Military Review

Stalin on the personality cult of Stalin

38
Stalin on the personality cult of Stalin



A fragment of an interview given by JV Stalin to the German writer Lyon Feuchtwanger, who visited the USSR in 1937.

Feuchtwanger. I have been here for 4 – 5 weeks. One of the first impressions: some forms of expression of respect and love for you seem to me exaggerated and tasteless. You give the impression of a simple and modest person. Are these forms an unnecessary burden for you?

Stalin. I totally agree with you. It is unpleasant when exaggerated to hyperbolic sizes. People come to ecstasy because of the little things. Of the hundreds of greetings, I respond only to 1 – 2, I don’t allow most of them to print, I don’t allow me to print too enthusiastic greetings as soon as I learn about them. In nine-tenths of these greetings - really full bad taste. And they give me unpleasant experiences.

I would not like to justify - it is impossible to justify, but humanly to explain from whence such unrestrained, reaching for ecstasy delight around my person. Apparently, in our country we managed to solve a big problem, for which generations of people have fought for centuries, babuvisty, Hebertists, all sorts of sects of the French, English, German revolutionaries. Apparently, the resolution of this task (it was cherished by the workers and peasant masses): exemption from exploitation causes tremendous delight. Too people are glad that they managed to get rid of exploitation. Literally do not know what to do with their joy.

A very big deal is the release from exploitation, and the masses celebrate it in their own way. All this is attributed to me - this, of course, is wrong, what can one person do? In me they see a collective concept and make a fire around me with a delight of calves.

Feuchtwanger. As a person sympathetic to the USSR, I see and feel that feelings of love and respect for you are completely sincere and elementary. Just because you are so loved and respected, can you not stop with your word these forms of display of delight that confuse some of your friends abroad?

Stalin. I tried several times to do it. But nothing works. If you tell them it's not good, it won't do. People think that I am speaking out of false modesty.

We wanted to raise the celebration about my 55 anniversary. I conducted through the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) the prohibition of this. Complaints began to come in that I prevented them from celebrating, to express their feelings, that it was not about me. Others said that I was breaking down. How to prohibit these manifestations of enthusiasm? Force is impossible. There is freedom of expression. You can ask in a friendly way.

This is a manifestation of a known lack of culture. Over time, this will bother. It’s hard to stop expressing your joy. It is a pity to take strict measures against the workers and peasants.

Victories are very big. The landowner and capitalist used to be a demiurge; workers and peasants were not considered people. Now the bondage with the workers removed. Huge victory! Landowners and capitalists are expelled, workers and peasants are the masters of life. Come to veal delight.

Our people are still lagging behind in terms of overall culture, so the expression of delight turns out like this. By law, prohibition cannot do anything here. You can get into a funny position. And the fact that some people abroad are upset is nothing to be done. Culture is not immediately achieved. We are doing a lot in this area: for example, in 1935 and 1936 years alone, over 2,000 new schools were built in cities. By all measures we try to raise the culture, But the results will affect through 5 – 6 years. The cultural rise is slow. Delight grow rapidly and ugly.

Feuchtwanger. I am not talking about the feeling of love and respect from the workers and peasants, but about other cases. Exposed in different places your busts are ugly, poorly made. At the planning exhibition in Moscow, where you still think about you all the same, why is there a bad bust? At the exhibition of Rembrandt, deployed with great taste, what is there a bad bust?

Stalin. The question is logical. I meant the masses, not bureaucrats from various institutions. As for the bureaucrats, it is impossible to say about them that they have no taste. They are afraid, if there is no Stalin’s bust, then they will either be a newspaper, or the boss will curse, or the visitor will be surprised. This is an area of ​​careerism, a peculiar form of "self-defense" of bureaucrats: in order not to be touched, Stalin’s bust must be set.

To any party that wins, alien elements are attached, careerists. They try to protect themselves according to the principle of mimicry - busts are put up, slogans are written, in which they themselves do not believe. As for the poor quality of the busts, this is done not only intentionally (I know, it happens), but also because of the inability to choose. I saw, for example, in the May Day demonstration portraits of mine and my comrades: similar to all devils. People are carried with delight and do not understand that portraits are not suitable. You can not issue an order to put up a good busts - well, they to hell! There is no time to be engaged in such things, we have other business and cares, and you don’t look at these busts.

By metrial:
http://senokositel.livejournal.com/71501.html
http://www.x-libri.ru/elib/furrg000/00000153.htm
Author:
38 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Komodo
    Komodo 18 June 2013 07: 32 New
    22
    And most of all those who were most enthusiastic were those who messed up most of all.
    They applauded loudest than anyone, and then the same cult was most violently exposed.
    1. sergo0000
      sergo0000 18 June 2013 07: 52 New
      +8
      Quote: Komodo
      And most of all those who were most enthusiastic were those who messed up most of all.
      They applauded loudest than anyone, and then the same cult was most violently exposed.

      Let me disagree with you. It seems to me that this is a question of psychology and probably self-defense. But not protection from the NKVD, but much deeper or something. It is common knowledge that if a person is called a pig for a long time, it will ever grunt. hi
      And if you stimulate a person with praise and say that he is the best, then naturally he will try to meet your expectations. Our people did not finish the institutes, so that probably only our people would have the natural instincts to realize this truth! Here they glorified the person, by the way, deservedly and by right! And during his lifetime, Stalin tried to meet the wishes of the working people! IMHO.
      1. Komodo
        Komodo 18 June 2013 08: 05 New
        19
        Quote: sergo0000
        That glorified man, by the way, deservedly and rightfully!

        I would now applaud Stalin too. Probably even standing.
        1. lexe
          lexe 18 June 2013 09: 37 New
          +7
          those who would applaud while sitting laughing - would also be quite a lot
          1. SCS
            SCS 18 June 2013 12: 38 New
            +2
            Quote: Lexi
            those who would applaud while sitting laughing - would also be quite a lot

            that's for sure))) with BAT you will not get sick ...!
            Lexey, good! Pleased laughing
            1. Gari
              Gari 18 June 2013 14: 31 New
              +2
              Quote: SCS
              that's for sure))) with BAT you will not get sick ...!
              Lexey! Pleased


              Like in a joke--
              Excavations in the desert. Archaeologists have found a pyramid and can not determine to whom it belongs. Found a mummy. Who is unknown. Invited comrades from the Cheka. Three healthy amballas arrived in black suits and with diplomats. We went into the pyramid. We got out after 3 hours tired, sweaty but satisfied.
              Archaeologists: - Well ?? figured out who it is ?? and whose pyramid?
              Boys from the Cheka: - Amenhotep XXIII
              Archaeologists: - How did you find out ????? !!!!!!! .......
              Boys from the Cheka: - He himself admitted ....... !!!!!!
          2. Vovka levka
            Vovka levka 18 June 2013 13: 36 New
            -3
            Quote: Lexi
            those who would applaud while sitting laughing - would also be quite a lot

            And those who lay in the ground?
        2. Stalinets
          Stalinets 19 June 2013 03: 47 New
          +1
          And now I applaud him !!!
    2. Pit
      Pit 18 June 2013 07: 56 New
      +8
      Quote: Komodo
      They applauded loudest than anyone, and then the same cult was most violently exposed.

      In particular, Khrushchev Nikita Sergeevich.
      From the death of Stalin and the "exposure of the cult of the personality of Stalin," he raised the most delicious dividends
    3. Vovka levka
      Vovka levka 18 June 2013 13: 34 New
      +1
      Quote: Komodo
      Stalin. I tried to do this several times. But nothing happens. You tell them - it’s not good, it’s not good. People think that I say this out of false modesty.

      The view of the subordinate should be dashing and slightly silly. In order to not confuse the authorities with their thoughts.
  2. Ruslan67
    Ruslan67 18 June 2013 07: 39 New
    11
    The initiative is worse than the flood what We will soon begin to put busts of Putin and each region in the homeland of the President soldier And everyone, in accordance with local canons, is better than Stalin about this and you will not say request
    1. cartridge
      cartridge 18 June 2013 07: 53 New
      +8
      To any party that wins foreign elements, careerists, are clinging on. They try to protect themselves on the principle of mimicry - they expose busts, write slogans in which they themselves do not believe.


      At the very bull's eye!
      1. cartridge
        cartridge 18 June 2013 08: 00 New
        -6
        Who is she dreaming of?
  3. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 18 June 2013 07: 48 New
    +4
    Judging by the number of “devils”, the Leader answered sincerely!
  4. fellow misha
    fellow misha 18 June 2013 07: 48 New
    +5
    Khrushchev is a living example of how Stalin was more alive than all the living .... but how did the cult of personality stop so quickly, etc.
  5. My address
    My address 18 June 2013 07: 50 New
    +9
    What wonderful lectures Martynenko, a teacher of the history of the CPSU, led at UPI in the 60s! Many interesting facts, which then, even after the removal of Khrushchev, were hushed up. On the role of Khrushchev and similar "faithful Leninists" in repression and unprofessional leadership. On the stupid things like killing Stalin Kirov. Without justifying Stalin, it was logical to show that at the end of the 20, at the beginning of the 30, he saved the country from the rift that the left and right communists led to. Martynenko spoke of the leaders as simply people who were responsible. And about Stalin as a man without the necessary number of reliable assistants. Stalin can be blamed in many ways, but then who was better than him and who could have achieved this?
  6. lewerlin53rus
    lewerlin53rus 18 June 2013 07: 56 New
    +4
    Alien elements, careerists, are attached to every party that wins (Stalin)

    The story goes on. The same thing happened with United Russia. All such elements joined the ruling party, completely discriminating it.
  7. treskoed
    treskoed 18 June 2013 08: 04 New
    +6
    Great stuff! The source! Unfortunately, I didn’t get acquainted before.
  8. pensioner
    pensioner 18 June 2013 08: 18 New
    +1
    Quote: Pit
    In particular, Khrushchev Nikita Sergeevich.
    From the death of Stalin and the "exposure of the cult of the personality of Stalin," he raised the most delicious dividends


    Then he burped out these dividends. And he lived in prison, although not behind bars.
  9. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 18 June 2013 08: 59 New
    +9
    Honesty and modesty! hi
  10. Mr.
    Mr. Gambu4aS 18 June 2013 09: 10 New
    +7
    An interesting article, sorry I did not read it before! I. Stalin GREAT, as always, everything in the case says, when the leader was alive, everyone was afraid to look him in the eye, everyone jumped and shouted: “Glory to the great father of the peoples,” but as soon as he left us prematurely, all the jackals grappled with a leash and the time has come for the khalui and swindler, which continues to this day, pah, disgusting!
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 18 June 2013 10: 21 New
      11
      Quote: Mr. Gambu4aS
      An interesting article, sorry I did not read it before! I. Stalin GREAT, as always, everything in the case says, when the leader was alive, everyone was afraid to look him in the eye, everyone jumped and shouted: “Glory to the great father of the peoples,” but as soon as he left us prematurely, all the jackals grappled with a leash and the time has come for the khalui and swindler, which continues to this day, pah, disgusting!

      Image clickable ...
      1. sincman
        sincman 18 June 2013 11: 11 New
        +5
        World Zionism most of all in the world hates two personalities - the Grand Duke of Kiev Svyatoslav Igorevich, for the fact that he destroyed the Khazar Kaganate - the center of speculation, slavery, occultism and devilry. And Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, because he did not allow the Khazar Kaganate to be restored within its former borders (Glodomor of the Slavs 32-33 in 3 sentenced territories of the USSR, practically repeating the borders of the former Khazaria, carried out by Lazar Kaganovich (direct descendant of the Khazar Kagan) and his comrade N. Khrushchev).
        Our first Hero and his feat is devoted to historical oblivion, the second Hero is still being watered with the dirtiest slops! And in that and in that case all sorts of "gozmans" had a hand in this - the descendants of those same Khazars.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. sincman
          sincman 18 June 2013 11: 23 New
          +4
          The alleged carat of the Khazar Kaganate

        3. sincman
          sincman 18 June 2013 11: 25 New
          +2
          Holodomor Carat

          1. The comment was deleted.
        4. sincman
          sincman 18 June 2013 11: 31 New
          +1
          At the same time, I never saw a clear explanation of historians, and why did Stalin, who was blamed for the famine without guilt, not starve people in other fertile territories of the USSR (In Kazakhstan, for example) ?! If he needed so much grain to pay for machines and equipment ?! Why didn’t these territories please him ?!
          1. SASCHAmIXEEW
            SASCHAmIXEEW 18 June 2013 12: 33 New
            0
            sincman-hunger was in the Russian regions, and look who was leading in those areas where there was a famine ...!
            1. sincman
              sincman 18 June 2013 12: 45 New
              +1
              Quote: SASCHAmIXEEW
              there was an olod in the Russian regions, and still look who was leading in those areas where there was a famine ...!

              Did I somehow dispute this?
              Khazaria was located not only on Ukrainian lands, but also within the borders of modern Russian regions (see map above). Lazar Kaganovich led everything along with Nikita Khrushchev and other assistants. Now I will not mention their names, but their nationality was not Aryan.
              1. sincman
                sincman 18 June 2013 12: 58 New
                0
                Here is an excerpt from the memoir book of L. Kaganovich “The Kremlin Wolf”, written by his nephew Stuart Kagan.
                Lazarus had to be safe on time. He knew that Stalin would not forgive him for mistakes and omissions. But Lazarus could not admit mistakes on his part. He must prove once again that everything he did was for the good and in the name of Stalin. He must continue to strengthen his belief in the correctness of the measures taken to reorganize agriculture. As his replacement in Ukraine, Lazar entrusted the conduct of active "collectivization" events to Mendel Markovich Khataevich, whom he knew as a proven person from his joint work in 1917 in Gomel. Khrushchev, who himself was a Ukrainian, could not be trusted in such a thing. Lazar appointed Khataevich the second secretary of the Communist Party of Ukraine and assigned him responsibility for the collectivization. It was Lazar who supplied Khataevich with the central troops of the OGPU and the army, which were transferred to Ukraine, the Kuban and the Volga region specifically to ensure the strictest isolation of sentenced areas, seizing food from the population, and sending peasants for destruction to the northern camps. The mouse should not have slipped out doomed areas. It was a gigantic event, which had no analogues in history - starve and evict the population from the territory that exceeded Europe in its area. Lazar knew that Khataevich would not fail. For the success of the entire operation, Lazar also replaced the head of the agricultural department of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, the Russian, Nikolai Alexandrovich Uglanov, the opponent of collectivization, with his man Karl Yanovich Bauman. However, Bauman was so "overdone" and overdid with the destruction of people that he had to be replaced by Molotov. There were rumors that collectivization stalled. Unseen in the history of Russia, especially Ukraine, famine broke out in Ukraine. The corpses of adults and children lay on the streets of Ukraine, the Volga region and the Kuban. The situation is heating up. There was a danger that Stalin could find out the whole truth, and then Lazarus would come to an end. Lazarus decided to blame everything on the excesses in the field. March 15, 1930 in the newspaper "Pravda appeared Stalin's famous article" Vertigo from success, "which temporarily saved the lives of millions of peasants. After this article, the Trotskyists were to regroup. To complete the matter, and cover up the traces of the crimes, Lazarus suggested to Stalin that he would go and deal with the situation on the ground. Again, remembering Lazar’s previously successful mission to Ukraine, Stalin replaced Molotov with Kaganovich.
                1. sincman
                  sincman 18 June 2013 13: 04 New
                  +2
                  To whom it will be interesting to inquire:
                  http://www.e-reading-lib.org/chapter.php/132511/5/Kagan_-_Kremlevskiii_volk.html


                  In general, I advise you to read the book in its entirety. Eyes will open to many muddy spots of history!
          2. Marek Rozny
            Marek Rozny 18 June 2013 21: 53 New
            +1
            Sinkman, how many nonsense in one statement ...
            1) Khazar Kaganate is a Turkic state. Jews were a minority there. Yes, the Turkic kagan, under the influence of Jewish preachers, adopted Judaism, but the bulk of the Khazar Turkic nomads adhered to traditional Turkic beliefs. Similarly, national minorities living there professed their religions.
            At one time, the Kyrgyz were Buddhists, the Uighurs were Manicheans, part of numerous Kazakh clans (Naimans, Kereis) were Nestorian Christians, Karaites - Jews, Yakuts and Altai - still practice ancient Turkic rites to a large extent, Polish-Lithuanian Tatars - Christians Catholics, Bulgarian Turkic nomads and Chuvashs with Tatars, Nagaybaks and Tatars-Khryashens converted to Orthodoxy. The Türks have always been calm about all types of denominations.
            2) Svyatoslav did not single-handedly defeat the Khazars, but together with the Oghuz Turks (ancestors of the Turkmens and Seljuks), and the Kipchaks killed the Khazars. In general, Khazaria existed in the 11th century. So the "Zionists" in theory should still hate Turks and Kazakhs)))
            3) The KazSSR under Stalin was not the breadbasket; virgin soil was raised from the time of Khrushchev. Prior to this, the basis of agriculture in Kazakhstan was animal husbandry (horses, sheep, camels). Agriculture was developed only by islets occupied by Russian immigrants, and in southern Kazakhstan, where they have always historically been engaged in this type of agricultural economy.
            4) It is a pity that the history of the famine in you is limited to Ukraine. The famine in Kazakhstan was even worse than in Ukraine or the Volga region. In two years, as a result of hunger and mass migrations outside the USSR (to Mongolia, China, Afghanistan, Iran), Kazakhs lost 50% of the population. Remember, the previous famine of the 20s, caused by the Bolshevik surplus appropriation system. In 1932-1933, the majority of livestock was taken from the Kazakhs, as a result of which there was a famine in the Kazakh steppe.
            At the very beginning of the 20th century, the Kazakhs were the largest Turkic people in the USSR (and in the world they were inferior only to the Turks, but here it must be taken into account that the Turks are not quite Turks, but Turkic-speaking), and after the uprising of 1916, two famines and repressions, by the end of the 30s, Kazakhs lost the vast majority of their population. Now even Uzbeks are 2,5 times more than Kazakhs. A hundred years ago, Uzbeks were a grain of sand compared to the number of Kazakhs (you can check according to the census of the Russian Empire).
            So do not invent that supposedly Stalin "protected" other nations and "starved" exclusively Ukrainians. Moreover, the fact of a gigantic famine in Kazakhstan was not hidden even in the Stalin era (although they tried to correct the census data). The leader of Kazakhstan, Goloshchekin, was eventually shot for allowing "excesses" that led to a national catastrophe.
  11. RPD
    RPD 18 June 2013 09: 18 New
    +2
    Alien elements, careerists, are attached to every party that wins. They try to protect themselves on the principle of mimicry - they expose busts, write slogans in which they themselves do not believe.

    37 year old, first call for ......
  12. tixon444
    tixon444 18 June 2013 10: 12 New
    +7
    Stalin was a person. And the PERSONALITY cannot but have a cult, especially in our country, in the USSR. But Khrushchev was hysterical, illiterate, stupid and envious, he decided to become just as great, he did the same and at the XXth Congress he made his “revelations”, although he was all in shit.
    1. Gari
      Gari 18 June 2013 14: 39 New
      +3
      Yes, in our country there was a Cult of personality, but there was also a Person.
      Personality of an outstanding statesman
      Later there were also “cults” (Khrushchev, Brezhnev ...). Outstanding
      but the Person, alas, was not.
  13. krez-74
    krez-74 18 June 2013 10: 17 New
    +2
    When the "jackals" want to vulgarize and belittle something, then first they sing praises, create a cult, making them burp, and only then, they rave enough ...
  14. sincman
    sincman 18 June 2013 10: 53 New
    +4
    Whoever has not read, READ MANDATORY book Nikolai Starikov "Stalin. Remembering Together". You will learn a lot of new, positive, and most importantly TRUE facts about Comrade Stalin!

    Abstract

    In the modern history of Russia there is no more famous person than Joseph Stalin. Disputes do not stop around him, and the assessments of his activity are diametrically opposed. There is no politician to whom so many words and phrases not spoken have been attributed. There is no statesman accused of so many crimes not committed by him. How to understand this ambiguous personality? The best way is to turn to the documents and memoirs of those who knew him personally.

    A book by Nikolai Starikov (author of the best-selling books Nationalization of the Ruble, Crisis: How It Is Done, Who Made Hitler Attack Stalin, etc.), based on the memoirs of Stalin's contemporaries and colleagues, documents and historical facts, will help you find answers to most pressing issues. Was Stalin a despot in relations with his associates and subordinates? Did Stalin really prevent his army from fighting with his inept leadership? What caused the repression in the prewar period? Why are Stalin’s speeches regarding geopolitics very relevant today? Why did contemporaries consider Stalin a very witty person? Why in our time, falsifiers of history took up the memoirs of Stalin's comrades-in-arms? Why did Stalin love the writer Mikhail Bulgakov and did not love the poet Demyan Poor? Why did Nikita Khrushchev hate Stalin so much? Why in the first months of the war did the “allies” send words of sympathy to the USSR, and not tanks and planes?

    This book will help you understand the complex historical era and the equally complex personality of I.V. Stalin. His biography, in the context of real historical events, gives an understanding of the motives of his actions. But the facts from the memories of real people - this is the story itself. Why did the figure of Stalin, long and firmly forgotten, precisely today find such a voluminous shape? What are some of our contemporaries seeking nostalgia for in it and what are others so fiercely opposing?

    Whatever the contradictions, one thing is clear: Stalin, at the cost of incredible efforts, managed to preserve and strengthen the gigantic country, making it one of the superpowers of the XNUMXth century.

    The Kremlin wall has many graves. One of them is the tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Another is the tomb of the Unknown Commander-in-Chief ...


    http://reeed.ru/lib/books/a/stalin_vspominaem_vmeste/
    1. Mr.
      Mr. Gambu4aS 18 June 2013 11: 38 New
      -2
      I read a lot of "works of art" by this author, writes a lot of truth but interferes with the lie, so that the current government looks like an angel, but anyway, it’s a mile from him, and Starikov has long exhausted his trust limit, only another pro-Putin propagandist! Khrushchev, as it were, of our time, has no opinion of his own, but he knows how to adapt to the current situation and lick the fifth point who needs and when you need, in fact, like all politicians flickering on blue screens!
      1. sincman
        sincman 18 June 2013 11: 52 New
        +4
        Quote: Mr. Gambu4aS
        I read a lot of "works of art" by this author, writes a lot of truth but interferes with the lie, so that the current government looks like an angel, but anyway, it’s a mile from him, and Starikov has long exhausted his trust limit, only another pro-Putin propagandist! Khrushchev, as it were, of our time, has no opinion of his own, but he knows how to adapt to the current situation and lick the fifth point who needs and when you need, in fact, like all politicians flickering on blue screens!

        What an impudent and cynical lie! Delusional statements I have not heard! And you can easily verify this by reading the books of Starikov and listening to his performances! You will not be from the "Gozman" ?!
        1. Mr.
          Mr. Gambu4aS 18 June 2013 12: 10 New
          -1
          Yeah, advertise it 10 more times. I am Russian and therefore somehow I do not really belong to Jews, although among them there are worthy people!
          1. sincman
            sincman 18 June 2013 12: 32 New
            0
            Quote: Mr. Gambu4aS
            Yeah, advertise it 10 more times.

            The best advertisement for Nikolai Starikov is Nikolai Starikov himself and his books.
            Quote: Mr. Gambu4aS
            I am Russian and therefore somehow I do not really belong to Jews, although among them there are worthy people!

            Of course there are, as among the Slavs unworthy! There are exceptions to any rule ...
      2. agbykov
        agbykov 18 June 2013 11: 54 New
        +1
        We are discussing the article, not the author.
  15. deman73
    deman73 18 June 2013 11: 57 New
    +3
    All sorts of liberals came up with all kinds of bullshit about Stalin and that unfortunately many believed and then they shouted that they were yelling now
  16. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 18 June 2013 12: 13 New
    +3
    Well, there was definitely no time or desire for anyone to please Joseph Vissarionovich to entertain ChSV. A man with great authority in society does not need to be glorified, his work speaks for him better than any praise in literature and painting, or cinema. Russia’s scale is not enough. It’s very convenient to fight the “dead lion”, but the paradox is that those who entered a similar fight with Stalin, after his death, shamefully lost and are thrown into the dustbin of history.
  17. trenkkvaz
    trenkkvaz 18 June 2013 13: 17 New
    -1
    Funny and naive interview.
    What did you want to hear from Stalin? Of course, he will come up with excuses. Not one leader with a personality cult will say that he personally instills him.
    And it turns out that now the people of North Korea are enthusiastic about their leader, because he has done a lot of good for the country? smile
  18. Vyalik
    Vyalik 18 June 2013 13: 18 New
    +5
    The author wrote everything correctly. I practically agree on everything with him and with Joseph Vissarionovich. That is why portraits were hung on all the cabinets and the busts were put on me, and it was always jarring to me, especially when you know the cabinet owners. For which it’s just an entourage and nothing more .Much of what Stalin did for the country and the people was forgotten. He, like every person, probably had mistakes, but only now they attribute to him all mortal sins, I forget the ancient wisdom, "the retinue makes the king." His retinue had done so many crimes, and blamed everything on Stalin that only a blind and deaf-mute person could not see it. One must learn not to repeat the mistakes of the past, to take the best in order to build the present and not to be Ivanes who do not remember kinship.
    And Stalin was a great statesman, his kingdom be in heaven. If we have a leader who will do at least half of what Joseph Vissarionovich did, he should put a monument in his lifetime, but only in Ukraine you can’t see such yet. But at least in Russia a man who is trying to do at least part of what Stalin did for the country.
  19. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 18 June 2013 13: 59 New
    0
    And in Turkmenistan, after "gaining independence", portraits of the President were stamped on all denyuzhki, and monuments and portraits of the TURKMEN LEADER cannot be counted. And nothing all survived.