Today's spirit of individualism, which is fully consistent with the Roman saying “Homo homini lupus est” (“wolf to man”) is alien to Russian civilization. It is inherent in the West and is now actively implanted to us.
1929 year - the universal collectivization.
The current financial system is interested in the fact that there are no associations of people, because it is much easier to manipulate each one individually, to direct it in the right direction. A person as a physical unit must consume the money created by this system “from nowhere” and spend it on himself. This is the ideal of the world order that is being imposed on us today. The average individual is trying in every way to get rid of any "unnecessary", from the point of view of merchants, concepts. Such as homeland, conscience, honor. Because it is difficult and even impossible to measure with money. So, in their opinion - too much. However, the planting of such individualism comes across from ancient times inherent, transferred at the genetic level from generation to generation, catholicity, collectivism, patriotism — remarkable qualities due to which our people, the country of old, were able to withstand all the ordeal.
By the way, this is why our “popular masses” for the good two centuries do not justify the hopes of various kinds of revolutionaries. The people of the people knitted and did not let the simplest people throw bombs at them. Suffice it to recall the peasant Osip with the “ahead of time” last name of the Commissars, who took away the hand of Karakozov, who shot at the Emperor Alexander II. And in the first Soviet years, those who were engaged in the reorganization of the world had to struggle with ordinary Russian peasants who professed patriarchal, grandfather's values.
In the end, the Soviet government won precisely because it corresponded to some deep notions of justice that existed among the people. Including - used the roots of communal management, modernizing the age-old Russian way into collective farms.
True, to maintain a given rate of collectivization (and of course, industrialization) without a certain violence failed. There have also been tragedies, but not because the country's leadership was about to kill millions of its inhabitants - of course not. With a shortage of specialists in the field, there were fools-servants, and even direct traitors, who not only did their job not as it should, but on the contrary, tried to make it worse.
Confirmation of this - the terrible famine of the beginning of the 30-s in Ukraine, which is much written about, and in Kazakhstan - much less is known about it. Comrade Goloshchekin, one of those responsible for the execution of the royal family, organized a mass plague there.
Here is how it was. The progenitors of the present-day Kazakhs are the Kipchaks-Polovtsi, known from the ancient Russian chronicles. The history of their relationship with the Russians is rather complicated, but for many centuries our peoples coexisted peacefully. The Kazakhs for centuries led a nomadic lifestyle. And suddenly a decision is made - to make them sedentary farmers. Agree that this is not possible in a short time. Perhaps, if necessary, a similar problem can be solved, but gradually, gently. Goloshchekin, on the other hand, forcibly began confiscating livestock from the Kazakhs, which supposedly should have prompted the population to engage in farming.
Imagine: you take away millions of heads - what will you do with them? If you want to slaughter livestock - you need to build cold storage facilities, meat processing plants, to ensure the delivery of products across the country. Then (what a famine!) There will be an abundance of meat, even for a short time. If you just want to pick up animals from nomads, pushing them to agriculture - you must equip pastures, create farms, ensure the reproduction of cattle and care for them.
Philip Goloshchekin, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan in 1920 – 1930.
Neither one nor the other was done. The animals were “socialized” and starved to death. Soon after the cattle, people began to die of starvation, who were deprived of their usual diet, but they did not know how to cultivate the land and did not want to.
The question is: can this be an accidental mistake, and on the scale of a huge region? Of course not. No need to be a rocket scientist in order to foresee terrible consequences. But everything happened according to the most bitter scenario. The state, for its part, assessed this terrible crime: Goloshchekin and his accomplices were shot.
And today, in order to stop the emerging speculation, it is important to emphasize: what Goloshchekin did, not only was not the policy or task of the country's leadership, but direct betrayal and sabotage (both in the rhetoric of 30's and in today's concepts), that followed a fair sentence.
And Goloshchekin did so not because he originally understood the task of building a new world, but because he was a Trotskyite. And he performed the task of a banker behind the scenes, who had to create unrest within the USSR and, most importantly, the unattractive face of the Land of the Soviets. So that the neighboring states distance themselves as far as possible from the “Red Russia” and flee to the zone of influence of the very same Western powers.
Certainly, collectivization is a very painful point in our history, and it is difficult to say whether the idea, which fully corresponded to the traditions of the Russian community, was carried out as it should. Assessing this is probably more correct to look from the position not of the present, but of that time.
Let us recall: since the West declared the “golden blockade” to the Soviet Union, it gradually refused to accept not only gold, but also oil and timber as payment for industrial equipment, grain remained the only export commodity. This inhuman act of political and economic pressure on the USSR was carried out consciously by the capitalist world — in order to cause the same famine in Russia, which happened in some of our regions.
The Stalinist plan in the current situation was simple. First, by purchasing industrial equipment and technologies in the West, to build enterprises for the production of machinery, including agricultural ones (and tractor factories were established). And then with the help of this technology to get an increase in yield and finally pay for the supply of grown grain.
But this required large enough farms. It is clear that you will not plow a six-hundred-square-meter tractor; the plot should be large. And since after the revolution the land was divided into small plots, it had to be somehow united, gathering the peasants into certain collective farms.
This, by the way, was ahead of its time, because today in the West most of the products are produced by large multinational companies. Or the so-called farms are also huge farms where high-performance equipment is used.
VDNH, end of 1980's
In reality, without the intervention of the state, the process of enlarging farms would probably take several decades. But we know: from the beginning of collectivization to the Second World War, there was one and a half decades left. There really was no time. And the words of Stalin: “we must run this distance in 10 – 15 years, otherwise they will crush us,” turned out to be prophetic.
Therefore, when you analyze how collectivization took place, on the one hand, it is incredibly painful to read about human losses, but on the other hand, you understand: if there was no industrialization and collectivization in super-short periods, we would have been defeated in the war with Hitler and the complete destruction of our people as such and Russia as a state.
I think that a final, objective assessment of what happened, after analyzing all the available facts and documents (and they continue to appear) should be given not by ours, but by subsequent generations.
Meanwhile, indisputably, it was possible to win the worst war in the whole history of mankind because the Soviet Union had already become an industrial country, and most importantly - a united and mighty power, with a united not a population, but a people united by a common idea, a patriotic impulse.
Neither ethnicity nor living in different national-territorial formations prevented this community. If at the time of the German invasion, the Soviet Union was several times smaller and fragmented, for example, on 15 independent states - Hitler and his English friends would have excellent opportunities to play on this, conquering each republic one by one. But against the economic power of a united Europe that worked for Hitler, the enormous economic and human potential of the Soviet Union came out.
Yes, the British and the Americans helped us, but their participation, firstly, was not decisive, and secondly, before setting us on an allied shoulder, they zealously strengthened and armed fascist Germany. And France worked for Hitler, and Czechoslovakia. The people's liberation uprising in Prague began a week after Hitler's Berlin fell. And before that, Skoda factories regularly produced Tanks, self-propelled artillery and aircraft for the Wehrmacht.
Then, due to the unity of the state and the people, it was possible to revive the country from the ruins, create a nuclear shield, guaranteeing security not only for our country, but keeping the world from a global catastrophe, step into space, become a great power, which was reckoned on the planet. Although, of course, the “cold war” and the arms race exhausted our economy, took away the forces necessary to solve the same social problems. But we would have stood these tests if it were not for the monstrous crime against his native state on the part of Gorbachev and his accomplices.
The restructuring announced by Gorbachev became a global betrayal of the country, carried out by an insignificant but active part of the elite in the interests of foreign "friends". And when the head of state changes the motherland, the consequences of this are very difficult to prevent.
We have experienced similar tragedies for the twentieth century twice. In 1917, Kerensky, who led Russia, betrayed her, doing everything to break up the country and start a civil war. And at the end of 80-x - the beginning of 90-x Gorbachev did everything that the USSR was dismantled as a geopolitical force.
Certainly, patriots from the state-political elites could destroy the insidious plans, but, alas, there were no people willing to risk their well-being, or even life on the Russian Olympus.
Stories are known when betrayal was stopped at a high enough level.
For example, during the Seven Years War, Empress Elizabeth felt unwell, and certain political circles waited for her death from day to day. As is known, the heir to the throne, Peter Fedorovich, the future emperor Peter III, was an ardent admirer of Frederick, the whole of Prussian and German. And in a situation where the empress could die, the commander-in-chief of the Russian troops Apraksin acted very “peculiarly”. After winning the battle of Gross-Egersdorf, he began a completely unmotivated, in terms of strategy, retreat. Lost during his "flight" part of the army.
Why did he do that? Because the successor of Elizabeth should have rejoiced at such a “course” of war. It should be remembered that Apraksin was appointed to the post of commander-in-chief thanks to his friendship with Chancellor Bestuzhev, who headed the pro-British “party” in Russia and openly took money from the British. Another thing is curious: Frederick, with whom we then fought, was the "sword" of England on the continent. Of course, Apraksin’s behavior can only be regarded as treason. And Elizaveta Petrovna qualified it that way. A new commander-in-chief was appointed, Apraksin was recalled from the army and left in Narva to await an investigation. But he suddenly died suddenly, although he hadn’t been ill before. The investigation did not even have time to carry out, but Chancellor Bestuzhev was also dismissed.
In the 80 and 90 of the twentieth century, the country was sold at the highest level. There was no one to stop the betrayal. By the way, an impartial investigation of what exactly happened at the turn of 80 – 90-s did not really exist, but it will be sooner or later, this is an objective necessity.
It is not by chance that the popular movement rises to deprive Gorbachev of the Order of St. Andrew the First-Called, the highest award of the Russian state, and call by name: who and to what extent is responsible for the destruction of the Soviet Union. There is an internal need for unification, for the restoration of power, for restoring order and justice, for residents of all regions of Russia and even in a large part of the former Soviet republics.
We are a unique civilization. National self-consciousness may temporarily succumb to strong external influences, but what is called the “Russian spirit,” as history shows, is indestructible. In our society, collectivism and patriotism, as usual, always oppose individualism.
Under the Soviet system of distribution, the system acted according to the principle “to all the sisters - according to the earrings”, evenly smearing a certain layer of “oil” of the created social product, over a piece of bread that everyone had. Therefore, all lived "average", almost the same, but no one was in misery. It was possible to live both on retirement and on a student scholarship. Today, the situation is different: someone is bathed in gold, but someone does not make ends meet. By and large, this Western model, which has existed there for centuries, does not take root on Russian soil. Society feels acute internal disharmony: something is wrong, unfair.
There is no wealth piety in our mentality. Our “rich” does not mean “dear”. Recognition is not received for the size of the wallet, but for specific cases. A wealthy person can gain credibility if he conducts socially useful activities or earned his capital with his own mind and talent.
Today the people of the rich are not valued, because part of the moneybags simply stole a piece of national wealth during the predatory privatization of 90's. Naturally, this not only can not cause the slightest respect, but on the contrary, it accumulates in society a certain irritation and tension.
Therefore, today's very important task is to reduce the distance between the poor and the rich; at the existing abyss, people simply cannot feel themselves as particles of one civilization, one people. By the way, intuitively feeling this, the Russian super-rich people send their families to London, they live there and keep money - because they do not identify themselves with the Russian people, but tend to assimilate with the citizens of Great Britain. This will never work out, because for an Englishman, even a super-oligarch from Russia will still be a second-rate man.
The damage done to us by Gorbachev and his accomplices is enormous.
Trotskyite Goloshchekin staged a pestilence in Kazakhstan that claimed more than a million lives. General Secretary Gorbachev went further. For example, in the same Kazakhstan, the population has just reached the level of 1991 of the year. During the transition to the “market”, even what was passed down from generation to generation was practically destroyed. Say, the outskirts of Almaty were famous for their magnificent gardens with delicious apples. There is even an assumption that it is this region that can be considered the “birthplace” of their garden-industrial cultivation. The symbol of Alma-Ata is an apple, and one of the translations of the name of the southern capital from Kazakh: “Alma” is an apple, “ata” is the father, ancestor. To date, the richest gardens are cut down, ruined, and in the stores of the apple capital - Chinese, Polish, Chilean fruits.
Question: why such reforms and transformations, after which it took more than twenty years to return to the starting point? By the way, Nursultan Nazarbayev had a premonition of the tragic consequences of the destruction of the Soviet Union, and the Kazakh SSR was the last to leave the country. And in the future, it was the president of Kazakhstan who supported the Moscow initiatives for the construction of the CIS, and for the formation of the Common Economic Space.
Life itself suggests the need for integration in the former Soviet Union. Even Ukraine, seemingly aimed at joining the EU, is seeking closer cooperation with the Customs Union. In addition to purely economic benefits, there are also geopolitical preferences related to the collective security of the states of the Commonwealth, where Russia plays the first violin.
The war is getting closer to our borders. To prevent global bloodshed, another general redivision of the world, to which the West pushes events, is possible only if there is an unification of states that do not want to fulfill transatlantic will.
It is necessary to respect ourselves, to understand that we are a separate, unique civilization, and no one except ourselves is interested in its preservation. Therefore, they are necessary: on the economic and political level, the Customs and Eurasian Unions, and in the moral, in every country, propaganda of the exploits of fathers and grandfathers, and all kinds of obstacles to Western attempts to “reformat” our young people. Our books and films, our music, visual arts are the common heritage of the Commonwealth. And we must by all available means drive out Western culture, Western ideas from our living space. No one talks about total prohibition. The best examples of Western art, of course, will be presented in a common palette, but they should not dominate. Otherwise, we will find ourselves in different “coordinate systems”, in different “civilizations” even with our own children. And sometimes our Russian kids sometimes no longer know who the Wolf and the Hare are, but they love Mickey Mouse. It should be the other way around. Let them know Mickey Mouse, but in addition to the heroes of domestic fairy tales and cartoons.
A shot from the movie "Legend number 17".
An example of self-identification is intended to show Russia, it will lead other peoples behind it.
At the same time everyone should start - from himself, first of all, getting rid of his own indifference to what is happening - at all levels: from the everyday to the state.
We know the wild stories when the girl felt bad in the subway, she fell on the rails, and no one who was nearby tried to even stop the train. But after all, there are other examples where people, risking their lives, save children from the fire, pull out failed people under the ice.
It is necessary to talk more about human actions, not to be afraid to call betrayal and heroism by their names, to announce bastards as bastards, and characterize heroes as heroes.
After all, there is not a single negative comment about the magnificent film “The Legend of 17” - although it would seem that it is special? The older generation respected the remarkable hockey player Valery Kharlamov even without this tape, and the young people did not know at all.
But this film is watched even by those to whom hockey is not interesting. It shows an honest, purposeful man who is ready for self-sacrifice for the sake of his country and a big idea. He goes to his dream, and even with a broken leg fights with the Canadians - just to win one match. This is important to him. And when today's youth sees this, it raises inherent in our man at the genetic level, but dormant collectivism, the willingness to give everything for the Motherland.
Poster of the film "Russian victim".
These best qualities are not claimed today, but they are and manifest when the Act is required.
The clearest example is the feat of the 6 Company of the Pskov paratroopers. It was not the best, frankly, the period of our history, when the children were no longer taught patriotism, they barely talked about the exploits of their grandfathers and fathers. But when before our ordinary guys, representatives of the “Pepsi generation”, the question arose - to skip the militants or die, they chose to die.
It is difficult to explain with words: it’s just that a Russian is like that. The Anglo-Saxons would have surrendered, they do not understand. And the Russians could not do otherwise, because for many centuries, our soldiers, without hesitation, went on the feat, gave their lives for their homeland.
And in this, from the top of the centuries, the greatest meaning is concluded: those with whom we fought began to realize that it was better not to mess with us. You can kill a hundred Russian soldiers, but for their lives you pay a price that makes this victory meaningless.
This is a kind of immunity, developed by opponents, that you should not go to Russia - and every time we gave in the face to those who climbed here, for a hundred years we were left alone.
Then again, more and more forces were gathered, they fell into coalitions - they saw that neither Karl XII nor Napoleon, who crushed the whole of Europe, could in no way defeat Russia. Prepared by Hitler, it would seem, did everything - and nevertheless lost. And always will be.
However, in order to be stronger, in order to repel the desire of anyone once again to test our strength, it is important not only to keep the powder dry, to revive science, industry, economics, education, but also to strengthen the Russian spirit. We need a state ideology, a national idea.
It is unfortunate that the concept of state ideology itself is not defined in today's Constitution, while the article 13 proclaims “ideological diversity”, emphasizing that “no ideology can be established as state or obligatory”. And article 6 guarantees that “a citizen of the Russian Federation cannot be deprived of his citizenship”. How to be with traitors to the Motherland? By the way, in some countries even the Minister of the Interior has the right to deny citizenship ...
Apparently, for the revival of Russia, it is time to consolidate at the highest legislative level both the values that determine the national ideology and the responsibility for betraying the interests of the state.
Such recognition will make each of us - and therefore, the whole country - stronger.