Military Review

A bet on "peaceful coexistence" was the fatal mistake of the leadership of the USSR

33
A bet on "peaceful coexistence" was the fatal mistake of the leadership of the USSRThe question is whether the leadership of Russia will be able to draw conclusions from this lesson.


Perhaps participation in the Helsinki Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, or in any case, the signing of its Final Act, was a strategic mistake of the Soviet leadership.

And the matter is not only in the ill-conceived acceptance of the “third package”, which formally allowed for “the freedom to disseminate information,” and practically made it possible to demand freedom for essentially disruptive propaganda on the territory of the USSR and its allies. Although the idea of ​​“the freedom to disseminate ideas” was in itself rejected by the USSR as early as the end of the 1940-s when discussing the draft “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.

Speaking of freedom, “the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas by any means and regardless of state borders,” the representative of the USSR, who was the notorious Andrei Vyshinsky, then formulated the position of the USSR as follows: “the first drawback of this article is that it proclaims freedom in general, freedom to disseminate "information and other ideas."

And then he said: “What ideas can be distributed freely and without hindrance? Most of the committee answers this question - all sorts of ideas. The Soviet delegation answers this question: We cannot recognize this, for the “ideas” of fascism, racial hatred, national hatred, sowing hostility between peoples, incitement to a new war — we consider it impossible to spread such ideas, we cannot allow such “freedom” . ...

... Of course, you are the majority at the Assembly. But the time will come, and perhaps the majority will see that it has made a big mistake. But we, who are in the minority, do not want, cannot and do not dare to make such mistakes. Our duty to our people obliges us to disagree with the question that we see in the draft of the third committee, because the terrible pictures of the just past war are restored in our minds, during which thousands and thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands and millions of our brothers perished at the hands of the fascist executioners, who enjoyed the freedom to spread their murderous and villainous so-called “ideas” in some countries without restriction and without hindrance. ”

Much, by the way, looks very relevant here. And the word “Freedom”, quoted in quotes and reproduced now in the name of the neo-Nazi party, which is currently sitting in a Kiev parody of parliament. And a reminder of the torchlight processions that end this freedom. Both blood and fires spread throughout the USSR after he revised his position in 1975.

But the strategic mistake was different. An international conference on the post-war world order was to meet in September 1945. This was the decision of the Potsdam Conference. The latter was going to after the victory over Germany - but before the end of the Second World War and before the victory over Japan. The United States at this point depended on whether it would help them in the war in the Far East and the Pacific Ocean - or not.

By September, assistance was provided, the victory was won, and Truman chose to give up legal obligations for his obligations. But he did not seek to revise them - in particular, because the course of events in the battles against Japan once again demonstrated, to put it mildly, the extremely different combat capability of the Soviet and American troops. And also because he feared the high popularity of the European Communist Parties.

Potsdam defined the formats of the world order, roughly reflecting the relatively equilibrium balance of forces between the USA and the USSR.

The idea of ​​holding such a conference was returned to the 1965 year, when it was put forward by the Warsaw Pact member countries, and it took another ten years for it to be assembled.

Its main content was in “finishing up the affairs of Potsdam” - consolidating the situation that emerged in 1945. But by that time the balance of forces had changed dramatically: in the 1945 year, the USSR bore the burden of post-war devastation, did not have atomic power. weapons, lost millions of soldiers, the United States was enriched by the war, divided the aura of liberators from Hitlerism, had an atomic bomb.

In 1975, the USSR was almost at the peak of power, reached parity in the field of nuclear weapons, survived its most successful eighth five-year plan, led the offensive on all continents, defeated the army. United States in Vietnam.

The United States experienced a severe social and economic crisis, was in a state of moral and psychological depression, experienced a “Vietnamese syndrome”, the authority of the authorities and national parties fell extremely low, and the country was shaking from political and economic scandals, rising prices, inflation and unemployment. Their economy was even richer - but in fact at the same time less powerful than the economy of the USSR.

The authority of the United States in the world rolled down and even their allies, France and Germany, ceased to be reckoned with them. Increased trade wars with Japan. There was widespread rejection of American politics.

The economy of the USSR, maintaining a not very high, but fairly decent level of the well-being of citizens (the era of growing deficit was still ahead) - fed and armed half of humanity. The US economy was weakening even using the resources of the other half and feeding on the light of the latter.

The USSR was on the rise - the US was on the way down. The USSR was increasingly becoming the dominant country in the world, the winner already in the post-war confrontation - the United States is losing dominance by the country losing this confrontation.

Aviation USA in Korea. Vietnam and the Middle East have demonstrated their backlog from the Soviet one and their defenselessness against Soviet air defense. American aircraft carriers sailed around the oceans in the sight of Soviet launchers. Troops stationed in Western Europe had little chance of keeping Soviet tank the offensive is longer than three days in its movement to the English Channel. The United States constantly initiated new rounds of the arms race - and constantly lost them.

The balance of forces changed in favor of the USSR, but its leadership was not focused on winning, but on maintaining the status quo. And the meaning of Helsinki was not seen in bringing the world order in line with the new balance of power, but in confirming the formats that corresponded to the balance of power of the 1945 of the year.

By the policy of "detente" and the Helsinki Accords, the USSR gave its Western competitors a breather. And he confirmed in relations with them the formats of equality and equivalence - although they were no longer such.

You can guess:

- either the Soviet leadership itself did not realize how much the system they represented was already superior in strength to a competitor;
- either believed that the victory had already been achieved and it was possible to give the vanquished to die quietly at home;
- Either the tiredness and the aging of the top of the Soviet leadership, who were under seventy by all, just had an effect;
- Either Brezhnev, very much wanted to look in the eyes of the international community "an outstanding fighter for peace."

Anyway, this competitor’s respite allowed him to at least avoid death — and go on the offensive in 1980.

In fact, even if the Helsinki Conference was to be assembled, it was necessary to determine the conditions of detente and the course towards “security and cooperation”.

And this should have been the first to assume:

- The first is the dissolution of NATO or at least its military organization;
- the second is the withdrawal of all American troops from the territory of Europe and the territories close to the USSR borders;
- the third - the removal of any restrictions on the supply to the USSR of industrial products and technologies.

Some would call it utopia, but utopia is often the most prematurely revealed truth. US 1975 of the year was neither US 1945 of the year nor US 1995 of the year. It was something like the USSR 1990-th year.

And at this moment European countries would enthusiastically agree to accept the status of neutral or at least non-bloc countries in exchange for guarantees of their national sovereignty by the USSR.

This was not done. For the fact that this was not done, the SSR paid for it later and Russia is still paying the price.

Moreover, it has not yet become clear to everyone, but sooner or later it will become clear that, despite the situation at the beginning of the 21 century, Russia can count on a dignified existence and development only if NATO and the EU cease to exist.

And whatever Russia is socialist or imperialistic, and no matter how it is called, it has no other way to the future than through solving the tasks that the Soviet Union could solve but did not solve in 1970-s.

In Europe, there can be either Russia - or NATO and the EU.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.km.ru/world/2014/05/27/voenno-politicheskii-blok-nato/740999-stavka-na-mirnoe-sosushchestvovanie-stala-fat
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. fleks
    fleks 29 May 2014 09: 23
    +7
    alas, history has no subjunctive mood
    1. I think so
      I think so 29 May 2014 16: 37
      -2
      The little article is weak and a pathetic attempt can be traced at least to defame the Soviet leadership ... Meanwhile, this Soviet leadership is THREE HEADS higher in understanding the problems and solutions in comparison with the CURRENT Russian leadership ... The very comparison of THIS leadership and the CURRENT is ridiculous ... too the very thing is to compare the GRANITE BULB and the LITTLE SORRY MANUSES ... somewhere the allegory is close ... In the time of Brezhnev, the Slavic empire reached the peak of its power, and in the time of the uh-ee, it is at sunset ... yes it at sunset, there is not the slightest sign of strengthening, but there are a lot of signs of degradation of ideas, of society, industry, demography, and culture ... Sunset ... And then they compare ...
      1. Erg
        Erg 29 May 2014 20: 23
        +2
        You are mistaken, Dear. Our society is preparing to take another step towards democracy and prosperity. This is hard not to notice. And attempts to black out useful endeavors by governments do not look right. respectfully
  2. ImPerts
    ImPerts 29 May 2014 09: 29
    +6
    Together. And Brezhnev was tired. And his surroundings. And laurels of peacekeepers wanted.
    And the collapse of the USSR helped the Western "partners" a lot. Both politically and economically.
  3. serge
    serge 29 May 2014 09: 41
    +3
    If you want peace, get ready for war. The late USSR was preparing for peace. And lost without a war.
    1. Postovoi
      Postovoi 29 May 2014 10: 36
      +8
      the USSR broke up due to betrayal, nobody lost to anyone, the traitors came and did their dirty deeds ...
      1. Maksim...
        Maksim... 29 May 2014 12: 18
        +6
        Then the majority of the population turned out to be traitors, having done practically nothing to save their country and taking to the streets with Yeltsin.
        1. I think so
          I think so 29 May 2014 16: 53
          +7
          People by DEFINITION STUPID! And therefore, only this (stupidity) can be attributed to him (the people), but those who INFORM the people, and EXACTLY DISINFORM - these are the traitors to the interests of the PEOPLE, for the sake of YOUR SKINNY interests ... Remember the then publications in the "democratic" media !
          Collective farms suck, FARMER will feed! As we see now, THEREFORMER DOESN'T FEED ANYWHERE ANYWHERE IN THE WEST! Feed here and there LARGE FARMS (roughly speaking collective farms).
          Next - A PRIVATE OWNER is more efficient than a state ...
          And what we see neither here nor there GLOBAL POPULATION PROBLEMS THE PARTICIPANT DOES NOT SOLVE DOES NOT SOLVE AND WILL NEVER SOLVE! And to us (the people) what then tryndely?
          Planning is Utopia! What do we see now? It turns out EVERYTHING AND ALWAYS AND IN THE WEST INCLUDING - PLANNED, PLANNED and WILL BE PLANNED! And to us, what was poured into ears THEN?
          Democracy SOURCE OF WELL-BEING! And what do we see now in reality? That WELFARE WITH DEMOCRACY HAS NO CONNECTION! He lives well who plunders the rest MORE SUCCESSFULLY (including using nonsense about democracy) or REASONABLE IN HIS (!) USE OF RICHES ACHIEVED BY PEOPLE from the earth. And what have these media outraged us?

          One can still bring a bunch of theses that SHOW THE FALSE AND SALE of people powdering THEN brains to the people ... Well, any people he was and will be a stupid herd ...
          1. Maksim...
            Maksim... 29 May 2014 18: 54
            -2
            PEOPLE BY DEFINITION OF STUPID

            And you are not stupid, of course wink .
            Collective farms suck, FARMER will feed! As we see now, THEREFORMER DOESN'T FEED ANYWHERE ANYWHERE IN THE WEST! Feed here and there LARGE FARMS (roughly speaking collective farms).

            Now in the United States, 67 percent of agricultural products are produced by farmers.
            And what we see neither here nor there GLOBAL POPULATION PROBLEMS THE PARTICIPANT DOES NOT SOLVE DOES NOT SOLVE AND WILL NEVER SOLVE!

            Private traders Rockefeller helped create drugs. Although I personally, nevertheless, advocate a mixed model of the economy.
            It turns out EVERYTHING AND ALWAYS AND IN THE WEST INCLUDING - PLANNED, PLANNED and WILL BE PLANNED!

            And detail? Who, where and when has it always been planned and plans in the West?
            That WELFARE WITH DEMOCRACY HAS NO CONNECTION!

            Directly, no. But the standard of living in democratic countries is usually somewhat higher.
            He lives well who plunders the rest MORE SUCCESSFULLY (including using nonsense about democracy) or REASONABLE IN HIS (!) USE OF RICHES ACHIEVED BY PEOPLE from the earth.
            Well, of course! If a neighbor lives better than me, then he is a thief.
            PS As for my comment above: I should have written "in this case" instead of "then".
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. explorer
              explorer 30 May 2014 09: 06
              0
              Collective farms suck, FARMER will feed! As we see now, THEREFORMER DOESN'T FEED ANYWHERE ANYWHERE IN THE WEST! Feed here and there LARGE FARMS (roughly speaking collective farms).
              1. Maksim...
                Maksim... 30 May 2014 11: 41
                0
                Large farms. There is still a difference between the collective farm and the farm ..
    2. optimist
      optimist 29 May 2014 18: 44
      +2
      Quote: serge
      If you want peace, get ready for war. The late USSR was preparing for peace. And lost without a war.

      Here we can say a little differently: you can win any war (including the "cold" one) only by attacking. The USSR, however, was exclusively defending itself, and, accordingly, lost ...
      1. Erg
        Erg 29 May 2014 20: 25
        +2
        To step was useless. The assumptions were not equal
      2. 16112014nk
        16112014nk 29 May 2014 21: 52
        +1
        The Germans also advanced in 1941.
      3. The comment was deleted.
  4. fzr1000
    fzr1000 29 May 2014 10: 02
    +9
    I agree completely with the title. About 15 years ago, one of the smartest people from MGIMO said that he talked about the reasons for the collapse of the country with his foreign colleagues in the 90s and together came to the same conclusion. A fatal mistake, and not at all the economy of the USSR or the introduction of troops into Afghanistan, or the arms race broke the USSR. Without a global political idea, no state has a future ..
    1. Prometheus
      Prometheus 29 May 2014 12: 47
      +1
      And what should be our political idea for our state to have a future?
      1. I think so
        I think so 29 May 2014 17: 02
        +3
        I think the political idea for the SLAVES should be as follows - THE SLAVES SHOULD LIVE AND BREED! Everything else is empty! In the days of the USSR, THIS idea was the main one and it REALLY WORK! And now, as we see, there is no idea and the Slavs are Dying Out ... Russia 200-250 thousand a year (count every year Smolensk completely disappears), Ukraine 50-60, Belarus - 20-30 ... Sad ...
        1. saag
          saag 29 May 2014 18: 05
          +2
          Well, first of all, what kind of physiological idea, and secondly, should non-Slavs live and reproduce?
    2. Good cat
      Good cat 29 May 2014 14: 28
      0
      Look, here's the truth: "Without a global political idea, no state has a future .." And what was the most global idea in the USSR in the mid-80s, right where to get and buy something, and we all somehow supported Gorbach then (with rare exceptions). If the hunchback would have pushed himself up and filled the hard workers with junk, even imported, even if he ran to the West for world awards, everything would be fine.
      1. Erg
        Erg 29 May 2014 20: 33
        +1
        The USSR, simply put, bought on green papers. All from the coils flew at the sight of imported junk. And there is nothing to blame Gorbachev.
    3. Erg
      Erg 29 May 2014 20: 29
      +1
      It all began in 1969 (one of the versions), when the USSR recognized the flight of states to the moon in exchange for economic concessions. Lying always leads to destruction. Do not put the pros wink
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 29 May 2014 23: 07
        -1
        A small lie creates an even greater lie to justify a small lie, therefore, the flow of lies will increase in increasing numbers. and then it becomes impossible to separate the truth from the lie, because the truth is covered by this lie. Lying is becoming the new truth.
        This is the reason that our story consists almost entirely of lies:
        - Tatar-Mongol yoke;
        - Peter the First Reformer;
        - the place of the Battle of Kulikovo;
        - the uprising of Razin;
        - October Revolution;
        - flight of amers to the moon;
        And there are also a lot of strange events in the history of mankind and Russia in particular, which raise doubts about the truthfulness when looking at them from a different angle ... hi
  5. Boris55
    Boris55 29 May 2014 11: 08
    +3
    The USSR began to "bring down" Khrushchev by announcing the slogan - "We will catch up and overtake America." Something the same can participate in the competition. We, brought up on the fact that man to man is a friend, comrade and brother, tried to fit into the system where man is a wolf to man. The imbalance of the desired with reality was one of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR.

    Under Leonid Ilyich, the upbringing of the new elite took place, a significant part of the time disappearing in the west. The children and grandchildren of Parteigenoss did not want to part with the lifestyle that they had after the death of their ancestors. At the same time, there was an accumulation of capital, which had to be legalized, which Gorbaty successfully managed with EBN ...

    The USSR was destroyed by more than one person - it was destroyed by the entire rotten elite, the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of whom are still in power and in bread places (in a sealed train car, a certain Abromovich rode in a place with Lenin).
    1. mithridate
      mithridate 29 May 2014 12: 32
      0
      100% true
    2. I think so
      I think so 29 May 2014 17: 17
      -2
      Pure nonsense write dear. And now on the shelves we’ll analyze your nonsense if you allow me ...
      1. How can you say that "Khrushchev began to bring down the USSR" if after Khrushchev the USSR developed and strengthened and increased its power for another 30 years ... And this is REALITY, not your fantasies about "imbalance between the desired and the actual."
      2. Nonsense about "the disappearance of the elite in the west" is not even funny anymore ... And tell me these ELITE sons who disappeared there, and then they dismissed everything. And what about "parting with the way of life" so here you apparently do not know that THAT ELITE lived SEVERAL ORDERS OF TIMES (the order is 10 times, several orders of magnitude is 10 in this degree) are more modest than the current ones. Your statement is illogical and absurd.
      3. "The USSR was ruined by more than one person" - it is strange how the "elite" can ruin a TOTALITY country in which EVERYONE AND ALWAYS obeyed the MAIN. It is such a TOTALITARY country that ONLY ONE PERSON who is at the helm and no one else can destroy. I would have tried the "elite" to destroy the USSR under Stalin ... And then, according to your opinion, the elite has easily ruined it ... you are talking nonsense, dear. When an ENEMY or DU.RAK is at the helm of a centralized country, such a country can only be saved by an EXTREME change of this fool or enemy.
    3. Erg
      Erg 29 May 2014 20: 36
      +1
      Well, you say too - the Bolsheviks are to blame. No, simple human weaknesses are to blame.
  6. parusnik
    parusnik 29 May 2014 11: 11
    0
    Management tired of living in tension .. and that's broken ..
    1. muginov2015
      muginov2015 29 May 2014 11: 56
      0
      We must be more precise in the wording, Alexey It will be more correct, the Guide is tired of living.
  7. dmb
    dmb 29 May 2014 11: 46
    +3
    If everything was as simple as the author writes. What one cannot agree with is the weakness of America at that time. Yes, they suffered a number of defeats, including Vietnam, but continued to be the first economy in the world. The point is not only in their ability to work and our idleness. These are the tales of the liberals. We have different ways of accumulating national wealth and initial conditions. They have shameless exploitation of the third world, we have only losses in this part. We are in ruins after the war. they are on the rise. Where they freely invested billions, we counted a penny. In this situation, ideology and propaganda certainly played a major role. And here we were in complete failure. They appealed to the most base feelings of our fellow citizens, we, by virtue of absolute mediocrity, and sometimes even outright betrayal of the ideological leadership of the party, did not oppose anything to this. Yes, and it would be difficult to oppose. Even the most ardent opponent of the Stalinist government understands what explained the party purges. By the way, they consisted not so much in executions as in expulsion from the party and deprivation of privileges. The communist then had mostly duties and not rights, and increased responsibility. And then the purges stopped and instead of the leaders of the Communists, party bonuses began to appear, ending with the freak-Gorbachev and K.
    1. smile
      smile 29 May 2014 12: 21
      -1
      dmb
      I absolutely agree, Dmitry.
      I would also like to express bewilderment - why is the author so fundamentally against the EU? On the contrary, if the EU is strong and independent, it will try to get out of the dictatorship of the United States, crush the Eastern European mongrels, who diligently spoil the relations of the European Union with us, which are actually US ambassadors to the European Union. It is more profitable for the European Union to cooperate with us than to scandal. U.S. too.
      1. I think so
        I think so 29 May 2014 17: 25
        -1
        You apparently taught history poorly at school ... And she says that Russia was ALWAYS DISRUPTED AND DESTROYED by the Europeans ... Swedes, French, Germans ... but in reality ALL (!) Europe PARTICIPATED in all of these campaigns against Russia! And here you dictate to them "will be more independent from the USA" ... Take off your rose-colored glasses and take a closer look at this vile, petty, evil and corrupt old woman (Europe) more objectively ...
        1. smile
          smile 29 May 2014 17: 54
          +1
          I think so
          We, like everyone, have had conflicts with the whole environment. But we regularly collaborated with them. And our allies have been among the Europeans. Right now, when Europe is weak enough and not capable of expansion to us, it would be more profitable for us if it got out of the dictates of the USA, which are trying to push Europeans with us. If they become independent, then, firstly, they will largely cease to be the vanguard of the United States, secondly, the US military presence will decrease dramatically, and thirdly, they will have a lot of contradictions with the Americans. The situation is similar to the one when the British set the French, and later the Germans, on us.
          Continue to continue, or still try to think with your head? :)))

          By the way, admit why you were not accepted to school? Maybe because you are talking to history, and it, you see, answers ... :)))
      2. Erg
        Erg 29 May 2014 20: 40
        0
        That's right. Russia needs to go closer to the EU. And, before it's too late, we need to restore relations with the United States. A year ago, we went hand in hand into the future. But a number of rash acts on the part of Russia, unfortunately, led to the destruction of this strong tandem. Do not put the pros!
        1. smile
          smile 29 May 2014 20: 59
          0
          Erg
          Even the official demarcation with the Americans occurred after Putin’s Munich speech. But in fact - right after the elbon left.
          I understand that this is a joke about the fact that we moved hand in hand with the United States until last year, but the joke is bad, because it is based on lies.
          As you asked, I didn’t put a plus for you. Put a minus - you did not say anything about him.
  8. 12571752dima
    12571752dima 29 May 2014 11: 55
    +1
    Gradually grabbers and hucksters came to power, and the most profitable occupation for them is the sale of their homeland. The process of squandering everything and everyone continues ...
  9. Maksim...
    Maksim... 29 May 2014 12: 15
    -2
    but it practically made it possible to demand freedom in essence of subversive propaganda on the territory of the USSR and its allies.

    Who knew that the ideology of the USSR would be so backward and incapable of even holding positions at home ?!
    Their economy was still richer - but in fact at the same time less powerfulthan the economy of the USSR

    Mutually exclusive paragraphs?
    US Aviation in Korea. Vietnam and the Middle East demonstrated their backlog from the Soviet one and their defenselessness against Soviet air defense

    In Korea, 16 to 69 old B-29s were shot down, while the DPRK infrastructure was largely destroyed.
    In Vietnam? What about Operation Lanebacker II?
    American aircraft carriers sailed the oceans in the sight of Soviet launchers

    And more detail you can?
    Troops stationed in Western Europe had little chance of keeping the Soviet tank offensive longer than three days in its movement to the English Channel

    According to the Soviet plan, it seems like two weeks were allocated, not three days. But not the point.
    - The first is the dissolution of NATO or at least its military organization;
    - the second is the withdrawal of all American troops from the territory of Europe and the territories close to the USSR borders;
    - the third - the removal of any restrictions on the supply to the USSR of industrial products and technologies.

    And they will send the USSR to hell, or at least they will demand mutual concessions.
    And at this moment European countries would enthusiastically agree to accept the status of neutral or at least non-bloc countries in exchange for guarantees of their national sovereignty by the USSR.

    Or maybe enough fairy tales about American slavery and Soviet equality ?! What is "national sovereignty" was shown in Hungary in 1956 and in the Czech Republic in 1968. The fact that a stronger state is trying to subjugate the weaker is absolutely normal.
  10. atos_kin
    atos_kin 29 May 2014 13: 35
    +2
    "In Europe, there can be either Russia - or NATO and the EU."

    The conclusion of the author of the article is quite cool, just do not need to separate NATO and the EU. In terms of composition, these are mainly the same countries (minus the USA and Canada). Following the logic of the author, taking advantage of the freedom to disseminate information, it is necessary to begin the construction of the United States of Europe, led by Russia, on the basis of the Eurasian Union. And then come to the conclusion: "Either the USE or the USA can exist on Earth."
  11. Alexandr 2
    Alexandr 2 29 May 2014 16: 01
    -3
    The USSR collapsed because the ideas professed by the ruling party lost in comparison with the reality of life.
    1. I think so
      I think so 29 May 2014 17: 40
      0
      Ideas have not lost ... ideas cannot lose at all, they can be falsified, discredited, hushed up, perverted ... This is actually what is happening now, and you think that "ideas have lost" ...
      Well, how can such an idea lose, for example - "Communism is the bright future of all mankind!" Well, it just can't, because if the FUTURE IS NOT A BRIGHT FUTURE, then what? DARK? That's just it, but since people agreed to live not in a bright future, but in a dark one ... that's where they go, as they say ... The same goes for the rest of the ideas of the communists. They are now being hushed up, perverted, distorted, falsified.
      And here, for example, the idea - "A man is a friend of a friend and a brother". If she lost, it means that today's Russians live in such a way that a person is NOT a friend to a person, not a comrade, and even more so not a brother.
      And so on for all the ideas of the USSR and communism ... look, take an interest and see that the Communists WANTED TO DECLINE THE GOOD, and the current EVEN do not declare anything good ... they only codify their past ... even GREAT AND DECENT ...
      1. Alexandr 2
        Alexandr 2 30 May 2014 11: 38
        +1
        To lose is the same as to falsify, de-discriminate, hush up, pervert. These are equivalent concepts.
  12. padded jacket
    padded jacket 29 May 2014 16: 34
    0
    In many ways, I agree with the author of the article. The USSR was a militarily powerful and industrially developed country. And he died because it was too soft and honest. I was not ready for the vile and dirty methods that would be used against him. 112 million people spoke out in favor of preserving the USSR, but they were not ready to fight for it, they were too accustomed to a quiet, measured life, they thought that it would be like that. We did not believe that then there were liars at the top. As a result, thieves, swindlers and outright traitors came to power. And largely thanks to Putin we are now crawling out of this terrible pit where we were shoved to a large extent with our silent help.
    The same thing is happening now in Ukraine, people see that the Nazis, thieves and traitors seized power. But they don’t want to lose their life, family, home to stop this brown-thieves' gang, I think Russia will send troops and everything will work out and we will live well and will we finally have happiness and freedom. But it also doesn’t work out, the residents of the southeast must decide their own destiny and Russia will help them.
  13. Karabanov
    Karabanov 29 May 2014 17: 59
    0
    I have not read the previous comments ... I want to say, the article was written in the spirit of Kalashnikov-Kucherenko (which by the way I understand). Of course, without fanaticism, but it takes pain for that, excuse me ... whether our conquests (without pathos). I don’t want to varnish the Soviet existence, but a lot of things seemed to me then, we could not understand. And the dictum came to mind - they wanted the best, but it turned out ...
    1. Maksim...
      Maksim... 29 May 2014 18: 56
      +1
      Oh sorry, please! By chance I put you a minus ...
      1. Karabanov
        Karabanov 29 May 2014 19: 25
        +1
        Do not mention it...
  14. combat66
    combat66 29 May 2014 19: 43
    +2
    Quote: I think so
    I think the political idea for the SLAVES should be as follows - THE SLAVES SHOULD LIVE AND BREED!

    A little tired countryman .... Are we cockroaches ?!
  15. Ajent cho
    Ajent cho 29 May 2014 23: 00
    0
    Quote: ImPerts
    And the collapse of the USSR helped the Western "partners" a lot. Both politically and economically.

    Well, the worse it will fall for them, for it is already clearly visible that SO immoral societies have no future.