The Commissar Order: The Document That Made War Stop Being War

21 108 81
The Commissar Order: The Document That Made War Stop Being War


On June 6, 1941, sixteen days before the start of Operation Barbarossa, the OKW (the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of the Third Reich) sent out a directive to senior headquarters entitled "Directives for the Treatment of Political Commissars." The document ordered the immediate execution of captured Soviet political workers, exempting them from the protection of international law, and preemptively absolving German soldiers and officers of responsibility for violating this law. The document was brief, marked "Top Secret, for Generals Only," and became one of the pillars of what would later be classified as crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg Trials.



"War of Worldviews": Ideological Preamble


Without understanding the ideological framework, the text of the order seems like a collection of oddities: why a commissar, by what signs is he identified, why was he denied even a formal interrogation? The explanation lies outside military logic. The Nazi leadership viewed the upcoming clash with the USSR not as a campaign against another state, but as the culmination of a "racial war" against Judeo-Bolshevism, an ideological concept built on the anti-Semitic myth of the Jewish origins and leadership of Soviet communism. This concept was not the rhetoric of party journalism, but the supporting framework of state policy: it was developed by Alfred Rosenberg in the party's ideological apparatus, disseminated by the Antikomintern bureau at the Ministry of Public Education and Propaganda, and reproduced in staff memos.

Adjacent to this frame was the second category, Untermensch, "subhuman", which combined racial hierarchy and a plan for the physical redistribution of eastern territories, known as General plan OstThe Slavic population of Eastern Europe was intended to be partially exterminated, partially resettled, and partially reduced to a labor force for the future German space. The Red Army's political commissar was inserted into this scheme as a dual target: both a bearer of "Bolshevik ideology" and, according to Nazi dogma, predominantly of Jewish origin.

That's why the order refers to the commissars not as "enemies" or "prisoners of war," but as "true bearers of resistance." This formula is not military, but ideological: it doesn't describe the enemy on the battlefield, but rather designates an enemy based on their convictions. Without it, the order would have been incomprehensible even to those who carried it out.

From Directive No. 21 to June 6, 1941: The Bureaucracy of Crime


The June 6, 1941, document was not improvised. Its origins can be documented, and this traceability alone is key to understanding the nature of the decision. On December 18, 1940, Hitler signed Führer Directive No. 21, which outlined the general outline of the war in the East. On March 3, 1941, at a meeting with senior military officers, he formulated the task bluntly: the upcoming campaign must be waged as a "struggle between two worldviews," with the extermination of the "Bolshevik intelligentsia" and the abandonment of ordinary legal restrictions. On March 30, the Führer assembled approximately two hundred senior Wehrmacht officers; a diary entry by Franz Halder, Chief of the General Staff of the Ground Forces, captures the thesis without embellishment: "A communist has never been and never will be a comrade. This is a fight to the death. Commissars and GPU officials are criminals, and they must be treated as such.".


What followed was the work of the staff machine. In Department L (National Defense) of the OKW Operations Headquarters, under the direction of Walter Warlimont, the Führer's formulations were translated into official language. On May 6, 1941, Quartermaster General of the Army Eduard Wagner and a group led by Eugen Müller presented a working draft. Commander-in-Chief of the Army Walther von Brauchitsch, who had promised senior officers back in March that he would prevent such an order, accompanied it in early June with his own order on the procedure for disseminating it. The author, Hitler, had already found a self-justification: the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 were declared inapplicable to a war with the Soviet Union on the grounds that the USSR had not signed them. The structure was legally shaky: the overwhelming majority of norms applied as common law, regardless of signature. But for internal use, it was suitable.

Here's a point that's awkward to discuss, but impossible to avoid: not a single senior commander retracted their signature or resigned. Some generals (Fedor von Bock, Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb) expressed private doubts; there was no institutional resistance. And this is the key characteristic of the moment: the criminal order went through the same staff procedure as any other, and was not rejected, but executed.

Text and performance: oral chain and extended interpretation


The document itself is brief. It orders that political commissars, identifiable by their insignia (a red star with a hammer and sickle on their sleeve), are to be separated from other prisoners immediately, while still on the battlefield, and executed "as a matter of principle and without delay." Commissars captured in the rear are to be handed over to the Einsatzkommandos and the SD, the security service of the Reichsführer-SS. The protections afforded to prisoners of war are not extended to them. There is to be no legal proceedings, no individual consideration of their case.

The manner in which the order was distributed proves that the command was aware of its illegality. The OKW distributed the text only to senior staffs; below the corps level, it was transmitted orally, without any written record. The German historian Hans-Adolf Jacobsen, who analyzed this episode using surviving documents, pointed out that the Wehrmacht commanders had no doubt about the illegal nature of the order; otherwise, it would not have been hidden from their own records. According to available data, the order was distributed to at least 340 operational units, encompassing all thirteen armies, forty-four corps, and over ninety percent of the divisions operating on the Eastern Front.

Parallel to the OKW decree, an agreement between Eduard Wagner and Reinhard Heydrich governed the Wehrmacht's interactions with the Einsatzgruppen, the SS's operational execution units tasked with the physical extermination of "politically unreliable" individuals in rear areas. The army handed over its own detainees to the SS and provided logistics; the SS carried out the actual executions. On the surface, this appeared to be a division of functions; in reality, it was a unified system in which the Kommissarbefehl served as an entry point into a broader mechanism of extermination.

Very soon, the order began to be interpreted more broadly. The category of "commissar" proved a convenient catchall for German headquarters, which began to include anyone they considered "deeply Bolshevized": junior political workers, party functionaries, captured Jews from the Red Army, servicemen from the Turkic and Caucasian republics, and officers considered ideologically dangerous by Nazi standards. The documented minimum number of executed commissars proper is approximately four thousand; the real estimate is in the range of ten thousand and likely higher. According to accepted estimates, approximately fifty thousand Jews serving in the Red Army were also executed under the broad interpretation of the order.

The documented minimum is approximately 4,000 executed commissars. Coverage: all 13 armies, 44 corps, and more than 90% of the Eastern Front's divisions. The total number of Soviet soldiers who died in German captivity between 1941 and 1945 is over 3 million.

An order against one's own purpose: the price and formal cancellation


The order had the opposite effect. The Red Army learned of the executions of commissars as early as July 1941: through escapees from captivity, through defectors, and through captured German documents. This information quickly became part of Soviet frontline propaganda. The effect was the opposite of what was intended: instead of the disintegration the order's authors had hoped for, a willingness to fight to the bitter end grew in Soviet units. Surrender ceased to be an option, because it no longer offered one.

The German commanders themselves realized this. In the fall of 1941, a number of field commanders appealed to the OKW to soften the order, not for legal reasons, but for military expediency: it was hindering the fight. On September 23, Hitler rejected any changes. Only on May 6, 1942, almost a year after its introduction, was the Kommissarbefehl formally suspended. The paperwork was removed, but the system was not. Einsatzgruppen continued to operate in the Soviet rear, the selection of "politically dangerous" individuals in Wehrmacht transit camps continued as usual, and executions under the expanded category continued until the end of the war. The rescinding of the order was an administrative gesture, not a political choice.

The full extent of this difference between paper and system was best illustrated by one episode, dating back to the post-war period. Nuremberg, April 1946, Courtroom 600 of the Palace of Justice. Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, Chief of Staff of the OKW, who signed the Commissarbefehl, is in the witness box. When questioned by the prosecution about the legality of the orders he issued, the field marshal answers calmly, without attempting to deny it: he knew the orders were contrary to international law and did not consider it possible to evade them. He adds a phrase Hitler uttered in response to the objections of senior officers.

"Ultimately, this is not your responsibility. I alone answer to the German people."

Nuremberg, Manstein and the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht"


The Commissarbefehl became a key piece of evidence at the Nuremberg Main Trial and the twelve subsequent American military tribunals held at the same Nuremberg Palace of Justice: against doctors, lawyers, industrialists, SS commanders, and senior Wehrmacht officers. The order was presented as documentary evidence that the crimes in the East were not excesses of war and were not the sole responsibility of the SS: they were signed by the highest military leadership, underwent staff procedures, and were executed by regular troops. The prosecution's case here was one of the strongest in the entire trial, because the text of the order existed and was impossible to challenge.

The 1949 Hamburg trial of Field Marshal Erich von Manstein became a separate issue. The defendant denied both knowledge of the order and its execution; the British military court found ample evidence to the contrary, including Manstein's own order of November 20, 1941, demanding the "destruction of the Jewish-Bolshevik system." Eighteen years in prison turned into four: in 1953, Manstein was released for health reasons, with the support of several Western politicians and military officials. By this time, the Cold War had already redrawn the framework: the Federal Republic of Germany was becoming a key NATO ally, and its Bundeswehr was built from the same officer cadre. Systematic prosecution of war crimes from 1941–1945 in the West effectively ceased.


It was in this pause that the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" took shape, the idea that the regular army fought like soldiers, while crimes remained the work of the SS and party structures. This myth endured for several decades and was only seriously shaken by German historiographic works and museum exhibitions in the 1990s and early 2000s, which brought back into the public domain documents that had been presented at Nuremberg and then forgotten. Among these documents is the Kommissarbefehl.

June 6, 1941, was not a date of excess. It was a decision: formalized, signed, distributed to headquarters, and executed. The war in the East had a program, and the order regarding commissars was part of it, not an exception. A document remains a document in the same legal sense as intended by those who signed it.

Glossary
Kommissarbefehl — “Order on Commissars”, OKW order of June 6, 1941.
OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht) — Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of the Third Reich.
SD (Sicherheitsdienst) — Security Service of the Reichsführer SS.
Einsatzgruppen — operational punitive commands of the SS, operating behind German lines in the East.
Untermensch — "subhuman", a racial category of Nazi ideology.
General plan Ost — a secret plan for the physical redistribution and colonization of the eastern territories.
81 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 11
    9 May 2026 03: 54
    The material is presented correctly. And nothing has changed since then. Europe is still ready to go to war against Russia and kill us simply because we are Russian.
    The only thing holding them back right now is the lack of real military power. But they're working hard on it...
    1. + 16
      9 May 2026 04: 46
      This article once again shuts the mouths of those smart guys fool Those who argued that commissars were unnecessary in the Red Army, that there was no need to politicize the army, that it was a farce and a show. But the Germans didn't see it that way, considering them "the true bearers of resistance," as stated above in the document. Stalin said: "If a capitalist praises you, it means you made some mistake. "And it needs to be corrected immediately." The same logic applies here. If the Germans considered the commissars extremely dangerous, then why did anyone here consider them useless? request
      1. + 10
        9 May 2026 05: 06
        ***It was in this pause that the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht" took shape, the idea that the regular army fought "like soldiers," while crimes remained the work of the SS and party structures***—from the text. A convenient myth indeed. It even entered Soviet cinema. Remember "Seventeen Moments of Spring"?—"We didn't burn, we fought, and it was the SS who burned." But Voronezh historians and local historians disagree, believing the following: Only a tenth of the war crimes in the Voronezh region were committed by the SS, but everything else... I think that the statistics in other regions in this regard are not very different.
        1. +6
          9 May 2026 07: 52
          The Voronezh region remembers the Magyars.
        2. +2
          9 May 2026 08: 15
          Quote: Proxima
          A convenient myth indeed. It even entered Soviet cinema. Remember "Seventeen Moments of Spring"? "We didn't burn, we fought, and it was the SS who burned."

          By the way, it was precisely there that everything was played correctly by the actors, in the sense that it was clear, one could really feel the self-justification and moral evasion of responsibility when the "retribution" was already close... I personally perceived this episode from the very beginning of the series as an exposure of this ideological "construction"
        3. +2
          9 May 2026 20: 29
          Quote: Proxima
          Only a tenth of the war crimes in the Voronezh region were committed by the SS, but the rest...

          The collaborators were extremely vicious. From Ukrainian nationalists to Crimean Tatars serving with the Germans. One veteran told me back in the mid-80s that when our unit was marching along the road, a Kalmyk was tied to a telegraph pole. Everyone knew they were savagely vicious against civilians. And whoever had a grievance would come up and beat the freak. Oh, and the veteran added that the Kalmyk was covered in spit and spit, from head to toe. And he was so beaten that he was hanging by the ropes with which he was tied. Back then, in the Soviet Union, I wasn't particularly interested in this; there was friendship among peoples. But now I remember the veteran's story.

          It's already known who actually burned the people in Khatyn. And finally, I'll add that people who personally experienced the occupation of Crimea said that when our forces liberated Crimea, they found wells filled with the corpses of our people. And it was the Crimean Tatars who did this, and only because they were Russians. They threw the bodies into the wells indiscriminately.
      2. +2
        9 May 2026 05: 28
        Quote: Proxima
        If the Germans considered the commissars extremely dangerous, then why did anyone in our country consider them useless?

        Because these "someones" were praised by the capitalists)))
      3. +1
        9 May 2026 07: 56
        Quote: Proxima
        , they say commissars were not needed in the Red Army

        The order to liquidate the institution of military commissars in the Red Army is Order of the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR Stalin No. 307 of October 9, 1942.

        The order abolished the institution of military commissars and introduced complete unity of command in the Red Army.


        This myth survived for several decades and was seriously shaken only by German historiographic works and museum exhibitions in the 1990s and early 2000s, which returned to the public domain documents that were presented at Nuremberg and then forgotten.
        Who in the USSR reminded the FRG and GDR of this for 45 years? In the name of "friendship," everything was forgotten.

        The genocide of our people occurred, but the USSR never recognized it. The courts only recently began the process.
        1. +4
          9 May 2026 08: 21
          Quote: Olgovich
          The order abolished the institution of military commissars and introduced complete unity of command in the Red Army.

          What did you get from this order? request In my humble opinion, one-man command should have been introduced in the Red Army at least after the Civil War. And the commissars fought admirably and carried out their duties even after the aforementioned order. Just remember the legendary film "Hot Snow."
          1. +1
            9 May 2026 11: 39
            And what makes it legendary? The film is based on Bondarev's book, and its connection to real events is rather distant.
            The legendary one is Bykov's "Aty-baty shli soldaty" (At-baty soldiers went), based on a real battle of Lieutenant Shironin's platoon, as a result of which the entire platoon received the title of GSS.
          2. 0
            9 May 2026 17: 56
            Quote: Proxima
            What did you get from this order?

            to your "no need" confirmation.
            Quote: Proxima
            And the commissars fought well.

            no longer commissars
        2. +2
          9 May 2026 09: 58
          In 46, there were over 600 non-German prisoners of war in Soviet captivity. Every European country (except Serbia, England, and a handful) fought against the Soviet people. This is something we must remember. It's a colossal civilizational tragedy that the USSR didn't address this topic! After all, the goal was the destruction of Russians. As a civilization.
        3. +3
          9 May 2026 10: 46
          Why does this order matter to you?
          Your idols, General Krasnov and the Cossacks of von Pannwitz's 15th Cavalry Corps, carried out the order regarding commissars with pleasure.
        4. +4
          9 May 2026 13: 22
          Forgot to add a couple of things:
          1) on replacing commissars with deputy commanders for political affairs (political instructors).
          That is, neither the people nor the essence of their work disappeared (except, of course, that the political officer no longer officially held a special position (although in fact he did), but was one of the deputy commanders in his unit):
          2) that 120 thousand political workers were transferred to command positions, and order 307 was also sent for the urgent replacement of the eliminated command staff
      4. -5
        9 May 2026 17: 53
        Quote: Proxima
        This article once again shuts the mouths of those foolish smartasses who say that commissars were not needed in the Red Army, why politicize the army, they say, it’s a farce and a show.
        Commissars in the Red Army were harmful. The country's leadership saw this and removed them. Commissars were a relic of the Civil War, when control over class-alien military specialists was a necessary condition for military operations, and even dual power wasn't an extreme price to pay. By the start of the Great Patriotic War, military specialists no longer commanded units and formations, but for some reason, commissars remained.
        1. +2
          9 May 2026 23: 27
          Quote: bk0010
          The commissars in the Red Army were harmful. The country's leadership saw this and removed them.

          There should be unity of command in the army. The commissar's status was simply downgraded. After the collapse of the USSR, it became clear that commissars were very useful and still exist in the modern Russian army, they just go by a different name. Incidentally, in Hitler's Germany, it was the Nazi Party that realized the harmfulness of the order regarding communists before the Wehrmacht. The order to shoot commissars was not rescinded, but a decision was made not to execute all communists en masse. The reason for this was that the Nazis doubted the victory of German arms far more than the Wehrmacht officers and generals and feared that if their doubts were confirmed, the victors would also begin executing Nazis en masse, just as the latter planned to execute communists. Now, the Jews Poroshenko and Zelensky and the Armenians Tymoshenko and Avakov are happy to execute all Russians and ban the Russian language, just as the Belgians executed rebellious Africans in the Congo, and only the threat of their own death can make them stop ranting about these desires.
          1. +1
            10 May 2026 09: 18
            Quote: gsev
            The commissioner's status was simply downgraded.
            It's not just that; it's a fundamental difference. A political officer is nowhere near a commissar in terms of authority.
            1. +1
              10 May 2026 14: 29
              Quote: bk0010
              The political officer is not even close to being a commissar in terms of authority.

              Dual power in the army is utter nonsense. But even now, Shoigu and Belousov are effectively just commissars or political officers, standing above Gerasimov.
    2. +1
      12 May 2026 14: 36
      Quote: Mikhail-Ivanov
      The material is presented correctly. And nothing has changed since then.

      It's certainly changed. History is being rewritten much more efficiently these days. And how our people manage to sit on ten chairs at once never ceases to amaze me. How can a state simultaneously be deeply hostile to the communist regime of the USSR, call itself bourgeois, and yet simultaneously claim the USSR's victories for itself and build a class-based society alien to both capital and the USSR's socialist path? Medinsky's textbook, released into schools, is worth something alone.
  2. -2
    9 May 2026 04: 20
    With this order, and also with the "Ost" plan, they doomed themselves to defeat in advance... They lacked political cunning.
    1. -1
      9 May 2026 05: 31
      Quote: Themistocles_
      With this order, and also with the "Ost" plan, they doomed themselves to defeat in advance... They lacked political cunning.

      That is, if there had been no such order, and instead of the Ost plan there had been some other one... Would they have won?
      1. 0
        9 May 2026 10: 00
        This plan has been in effect for hundreds of years. And the same goals and plans remain today.
  3. +9
    9 May 2026 04: 25
    Even before 1941, the fascists began to exterminate communists. Fascism saw communists as the main force that could resist fascism. Not everyone in the Border Troops was a communist. But border guards weren't even taken prisoner. They were considered political troops. What could the right do against a Nazism that was resurgent? Indeed, the right was the force from which Nazism arose.
    1. 0
      9 May 2026 05: 32
      Quote: Nikolay Malyugin
      What can the right do about a Nazism that is resurgent? The right was the force from which Nazism emerged.

      Bees against honey ...
    2. -1
      9 May 2026 08: 02
      Quote: Nikolay Malyugin
      Even before 1941, the Nazis began to exterminate communists.

      Not just fascists: Thousands of German communists who fled to the USSR from Hitler were arrested, shot, or sent to the Gulag in the 1930s, especially during the NKVD's "German operation."

      Under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, approximately 400 German communists who died in Nazi concentration camps were handed over to Hitler.
      1. +1
        9 May 2026 11: 55
        Quote: Olgovich
        Thousands of German communists who fled to the USSR from Hitler were arrested, shot, or sent to the Gulag in the 1930s, especially during the NKVD's "German Operation."

        Why not millions? Can you give an exact figure for these thousands of German communists?
    3. 0
      10 May 2026 10: 56
      It is worth mentioning one more category who were immediately shot - policemen.
      So, the concept of "commissars" was interpreted very broadly, as people who were most consciously loyal to the country, but who were definitely not needed by the Germans for the construction of the "new order", and were even dangerous.
      That is, they had already calculated the strategy “for after victory” and were thinking very practically.
      But a small snag occurred: their victory never materialized, nor did the "draw" the leaders of '44 coveted. And they had to answer for everything, including the "bestial-breeding" orders, including those issued by Keitel.
    4. 0
      22 June 2026 21: 06
      Not everyone in the Border Troops was a communist. But border guards weren't even taken prisoner. They were considered political troops.
      The border troops were under the control of the NKVD. Here's why.
  4. +5
    9 May 2026 04: 41
    Quote: Nikolai Malyugin
    Not everyone in the Border Troops was a communist. But border guards weren't even taken prisoner.

    They took...the wounded, the shell-shocked, the exhausted...
    1. +1
      9 May 2026 06: 57
      The green cap itself was already a death sentence.
  5. +6
    9 May 2026 05: 01
    The war in the East had a program, and the order on commissars was part of it, not an exception.

    For decades, this vile West has been fighting against Russian civilization, for centuries it has been mocking Orthodoxy, for the fourth decade it has been dancing on the remains of the socialist state, rejoicing in the victory of capitalism with a bestial grin, exulting in the triumph of evil and filth over conscience and justice.
    One question remained unanswered:
    "How will the Russian leadership defeat those hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian Nazis and followers of Bandera* and Hitler?"
    Do current leaders remember the instructions of A.V. Suvorov:
    "The uncut forest grows again"
    1. +1
      9 May 2026 05: 42
      Quote: yuriy55
      For decades, this vile West has been fighting against Russian civilization.

      Cycles of civilizational development: birth, development, flourishing, and decline. What development cycle is the "Russian civilization" in now?
      1. -1
        9 May 2026 06: 04
        Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
        Cycles of civilizational development: birth, development, flourishing, and decline. What development cycle is the "Russian civilization" in now?

        Anabiosis...
      2. 0
        9 May 2026 07: 26
        Comatose... Because the Western-type values, stubbornly imposed against all odds, are in complete contradiction with Russian civilization. Even if you coat them with Orthodoxy and a kosovorotka.

        Let's recall all the Russian fairy tales and proverbs. They all say the same thing: being a prosperous, strong landowner is good and right. But being rich is very bad. For our ancestors understood perfectly well that righteous labors will not buy you stone palaces.
        1. +1
          9 May 2026 12: 38
          Everywhere they say the same thing - it is good and right to be a prosperous, strong owner.

          For our ancestors, a wealthy, powerful landowner was a bloodthirsty kulak or some other shopkeeper or merchant. As soon as the opportunity arose, they were exterminated as a class.
          1. 0
            9 May 2026 14: 19
            The kulak is a relatively recent development, the result of the vigorous activity of Stolypin, the father of the Russian Revolution. That's why they were so hated—everyone still clearly remembered how the kulak acquired his wealth. Well, much like today's bourgeoisie.

            Under communal land ownership, there could be no bloodsuckers in the villages at all. And all the proverbs were coined back then.
            1. +3
              9 May 2026 14: 51
              The fist is a relatively late product, the result of the vigorous activity of the father of the Russian revolution, Stolypin.

              Stolypin had a negative attitude towards kulaks; they had been known long before him, even in pre-Petrine times, since the 17th century.
              The natural counterweight to the communal principle is individual property. It also serves as a guarantee of order, since the small proprietor represents the very cell upon which stable order in the state rests. Nowadays, the more powerful peasant usually turns into a kulak, an exploiter of his fellow peasants—a bloodsucker, as the saying goes.

              A person who has become rich is more envied by his own people than by others.
              1. +1
                9 May 2026 15: 54
                Once again, under communal land ownership, the emergence of a kulak was impossible. This is simply because the land was remeasured every year, and who would get what was decided by lot. Similarly, duties were imposed on the community, not on any individual peasant. And who would pay how much was decided at the village meeting. The wealthy paid more, the poorer less. And the community couldn't allow anyone to become completely impoverished—who would then fulfill the duties? If someone fell into trouble, the community was obliged to provide assistance. And if there were no village rabble, where would the kulaks come from? Who would they parasitize on? No one is saying that all peasants were equal—of course not, some were richer, some were poorer. But the kulak, a character who entangled the entire village in debt and existed on that—that was something that never happened. Until now.

                The kulak as a phenomenon could only exist where there was no commune. That is, in the Volga region, Siberia, and some other places. But not in the core of Rus'.

                It's not a question of envy. It's just that, as a result of the reforms, everyone had a roughly equal start. How can you suddenly become a village rich man in just ten years? The only way is by cheating your fellow villagers! How else could you do it? That's what they remembered, and that's why they hated them.
                It's like today's alligators—did they make their fortunes through their own labor? No—they stole Soviet public property and are getting fat off it.
                1. 0
                  9 May 2026 22: 27
                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кулак_(крестьянин)
            2. -1
              11 May 2026 20: 10
              Quote: paul3390
              With communal land ownership, there will be no bloodsuckers in the village. it couldn't have happened in principleAnd all the proverbs were formed back in those days.

              You are not right.
              It could easily be - from the banal ""non-drinker" before our Luke - 72 children belay.
              And every year of poor harvest, the district discussed how much aid to provide to each village - except for the Lukov cordon lol
              Where they managed to weave, felt, potter, sew sheepskin coats, etc. - that is, earn money out depending on the harvest or livestock mortality.
              The rest of the villages regularly found themselves on the brink of starvation - we had 3-4 years of drought in a row - easily
        2. 0
          12 May 2026 09: 21
          Quote: paul3390
          Let's remember all Russian fairy tales and proverbs.

          Well, now they're even suggesting that Pushkin be rewritten - "The Tale of the Priest and His Workman Balda" paints the cult worker in the wrong light...
      3. +2
        9 May 2026 11: 24
        It's usually inappropriate to offer advice on such topics, but there's an interesting, though not incontrovertible, work: Lev Gumilev's "From Rus' to Russia." It's specifically about the origin, development, rise, and place of "Russian civilization." It's worth reading only if you don't reject the theory of ethnogenesis.
    2. +6
      9 May 2026 05: 48
      In 1990, Bandera's nationalist ideas were officially revived at a public assembly in Lviv, Ukraine. Gorbachev, then in power, not only failed to stop this, but even approved it. Even Ukrainians themselves suffered from this betrayal. On May 9, 2011, Bandera supporters openly beat WWII veterans in Lviv, and there was no serious response from Russia.
      Is the West to blame?
      1. 0
        9 May 2026 06: 08
        Quote: Ed Mack
        Is the West to blame?

        No, it was inevitable... The lies, hypocrisy, meanness and bribery of the West played a significant role...
        We went through fire and came out unscathed, but not everyone managed to avoid the "copper pipes"...
        Slavushka, Slavushka, Sweet poison
      2. +3
        9 May 2026 08: 05
        Quote: Ed Mack
        In 1990, at a public assembly in Lviv, Bandera's nationalist ideas were officially revived. Gorbachev, who was in power at the time, not only didn't stop it, but even approved it.

        If only there... in Belarus, the Baltics, nationalist movements of all kinds of Sajudis found strong support from Moscow, despite objections and warnings from the local level... all this was done under the "flag" of multi-party politics on the "advice of friends" from the West
        P.S. And there he was praised by everyone and in unison, perhaps the only leader of the USSR to have earned "wide approval" from the West - "if a capitalist praised you, it means you made some kind of mistake" @Stalin
  6. -1
    9 May 2026 05: 39
    Do the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Banderites currently have similar orders regarding the Russian army, or even Russian citizens? What's the basis for their anger toward civilians, for example, during the seizure of the Kursk region or attacks on residential areas across Russia?
    1. +2
      9 May 2026 08: 52
      Quote: V.
      What is the basis for such malice towards civilians, for example, during the seizure of the Kursk region or attacks on residential areas across Russia?

      Based on a sense of racial superiority. Since the Soviet era, Ukraine has cultivated Ukrainianism as a nation superior to Russians in every way. After its collapse, this was reinforced by even greater resources and propaganda, with the full connivance of the Russian leadership, right up to the present day.
  7. 0
    9 May 2026 06: 06
    Quote: V.
    Do the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Banderites currently have similar orders regarding the Russian army, or simply Russian citizens?

    I asked how modern Banderites treat our prisoners of war, especially those from the DPR and LPR... it's terrible... they behave worse than the Gestapo... real employees of Himmler's Einsatzkommando.
  8. +9
    9 May 2026 06: 11
    When you look at the photographs of captured commissars taken by the Germans, you feel respect for these people. Knowing that you desperately They'll put you up against the wall, don't lose heart, don't crawl on your knees before the enemy, begging for your life. Yes, these were the communists! Everlasting memory!
    We have lost the best in this war. And this will certainly have an effect.
    I.Stalin
    Comrade Stalin, as always, turned out to be rights. The Gorbachevs who came after them, the Svanidzes and others who wormed their way into the party for the sake of their careers, as they themselves say, destroyed a great country and squandered the results of victory.Paradox: those who took an active part in the destruction of the country that defeated Nazism will now celebrate the victory of the USSR, which they destroyed!? Y...aa.
  9. +3
    9 May 2026 06: 29
    In my opinion, the West, which gave birth to fascism, Hitler, and concentration camps, sent Hitler to the USSR primarily to finally and forever defeat and destroy Russian civilization. Statistically, it just so happened that many commissars (during WWII, political instructors) were Jews. Many, but not all. There were also a large number of Russian political instructors, and the main leaders of the USSR were even Georgians. So, Jewish political instructors did not give priority to Russian political instructors, who suffered a worse hell if they were captured. Jews were simply listed as Germans, as those slated for extermination first. And since Europe has now returned to its usual state of mind that Russian civilization must ultimately be destroyed, today they have prepared for the Russians the fate of the Jews during WWII. Only now Europe is more cunning and does not speak so openly about the final solution of the Russian question, as Hitler spoke about the final solution of the Jewish question. Remember the film "White Tiger". At the end of the film, in his monologue, Hitler clearly states that he was only doing what Europe had dreamed of for centuries. Moreover, as Hitler says there, he proposed that Europe do this together, and it agreed! Do you think that France, Norway, Finland and other Western countries, which fell under Hitler without resistance, did not understand why they were falling under Hitler without resistance? They understood that henceforth they must fulfill the mission of Europe's age-old dream - the final solution of the Russian question.
  10. +1
    9 May 2026 06: 42
    This rather interesting article examines the document on the treatment of commissars, signed on June 6, 1941.

    A rather revealing document on the treatment of Red Army prisoners of war, which indicated the possible imminent outbreak of war, concealed the presence of large Nazi army headquarters relocated to our border. Documents remained in effect, preventing our intelligence from learning of the massive concentrations of Nazi troops near our border, even if the document had fallen into the hands of our intelligence officers.


    It is also interesting to see where the document was sent from the General Staff of the Wehrmacht ground forces.
    1. +1
      9 May 2026 06: 47
      It is clear from the distribution that if the document were compromised, intelligence could have learned about the presence on the Soviet-German border of one (out of three) Army Group B, five field army headquarters (2nd, 4th, 11th, 18th and Norway) (out of nine) and only one tank group (4th Tank Group).

      Of the five army headquarters, three were not located in the territory of the former Poland and East Prussia: Army Norway was in Norway, the 2nd Army was stationed in the Balkans, and the 11th Army, although it had a name, "General Command of German Troops in Romania", but until 21.6.41 it was stationed on the territory of Germany.

      Why was the 4th Tank Group's headquarters allowed to be discovered? Probably because if there was a 4th Tank Group, then there must have been three other Tank Groups, the presence of whose headquarters near the border was concealed beginning in late April...early May 1941.

      Furthermore, the 4th Tank Group began its formation on February 17, 1941, based on the headquarters of the 16th Motorized Corps, which was stationed in East Prussia. This tank group had the smallest number of tanks, and our intelligence likely must have been under the impression that the group's formation was not yet complete.

      Unfortunately, our intelligence did not learn about the formation and presence of the 4th Tank Group and other Tank Groups, as well as about other major headquarters of the Nazi troops before the start of the war...
  11. +3
    9 May 2026 08: 48
    "Happy Victory Day to all, dear comrades"@ !!!
  12. +2
    9 May 2026 09: 12
    What is. i.e.
    I remember an attempt to turn to this experience after 2014.

    When, after the Maidan, it became uncomme il faut to criticize the oligarchs who organized it, information about them was swept under the rug, and everyone started blaming the "European commissioners" + centurions + desyatars, also from Europe...

    But... they sold gas to Europe, it's not nice to criticize it, they also dropped the topic, and started blaming everything on the State Department...
    1. +2
      9 May 2026 14: 49
      They started blaming everything on the State Department...
      And to the Anglo-Saxons laughing
  13. +2
    9 May 2026 10: 33
    Alas, my grandfather died like that. He was traveling as a political officer. The unit was traveling with only documents, unarmed. The train left one station and arrived at another. Germans met them on the platform. Everyone was kicked out of the carriages. The commanders, communists, and political officers were immediately taken away. This was recounted after the war by a fellow countryman of his who was in the same carriage with him, was captured, and survived. So, my grandfather never even made it to the front. And no one ever saw him again. Apparently, they shot him right away.
  14. +3
    9 May 2026 10: 48
    The article is essentially false.
    Commissars were systematically eliminated because they were living bearers of communist ideology. Communists, in all countries, were the most ideological and implacable enemies of fascism. Half of the USSR Communist Party perished in the war, which, incidentally, is the highest loss rate for any single group of people during WWII.
    In this article there is not even the word “communist”, nothing about the difference in ideologies and the essence of the conflict between communists and capitalists.
    1. -3
      9 May 2026 12: 19
      In fact, the Socialist Workers' Party was in power in Germany at that time.
      National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP). Until 1941, the USSR and Germany had an official Treaty of Friendship, and negotiations were underway to fully integrate the USSR into the Germany, Italy, and Japan bloc. Here, Comrade Molotov is seen conducting these negotiations in 1940.
      And you won't see such irreconcilable hostility in other photos from that time. Incidentally, May 1st had been an official public holiday in Germany—National Labor Day—since 1933. Workers' rallies and festive marches were held, including in the occupied territories.
      1. 0
        22 June 2026 21: 19
        The same "socialist" as "labor"
        How Churchill viewed this "pact":
        "It's impossible to say who was more disgusted by him—Hitler or Stalin. Both recognized that this could only be a temporary measure... In favor of the Soviets, it must be said that it was vitally important for them to push the starting positions of the German armies as far west as possible."
        1. 0
          22 June 2026 22: 17
          The same "socialist" as "labor"

          Officially, it was a socialist and workers' holiday, and May 1st was celebrated just like in the Soviet Union. Here, understandably, we didn't like to remember it.
          How did Churchill view this "pact"?

          In fact, this is a completely different pact. Churchill saw it as he should have. It was vital to him that the USSR and Germany not reach an agreement. But they almost did, and only Hitler's utter stupidity destroyed the potential military alliance, and Churchill had no merit in that. The USSR was forced to become England's ally. It is in this light that Churchill's memoirs must be understood.
          Churchill does not mention at all the attempt to join the Union with Germany, Italy and Japan - the "Four Axis Powers Pact" (negotiations - in the first photo).
          The quote you cited is about a completely different pact - the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact.
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пакт_четырёх_держав
    2. 0
      9 May 2026 23: 48
      Quote: istoler
      The commissars were systematically destroyed because they were living bearers of communist ideology.

      The Germans sought to eliminate leaders among the peoples they conquered. Commissars were considered leaders, and therefore were eliminated. When the Germans encountered stubborn resistance from Podolsk cadets, a bomber dropped the disfigured corpse of a man on their position with a note identifying him as the executed collective farm chairman. In Poland, the Germans killed people for possessing service uniforms from the days of independent Poland.
  15. +2
    9 May 2026 10: 58
    Without understanding the ideological framework, the text of the order seems like a collection of oddities: why a commissar, by what signs is he identified, why was he denied even a formal interrogation.

    There's a fundamental difference between a commissar and a political officer (pompolit), although they're often confused. A political officer is a service member subordinate to a commander and part of the overall structure of the Armed Forces. A commissar, on the other hand, wasn't subordinate to a commander; he or she served as a parallel authority within the army, subordinate to the political administration. In the Red Army, the institution of commissars emerged during the Civil War as an element of political control over commanders.
    The communist cell is part of the ruling party, and the commissar is the authorized representative of the entire party. This explains his role both within the unit and within the unit's communist cell. This also explains his right to oversee the commander. He oversees the command staff as a political leader oversees a technical executive.[8]

    Commissars did not always have any military training at all.
    People's Commissar Timoshenko, speaking, drew attention to the fact that
    The majority of the army's political personnel (73 percent) have no military training... The majority (77 percent) of the reserve political personnel have no military education.

    The institution of commissars was partially abolished after the civil war, but was fully restored in 1937. It was abolished in 1940 at Tymoshenko's insistence and replaced by political officers.
    But in 1941, before the war, the institution of commissars was reintroduced.

    The institution of military commissars was reintroduced (or rather, restored) before the war in 1941 by a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR based on the decision of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks); the State Defense Committee Resolution “On the Members of the Military Councils of the Armies” was also adopted.

    That is, the commissars were once again removed from subordination to the armed forces and a parallel system of power was created in the army.
    On October 9, 1942, by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR "On the Establishment of Complete Unity of Command and the Abolition of the Institution of Military Commissars in the Red Army," the institution of commissars was replaced by that of deputy commanders for political affairs (zampolit). However, at the highest level, the institution of commissars remained—the positions of members of the Military Councils of the fronts and armies were retained.
    The Germans did not consider the commissars to be military personnel, but many in the Wehrmacht did react negatively to the decree, as the Germans in the army had their own unique ideas about the rules, even if they were already vague.
    The effect was the opposite of what was intended: instead of the disintegration the order's authors had hoped for, Soviet units became increasingly willing to fight to the end. Surrender ceased to be an option because it no longer offered one.

    Unfortunately, in 1941 they surrendered quite actively :(( The Decree on Commissars did not affect this, since it only concerned the institution of commissars in the army.
    1. +1
      9 May 2026 23: 50
      Quote from solar
      There is a fundamental difference between a commissar and a political officer (pompolit), although now they are confused.

      There are also counterintelligence agencies in the army. In Russia, after 1917 and today, they are less subordinate to army command than the commissars of the 1930s.
      1. 0
        10 May 2026 00: 28
        Yes, they had their own hierarchy.
  16. 0
    9 May 2026 11: 15
    OKW (High Command of the Armed Forces of the Third Reich)
    OKW (from German: Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, German: OKW) High Command of the Wehrmacht, the central element of the command structure of the German armed forces in 1938–1945
  17. +2
    9 May 2026 11: 53
    The Einsatzgruppen continued to operate in the Soviet rear,
    Einsatzgruppen in the Soviet rear?
    The Einsatzgruppen of the Security Police and the SD (German: Einsatzgruppen der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD, abbreviated EGr, "task forces" or "deployment groups") were paramilitary death squads of Nazi Germany that carried out mass murder of civilians in occupied European countries and the USSR. They played a leading role in the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question."
    Perhaps in the GERMAN troops operating in the rear?
  18. 0
    9 May 2026 12: 08
    Well, the pure Wehrmacht is crap, it wasn't the SS who used the scorched earth tactics, but looting - look at the prisoners in Stalingrad or near Moscow in women's headscarves, pure and simple...
    Another thing is that the idea that the perpetrator bears responsibility for carrying out a criminal order only began at Nuremberg. So the Wehrmacht hoped it would work—the Führer was responsible for everything!
    1. -4
      9 May 2026 12: 53
      It was not the SS who used the same scorched earth tactics

      Order No. 0428 "On measures to deprive the enemy of the ability to use populated areas for defense" - an order of the Supreme Command Headquarters from November 17, 1941 - is the "scorched earth" tactic.
      The order required the complete destruction of all abandoned settlements, and those already abandoned - in the enemy's rear at a distance of 40-60 km in depth from the front line and 20-30 km to the right and left of the roads, using artillery, aviation and specially created groups for this purpose.
      The rate of the High Command ORDERS:

      1. Destroy and burn to the ground all settlements in the rear of German troops at a distance of 40-60 km in depth from the front line and 20-30 km to the right and left of the roads.

      For the destruction of populated areas in the specified radius of action, immediately throw in aircraft, make extensive use of artillery and mortar fire, reconnaissance teams, skiers and guerrilla sabotage groups equipped with incendiary bottles, grenades and blasting agents.
      ...
      3. If our units are forced to retreat in any given area, remove the Soviet population with them and be sure to destroy all populated areas without exception, preventing the enemy from exploiting them. For this purpose, primarily use the hunter teams assigned to the regiments...

      Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya died while carrying out this order.
      Goebbels declared "total war" with similar demands only on February 18, 1943, after the German defeat at Stalingrad.
      1. 0
        9 May 2026 13: 21
        This tactic was also actively used in the Patriotic War of 1812. Depriving the enemy of resources...
        1. 0
          9 May 2026 13: 31
          In principle, it's quite reasonable and logical from the military's perspective. The population suffers greatly, however. But at the time of the 1912 war, there were no agreements on the rules of war.
      2. +4
        9 May 2026 13: 35
        It's a small difference - Soviet troops destroyed buildings, and the order was to evacuate the villages. And now the Wehrmacht: "All villages and hamlets must be burned and destroyed, without thinking about the population, in order to deprive the enemy of a roof over his head"
        It doesn't work to equate Soviet troops with the Wehrmacht. Are you feeling sorry, as always? By the way, the quote is from a 41 order for the Wehrmacht, during the counteroffensive near Moscow. You also lied about 43, as always.
        1. -5
          9 May 2026 13: 47
          It makes little difference - Soviet troops destroyed buildings, and the order was to evacuate the civilian population.

          According to the order, populated areas were to be completely destroyed. As for evacuating the population, we know from the story of Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya's death that this wasn't necessarily the case; our troops remained in the village. Moreover, this order couldn't have been carried out in principle, given the destruction of populated areas by artillery, aircraft, mortars, and sabotage groups. :((
          1. +4
            9 May 2026 14: 14
            Again, a lie - in the case of Kosmodemyanskaya, the destruction of housing already confiscated from the population by the Wehrmacht is a military facility, moreover, on foreign territory.
            1. -2
              9 May 2026 14: 38
              The Kosmodemyanskaya case clearly illustrates that the order for the general evacuation of the population was not carried out in real life.
              And the group had an order: the total destruction of populated areas, in full accordance with order 428.
              In pursuance of order No. 428[6], on November 18 (according to other sources, 20), the commanders of the sabotage groups of unit No. 9903, P. S. Provorov (Zoya was included in his group) and B. S. Kraynov, were given the task of burning down 10 populated areas within 5-7 days, including the village of Petrishchevo (Vereisky District) (now the Ruzsky District of the Moscow Region).

              The order was partially carried out.
              On November 27 at 2 a.m., Boris Kraynov, Vasily Klubkov and Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya set fire to three houses in Petrishchevo (residents of Karelova, Solntseva and Smirnov)[6].

              Later, the owners of the burned houses attacked Zoya with their fists. :((...
              1. +4
                9 May 2026 16: 50
                We only know about the kulaks from the words of enemy propaganda (that is, yours), and the houses were occupied by the Germans.
            2. -1
              9 May 2026 23: 55
              Quote: Foggy Dew
              Another lie - in the case of Kosmodemyanskaya - the destruction of housing already confiscated from the population by the Wehrmacht

              Ilya Starinov has authoritatively argued that the order to destroy housing and forests in occupied territory was primarily harmful. It was a waste of ammunition and embittered the local population against the partisans and the Red Army.
              1. +1
                22 June 2026 21: 38
                The order to destroy housing and forests in the occupied territory was mostly harmful. Ammunition was wasted foolishly.

                Many hundreds of frostbitten and frozen-to-death Germans disagree with "you" on this point. Moreover, the Wehrmacht suffered slightly fewer losses from frostbite in the winter of 41 near Moscow than from fire.
                And it’s no wonder that the Wehrmacht veterans themselves called the medal for the battles in the winter of 41 the “Frozen Meat Medal.”
                1. -1
                  22 June 2026 23: 19
                  Quote: Jager
                  Many hundreds of frostbitten and frozen to death Germans disagree with "you" on this issue.

                  This is a foolish waste of resources. Artillery and aircraft should be striking enemy personnel and equipment. Partisans should be ambushing communications lines and laying mines. Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya gave her life for attempting to burn a compatriot's property, when she could have planted five mines and killed several Germans.
                  1. 0
                    10 July 2026 21: 26
                    Holy shit! Finally, a messiah who knows what to do and how to do it, and he's ready to become President!!! Too bad he already has a job; he's probably just a taxi driver...
  19. 0
    14 May 2026 00: 13
    We won't force our adversaries to comply with "international law" by adhering to these norms. Military necessity is more important than slobbering tolerance. Irreconcilable adversaries must be destroyed. Potential enemies whose guilt cannot be proven must be isolated.

    If the enemy doesn't fear retribution, if potential terrorists and saboteurs enjoy all the rights of honest citizens, then our oil refineries will continue to burn from drones launched from the balconies of neighboring houses.
  20. 0
    6 August 2026 12: 30
    constructed from the anti-Semitic myth of Jewish origin and leadership of Soviet communism.
    .
    From the perspective of the current situation in Russia, there is no need to even comment.