Military Review

Unfulfilled Belovezhie

Unfulfilled BelovezhieI remember the shock when, eight years ago, in a work on a book about Beria, historical the puzzle has developed into an unambiguous picture: on June 26, 1953, a coup d'etat took place in the USSR. Since then, the picture has not changed - yes, it was a military-political coup, a coup, which was preceded by a conspiracy. Among the conspirators are the future head of state Khrushchev, Minister of Defense Bulganin, his first deputy Marshal Zhukov, former Minister of State Security Ignatiev and others, of a lower rank. This is not a conspiracy thesis, just a historical mosaic only in this case evolved into a consistent picture.

It is not surprising that, after coming to power, the putschists, who could not resist, began to rehabilitate their friends who had suffered under the former regime. And since the fact of the coup was not recognized openly, then in order to do this, we had to think a lot, including post-war repression, which actually was not. Who does not believe, can go to the website of Oleg Mozokhin and see the statistics of the NKVD – MGB there. All the so-called "repression" - this is the strength of a couple dozen high-profile cases.

Total sweep

The loudest, hysterical, and widespread of all post-war was the "Leningrad affair." But this is strange: all attempts to find out what exactly the secretary of the Central Committee, Kuznetsov and his accomplices, were accused of in particular, are in vain. None of the historians for all the years could not break through to the materials of the case itself, but even to see the indictment or read the sentence. There is a document that is issued as a sentence - however, in the Criminal Code of that time, as well as another, there is no article for “separation of the party organization from the Central Committee” and other party sins. Apparently, under the guise of a sentence, they are trying to substitute some kind of party decree, or even just a piece of paper, somehow.

The fruitless efforts of scientists show that nine out of ten “Leningrad affairs” simply do not exist. At the time of Khrushchev, archival documents were destroyed by wagons, so nothing surprising. Except for one thing: why was it done so thoroughly? In the end, any indictment can be declared falsified, testimony - stamped. And then the documents were cleaned completely, moreover, shortly after the coup, Minister of State Security Abakumov and all of the then leadership of the investigative department for particularly important cases were convicted and shot in 1949 year — that is, live witnesses who could tell something .

The conclusion suggests itself: in these accusations was not just a betrayal of the Motherland, not just espionage, but something that, even after receiving power, Khrushchev and company were mortally afraid.

What exactly could they be afraid of — such that even it was impossible to disprove, but it was simply necessary to make it unbecoming? Is it possible that no information has been preserved, even crumbs, by grasping which, can you “swing on indirect”?

RCP, killed in the womb

Kroshechki yet found. 7 May 1954, at a meeting with the Leningrad party activist, Khrushchev said: “You remember how the matter was fabricated. It was claimed that in Leningrad there was a conspiratorial organization that wanted to stand out from the Soviet Union, take the leadership of the country in their hands ... It was claimed that they wanted to create a center in Leningrad, to oppose it to the Central Committee of the party. ”

Here are the remaining and drawn out at the end of 80-x (up to 1991 year - this is important!) Party documents. 21 February 1949 at the plenum of the Leningrad party organization said a lot about the formation of a special “Leningrad” clan inside the CPSU, a closed group tied to the secretary of the Central Committee and the head of the personnel department of the Central Committee of Kuznetsov in Moscow. Nobody denied these accusations at the plenum. And here is what the former first secretary of the regional committee Popkov said now:

“I have repeatedly said ... about the RCP. Discussing this question, I said such a thing: “As soon as the PSC is created, it will be easier for the Central Committee of the CPSU (B.): The Central Committee of the CPSU (B.) Will govern not every regional committee, but through the Central Committee of the RCP.” I, on the other hand, said that when the Central Committee of the RCP is created, then the Russian people will have party defenders. ”

It turns out that Kuznetsov and his comrades in the 40s were planning to do what was realized forty years later and led to the collapse of the country - to create a Russian Communist Party. There were also plans to make Leningrad the capital of the RSFSR. Whom did Kuznetsov see at the head of the Russian Communist Party? Who, if not yourself, beloved? It is clear and why. The comrade rushed to the state power, but had no chance to circumvent the successors of Stalin, Malenkov and Beria, and the leader was unequivocally removed the leader from the government. And with the Communist Party of Russia in hand, numerically quite comparable with the CPSU (b), it was possible to fight for power with Moscow.

Having become the head of the Central Committee personnel department in 1947, Kuznetsov began to act: to place members of his Leningrad team in high party posts - and managed to do so. 22 December 1948, the same Popkov, at a conference of the regional committee, proudly stated that in two years the Leningrad party organization had nominated thousands of people for 12 leadership, of which 800 were outside the region.

Naturally, talk about the creation of the Communist Party of Russia was not a long secret to Stalin. However, formally nothing could be done with this initiative. How to prevent people from wanting to create a “missing” Communist Party in the USSR? Moreover, the idea would find support among the people, as it found forty years later. However, there was an obstacle for the conspirators. To hold a constituent congress, it was necessary to collect a large number of high party ranks at one point in space - and how to do it? Previously, they naturally talked at the plenary meetings of the Central Committee - but since March 1947, almost from the time Kuznetsov was appointed (coincidence?), The Central Committee plenums have not been held.

And here, as ordered, at the beginning of 1949, the All-Russian, and in fact, All-Union Wholesale Fair takes place in Leningrad. Passes with the permission of only one chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR, Rodionov, without the approval of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, which was a grave violation of state discipline. And the idea itself turned out to be ridiculous and ruinous - one loss for four billion rubles. But the high party officials were able to talk enough ...

Whether this fair was a constituent congress of the Communist Party of Russia or just a meeting of Kuznetsov’s supporters is unknown. However, after it, events begin to unfold very quickly. In punishment for the arbitrariness of Kuznetsov, Rodionov and the chairman of the Leningrad Regional Committee Popkov removed from work. Having fidgeted with a shallow fly at the reporting and re-election meeting, the rest of the Leningrad leadership is being removed. Soon, another “Leningrad citizen” was shot for abuses in planning, although he had been sitting in Moscow for a long time, the chairman of Gosplan Voznesensky. Six months later, they were all arrested and shot a year later.

By the way, it seems that the death penalty, abolished in 1947, was returned to the Criminal Code for the sake of “Leningraders”. On January 8, the Minister of State Security Abakumov presented Stalin with a list of the defendants in the “Leningrad case” and his views on the process, and on January 12, by decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Council, the death penalty was reintroduced for three categories of defendants: traitors, spies, and bombers. The latter hardly referred to Leningrad, but it is known that among the accusations at the trial was espionage, treason and participation in the anti-Soviet organization, and also, as Khrushchev let out at a meeting with the Leningrad activist party, they were also accused of “wanting to stand out” from the Soviet Union, to take over the leadership of the country. "

So stand out or take over the leadership of the country? After all, perhaps either one or the other ...

Dangerous Liaisons

Let's think: how exactly did the future First Secretary of the Communist Party of the RSFSR intend to exercise his powers? If he agrees in everything with the policy of Moscow, then in the usual way. But if he agrees in everything with the policy of Moscow, then why start a party of his own and his own capital?

At the first disagreement with the central government, he will certainly want to take advantage of the numerical advantage of his organization, which forms the basis of the CPSU (b). Perhaps the Kremlin will have to give Smolny. To give in once, to give in two, and then the other republics will have a completely legitimate bewilderment: who actually controls the state? General Secretary or Kuznetsov? Why do we have to obey Kuznetsov? Did we choose him? The first person in Russia? And we have our first faces, and Kuznetsov and I are not on the road.

If the Kremlin does not want to give Smolny (and he certainly does not want), then the Communist Party of the RSFSR has the full right, in accordance with the Constitution, to raise the issue of secession of the republic from the USSR. But this is separatism, a terrible thing for the Soviet Union and punished mercilessly.

As we see, the emergence of a separate Russian leadership inevitably led to the collapse of the USSR. It was saved only by the fact that the constitutional right to secession of the republic from the Union is extremely difficult in practice. Almost impossible. Especially in the Stalinist USSR, where the friendship of nations was a sacred concept. But you can do otherwise!

In 1922, the USSR was created by the decision of four republics: the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus and the Transcaucasian Federation. The last in 1936 was disbanded without a successor, and by the end of the 40-s of the four republics that signed the treaty of alliance, three remained. It was here that the Achilles' heel of the Soviet Union was located: it, which includes fifteen republics, could be disbanded by the decision of only three of them. To do this, it was enough to agree with three leaders: the RSFSR, Ukrainian SSR and the BSSR. However, in the Soviet state system, where all decisions taken were sanctioned by party organs, the leadership of the RSFSR, which did not have the Communist Party, was deprived of the opportunity to do so.

I am setting out a well-known scenario, is not it?

Could this combination be played out in 40's? And why, actually, no? It’s not such a complex idea that the party bosses that fought Stalin for power could not come up with it. And if we find in the leadership of these three republics people who are connected to each other by participation in a conspiracy, then we can with a high degree of probability speak of an unfulfilled "belovezhie".

So, in Russia, according to the proposed scenario, Kuznetsov was supposed to sit down. In Ukraine, Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, the unforgettable our fighter with Stalinism, the leader of the conspirators seized power in June 1953, has been sitting for thirteen years. Was he associated with Kuznetsov? Judging by the fact that, barely entrenched in power, he immediately hurried to rehabilitate the “Leningraders” and then desperately promoted the “Leningrad affair” as the most outrageous of the “Stalinist crimes” - there was a connection, and quite close. What else could they have in common? They belonged to different generations, in the service they practically did not overlap, and they didn’t seem to lead cordial friendships.

What is even more interesting is the Belarusian leadership. The first secretary there was no Gusarov who showed himself. But the second ... Oh, this is an interesting person! Semen Denisovich Ignatiev, the former minister of state security, the creator of the “doctors' case”, who practiced the order of the times of Yezhov in the MGB - torture and falsification of cases, including those of his predecessor Abakumov. Moreover, there is evidence that on the fateful day of 26 June Beria was going to demand that the Presidium of the Central Committee sanction the arrest of Ignatiev. Judging by the fact that this character got up and how the party leadership headed by Khrushchev defended him, this is an undoubted participant in the Khrushchev conspiracy. Or Kuznetsovskiy?

As we see, there is a connection between the leadership of the three republics, quite definite and unequivocal. So, the Bialowieza scenario in the year in 1950 could well have taken place, it fits perfectly into the big picture.

This version explains a lot, including the total sweep of the “Leningrad affair”. Perhaps, by the way, this did not happen in the Khrushchev times, when too many still kept in mind all that had happened and there was no point in secreting everything, but much later. For example, when the RCP was created and unwound, all kinds of analogies there were completely useless. Or when, after 1991, the publicity broke out of control, out of place were based on the similarity of scenarios, reflections on the connection of Secretary General Khrushchev with those forces that enthralled his successors, who endowed us with “perestroika” ...
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. oracul
    oracul 7 February 2014 09: 02
    The version of events has the right to life. Moreover, it is quite logical. The events preceding the collapse of the country have confirmed this. The Communist Party supported the independence of Russia. The vulnerability is the lack of documents, but thanks to Khrushchev for this.
    PS. By the way, it was always touching why the "criminal regime" needed to keep in the archives documents that "compromise" it. Some of them looked painfully odious. One will involuntarily think about possible falsifications on the part of Khrushchev and those like him.
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 7 February 2014 09: 50
      If Khrushchev was a supporter of the collapse of the USSR through the RCP, then what did he not create the RCP after coming to power - he did what he wanted. The real separatism began with the socialist countries, and Khrushchev did not let go of either the GDR or Hungary, the conflict with China was only for the sake of sight.
      It is more likely that the RCP was disadvantageous to the "internationalists" and speculation was hung on the Leningraders during the blockade, making them extreme. In this case, there is a lot of dirt and secrecy is understandable.
      1. Patriot of Ukraine
        Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 13: 43
        Quote: Volkhov
        It is more likely that the RCP was disadvantageous to the "internationalists" and speculation was hung on the Leningraders during the blockade, making them extreme.

        it's hard to find a black cat in a room without light, especially if she is not there.
        The fact is that A.A. Ascension was without a doubt a talented leader, a man of exceptional intelligence and abilities. In addition, unlike Nikita Sergeevich, he did not pretend to be a holy fool in front of the owner, and this ruined him.
        1. Volkhov
          Volkhov 7 February 2014 16: 40
          Kudrin is also smart, but when he proposed to reduce military spending in preparation for the war ... he was quickly fired.
          Also with Voznesensky - he proposed to develop the production of consumer goods at 49, and Stalin's plans to fight at 55 - that reduced talent.
          Kudrin is right from the point of view of the economy of the Russian Federation, and Trotskyism needs Russia as a bundle of brushwood in the World War at any price by Russians and their money - the pangolin pushed aside the obstacle, unless it swallowed as Voznesensky.
          1. pRofF
            pRofF 8 February 2014 01: 51
            Stalin was going to fight? In the 55 year?
            You have once again surpassed yourself. Share the coordinates of the mushroom plot?
            1. Volkhov
              Volkhov 8 February 2014 06: 35
              Quote: pRofF
              Share the coordinates of the mushroom plot?

              It is clear that drug addiction is walking the world, has penetrated the army ... but in order to get mushrooms in February you need to feel like a reindeer - ride Santa Claus, it may feel better.
              1. pRofF
                pRofF 8 February 2014 13: 36
                But you somehow got it! Otherwise, where and how can your "statements" be substantiated? I am personally at a loss. Only mushrooms come to mind wink
                1. Volkhov
                  Volkhov 8 February 2014 17: 07
                  Quote: pRofF
                  Only mushrooms come to mind

                  Such a mind is different for everyone. Or maybe mushrooms grow in it - on rotten propaganda they like to settle ...
                  1. pRofF
                    pRofF 8 February 2014 22: 43
                    So who argues. Mind - it is different) Someone believes propaganda, someone - that. that he invented himself, someone - believes the facts. I am now impressed by the latter. So the facts - in the studio! Otherwise, how is your version different from the same propaganda?
                    1. Volkhov
                      Volkhov 9 February 2014 02: 12
                      Preparing for war "55" is a voluminous event and it is impossible to describe it in a commentary - learn history, although you will not be able to do this either due to the large amount of information and the proximity of large events.
                      - 42 year contract (mentioned by Chuyev)
                      - why Golovanov from the pilots moved to the paratroopers (preparing to storm German bases in the north)
                      - the nomenclature and quantity of military equipment according to the Stalin plans (12000 IL-28, battleships, cruisers, landing submarines)
                      - where the roads pulled and where the fleet bases were planned (Cape Kamenny in the Gulf of Ob and the mouth of the Yenisei) - because the cruisers Stalingrad look like an icebreaker from below ...
                      Try to collect information and lead to a system - you will come to similar conclusions.
        2. aleshka
          aleshka 7 February 2014 21: 59
          Hitler was also a very talented leader !!!
      2. fennekRUS
        fennekRUS 7 February 2014 13: 58
        ... then why didn't he create the RCP after coming to power, what's the point? If the gentlemen got more than they intended? Plan B, so to speak. Why should Khrushchev dismember the Union after coming to power?
      3. Azzzwer
        Azzzwer 8 February 2014 18: 28
        Quote: Volkhov
        why didn’t he create the RCP after coming to power
        so she was not needed at that time, however ... laughing
        1. fennekRUS
          fennekRUS 10 February 2014 15: 27
          what am I talking about? bully but
  2. Asgard
    Asgard 7 February 2014 09: 04
    Well, wait, "St. Petersburg" continue to ruin the Great Country.
    The Rosiyansko Communist Party supports all anti-people laws.
    Wait they did it, but not for long. Judas EVERYTHING appeared (the price of this experiment, of course, is prohibitive, 30 million Russian-speaking)) But it's worth it ... Surely the "proscriptions" have been made))))
    It is not worth "dragging" into the future those who are capable of betraying ... Calling themselves liberal patriots, imposing the power of the slave owners ("democracy")) on a LOVE PEOPLE ...
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 7 February 2014 14: 55
      Quote: Asgard
      Well, wait, "St. Petersburg" continue to ruin the Great Country.

      Vladimir, you’ve been on the site for two years now and you have been writing the same thing all the time. The shops are ruining the country and all that. But when will it fall apart ??? You write, you write, one problem + None of your forecasts have come true request
      After listening to Putin, you understood from his speech that we leaked Syria, maybe you close your ears when you listen to him?
      Quote: Asgard
      It is not worth "dragging" those capable of betraying into the future ...

      Will you clean the race by measuring the skulls?
  3. CHILD
    CHILD 7 February 2014 09: 11
    It turns out that they didn’t dig it to the end in the 47th, Ignatiev got the ends and hid it ... but in the 91st Gorbachev in general slurped up, if he didn’t provoke it himself .... the struggle for power never fades))))))
  4. Stinger
    Stinger 7 February 2014 09: 30
    "Oh, how many wonderful discoveries we have
    Prepare the spirit of enlightenment
    And the experience of the son of errors difficult,
    And genius, paradoxes friend, "
  5. Orik
    Orik 7 February 2014 09: 46
    So, in Russia, according to the proposed scenario, Kuznetsov was supposed to sit down. For thirteen years in Ukraine, our unforgettable fighter against Stalinism, Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, the leader of the conspirators who seized power in June 1953, has been sitting in Ukraine. Was he connected with Kuznetsov? Judging by the fact that, having hardly gained power, he immediately hastened to rehabilitate the "Leningraders" and then desperately PR the "Leningrad case" as the most outrageous of the "Stalin crimes" - there was a connection, and quite close.

    Khrushchev sat in Ukraine from 1938 to 1949 inclusive, where did the author find 30 years? Second, the fair was held in Leningrad in the same 1949. Nothing could sign the Khrushchev on behalf of Ukraine.
    The creation of the RSFSR party did indeed threaten the collapse of the union, but the constant funding of the union republics by ripping off the Russian people led to the same result. Gradually they began to think that they were so "great", and they feed the "lazy" "drunkards" of Russians, the Stalinist force was gone and the result was the same ... the collapse of the USSR. Now we are again stepping on the same rake in Russia.
    1. velikoros-xnumx
      velikoros-xnumx 7 February 2014 12: 47
      Quote: Orik
      where did the author find 30 years?

      Read carefully
      Quote: Orik
      In Ukraine already thirteen our unforgettable fighter against Stalinism Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev sat for years
      1. Orik
        Orik 7 February 2014 15: 42
        Even if we take 41, 42, 43 years, well, 13 years did not work out, only 11, but in fact 8-9 years.
  6. parus2nik
    parus2nik 7 February 2014 11: 46
    total cleansing of the "Leningrad case" ... Yes, that is total, then total ... And now, what is interesting, neither Beria nor Abakumov was charged with falsifying the "Leningrad" case ... they were quickly shot ... and Ignatiev S.D. lived happily ever after ... The head of the department of party and Komsomol bodies of the Central Committee Ignatiev, by a special decree of July 11, 1951, was appointed representative of the Central Committee in the Ministry of State Security. From 9.8.1951 to 5.3.1953, the Minister of State Security of the USSR "Mingrelian affair") simultaneously headed the department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, and then personally the Department of the MGB Security after the removal of the long-term chief of Stalin's security, General NS Vlasik. After the death of I. Stalin in March 1953, the ministry merged with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, headed by L. Beria, and Ignatiev became the secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. The day after the release of doctors (in the "case of doctors"), on April 5, 1953, by a poll The CPSU made a decision in view of "serious mistakes made by Comrade S. D. Ignatiev in the leadership of the former USSR Ministry of State Security" to release him from his duties as secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. On April 28, 1953, S. D. Ignatiev was also removed from the Central Committee of the CPSU by a survey of members of the Central Committee. At the suggestion of Beria, supported by other members of the Presidium of the Central Committee, the Party Control Committee under the Central Committee of the CPSU was instructed to consider the issue of party affiliation of S. D. Ignatiev. At the July 1953 Plenum of the Central Committee, the resolution of the Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU of April 28, 1953 was canceled, and S. D. Ignatiev is reinstated as a member of the Central Committee. On 19.12.53, he was appointed first secretary of the Bashkir Regional Committee, in office until 27.06.57. 27.06.57/3.12.60/1960 appointed first secretary of the Tatar regional committee, released on 27/1983/XNUMX for health reasons. Prof. B. F. Sultanbekov notes his efforts to preserve the Tatar culture, school and language, as a result of which, Sultanbekov points out, Ignatiev was accused of indulging "national narrow-mindedness" and removed from work under the pretext of "seriously deteriorating health", retired. Since XNUMX years old personal pensioner of federal significance, lived in Moscow. He died on November XNUMX, XNUMX.
    1. CHILD
      CHILD 7 February 2014 12: 07
      yes ... the pensioner managed to code ......
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 7 February 2014 14: 21
      According to the author, Beria was killed and not arrested, but then, on the appearance of interrogations, it was worthless to show the twin.
  7. Patriot of Ukraine
    Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 13: 39
    Vobschem so the author - it would be better to say immediately. The Georgian mafia of Stalin-Beria is our vso. Russian Kuznetsov, Ascension, etc. according to the list, including Zhukov’s inner circle - destroyed Zhukov wassat and Khrushchev, mass repression in the army is Zhukov's fault. And just do all the Russians (and 90% of the putschists are ethnic Russians) are traitors. And give us from sunny Georgia another mudakoshvili to the kingdom. Will Saakashvili fit? good birthday on the same day as Stalin-Dzhugashvili
    1. fennekRUS
      fennekRUS 7 February 2014 14: 00
      Leave it to yourself) He’s on your Maidan, one of the first to ride)
    2. atos_kin
      atos_kin 7 February 2014 14: 10
      Betray only their own, strangers never. The author, unlike you, thinks about what he writes.
      1. Patriot of Ukraine
        Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 14: 12
        that is, in your opinion, that the Marshal of Victory is a Jew? wassat
      2. fennekRUS
        fennekRUS 10 February 2014 15: 32
        For any occasion, in history there is a profound aphorism. I see no reason in the discussion, for its source is removed. The request to the author of the article is to rub this thread so as not to offend the feelings of people with a different sense of humor
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  8. dmb
    dmb 7 February 2014 14: 16
    Again you will have to "encroach on the sacred." As it is quite rightly called the work of Prudnikova on one of the literary sites: "an attempt on myths." This genre appeared in the era of democracy and, unlike science fiction, it can be called unscientific fiction with complete confidence. For some reason, the suppliers of personnel for him are mainly physics and mathematics faculties. Apparently, physicists and mathematicians at that time were in abundance, well, like now political scientists, lawyers and managers. Hurry-ups from "unscientific science fiction writers" began to exploit the topic of aliens and women who became pregnant from them. But serious creators, by means of arithmetic counting (fortunately, such education allowed), quickly realized that one could not earn much on articles in AIDS-INFO, and turned to topics of the recent past. There is scope for creative activity, measured not by a cheap rag, but by a solid edition in a thick cover at 500 rubles apiece. And they will buy, because the characters and the results of their activities are well known to the readership. And the masses are eager for "exposure". It doesn't matter who we expose, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev. The main thing is that these "revelations" clearly show that we could live well, but began to live badly not thanks to ourselves and the scoundrels we admitted to power, but to those who have already died, and you cannot ask much of them. If you carefully read the creations of Mrs. Prudnikova and those like her, you get the feeling that she forged the date of birth in the passport, and spent most of her adult life under the table at which the Politburo ate, or under the sofa on which Beria slept. It is difficult to explain other reasons for her "awareness" of the events described in her books, for she, like most "unscientific science fiction writers", does not cite primary sources.
    1. Patriot of Ukraine
      Patriot of Ukraine 7 February 2014 14: 51
      Quote: dmb
      If you carefully read the creations of Mrs. Prudnikova and those like her, you get the feeling that she forged the date of birth in the passport, and spent most of her adult life under the table at which the Politburo ate, or under the sofa on which Beria slept. It is difficult to explain other reasons for her "awareness" of the events described in her books, for she, like most "unscientific science fiction writers", does not cite primary sources.

      1. lelik613
        lelik613 7 February 2014 22: 07
        Beria did not sleep on the couch, he raped millions of citizens
    2. atos_kin
      atos_kin 7 February 2014 15: 13
      Writing comments and advice to give in the square is easier than working long and hard on the topic. Try to do better, or at least not worse. All good science fiction writers are primarily good analysts, and therefore they are valued regardless of their education.
      1. dmb
        dmb 7 February 2014 21: 21
        Based on your comment, you agree with me that Prudnikova writes unscientific fiction. And the flag would be in her hands, but she is passing off her fantasies as historical reality. And gullible citizens believe her for the reason stated by me above. As for the thesis that it is easier to criticize than to write, then usually this argument is given by individuals who do not shine with talent to justify their mediocrity. Like: "again the people got bad." As for the hard work on the topic, I would like some confirmation. You are familiar with the creative laboratory of Prudnikova, do you know where she got the information presented to her ..., no, not her personal assessments, but "historical facts"? about 1922, of course, this is "the pinnacle of analysis." Well, and the last thing, about ““ write better. ”I think I can’t, and therefore I don’t write, because I’m not accustomed to hack, like Prudnikova and similar“ prospectors ”.
  9. rate
    rate 7 February 2014 16: 24
    Quote: oracul
    Involuntarily, you will think about possible falsifications by Khrushchev and others like him.

    The conclusion that I made for myself is that Khrushchev’s USSR was killed and not Stalin’s. A significant role in this entire history of fraud belongs to the military. The myth of the unpreparedness of the USSR for war was launched by Khrushchev and the marshals; he was not there when Stalin was. Under Stalin, an investigation of deafening defeat was conducted in 41 g. By the way, it was stopped with the death of Stalin and Beria. So that. All these are Siamese twins: this and that. Khrushchev-Brezhnev socialism and unpreparedness for war in 41g. coexisted throughout the whole period from 1956 to 1991. After all, they were preparing, weren't they? And who failed? This is the secret.
    Where did I get the information: "Who slept through the beginning of the war?" Kozinkin O.Yu. read gentlemen. There is also A.B. Martirosyan. There is still a "conspiracy of marshals" Mukhin Yu. "Murder of Stalin and Beria" Look in general.
  10. makeev.dmitry
    makeev.dmitry 7 February 2014 16: 30
    I feel that soon the whole truth will come up, and about the Wends, and about the Varangians, about the split, and about Grozny, and about Nikolashka, and about the dropshoot, and about Khrushchev with Humpback, and so on. And our children will study the history of the fatherland in the context of world history, in the form of clear causal relationships, and not in the form of a set of accidents. And self-interest in distorting history will be recognized as a grave crime before society, as deprivation of the ability to draw conclusions from previous mistakes.
  11. Klim
    Klim 7 February 2014 17: 28
    Why are such scoundrels as Khrushchev and Gorbachev so easily get off?
  12. siberalt
    siberalt 8 February 2014 07: 51
    And the casket just opened. No matter how many questions were asked to teachers of the history of the CPSU and party agitators why the RSFSR does not have its own Komsomol and party organization, he could not really explain anything from them. It all boiled down to the fear of reproaches for Russian chauvinism, either in the tradition, or even that the CPSU is our Russian party. And the Leningrad affair was explained by the struggle between the Moscow and Leningrad party organizations. But never and nowhere about the PKK. Now it is clear that this was taboo. Indeed, in fact, when the PKK was created in the USSR, a situation of dual power immediately arose with all the consequences described by the author in the article. That is why Gorbaty was against the abolition of Article 6 of the Constitution of the USSR and shouted that the abolition of the CPSU would deprive the Union of its main bond (its "cementing foundation"). Now the sources of the collapse of the Union can be assessed differently.
    Thanks to the author for the article!
    1. mark7
      mark7 9 February 2014 00: 06
      Quote: siberalt
      Thanks to the author for the article.
  13. Zomanus
    Zomanus 9 February 2014 06: 41
    An exciting article. And most importantly, this could well be. After all, later this was realized. By the way, the subsequent flirting of Khrushchev with amers quite suggest this idea. In short, as if the country was not strong, in power all this can quickly nullify.