Stalin's inadequacy in recent years - is there any?

                        No, but in fact the Trotskyists (Khrushchev) had already seized power.

                        I've already written about Stalin's seizure of power in 1924 and Trotsky's comments on the matter. Why is it so hard for you to believe that by 1952, power had passed to the Trotskyists?

                        By the way, the seizure of power is happening before our very eyes today.
                      3. +1
                        27 December 2025 11: 02
                        Quote: Boris55
                        No, but in fact the Trotskyists (Khrushchev) had already seized power.

                        So, you're calling Stalin an incompetent manager and a naive youth, outplayed by those he could wipe out with a snap of his fingers? And someone who had unique experience in the struggle for power? And who are these Trotskyists who seized power from Stalin in the USSR back in 1952?
                        Quote: Boris55
                        By the way, the seizure of power is happening before our very eyes today.

                        By the way, I don’t see who’s stealing from whom - the characters are 80% the same as 20 years ago.
                      4. +1
                        27 December 2025 11: 21
                        The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        You call Stalin an incompetent manager.

                        In October 1952, at the 19th Party Congress, the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) was renamed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). This act sealed the Trotskyist victory over the Bolsheviks. Stalin was competent. All party decisions, to this day, are made by majority vote. Stalin no longer had a majority and had virtually no influence on party decisions.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        And who are these Trotskyists who seized power from Stalin over the USSR back in 1952?

                        Khrushchev, Brezhnev and others like them.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        The characters are 80% the same as 20 years ago.

                        And the personnel for them are being trained in VSHY (USA), and "Senezh" for the bourgeoisie.
                        Preparations are underway for a change of elites (a takeover of power) created by Putin – "The Time of Heroes." "Personnel decide everything."
                      5. +1
                        27 December 2025 11: 28
                        Quote: Boris55
                        Khrushchev, Brezhnev and others like them.

                        What did Brezhnev decide from Moldova? And Khrushch, after the 5th Congress of the CPSU, joined Stalin, Malenkov, Beria, and Bulganin in the "Five," a small Bureau of the Presidium of the Central Committee, created at Stalin's suggestion, an unauthorized body in which all power was concentrated. Just one of the five... Are the others also traitors and Trotskyists?
                        Quote: Boris55
                        Preparations are underway for a change of elites (a takeover of power) created by Putin – "The Time of Heroes." "Personnel decide everything."

                        I don't believe it. You believe it. Faith doesn't require facts. And who's right? How long will it take us to find out? 5-10-25 years? Or will a couple of years be enough?
                      6. +1
                        27 December 2025 11: 31
                        Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        And who is right? We'll find out in how long? 5-10-25 years?

                        It took the Trotskyists 40 years to destroy Stalin's USSR. I hope this process will proceed significantly more quickly today.
                      7. 0
                        27 December 2025 11: 59
                        Quote: Boris55
                        It took the Trotskyists 40 years to destroy Stalin's USSR. I hope this process will proceed significantly more quickly today.

                        In general, faith in all that is good will last you a lifetime - that's right, those in power really need people like that, people who believe unconditionally and don't doubt anything... if only the whole country could be instilled with Boris's wisdom, there would be joy... laughing It would be better if they just declared a monarchy and moved on with their lives. I would even be for it. It would be better to have a monarchy if the only other option is a feudal kleptocracy, then at least the monarch is definitely interested in the prosperity of his country.
                      8. 0
                        28 December 2025 14: 38
                        The most direct evidence of Stalin's inadequacy is the beginning of the fight against the Jews as a nation...
                        For such tricks, their god punishes anyone.
                        The most interesting thing is that after Stalin, the theme continued, which became the reason for the complete degradation of the USSR.
                      9. 0
                        28 December 2025 14: 51
                        Quote: Igor
                        the beginning of the fight against the Jews as a nation...

                        What kind of nationalism is this that's close to fascism? I agree that Jews are smart, but tying that to the idea that whoever kicked them out is waiting for collapse is a bit much. Especially since Jews didn't disappear in the USSR; it's just that the smartest ones survived and made it through.
                      10. 0
                        28 December 2025 14: 54
                        Well, then read about the doctors' plot.
                        There, the communists promoted precisely their Jewish nationality.
                        Here, in the case of mountaineers, mountaineers were exterminated only because Krylenko was a mountaineer and moved its development forward in the USSR
                      11. 0
                        28 December 2025 23: 11
                        Half of the doctors in this "case" were not Jewish.
      2. 0
        26 December 2025 21: 00
        Do you have any specific examples, facts, proof, or links? What role models should I look up to? Or are you just mouthing letters and only able to type?
      3. +1
        28 December 2025 06: 40
        Quote: Freeal
        A system is a lousy one if its well-being, and indeed its very existence, depend on the presence of a strong leader. A state must be stable so that it can't be destroyed by someone who, by a twist of fate, has ascended to the throne.

        Stalin created this system, and it existed quite successfully for quite a long time under frankly weak leaders. It only collapsed after outright betrayal or inaction by the entire top brass.
    4. +4
      26 December 2025 08: 05
      And yours won't screw it up now! Or is it too hard to think for yourself, you can only repeat it from ready-made articles.
      1. man
        +8
        26 December 2025 09: 40
        Quote: Gardamir
        And yours won't screw it up now! Or is it too hard to think for yourself, you can only repeat it from ready-made articles.

        They're screwing up, but it's much nicer to blame it all on the communists... sad
        1. -1
          28 December 2025 15: 09
          Is there even one person in power today who didn't have a party card in their pocket in 1990?
          1. man
            0
            28 December 2025 16: 29
            Quote: Igor
            Is there even one person in power today who didn't have a party card in their pocket in 1990?

            I don’t know, I was never a member of the party, and I only began to appreciate the communists in 1993, alas... sad
            1. -1
              28 December 2025 17: 10
              But I know...
              All the current ones WERE COMMUNISTS THEN.
              And I always valued them... For their ability to cling to power...
              1. man
                +1
                28 December 2025 20: 48
                Quote: Igor
                But I know...
                All the current ones WERE COMMUNISTS THEN.
                And I always valued them... For their ability to cling to power...

                The common people didn't cling to anyone; they were mostly elderly people who had been through the war. They tried hard to recruit as many workers as possible into the party, trying every possible way to persuade them. Some gave in to their persuasion...
                1. -1
                  28 December 2025 21: 21
                  "common man" is not a sign of quality.
                  Moreover, you describe the "common man" as a banal weakling.
                  1. man
                    +1
                    28 December 2025 22: 07
                    Quote: Igor
                    "common man" is not a sign of quality.
                    Moreover, you describe the "common man" as a banal weakling.

                    Ordinary people are NOT officials, I meant them...
                    1. -1
                      28 December 2025 22: 16
                      That's what I'm talking about, those who were drawn into the CPSU for the sake of party committees and newspaper subscriptions.
                      Smart people went there for positions.
                2. -1
                  28 December 2025 21: 21
                  "common man" is not a sign of quality.
                  Moreover, you describe the "common man" as a banal weakling.
      2. -6
        26 December 2025 09: 44
        The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

        Quote: Gardamir
        And yours won't screw up now!
        Quote: mann
        They're screwing up, but it's much nicer to blame it all on the communists...

        I don’t know about yours, but ours are expanding Russia with territories.
        1. +7
          26 December 2025 11: 04
          I just happened to find out the amount lost in exchange for the supposed increase.
          1. -1
            26 December 2025 11: 12
            The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

            Quote: Gardamir
            I just happened to find out the amount lost in exchange for the supposed increase.

            Are you comparing the territories of the USSR with today's Russia or the Tsarist one?
            1. +4
              26 December 2025 11: 16
              The Trade Federation gifted territories to Norway, China, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan...
              1. +2
                26 December 2025 15: 43
                The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                Quote: Gardamir
                The Trade Federation gifted territories to Norway, China, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan...

                Specifically:
                You forgot about Shivyrnadze, who signed over fishing grounds in the Barents Sea to the United States.
                Medvedev, while president, bequeathed fishing grounds to Norway.
                Yeltsin started the demarcation of the borders with China, and Putin finished it – now we have no territorial claims – there will be no new Domansky.
                Kazakhstan – to Yeltsin.
                What about Azerbaijan – in the Caspian? We're on an even playing field with all the countries in that basin.
                1. 0
                  26 December 2025 21: 11
                  Quote: Boris55
                  Yeltsin started it, and Putin finished it – now we have no territorial claims – there will be no new Domansky.

                  Yes, it won't happen... They got everything they wanted... A wonderful way to end a dispute - just give it all away... And what's it like in the Constitution... The Constitution of the Russian Federation directly prohibits actions aimed at alienating the country's territory, and calls for this, ensuring the integrity and inviolability of the Russian Federation, which is enshrined in Article 4 and Article 67(2), and also introduces criminal liability (Article 280.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) for such acts, emphasizing Russia's sovereignty. Or if someone argues with us, then it's immediately not our territory, right, in your opinion?
                  1. 0
                    27 December 2025 08: 51
                    The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                    Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                    Everything they wanted was given to them.

                    The demarcation line between Russia and China runs along the center of the Amur River, as has been the custom throughout the world since time immemorial.

                    Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                    The Constitution of the Russian Federation directly prohibits actions aimed at alienating the country's territory.

                    Watch the chronology.
                    This article was included in the Constitution in 2020.
                    1. 0
                      27 December 2025 09: 17
                      Quote: Boris55
                      The demarcation line between Russia and China runs along the center of the Amur River, as has been the custom throughout the world since time immemorial.

                      however, even justifying the fact that it was accepted in the world, fact The transfer of Russian lands (since the 19th century, which neither the Russian Empire nor the USSR gave up) remains a fact.
                      Besides:
                      Following demarcation work, on August 15, 2017, Lake Sladkoe in the Kupinsky District of the Novosibirsk Region was entirely transferred to Kazakhstan.
                      In mid-May 2015, a meeting of the joint Russian-Azerbaijani commission on state border demarcation was held in Moscow. Russian authorities awarded their neighbor three large tracts of mountain pastures in the Dokuaparinsky district of Dagestan.
                      And what about the Russian Federation - has anyone written anything?
                      1. 0
                        27 December 2025 10: 09
                        The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        however, even substantiating the fact

                        Before Putin amended the Constitution, giving and giving away things simply, even without a thank you, was perfectly legal; at least these acts were not unconstitutional—they did not contradict the Basic Law.

                        But what a cry the liberals raised about the amendments, seeing in them only an extension of the presidential term, introduced by the communists - Tereshkova, with the aim of thwarting them all...

                        ps
                        I am against the distribution of territories. Everyone involved (D.A. Medvedev) must be brought to justice.

                        By the way, within Russia itself, the borders of about 200 constituent entities are unsettled.
                      2. 0
                        27 December 2025 10: 58
                        Quote: Boris55
                        I am against the distribution of territories. Everyone involved (D.A. Medvedev) must be brought to justice.

                        It was only in 2011, actually... I wrote about other periods too... Who are you "crumbling the loaf of bread" at? wink
                        And... why didn't they do this earlier, before they gave up everything they gave up? Would I have voted against a referendum? Or is the issue completely unimportant? Or so they wouldn't say, "It's not just about extending the deadlines," but also about so many other important things?
                        Quote: Boris55
                        By the way, within Russia itself, the borders of about 200 constituent entities are unsettled.

                        In my opinion, this is not at all comparable to the transfer of land to other states... by the way, we have significantly fewer than 200 subjects...
                      3. 0
                        27 December 2025 11: 11
                        The essence of Russian civilization is Bolshevism.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        It was only in 2011, that's for sure.

                        And he managed to cause quite a bit of trouble...

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        Why didn't they do this before?

                        So the time has come.
                        Issues that required immediate resolution:
                        - stop the collapse of the country;
                        - fill the budget with money;
                        - provide people with work;
                        - ensure food security;
                        - restore the country's defense capability;
                        - etc.

                        Until all these problems are solved, there's no point in thinking about anything else. When the house is falling apart, there's no point in putting up new wallpaper.
                      4. 0
                        27 December 2025 11: 16
                        Quote: Boris55
                        When the house is falling apart, there is no point in putting up new wallpaper.

                        What I mean is that a normal owner doesn't let things get to the point where the house falls apart.
                        Quote: Boris55
                        Issues that required immediate resolution:
                        - stop the collapse of the country;
                        - fill the budget with money;
                        - provide people with work;
                        - ensure food security;
                        - restore the country's defense capability;
                        - etc.

                        Well, that's what I'm talking about... so that the "Borises" would think - well, the deadline is a trifle... there are so many necessary issues on the agenda... the usual crowd psychology management and mass manipulation laughing
                      5. 0
                        27 December 2025 11: 27
                        Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

                        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                        There are so many necessary questions on the agenda

                        When you have a fire in your house, will you think about the wallpaper and what glue to buy for it?

                        So you're talking about trifles... By 2000, Yelitsin had done everything to destroy the country, and you're talking about territories... We could have lost the entire country...
      3. 0
        26 December 2025 10: 39
        Well, history is coming full circle again. The authorities never learn. They lie, lie, and gather sycophants around them.
    5. +9
      26 December 2025 09: 17
      Quote: andrewkor
      The communists squandered such a state!

      By the late 1980s, communists could only be found at the bottom of society—workers, peasants, and the intelligentsia. And all those who had risen to leadership by then had metamorphosed.
      A world of its own. Its own morals. Benefits, special rations, special conditions, special cars, housing. Offices, secretaries. Mutual responsibility, nepotism.
      Celestials
      From district leaders to country leaders
      I called them the party in power. A party within a party.
      The country and society as a whole were ruled by the ruling party. They had no connection whatsoever to the communists, the charter, or the morality of the CPSU. All they had was a party card in their pocket.
      1. +3
        26 December 2025 10: 44
        A controversial issue. The Communist Party's problem was one thing: careerism—no way to get to the top without a party card. Or simply by merit? A rare exception. The following happened to me: the chief engineer called me in and chided me: "Why are you, a promising young specialist, not in the party?" I replied, "I'm not ready." We waited a bit. He asked, "Are you ready?" No. And then it all started. From a good specialist, I immediately became a bad one.
        1. +1
          26 December 2025 16: 14
          Quote from: dmi.pris1
          A controversial issue. The CPSU's problem was one thing: careerism; you couldn't get to the top without a party card.

          Well, that's exactly what my whole comment is about.
          A party within a party, a sect
          They didn't like strangers there
      2. man
        +1
        26 December 2025 14: 54
        By the end of the eighties, communists could only be found at the bottom of society - workers, peasants, and the intelligentsia.
        It is a under capitalism lower classes... sad Have you ever tried calling anyone "low" under the communists?
        1. +1
          26 December 2025 15: 42
          Quote: mann
          at the bottom of society - workers, peasants, intelligentsia.
          This is the lower classes under capitalism

          Perhaps I didn't formulate my thought correctly, or the word "lower classes" has the wrong association with you.
          The lower classes of society are what this society rests on, the base of the pyramid, the foundation
          I don't know what exactly confused you.
          1. man
            0
            26 December 2025 19: 31
            Quote from sdivt
            Quote: mann
            at the bottom of society - workers, peasants, intelligentsia.
            This is the lower classes under capitalism

            Perhaps I didn't formulate my thought correctly, or the word "lower classes" has the wrong association with you.
            The lower classes of society are what this society rests on, the base of the pyramid, the foundation
            I don't know what exactly confused you.

            I was offended by the word "lower classes." In Soviet times, it wasn't officially used at all, especially when referring to workers. Officially, it was considered honorable to work.
      3. 0
        26 December 2025 21: 14
        Quote from sdivt
        By the end of the eighties, communists could only be found at the bottom of society - workers, peasants, and the intelligentsia.

        + Absolutely right! The partycracy created a kind of bourgeois stratum, or rather, a sect, behind an ideological screen. Party meetings took on the character of a ritual, where they first praised the elite, then lulled the rank-and-file members into complacency with monotonous speeches, and then made decisions that would appeal to the elite.
    6. man
      +1
      26 December 2025 12: 54
      Quote: andrewkor
      The communists squandered such a great power! They couldn't find a Stalin or Beria!
      Those who were objectionable were killed (Masherov) or exiled (Polyansky)!

      Are you sure you're not talking about our time? All that's left to do is replace the communists with capitalists and replace the names of the undesirables... Yes, the communists also created... so much so that the capitalists haven't been able to screw it up in 30 years...
    7. +2
      26 December 2025 21: 07
      Quote: andrewkor
      The communists squandered such a state!

      Not communists, but PARTOCRATS!
      1. 0
        27 December 2025 11: 55
        And you read the charter of the CPSU.
        He prohibits discussions within the party and demands unquestioning obedience.
        1. 0
          27 December 2025 16: 11
          Quote: Igor
          He prohibits discussions within the party and demands unquestioning obedience.

          But they did have some free will in deciding local issues?
          1. -1
            28 December 2025 00: 41
            Yes, they could decide for themselves who would run for vodka.
      2. 0
        28 December 2025 05: 20
        There are party officials in any party: the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), the Social Democratic Party (SDPG), the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), the National Socialist Party (NSDAP), the Communist Party (KD), and the Socialist Republic (SR).
    8. -2
      27 December 2025 19: 23
      You should have stayed behind the communist barbed wire longer, wearing Ural shoes. You don't understand a damn thing.
  3. +8
    26 December 2025 05: 09
    I don't know how it was with World War II, but in 1987 something really began that resembled the beginning of a new Great Depression.
    October 19 – Black Monday: a sharp drop in stock indices in the US and around the world.
    October 26 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell to 156,83 points.
    December 31 – The US dollar fell to its lowest level against major world currencies in US history.

    But all this was nothing compared to what was happening in the USSR.
    Not in the country - the country continued to live a normal life, and nothing yet foreshadowed trouble.
    A nightmare was flaring up in the spotted head of its leader and those he dragged into the Politburo.
    1. -2
      26 December 2025 11: 31
      The West did experience periodic economic downturns, but on average, its economy grew 2% faster than ours since the 1950s. This may seem insignificant, but due to compound interest, after three decades the result was a huge difference in quality of life. There were two options: either try to reform and fix the system, but risk its ultimate collapse, or sever all ties with the West so that people wouldn't know what life was like there, like in North Korea. There were no good options, only bad and terrible ones.
      1. +4
        26 December 2025 11: 35
        Quote: overland
        On average, its economy has grown 2% faster than ours since the 1950s.
        What are you saying ?!
        1. 0
          27 December 2025 09: 36
          Quote: The Meaning of Life
          What are you talking about...?!

          smile You provided an interesting table! In 1995, Japan's economy was 72% the size of the US. Now it's less than 14%. That is, it has fallen back (collapsed) more than fivefold... and yet they're showing no panic, no "perestroika." request
          On the other hand, what are the reasons for this rollback? Was it China and South Korea that pushed them aside, or what? what
          1. +1
            27 December 2025 19: 44
            I don't know. Maybe it was the other way around, growing up in the US. Anything could have happened in 30 years.
            Where did you get your current data? The table ends in 2000.
            1. 0
              27 December 2025 20: 25
              Quote: The Meaning of Life
              Where did you get your data about now?

              From the IMF -)))
              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%BF%D0%BE_%D0%92%D0%92%D0%9F_(%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB)
              1. +2
                27 December 2025 20: 33
                Well, it's clear there that Japan has fallen, but not by much, from 5500 to 4280. But the US has risen from 7600 to 30600.
                True, we still need to adjust for inflation, but this will not change the overall picture.
      2. +5
        26 December 2025 11: 38
        There's a nuance here that Soviet political scientists didn't understand. Everyone was comparing socialism and capitalism. But the West was better off not because capitalism was more economically advanced, but because the West was always robbing someone.
        1. +4
          26 December 2025 12: 29
          Quote: Gardamir
          and because the West has always robbed someone.
          The main purpose of capitalism is capital growth—one might even say, greed—which is what drives consumer society and the cult of money. Moreover, global capitalism is a pyramid scheme where the prosperity of the top requires constant expansion of the base, otherwise, crisis and the Great Depression. Having absorbed the socialist countries, the base was expanded, but the expansion ended, the reprieve lost. A new reset is needed, a war to write off debts and reap new profits from bloodshed. We have what we have, the enemy has been designated, the European lackeys are preparing for war, and the masters are preparing to sit it out overseas. Approach Russia's borders, persuade them to recognize the coup d'état in Kyiv, give them an eight-year head start to pump up the Ukrainian Armed Forces, brainwash them... So, almost four years of this strange military operation, where for some there's bloodshed and destruction, while in a "parallel reality" there are fireworks and celebrations, a furor of successes and achievements, but all the while declaring the need to bring Asian migrants to Moscow and a willingness to negotiate on Ukraine. Don't the stated goals of demilitarization and denazification only imply the capitulation of the Nazi regime, and not "negotiations with Hitler"? How should this all be understood, who benefits so much from it, and what will ultimately result? These are interesting questions.
          1. +2
            26 December 2025 13: 43
            So you insist Russia isn't capitalist? Or are Russian bourgeois all saints?
            1. +7
              26 December 2025 14: 43
              Quote: Gardamir
              So you insist that Russia does not have capitalism?
              What is this, not capitalism, the most typical peripheral capitalism, which is fundamentally different from the capitalism of the metropolitan countries. How else can it be when raw materials and semi-finished goods are mainly sold, while assets are transferred abroad by gentlemen with dual and triple citizenship? A "henpecked" Western "elite" that keeps its wealth in foreign currencies and foreign banks. The "our-not-ours" Central Bank itself, which is effectively subservient to the IMF/Fed. The top of the capitalist pyramid is clearly not in Russia. Why, exactly, was the USSR destroyed? Clearly not so that Russia could become even stronger.
        2. +3
          26 December 2025 13: 18
          Why are you so quick to call us robbers? In modern parlance, that's called successful trade and a profitable investment. We give you beads, and you give us Manhattan Island; you give us gold, and we'll give you blankets made from the corpses of those who died of smallpox. We give you credit, and you give us your independence. Something like that.
        3. man
          +2
          26 December 2025 15: 06
          Quote: Gardamir
          There's a nuance here that Soviet political scientists didn't understand. Everyone was comparing socialism and capitalism. But the West was better off not because capitalism was more economically advanced, but because the West was always robbing someone.

          The USSR, on the contrary, helped... and very often for free... It irritated us then, but now it’s clear that it was a relatively cheap and, most importantly, almost bloodless way to keep enemies at bay on distant borders...
      3. +3
        26 December 2025 21: 21
        Quote: overland
        There were no good options, only bad and terrible ones.

        Stalin's version was a good one, when, before his death, he introduced a large number of specialists into the Central Committee. So that instead of a partycracy there would be something like a sciencecracy, but these people were quickly eaten up.
        1. 0
          28 December 2025 23: 17
          The overwhelming majority of those who joined the Central Committee at the 19th Congress were elected to it at subsequent party congresses.
    2. 0
      27 December 2025 19: 46
      No, sir. Glasnost and perestroika were all around. But when Chernobyl happened, no one (from above) remembered glasnost. And only when hiding the tragedy became impossible did glasnost begin to appear. Wow, how hard it was. You say, "the country continued to live a normal life, and nothing yet foreshadowed disaster." That's not true. The country was suffocated by "low prices," by total shortages. All of this foreshadowed disaster. And the disaster gradually began to grow, not overnight. It took another 15 years of inept, clumsy leadership to get "to nowhere." Let me remind those who don't know / have forgotten that somewhere around 1984, the newspaper Pravda published a programmatic article, "I Can't Abandon My Principles," by a certain N. Andreeva (more likely a collective image of communist fundamentalists). It was there in black and white: "We will tear the tattered sails of perestroika." It was a challenge at the time. It hadn't yet reached street clashes, but people were still raising their voices. Especially against the backdrop of the food stamps that had already appeared in Moscow (in the rest of the USSR, they had been around for five to ten years for various goods, but they kept quiet about it), with the adventures of B.N. Yeltsin, and so on. Plus, the union republics began to break away, starting with the Baltic states. And much more. So the Union didn't have much time left to live. I remember all this very well; no need for empty rhetoric. Regarding Gorbachev and the like—it all fits into the general context of events of those years. It's easier to smear someone personally than to try to understand the essence of what was happening.
      1. +1
        27 December 2025 20: 04
        Quote: V Kor
        But when Chernobyl happened, no one (at the top) remembered glasnost. And only when hiding the tragedy became impossible did glasnost begin to emerge. Oh, how hard that was.
        Information about Kupyansk was no more difficult than it is now. Only back then, there was no internet.

        The country was suffocating from the "nizyaya", from the total deficit.
        You felt suffocated in your pants.

        Let me remind those who don’t know/have forgotten that somewhere around 1984, the newspaper Pravda published a programmatic article, “I Can’t Abandon My Principles,” by a certain N. Andreeva (more likely, this is a collective image of communist fundamentalists).
        It's all clear with you. Not only weren't you alive during that time, you skipped history classes at school in the 2000s. laughing laughing laughing

        It's easier to smear someone personally than to try to understand the essence of events.
        So, the country's leader isn't personally responsible for anything? Is that what they drilled into you in history class at school?
      2. 0
        28 December 2025 23: 19
        Nina Andreeva's article "I Can't Compromise My Principles" was written during the perestroika era, not in the pre-perestroika year of 1984.
    3. -1
      28 December 2025 00: 42
      And in 1980, gasoline prices in the USSR doubled....
      1. 0
        28 December 2025 02: 06
        Quote: Igor
        And in 1980, gasoline prices in the USSR doubled....
        from 10 to 20 kopecks per liter
        1. -2
          28 December 2025 08: 52
          No.
          From 20 to 40.
          In today's money, this is about 120-160 rubles per liter.
          1. +1
            28 December 2025 09: 44
            I am pleased to have the opportunity to expose a liar and anti-Soviet person. laughing
            1. -2
              28 December 2025 14: 18
              Tell!
              Have you completely lost your mind that you're left with the task of solving the simplest problems with your left-handed intellect?
  4. +7
    26 December 2025 05: 33
    The fact that we still use Soviet electricity, gas, and heat speaks volumes. But other questions arise. Why did Gorbachev appear? And he was applauded. Throughout the life of Soviet society, we were haunted by the ills we inherited from Tsarist Russia: nepotism, servility, and bribery. And if selflessness in relationships emerged in Soviet society, it's thanks to Soviet culture. Positive traits are always harder to cultivate than negative ones. There's no need to cultivate anything.
    1. +2
      26 December 2025 06: 55
      What's the
      Soviet electricity
      ?
      1. +1
        26 December 2025 10: 48
        TOE, rewritten under the dispute with Kautsky laughing
      2. +2
        27 December 2025 12: 46
        This is what lights up your apartment. This is what allows you to watch TV and work on your computer.
        1. -1
          27 December 2025 13: 22
          My house and the neighboring houses are connected to a gas piston unit built about 15 years ago.
    2. +2
      26 December 2025 21: 30
      Quote: Nikolay Malyugin
      But other questions arise. Why did Gorbachev appear?

      Gorbachev emerged as a natural result of a biological process—competition. If we assume that humans are primates—that is, essentially lazy apes, and the laziest of the laziest, whose brain activity is focused on searching for the tastiest bananas while doing nothing—they learned to disguise themselves behind party symbols.
    3. +1
      27 December 2025 20: 00
      Electricity, gas, and heat are physical objects and have nothing to do with Soviet power. There's no denying that during the Soviet era, a Soviet engineering school emerged that allowed for both their extraction and utilization. Those ills—nepotism, etc.—were not a Soviet invention. Embezzlement has always existed (as the fastest way to profit from contracts) all over the world. More so in some places, less so in others. In the US, lobbying is legally sanctioned. Food stamps for Bolshevik Party members during the hungry years of the Revolution provided fertile ground for nepotism, bribery, and so on. Plus, there are the national traditions of the East, which are still very much alive today.
  5. +5
    26 December 2025 05: 39
    Gorbachev was just the tip of the iceberg. The nomenklatura desperately wanted to integrate into the West. Even a thousand hypothetical "Gorbachevs" couldn't have pulled off the Holocaust. They integrated...
    1. +3
      26 December 2025 06: 37
      I agree. In fact, if you dig deeper, the mistakes of state-building have been gradually accumulating since the 80s, until quantity turned into quality by the late 20s. The gradual decay of the elites is also part of the story; it began under Stalin and accelerated significantly after the 20th Congress.
  6. +7
    26 December 2025 06: 26
    However, the “rats” of that time gained the upper hand and simply destroyed the planet’s advanced civilization.

    So these same rats are still sitting in the same leather chairs, and we see them all every day in pompous news about economic growth and other nonsense. Everything remains exactly the same as it was 35 years ago.
  7. +2
    26 December 2025 06: 54
    From 1975 to 1981, the Americans did not carry out a single manned flight, despite the active space program of the USSR.

    Well yes...
    And then they started transporting people into orbit in whole buses.
    1. +4
      26 December 2025 10: 32
      You're absolutely right. The Americans were committed to space exploration. They saw no point in endlessly repeating the same old story. After a series of expendable Apollo flights, the Super Shuttle program took the lead in manned spaceflight. The first shuttle under the program was built between 1974 and 1977 (Enterprise (OV-101)) and used to test flight elements. The second, fully operational one, was assembled between 1975 and 1979 (Columbia (OV-102)). Americans had entered a different league in space, and Musk's current successes trace their roots to the Shuttle program—it was then that they gained the necessary experience.
  8. -1
    26 December 2025 07: 47
    The American elite feared that Brezhnev's peace-loving regime would be replaced by young, energetic communists—people with will and intelligence like Stalin, Beria, Korolev, and Chelomey. Then the "collective West," led by the United States, would be finished.

    A brilliant phrase.
    You have to really manage to cross a prisoner and his guard...
    1. 0
      27 December 2025 03: 07
      So the prisoner created the rocket industry, and the security guard organized the atomic bomb.
      I've memorized your definitions. Thank you for raising the most pressing issues of the past with an ethnographic bias from columnist Igoryasha.
      1. -4
        27 December 2025 06: 23
        The rocket industry was created by captured Germans, who brought to the USSR technical solutions, materials, technologies, and, most importantly, mathematical apparatus.
        1. +1
          28 December 2025 02: 17
          The captured Germans actually brought back technical solutions, materials, technologies, and mathematical apparatus in their heads.
          Only they were brought not to the USSR, but to another country, where the creators of the V-2, led by Wernher von Braun, were building lunar rockets.
          1. -1
            28 December 2025 08: 50
            Learn the story.
            The US did not use Brown's services until the first satellite.
            1. +1
              28 December 2025 09: 48
              Quote: Igor
              Learn the story.
              The US did not use Brown's services until the first satellite.
              Naturally: before the first satellite, they didn’t even fly into space. laughing laughing laughing
  9. -3
    26 December 2025 08: 04
    How insanely afraid the enemies of the USSR are of even the slightest responsibility for everything they've done, including their seizure and dismemberment of the USSR. And even in this, they have absolutely no basis. They simultaneously slandered the Communists to justify their seizure of the USSR, and simultaneously cowardly blamed the Communists for the seizure of the USSR by their enemies. For 35 years, they've been perpetuating their cowardly nonsense that "the USSR collapsed on its own," and that they had "nothing to do" with their dismemberment of the USSR into their evil, anti-Soviet, Russophobic states.
    Having proven that they made EVERYTHING worse for the republics of the USSR they captured and their peoples - in comparison with the USSR, for decades they have been manically criticizing everything that the communists and their supporters did, how they worked and fought.
    1. +2
      26 December 2025 08: 18
      The enemies of the USSR fear nothing...
      Look, Zyuganov is driving around quite comfortably on the Aurus...
      Stalin, it's true, was thrown into the pit, but Stalin's constitution, with its right for republics to secede from the USSR, still worked.
      1. -2
        26 December 2025 08: 59
        The enemies of the USSR don't care about the laws and the Constitution of the USSR, or about their own laws and their own Constitution. And every time the conversation turns to YOU, to what you yourself have done, you cowardly shift the blame onto others, cowardly shift the blame and responsibility onto others for what you yourself have done.
        And with all this, you also imagined that you are more worthy of owning the country than the communists and their supporters.
      2. +4
        26 December 2025 10: 21
        But Stalin's constitution, with its right for republics to secede from the USSR, still worked.

        You're wrong here. This was the fundamental principle of the creation of the USSR, laid down by Lenin. And the first, "Leninist," Constitution clearly stated this.
        Chapter II On the sovereign rights of union republics and union citizenship
        ...

        4. Each of the union republics retains the right to freely secede from the Union....

        https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Конституция_СССР_(1924)_редакция_31.01.1924_г.
        1. +6
          26 December 2025 10: 41
          For each of the Union republics retained the right to free exit from the Union

          But the unified planned economy prevented them from taking advantage of it.
          And until Gorbachev destroyed the planned economic system, no one even mentioned it.
          And then someone named Yeltsin, Gorbachev's accomplice, stuttered
          1. +3
            26 December 2025 11: 00
            Under Lenin, and even partially under Stalin, the economy was not so unified and not so planned.
            Chapter II On the sovereign rights of union republics and union citizenship
            3. The sovereignty of the Union Republics is limited only within the limits specified in this Constitution, and only with respect to matters within the Union's jurisdiction. Outside these limits, each Union Republic exercises its state authority independently; the USSR protects the sovereign rights of the Union Republics.

            The NEP pulled the country out of ruin, but then it outgrew the level of Soviet governance, and they decided to get rid of it, with the consequences in the form of famine quickly following. The government then tried to get rid of private owners as much as possible, although under Stalin they still partially survived in the form of private artels and so on. The Twelve Chairs refers to the NEP era, 1927; the Golden Calf, immediately after, 1931.
            Gorbachev tried to return to the times of late Lenin and early Stalin, but he simply lacked the capacity for this – the system of promoting personnel in the Union by the 80s had completely ceased to meet the needs of the country.
            But there's another example. The NEP was closely observed by the young Deng Xiaoping, who implemented what had been abandoned in the USSR.
            After Mao's death in 1976, Deng became the leader of the CPC. In July 1979, he supported the creation of the Institute of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Thought, which studied the NEP, primarily the works of N. I. Bukharin. Chinese social scientists studied the works of Bukharin, who advocated a symbiosis of planned and market regulation and noted the potential of the NEP economy. In 1985, Deng acknowledged that "the most correct model of socialism was the New Economic Policy in the USSR." Deng Xiaoping, while supporting Bukharin's ideas, also condemned Stalin's repressions. In the 1980s, under Deng Xiaoping's influence, China embarked on a path of economic market reforms combining individual entrepreneurship and state regulation, which led to the growth of industry and agriculture and an increase in the population's standard of living.

            Today's China is what the USSR could have become if we hadn't abandoned the policies of Lenin and early Stalin. But it didn't work out that way :((...
            1. 0
              27 December 2025 20: 31
              You can read about the organization of planning in the USSR, for example,

              Braginsky B.I., Koval N.S. - Organization of planning of the national economy of the USSR 1954

              And about the balance method

              Kossov V.V. Intersectoral balance. M: “Economy”, 1966. 224 p.

              Roughly speaking, if Uzbekistan harvests 1 million tons of cotton, the RSFSR will use it to make suits. But if the RSFSR doesn't exist, what will Uzbekistan do with 1 million tons of cotton?
              Will the market decide? We've seen it all too well.

              Lenin also wrote

              politics is the most concentrated expression of economics

              5th ed., v. 42, p. 216

              And so the planned economy bound the republics together more tightly than any legal declaration. And in the constitution, the articles you cite express the complete equality of all republics.

              As for the NEP, already under Stalin, closer to 1940, the share of the market economy was a fraction of a percent, which can be seen from the table “The share of the socialist economy” on page 42 in the book
              Ioffe Ya.A. We and the Planet: Facts and Figures
              7th edition, supplemented. - M.: Politizdat. 1988. - 256 p.

              Therefore, I see no point in discussing the rest within the framework of the issue of the collapse of the USSR into separate republics.
              1. 0
                27 December 2025 20: 44
                Why are you writing all this? I'm well aware of the shortcomings of the planned economy in the USSR; I lived through it. They didn't plan for toilet paper—everyone wipes themselves with newspapers or burdock leaves, depending on their luck.
                And in the constitution, the articles to which you refer, these words express the complete equality of all republics.

                The articles of the constitution were based on the fundamental principles of Lenin's policy on the national question. You've forgotten how this conversation began.
                1. 0
                  27 December 2025 21: 13
                  And why did you write all this?

                  You have forgotten how the conversation began.

                  No, I remember perfectly well where we started.
                  We started with your link.
                  For each of the Union republics retained the right to free exit from the Union

                  after which I explained to you that this article declares the equality of republics (the same equality of nations that the Bolsheviks spoke about), however real separation The republics are confronted by a rigid economic connection between them. And you tried to downplay this economic connection by citing the NEP era. And I also reminded you of Lenin's words about the connection between economics and politics.
                  1. 0
                    27 December 2025 21: 20
                    No economic ties could preserve the British Empire. What you're writing is unrealistic, as the USSR demonstrated by the end of the Brezhnev era, and for some time afterward, it held on by inertia. China, however, managed to take a different path, the same one the USSR initially followed, until the country's level of power outstripped the level of its leadership, which frightened it, and we turned away from that path.
                    1. 0
                      27 December 2025 21: 25
                      No economic ties could preserve the British Empire.

                      Sorry, you are confusing a well-known plant with herring.
                      Economic ties in a market economy and economic ties in a planned economy are completely different things.
                      Referring to the example above, Uzbekistan was guaranteed that its 1 million tons of cotton would be purchased and put to use.

                      What you write is unrealistic, as the example of the USSR showed by the end of the Brezhnev era.

                      Don't change the topic of discussion, that's demagoguery.
                      1. +1
                        28 December 2025 22: 48
                        Economic ties in a market economy and economic ties in a planned economy are completely different things.

                        Do you think that a market economy doesn't use planning at all? You're wrong.
                        Read this, for example.
                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haut-Commissariat_à_la_Stratégie_et_au_Plan
                        The fully planned economy in the USSR, taken to the point of absurdity, hindered the country's development and was a constant source of internal conflict due to the subjectivity of decisions and the inability to cover all aspects. I have witnessed this; in the Soviet Union, there were constant shortages of something due to the aforementioned planning shortcomings. China built its economic policy on the path initially taken by the USSR, but the country's leadership at the time lacked the necessary expertise and was unable to cope with this model. It therefore decided to abolish it, and the country took a completely different path, which worsened under Khrushchev. Meanwhile, Chinese leaders, using the original Soviet model, managed to cope quite well in their time. We see the results clearly in China. You, however, only have abstract arguments.
                        Referring to the example above, Uzbekistan was guaranteed that its 1 million tons of cotton would be purchased and put to use.

                        This is a very simplistic approach. You don't consider the obvious downsides. What if, for some reason, Uzbekistan doesn't grow that 1 million tons of cotton? What if, on the contrary, it grows much more? What then? Everything will collapse like a house of cards, as we witnessed repeatedly in the USSR. And the more complex the economy became, the more obvious the shortcomings of this economic model became. By the end of the Brezhnev era, this became evident in a wide range of economic sectors. Planning imbalances began to surface at every turn; it was obvious to everyone. But the USSR had lost the system for selecting personnel capable of governing the country. Therefore, Gorbachev found himself at the top, unable to implement what Xiaoping had achieved based on the Soviet model of the 20s.
                        Don't change the topic of discussion, that's demagoguery.

                        Where did you see a substitution? I'm writing strictly to the point.
                      2. 0
                        29 December 2025 08: 07
                        Do you think that in a market economy planning is not used at all?

                        I don't think so, but in this matter it doesn't matter.

                        You are again demonstrating a demagogic approach.
                        Our question was:
                        The influence of the planned economy on the connection of the republics into a single state.

                        And it is quite obvious that the planned economy bound them together more strongly than any political declarations.

                        However, instead of discussing this issue, you moved on to empty declarations on the topics
                        1. Planned economy under Brezhnev
                        2. Disadvantages of a planned economy
                        3. etc.
                        I can answer all these questions, but I don’t want to digress, it’s a waste of time.

                        You are a demagogue, sir.
          2. 0
            26 December 2025 11: 50
            Did Gorbachev destroy Gosplan?
            What parallel reality is this in?
            1. +1
              27 December 2025 19: 05
              Firstly, I wrote that Gorbachev destroyed the planned economy, not Gosplan; they are not the same thing.
              Secondly, you can read about it in my articles
              [https://topwar.ru/234205-tehnologija-polzuchej-burzhuaznoj-kontrrevoljucii-19851993-gg-i-kak-ej-protivodejstvovat-chast-1.html]

              [https://topwar.ru/234344-tehnologija-polzuchej-burzhuaznoj-kontrrevoljucii-19851993-gg-i-kak-ej-protivodejstvovat-chast-2.html]

              [https://topwar.ru/234755-tehnologija-polzuchej-burzhuaznoj-kontrrevoljucii-19851993-gg-i-kak-ej-protivodejstvovat.html]

              [https://topwar.ru/237615-o-diktature-proletariata-trudjaschihsja-io-dvizhuschej-sile-burzhuaznoj-kontrrevoljucii-1985-1993-gg.html]
              They also contain links to where I got the information from.
              Thirdly, a friend gave me a link to a book I didn't know about. It's also about this, you can read it.
              Lisichkin, "War after War, the Information Occupation Continues"
              1. -2
                28 December 2025 00: 29
                How did this destruction of the planned economy manifest itself?
                1. 0
                  29 December 2025 07: 55
                  You are obviously not a reader, but a writer?
                  In particular, in the total shortage under Gorbachev.
                  1. -1
                    29 December 2025 08: 00
                    Under Gorbachev, as under Brezhnev, stores were filled with all sorts of junk, which was produced according to plan...
                    And what was in short supply was something that wasn't planned for release, or something that they didn't know how to release.
                    1. 0
                      29 December 2025 08: 11
                      Look at the photo in this article and read it, as if you weren't alive then.
                      [https://topwar.ru/173328-pustye-polki-pozdnego-sssr-kak-vlast-sama-organizovala-deficit.html?ysclid=mjqp9b13w73259103]
                      1. -1
                        29 December 2025 08: 39
                        By then I had already started writing my dissertation on powerful HF generators.
                      2. -1
                        30 December 2025 08: 26
                        If you didn’t notice the empty shelves and write
                        Under Gorbachev, as under Brezhnev, the stores were overflowing with goods

                        then I assume that the country in which you wrote this dissertation is not the USSR.
                        Or did your mom and dad go to the store for you?
                      3. -1
                        30 December 2025 08: 28
                        Well, why ...
                        I wrote my dissertation at the Ryazan Radio Institute under the supervision of Professor Yu.I. Sudakov.
                      4. -1
                        30 December 2025 08: 29
                        Then you're just a troll.
                        Bye
                      5. -1
                        30 December 2025 08: 32
                        So, you haven't said hello yet...
                        Oh, I got it ...
                        You are that very troll.
              2. -3
                28 December 2025 00: 35
                8. Rejection of the party's leading and guiding role in the life of the country (Article 6 of the USSR Constitution). The goal is to reject the construction of socialism and, subsequently, communism in our country.

                That is, Stalin lied when he said that socialism was built in the USSR
                Did Brezhnev lie about developed socialism?
                1. 0
                  29 December 2025 07: 58
                  Did Brezhnev lie about developed socialism?

                  I don't think so. He was wrong when he said that restoring capitalism from within was impossible.

                  If you read Lenin's work "State and Revolution," you will see that socialism goes through several stages in its development, for the reasons indicated there.
                  1. -2
                    29 December 2025 08: 25
                    Lenin had time to fantasize about many things, but when he was confronted with reality, he immediately put forward the slogan about the need to build state capitalism.
                    Which was successfully built.
                    But no one has ever bothered to define what “socialism” is.
                    The same IML 70 years old was not enough for this
                    1. 0
                      30 December 2025 08: 23
                      But no one has ever bothered to define what “socialism” is.

                      Your answer shows that you don't understand the meaning of the words you write. Your knowledge is fragmentary. I won't even try to teach you; it's impossible to do so in a short answer.

                      You need to study, not have discussions here.
                      Goodbye.
                      1. -2
                        30 December 2025 08: 26
                        Your answer suggests that you, like others like you, have not been able to find the meaning of the term "socialism".
                        Don't worry. There is no such definition.
                      2. +1
                        30 December 2025 08: 27
                        Your answer shows that your knowledge is zero.
                        You are a troll.
                        Goodbye.
                      3. -2
                        30 December 2025 08: 30
                        This answer of yours confirms that I am right.
                        By the way, I didn’t conduct any discussion.
                        I just asked one question that made you hysterical.
        2. -2
          26 December 2025 11: 48
          Where am I wrong?
          During the Leninist constitution, it was Stalin who governed inter-republic relations.
          1. +2
            26 December 2025 23: 37
            Read what Lenin wrote on the national question long before the revolution. Everything was done strictly according to his views.
            1. -3
              27 December 2025 06: 21
              Lenin wrote everything and anything for all occasions.
              The only thing he consistently worked for and brought to life was Russia’s defeat in the war and the unleashing of a civil war in his own country.
              Well, and to a certain extent about the oppression of Great Russians. Here Stalin really went all out.
              1. 0
                27 December 2025 20: 51
                Lenin wrote everything and anything for all occasions.

                Specifically, on the national question, Lenin had a fairly clear line from the very beginning of the 20th century, dating back to Marx and Engels. It was this line that was enshrined in the Soviet Constitution as the foundation of the country's existence in all its versions—Leninist, Stalinist, Brezhnevist—for the entire existence of the USSR.
                1. -2
                  28 December 2025 00: 23
                  What exactly was secured?
                  According to the constitution, not all nations have the right to self-determination.
                  1. +1
                    28 December 2025 01: 08
                    The Soviet republics were formally constitutionally separate and independent states. The Byelorussian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR were members of the UN.
                    not all nations have

                    Nations and nationalities are not the same thing, they are different concepts.
                    1. -1
                      28 December 2025 08: 53
                      And for sure.
                      Chuvash is a nationality, and Moldovans are a nation
              2. +1
                28 December 2025 02: 24
                Quote: Igor
                The only thing he consistently worked for and brought to life was Russia’s defeat in the war and the unleashing of a civil war in his own country.
                I looked at the map of the USSR in the year of Lenin's death—it doesn't look like a country that had lost a war. Especially compared to the map of the Russian Federation after it overcame its totalitarian past in 1991.
                And the civil war was unleashed by the Whites, incited by the interventionists.
                1. -1
                  28 December 2025 08: 48
                  And you are also illiterate.
                  Lenin called for Russia's defeat in the First World War.
                  In a war where Russia was essentially the winner, but the Bolsheviks agreed to a separate peace, and Russia began to pay reparations to the losing side
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                  2. +1
                    28 December 2025 09: 51
                    Quote: Igor
                    Lenin called for Russia's defeat in the First World War.
                    Not true. Lenin wanted the governments of ALL the warring countries to be defeated. He wrote about this at length and willingly.

                    Quote: Igor
                    In a war where Russia was essentially the winner
                    In which war is this? belay
                    1. -2
                      28 December 2025 14: 22
                      He wanted Russia's defeat...
                      For this, the Germans gave him money and provided a corridor to Russia.

                      And ri could have become the winner in the First World War, but in fact it lost to the losing side
                      1. +1
                        28 December 2025 20: 09
                        Quote: Igor
                        For this, the Germans gave him money and provided a corridor to Russia.
                        Not "him", but "them".
                        1) General Alexander Alexandrovich Frese. Served on the General Staff and was a member of the State Council of the Russian Empire. The war found him in Germany. After living in Germany for six months after the war began (apparently receiving instructions from the German General Staff and training in espionage), he returned to Russia in February 1915 and... resumed his duties on the General Staff and the State Council!
                        2) Konstantin Nikolaevich Stavrovsky. Also a general, he was a member of the Military Council of the Russian Empire. The war caught him in Germany, too (it seems our generals were in good shape there). He also spent six months in Germany (apparently he attended the same courses as Frese). In March 1915, he returned to Russia and resumed his work on the Imperial Military Council.
                        So what are we surprised about after this?

                        And ri could have become the winner in the First World War, but in fact it lost to the losing side
                        Germany didn't lose the war. It fell victim to the Revolution. Afterward, the Germans mourned for a long time, claiming that the vile revolutionaries had stabbed Germany in the back, and that if not for this, Germany would certainly have won. And they were right: by November 1918, not a single enemy soldier had set foot on German territory; one of Germany's main adversaries, Russia, had already left the war, and those who remained spent so much time and lives on every kilometer of advance that the populations of these countries would have expired before they reached Berlin.

                        The commander of the military district, Allenstein, reported directly to Hindenburg:
                        "The soldiers who returned from Russian captivity, including non-commissioned officers, as a result of the revolution they had experienced, lost all discipline and brought with them so many Bolshevik ideas that they are having a disastrous influence on their comrades."

                        "Now, in retrospect, I can say that our defeat clearly began with the Russian Revolution." E. Ludendorff. My Memories of the War of 1914-1918, Moscow, 1924, Vol. 2, pp. 206, 296."
                      2. -2
                        28 December 2025 21: 16
                        I don't think your global copypasta can clarify your point.
                      3. +1
                        29 December 2025 01: 40
                        Think less about your mantra. Then smart thoughts will come.
                      4. -2
                        29 December 2025 06: 59
                        What does it mean to "think about a mantra"?
                        Do you know the meaning of this term?
                      5. +1
                        29 December 2025 21: 53
                        This is what you keep saying about Lenin. Contrary to the facts and common sense.
  10. +3
    26 December 2025 09: 07
    The Soviet Union had every chance of wearing down the United States in the arms race by relying on asymmetric responses and Breakthrough technologies. Achieve an economic miracle.

    Millions of engineers and students are heading for the sky every autumn. An autumn filled with impassable mud in the fields, stinking, rotten vegetable warehouses, the loss of a third of the harvest, and so on—is this breakthrough technology? And buying grain from the US—is this weakening the US?

    And the costs of materials and labor are 2.5 times higher per unit of production than in the USA (Ryzhkov), and there is also a lag in the scientific and technological revolution?

    What other miracle, where from?
    1. -3
      26 December 2025 09: 21
      How insignificant are the enemies of the USSR, if in 35 years of your highly paid work you have not achieved anything FOR yourself or what you YOURSELF have done, and for all 35 years you have only been “sucking up” everything that the Soviet communists and their supporters have done.
      If there are still a huge number of supporters of Lenin, Stalin, Brezhnev on the Internet, and among you there are no supporters of your "leaders", under whom you boast, like everyone else, "now it is better than in the USSR."
      You betrayed two of your "leaders", you handed them over to communist supporters, and for the third you had to hire paid bots so that at least they would pretend to be his supporters on the Internet with stupid manuals, that he is the best, the very best, that he saved, raised from his knees.
      1. -3
        26 December 2025 10: 09
        Quote: tatra
        that he saved, raised from his knees.

        Isn't that so? Only the second Chechen war stopped the centrifugal forces destroying Russia.

        Towards the end of the last century, the Vlasovite communist Yeltsin, with tears streaming down every television screen in Russia, solemnly handed over power to his ideological enemies—the St. Petersburgers, believing that nothing could save Russia from collapse. The Sverdlovskites, however, did not want to answer to history for the country's collapse—they wanted to remain clean. They failed!!!
      2. -1
        26 December 2025 19: 21
        Quote: tatra
        How insignificant are the enemies of the USSR?

        How insignificant are the enemies of enemies, if the insignificant ones destroyed them lol
    2. +5
      26 December 2025 11: 20
      Quote: Freeal
      Frankly, it's a mediocre system if its well-being, and indeed its very existence, depend on the presence of a strong leader. A state must be stable, so that it can't be destroyed by someone who, by some twist of fate, happens to sit on the throne.

      Basically, yes. With a smart leader, such a system is capable of working miracles. But it proves helpless against a moron who has seized power. I don't remember who said it: "A person's shortcomings are a continuation of his virtues, and vice versa.".

      A state that could not be destroyed by the %%%% who, by the will of fate, climbed onto the throne, would never have been able to win the Civil War, repel the intervention, carry out industrialization, win the Great Patriotic War, restore industry and the economy in five years (!), simultaneously creating a nuclear missile shield, ensure constant growth in production and the grandiose construction of the 1950s-1970s.
      And the state, which was able to do all this, was unable to cope with a bunch of parasites who had made their way to the top of power.

      It is sad that decommunized Russia, having abandoned the Soviet gains, has become a pitiful shadow of its former might, but at the same time has retained the main flaw of the Soviet system - it rests entirely on one man and is completely dependent on his whims and caprices.
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. +3
        26 December 2025 11: 51
        Quote: The Meaning of Life
        Once again the tsar-wanker began to drone on with his favorite mantras about butts, dirt and stench.

        Unfortunately, Olgovich's political leanings don't change the fact that the 28 million people employed in Soviet agriculture were losing the battle for the harvest every year. And it was only with the help of the army and urban "mobilizers" that the battle was resolved. smile
        And about the smell... the vegetable warehouse on Ispytateley, near Udelny Park, smelled of rotten contents for an entire block.
        1. +1
          26 December 2025 12: 08
          Everyone confuses economic systems with reality. It's not about capitalism versus socialism. They like to say that sanctions aren't having an impact and the economy is growing. But they're very embarrassed to say that the country is behind the Iron Curtain.
          There were sanctions against the USSR, too, but we didn't think about it. Besides, "Russia is not America," says Parshev. That also has an impact. And let's not forget the advancement of science and technology. Now, for example, you can assemble an industrial refrigerator in half a day, but that's not because we live under capitalism.
      2. -2
        26 December 2025 19: 15
        Quote: The Meaning of Life
        Once again the tsar-wanker began to drone on with his favorite mantras about butts, dirt and stench.

        These are "breakthrough commercial technologies" with which the author, with a purpose..., intended to defeat America. And how much more did he have to stick his butt in the sky? lol
        Quote: The Meaning of Life
        What about the cost of materials and labor per unit of production before 1917 and after 1991?

        competitively profitable?
        1. +1
          27 December 2025 19: 53
          Quote: Olgovich
          These are "breakthrough commercial technologies" with which the author, with meaning...., is going to defeat America.
          Come on, let's talk about modern BANANOtechnologies, with which you are going to defeat America. laughing laughing

          competitively profitable?
          What do you mean there's no production because they can't compete? Well, that's all you need.
    4. +1
      27 December 2025 03: 20
      Olgovich(Andrey)
      Millions of engineering and student priests fly into the sky every autumn
      but then - for a whole year - student canteen at student prices. it was fairIt also helps clear your head and promotes work discipline. Schools now definitely have summer work hours—that's exactly why.
      Does purchasing grain from the US weaken the US?
      As far as I understand, they bought hard varieties of wheat from abroad, and we grew wheat that was more weather-resistant and had time to ripen - so they sold it back. And even this didn't last long - after the virgin lands were developed, they stopped buying it.
      1. -1
        27 December 2025 12: 03
        Our student canteen was called Buchenwald.
        And only first-year students ate there.
        Because canteen fat is a direct path to gastritis.
        But the regional party committee canteen provided tasty and inexpensive food.
        But it wasn't every day that you could get there.
        1. +2
          27 December 2025 14: 51
          Quote: Igor
          Our student canteen was called Buchenwald.

          Well, our student cafeteria (university cafeteria) fed us so well that no restaurant today can even come close to it. Not even the most expensive one!
          Even the rector (a member of the Supreme Council) ate lunch there every day -))) Oh... those were the good old days! By the way, in the restaurant (after our canteen), the food seemed... plasticky and tasteless.
          And there was also an excellent canteen in the port in Kholmsk... wonderful... but still not quite up to par with ours winked
          1. -2
            27 December 2025 15: 51
            A wonderful fairy tale....
            1. +1
              28 December 2025 10: 38
              Quote: Igor
              A wonderful fairy tale....

              smile Here is the rector -
              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD,_%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%BC%D1%91%D0%BD_%D0%95%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87
              *****
              I must admit that he didn't stand in line with the other teachers and students. They usually ate lunch together, the three of them. The rector, vice-rector, and party organizer. feel and a separate table in a sort of room separated from the common room.
              The dean was standing in line... and so were all the department heads -)))
              ******
              But we weren't offended by that -)) it was actually quite "modest" -)))
              1. -2
                28 December 2025 14: 33
                Chelyabinsk?
                I was there on a business trip.
                Judging by the range of products in the stores, you would be ready to mistake even shortening for butter.
                I remember when I was coordinating the business trip, the host tearfully asked me to bring more sausage cheese and tea, No. 36...
      2. -2
        27 December 2025 14: 09
        Quote: Disant
        student canteen

        the place was called a sickhouse
        Quote: Disant
        As far as I understand, they purchased durum wheat from abroad.

        any
        Quote: Disant
        After the virgin lands were raised, they stopped purchasing

        They bought more and more - 20% of what was needed in 1990
        1. +1
          27 December 2025 19: 49
          You're lying. Beer halls were called "sick-houses."
          1990 was the year of the flourishing of cooperation, the transition to the current attitude, so it is not surprising laughing
          It is interesting to compare how dependent the Russian Federation is on imports now.
          1. -2
            28 December 2025 14: 35
            Why were beer halls called "sick-houses" in your area?
            Were the people there throwing up from the beer?
            1. +1
              28 December 2025 20: 11
              Well, not everyone is as used to booze as you.
              1. -2
                28 December 2025 21: 19
                Booze?
                What it is?
                So, what were you burping about in your pubs?
                Was the beer of such disgusting quality?
                1. +1
                  29 December 2025 01: 43
                  You probably didn't even live through the Soviet Union. All self-respecting men diluted their beer with vodka.
                  1. -2
                    29 December 2025 07: 02
                    Now your social circle has become clear...
                    I haven't dealt with such scum...
                    And if I diluted anything with vodka, it was liqueur...
                    1. +1
                      29 December 2025 21: 52
                      Think about it, what a high-brow prude.
  11. +1
    26 December 2025 09: 27
    It's like I'm reading a Russian epic. But seriously, the author writes that the USSR won in 1975; victory implies enjoying the fruits of victory. Where did that happen? On the contrary, people began to grow poorer, the state ossified, ideology turned into a religion with party priests who didn't understand or even believe what they were saying. It's like in the fairy tale: the warrior who slew the dragon became one himself.
  12. +9
    26 December 2025 09: 30
    Ah, Samsonov...
    It's a bit reminiscent of the thoughts of a blonde who is convinced that the world revolves around her...

    + standard templates like “the dollar is about to collapse”
    instead of at least some numbers, statistics, facts.
    For the ego, of course, "the people will swallow it" will do.
    but no more.
    1. -1
      26 December 2025 10: 02
      Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

      Quote: Max1995
      ...at least some numbers, statistics, facts.

      Figures.
      CIS countries have switched to using local currencies at 97% of their payments. SCO countries have switched to using local currencies at 93%. BRICS countries have switched to using local currencies at 90%. Isn't this an indication that the dollar's influence in the world is steadily declining?
      1. +3
        26 December 2025 11: 18
        China and India account for 87% of the BRICS countries. In 2025, 31% of China's foreign trade was conducted in yuan, 57% in dollars, and the remainder was primarily in euros. India's foreign trade is denominated in dollars, with 85% of its foreign trade denominated in dollars. Therefore, your statistics claiming that 90% of BRICS countries no longer use dollars as their primary means of foreign trade are simply nonsense.
        1. -1
          26 December 2025 11: 31
          Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

          Quote: overland
          This is just nonsense.

          This doesn't change the essence of the issue. The dollar is losing its appeal.
        2. +1
          27 December 2025 13: 06
          The discussion concerned mutual settlements between the organization's members. It's an indisputable fact that the dollar's share of international transactions is steadily, albeit slowly, declining. Even the IMF admits that its share has fallen below 50%, down from over 70% 20 years ago.
  13. +7
    26 December 2025 10: 10
    The author was clear from the very first paragraphs. Only he could write such nonsense about the USSR's victory in the Cold War or about a flight to Mars. :((
  14. +3
    26 December 2025 11: 11
    The American public and press, as if working for Moscow, constantly criticized and discredited the American authorities, intelligence agencies, and army (just like the Soviet public and press during the years of the late “perestroika” and “reforms”).


    The author fails to recognize that this is a key factor in the success and stability of the American system. When the press is relatively free and allowed to criticize the government, problems are exposed, and politicians risk losing elections if they don't take action to address them. Corruption is also exposed without fear of reprisals from those in power. However, it's important that this be done early, from the very beginning, and not when the system is already close to collapse. Otherwise, in the words of a French historian, "the most dangerous moment for a bad government is usually when it embarks on reforms." This is precisely what happened to us during perestroika.
    1. +2
      26 December 2025 11: 19
      Don't worry, criticism is prohibited right now. What's happening isn't an election. The system is close, but there won't be perestroika.
    2. +1
      27 December 2025 13: 03
      Quote: overland
      The author fails to realize that this is a key factor in the success and stability of the American system. When the press is relatively free and allowed to criticize the government, problems are exposed, and politicians risk losing elections unless they take action to address them.


      The key factor in the stability and success of the American system is that it is far more totalitarian than the Soviet one and successfully manipulates the minds of its electorate. Corruption? The entire system is based on total corruption, the notorious "lobby" (though that's just the tip of the iceberg). And those appointed to the ranks of corruption are those who run counter to the most influential part of the elite at the given moment.
      The United States is copying ancient Rome, and quite successfully. And the end will be similar.
  15. +4
    26 December 2025 11: 14
    Excuse me, but what about the brilliant quote from a brilliant man that nothing was produced in the USSR except galoshes?
    1. +2
      26 December 2025 11: 59
      Quote: roosei
      Excuse me, but what about the brilliant quote from a brilliant man that nothing was produced in the USSR except galoshes?

      There is no such quote. And there never was. smile
      That speech said the USSR had a defense industry—a fantastic, powerful one. And space exploration. Great achievements of the Soviet regime. But consumer goods—the "galoshes"—were a disaster. There were either too few of them, or they were of such poor quality that no one bought them.

      And the author of the article in question, by the way, carefully avoids the topic of consumer goods in his panegyric to the USSR, focusing on the aforementioned defense and space industries:
      The Russians created a constellation of wondrous inventions in the fields of space, rocketry, aircraft construction, etc. Russian "left-handers" created weapons that were cheaper and higher quality than those in the West.

      Honestly, you can't write in a laudatory article that all this was created in cities where food stamps were commonplace. And in those cities where there were no stamps, the proletariat demanded their introduction.
      We, workers of the Ural Chemical Plant, cannot buy anything in our stores. There is absolutely nothing to feed the family. Is it really impossible to somehow improve the nutrition situation in our time? We demand improved food supplies and it is mandatory to introduce coupons for receiving meat and dairy products, as was introduced in the cities of Sverdlovsk, N. Tagil, Kizel, Gubakha, Gorky, Izhevsk and othersOnly then will we be able to buy groceries after work.

      © Letter from workers of the Ural Chemical Plant to the CPSU Central Committee and local party bodies with a request for the introduction of food stamps. May 1979
  16. +2
    26 December 2025 11: 17
    Some kind of propaganda from a political officer, from the past and foggy past.
    Why didn't the author write about the deteriorating planned economy, bribery and the eternal shortage of everything and everyone?
    And don't even start talking about foreign policy, it will be sad and embarrassing, especially the 70s and later.
    1. +1
      26 December 2025 11: 34
      Bolshevism is the essence of Russian civilization.

      Quote: merkava-2bet
      Why didn't the author write about the deteriorating planned economy, bribery and the eternal shortage of everything and everyone?

      The CPSU's deliberate policy of dismantling Stalin's USSR led to precisely this: bribery and shortages. Bribes were paid to party leaders in exchange for loyalty to Khrushchev and his successors. The liquidation of the cooperatives led to shortages.
      1. +2
        26 December 2025 13: 08
        The CPSU's deliberate policy of draining Stalin's USSR led to exactly this - bribery and shortages.

        Shortage!
        Under what conditions would it be simply impossible? Unthinkable?
        During the era of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, a significant role was given to small enterprises, which were then defined as INDUSTRIAL COOPERATIVES (hereinafter abbreviated as PC).
        Let me remind you.
        By 1953, the USSR had 114,000 workshops, production facilities, and other enterprises within the personal computer system. They employed 1,9 million people (12% of the population), producing 6% of the gross domestic product. The personal computer system included enterprises of all types, excluding heavy engineering, machine tool manufacturing, shipbuilding, and metal smelting. However, personal computer enterprises did produce other products, including metalworking, chemicals, food processing, textiles, clothing, and so on.
        The PC system included:

        100 design bureaus;
        22 expert laboratories;
        2 research institutes.

        All industrial cooperatives were part of local industry, not state-owned ones, and therefore paid taxes to the local budget. This allowed for rapid improvements in living conditions for the local population and led to protectionism among local authorities. No one even considered demanding bribes from cooperative members! On the contrary, municipal and regional leaders did everything they could to attract entrepreneurs to their territories and cultivate them among their own citizens.

        By 1953, PC enterprises were producing:
        40% of furniture;
        70% metal utensils;
        30% knitwear;
        90% of children's toys.
        The first Soviet vacuum tube radios were produced in 1930 by the Leningrad-based Progress-Radio cooperative. The first radiograms began to be produced in 1935. The first televisions with cathode-ray tubes were released in 1939. Anything new and advanced that was planned for production in Western countries was immediately embraced by the Soviet industrial cooperative and implemented at an accelerated pace.
        Industrial cooperation was also active during the Great Patriotic War! The industrial cooperative's enterprises produced ammunition and combat vehicle parts, and the state, as in the pre-war years, continuously supplied the industrial cooperative with necessary warehouse space, raw materials, equipment, and transportation services. Furthermore, the industrial cooperative purchased tanks and aircraft with its own funds and donated them to the fighting Red Army.
        The characteristics of the PC enterprises were as follows:
        -- own non-state pension system;
        -- providing loans to employees for the purchase of tools, equipment, livestock, and for the construction of housing;
        -- ensuring legal protection.
        As I have already said, local authorities acted as stakeholders in the activities of the PC.

        But, from the perspective of some blinkered ideologists and secret enemies of Soviet power, Soviet industrial cooperatives were a bourgeois relic, not to mention not subject to full control by central government bodies (Bukharin's idea!). After Stalin's death, industrial cooperatives were largely destroyed, as were individual farmers in agriculture.
        And for some reason it seems to me that if industrial cooperatives had survived, we would now be living in the USSR and, in terms of development, would be the most advanced country in the world.
  17. +2
    26 December 2025 11: 32
    Quote: Max1995
    Ah, Samsonov...
    It's a bit reminiscent of the thoughts of a blonde who is convinced that the world revolves around her...

    + standard templates like “the dollar is about to collapse”
    instead of at least some numbers, statistics, facts.
    For the ego, of course, "the people will swallow it" will do.
    but no more.

    We can't eat it. It was unpleasant to read. Although some of the comments are quite accurate. And the comparison with Plokhish is absolutely spot on.
  18. +2
    26 December 2025 11: 36
    Two identical anti-Soviet themes, but people are drawn to criticize Skomorokhov.
  19. -2
    26 December 2025 12: 38
    Bravo, Alexander Samsonov!
    good drinks love hi )))
    The forum can and should provide clarifying details.
    For example, in Russia, we've almost finished eating the Soviet legacy, so let's finish it in the annexed lands of Malorossiya. They're planning to share the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant with the Americans, whose shells rain down on our soldiers. So the Americans can mine cryptocurrency there. Our grandfathers built it! Our Soviet grandfathers! The project was developed by Soviet scientists! According to the Constitution, the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant is ours! Why would such a gift be given to the backbone of NATO, apparently, to our enemy—the United States?
  20. 0
    26 December 2025 13: 43
    This article is so twisted and convoluted! It's like Dr. Goebbels' recipe: add 1/3 truth to 2/3 lies. So it is here. Facts, events, and circumstances are all chopped into a fine vinaigrette, some consistent, others not so much. The main idea and red line of all anti-Sovietists is to prove that the collapse of the Union and its idea was inevitable. So they stretch the owl over the globe and manipulate facts, events, and phenomena. But the fact that more than 30 years after the fall of the USSR, the fight against it hasn't abated, but rather intensifies, speaks volumes. And this fight is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to justify the current degradation and decay.
    1. 0
      23 February 2026 06: 03
      Quote: oleg Pesotsky
      The collapse of the Union and its idea was inevitable... more than 30 years after the fall of the USSR, the fight against it continues


      Your idea died for any reasonable people by the end of the 60s. All that remains is a handful of out-of-touch dreamers and theorists.
      Following the idea, the system inevitably collapsed, and with it the country.
      Communism was built on lies and terror from the very beginning. And deceiving and intimidating the entire nation forever won't work.
      As for the "struggle," it's still going on "30 years later," only online, and carried out by a handful of communist sectarians. These farts and absurd articles are the "struggle."
      1. 0
        23 February 2026 14: 14
        The very fact that you're writing these lines is proof of the validity of the socialist idea. You're still fighting it 30 years later. Stillborn constructs aren't fought like that. And secondly, what can you offer in its place? Crisis, inflation, rising prices, degradation, wars, and ethnic strife? That's why your position is both mistaken and harmful.
  21. +3
    26 December 2025 14: 18
    My career began with the production of polymers for the Buran's thermal circuit. The state was
  22. +3
    26 December 2025 20: 46
    That's right. The elite wanted everything they owned de facto to become theirs de jure. A unique phenomenon: a change in social structure without a change in leadership.
  23. -1
    26 December 2025 22: 26
    Quote: aybolyt678
    Not communists, but PARTOCRATS!

    And who are these party officials? Where did they come from, and where were the communists?
  24. 0
    27 December 2025 07: 55
    "By 1975, the United States and its allies had suffered a severe military and political defeat in Vietnam. This had a profound impact on the psyche of Western and American society. Americans were demoralized..."

    And to further cement the blow to the psyche of American rulers, the popularly elected authorities in our country began searching for a stake. But they couldn't find one.
    And about unemployment in the West and the working woman in our country... Finding yourself unemployed and living on welfare is scary in any country. But working and living on the minimum wage is just as scary.
  25. 0
    27 December 2025 23: 45
    The West was losing in terms of science, education and culture

    The West made the Intel 8080 processor, the USSR cut it up, copied it, and the "domestic" K580 appeared, but when the Intel 8085, 8086, 80286 came along, the carbon copy was no longer up to the task.

    Same thing: PDP11 -> SM EVM, IBM 360 -> ES EVM
    1. 0
      31 December 2025 22: 20
      Why are all anti-Soviet people such liars?
  26. +1
    27 December 2025 23: 52
    And when software development began, the military laughed heartily – what are they paying for, holes in punched tape? Hee-hee-hee

    Already not funny?
  27. log
    +2
    28 December 2025 08: 36
    Listen up, Boris and Level 2 Advisor! Will you please stop clogging up the airwaves with your pointless chatter?
  28. +1
    29 December 2025 04: 55
    The Soviet Union was doomed from 1970 (and perhaps even earlier). Although, in theory (but without violating the laws of physics), it would have been possible to "rebound" later. But in reality, the deeply ingrained Soviet ideology prevented us from changing anything, not even thinking about or proposing change. After all, we were "the most advanced!" "Just think, if even with such widespread mismanagement our country is alive and thriving, then imagine its resilience!"
    In general, "The Teaching of Marxism-Leninism is omnipotent, because It is True!"
  29. -2
    30 December 2025 08: 38
    [quote=october][quote]No economic ties could preserve the British Empire.[/quote]
    Sorry, you are confusing a well-known plant with herring.
    Economic ties in a market economy and economic ties in a planned economy are completely different things.
    Referring to the example above, Uzbekistan was guaranteed that its 1 million tons of cotton would be purchased and put to use.

    Exactly.
    They received money for this million tons, but did not deliver any cotton...
    And what they supplied... It wasn't cotton, but trash.
    When Uzbek cotton arrived at our factory in the village, the head of the rock workshop went to hang himself.
    Up to half of the raw materials went to waste
  30. 0
    23 February 2026 05: 55
    Oh my god, what utter nonsense! The communists still don't understand anything. Naive old fools.