Who and what made Patriotism of General Vlasov? Part one
Historiographic sensations and pseudo-sensations began to be born in such a volume that, it seemed, literally everyone who saw a “creative grain” saw themselves as describing the course of historical events. The concept of “liberal historian” was born. And if initially the concept and activities of such people seemed very interesting both to professionals and ordinary people, over time the liberal epithet turned into a frankly abusive one. The liberal historian today is perceived not at all as a historian, but as someone who is overly eager for a sensation, and a sensation aimed exclusively at the cultivation of Russophobia or dubious values.
The Katyn case, the battles of the Great Patriotic War, the Russian revolutions, the role of individuals in the history of the state, the era of industrialization, the era of imperial reforms of the middle of the 19 century - these are just an incomplete list of what if not turned upside down, then served with spicy sauce. With such a sharp, that history and many historians have become frankly similar to, excuse me, corrupt girls - who pays, that “girl and dances”, he and “dines” ...
One of the topics that many representatives of the so-called creative community wanted to spice up with their own sauce was the topic of betrayal of General Vlasov. At the beginning of the 2000-x (apparently, on the post-perestroika wave), voices that General Vlasov was no longer a traitor, that he was a true Russian patriot, who applied forces to fight "vile Bolshevism" and "Stalinism", began to erupt. One of the first ideas to rehabilitate the “honest” name of General Vlasov was born by Sergey Belavenets (he is the monk Nikon, a member of the council of the so-called Russian nobility assembly, winner of two awards of the Russian Imperial House, confessor of the movement “For Faith and Fatherland”). His example was followed by representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR), who after the publication in 2009 of the book of the priest of the ROC, Archpriest George Mitrofanov, “The Tragedy of Russia:" forbidden "themes of the history of the 20th century in church preaching and journalism," also decided to reflect on glorification of Andrei Vlasov.
And here are some of the fruits of a liberal approach to the essence of national history in excerpts from readers' comments on Vlasov’s materials in the media:
Some Hukku writes:
Quotation from Wikipedia:
Against the political system, it turns out, the "great" man went ...
The ideas of rehabilitation and even the glorification of General Vlasov and all those who subsequently rose up under the banner of the ROA (Russian Liberation Army), in fact having taken the oath of allegiance to Hitlerite Germany, began to move actively in the media environment. The promotion of these ideas was carried out and continues to be quite active and persistent. So, for example, the Synod of Bishops of the ROCOR held a seminar in which the topic of General Vlasov was assigned a special role. Here are some excerpts from that seminar:
So, the ROCOR urges historians to deviate from the “black and white” interpretations, to delve deeper into the essence of the issue. Well, it is certainly necessary to delve into the essence of the question, but only the following quotation contains words that immediately negate this call:
That is, at least, the inconsistency is obvious here. The Synod of Bishops calls not to slip to exclusively “white” or exclusively “black” in the interpretation of the course of history, but immediately declares that General Vlasov is not a traitor, but a fighter with Bolshevism ... Even without half tones ... Interesting logic ...
ROCOR, a number of dignitaries of the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as liberal interpreters of history, have been trying for a long enough period to present Andrei Vlasov as a heroic figure that the illiberal historians unjustly slandered. And they try, despite the fact that in November 2001 of the year, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused to rehabilitate General Vlasov and many so-called “Vlasovites”.
So, what are the main points of supporters of the idea that Vlasov is not a traitor, Vlasov is a true Russian patriot.
Main idea: Andrei Vlasov (already outside the USSR) himself pronounces an accusatory anti-Stalin and anti-Bolshevik speech. Like, what is there to think and guess when a quick general presents us his point of view.
But is it your own? .. Or even not so, but how many general points of view did General Vlasov have? ..
Referring to that speech - the so-called Prague Manifesto (manifesto of the “Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia”) 1944 of the year. We present excerpts from this speech (video version -
:
What a fine general Vlasov! - exclaim in the ROCOR. What are the right words said Vlasov! - echo them those who firmly believe in the patriotism of the escaped general. Yes, he wanted to use the power of the German army to create a sovereign Russian state free from Bolshevik "tyranny"! - say the same people.
But after all, bad luck ... Neither the ROCOR, nor among other modern fans of the ROA and General Vlasov does not take into account other documentary evidence related to the name of the fugitive general.
The end of the 1 part.
- Alexei Volodin
- Who and what made Patriotism of General Vlasov? Part one
Who and what made Patriotism of General Vlasov? Part two
Information