Military Review

The general is above the particular, or Why is the "philosophy of slivers" alien to us and harmful?

145
One of the cheapest and worn tricks of the “de-Stalinizer”: “And what if you are put to the wall, how do you sing then?” Well, they say, talk about the scoop, until Bloody Stalin reached out to your family.


The question itself is a manifestation of the vile philanthropic morality (it's hard to call it moral). After all, it implies something simple, familiar: "its own shirt is closer to the body." Own skin more expensive. Right?

So what do these GOELRO and BAMs, OSOAVIAHIMs and Uralmash have to you, if you yourself and your loved ones are rolled into the asphalt? So what do you think about the fact that your country will be powerful and prosperous? You won't see it yourself. Wood chopping, chips fly. You are a sliver.

Be a sliver who wants to hunt! And its own skin, too, while sitting well. As beaten Ayn Rand - "everyone dies alone."

Only here the important moment is lost. As soon as a single chip begins to worry about his own skin, the whole forest is guaranteed to disappear. If on a ship in distress everyone starts to think only about his own salvation, in the end no one is saved. The philosophy of slivers - the philosophy of the alarmist, egoist, defeatist.

A variety of tools of psychological struggle are aimed at activating such subconscious loneliness today. Execution of LIH - "but imagine yourself with a knife at the throat." GULAG museums - “but imagine yourself in the cellars of Lubyanka”. Fearfully? Of course, scary. Do you have the courage not to renounce your convictions? After all, any commies can be sent by force of thought to the basement and break, humiliate, dehumanize. Make sing "Glory to Ukraine!"

However, this, fortunately, does not change anything. Even if you knock out your teeth and fry Giordano Bruno’s heels, if you force him to choke on blood and abandon all of his heresy, the Sun will not begin to rotate around the Earth.

When we talk about the Soviet experience, the Soviet legacy, we primarily mean the primacy of the interests of society, of the collective over the interests of the individual. That's why the whole fight is going. Our liberal opponents (those who urge to try the GULAG on themselves) are preaching the opposite: they have personal interests, by definition, are higher than public ones. In a critical situation (war, shipwreck) it is just a cry pretending to be ideology: “Save yourself who can!”

However, most subconsciously (any team has some kind of subconscious feeling) understands: sliver ideology will destroy everyone. There will be no gulag, no capitalist paradise. That is why in one form or another collectivist morality will still win once. Just the team has not lost the will to live. Visitors to an abandoned museum at the execution site of Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya are greeted with the words: “This is happiness - to die for your people.” Not so much for oneself, not so much for one’s family, not so much for this village (the prosyvrinin was unhappy - he burned houses, people left homeless for children), as for the people, for the common cause, in which each such feat is an inconspicuous grain of sand.

That is the deep meaning of the Soviet doctrine. How many injustices during the war? How many wrong tribunals? But War is sacred, raising the question of the price of Victory is sacrilege (although prosvirnins are putting it). So why is the great construction of 30-x, the great project on the reorganization of life, on pulling the country out of the abyss of degradation and decay, is estimated by us differently? After all, it was also a war. Only war for the future.

It seems to me that the question “And if you were in the Gulag?” Implies the answer: “Let the Gulag, but then you take the Reichstag.”

When in 90 they kicked Pavlik Morozov (traitor, bastard, geek) with their feet, there was also a special, cunning meaning in this ritual shame. Pavlik passed his native people, who were pushers, bread speculators and sadists. Passed to the state - because not only his own family suffered from these people. Pavlik put the interests of society above the interests of blood. In other circumstances - it is a gesture of childish despair. In others - a real feat. Consonant, for example, with the murder of his son Andriya by Taras Bulba. However, Pavlik’s father and grandfather safely left the gulag. The child was less fortunate.

And what about this stories sees our "detalinizator"? He sees a terrible, unnatural picture. He sees a country where even close people knock at each other, they give each other, renounce each other. The supreme commander, who condemns his son to death in captivity, is simply an idiot from this point of view. After all, he made a choice in favor of the general, sacrificing the private, his, dear, beloved. I betrayed my son. Probably bad and scary. But the “pre-Stalinization” opposite is when everything is sewn-covered, when the hand is washing the hand. Is it possible to imagine that today the mayor’s son, say, Tavda, wrote a complaint against his father to the prosecutor’s office for stealing money for social programs? That's it.

When another liberator howls: “And my great-grandfather was deported,” for some reason, it is no longer accepted to understand why they deported him to where they deported. They shout about the mistakes of the investigation and the excesses on the ground, but they hint at something else: everything is universal, everyone is repressed by mistake, they have suffered for nothing. After all, this is my great-grandfather! He is by definition can not be bad. Because he is mine. I am. My shirt. My body.

All these problems, the correlation of personal and social, family and national, this whole philosophy of splinters, the triumphant tradesman, are very well visualized in the movie “The Cranes Are Flying”. Remember the scene when the rear huckster comes to the hospital hammered by the wounded and asks to give him a car - ride with a woman? Reconsider. The war was won precisely because it was usually shot for in the USSR. The USSR was destroyed precisely because the surviving huckster did get his car. It is painful and difficult to admit, but cranes fly when and only if there are splinters somewhere in the neighborhood.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/blogs/obshchee-vishe-chastnogo-ili-pochemu-nam-chuzhda-i-vredna-filosofiya-shchepki/
145 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Tersky
    Tersky 9 September 2015 15: 02 New
    +50
    good Good article, topical such ... and writing style on top yes . A plus....
    1. Baikonur
      Baikonur 9 September 2015 15: 10 New
      +15
      Also express absolute agreement with the author!
      And the example about Pavlik Morozov is very revealing:
      Pavlik placed the interests of society above the interests of blood. In other circumstances, it is a gesture of childish despair. In others - a real feat. Consonant, for example, with the murder by Taras Bulba of his son Andriy. However, Pavlik’s father and grandfather safely sat back from the Gulag. The child was less fortunate.
      1. Private IITR
        Private IITR 9 September 2015 15: 22 New
        +18
        Thank you for the article!
        1. CALL.
          CALL. 11 September 2015 16: 59 New
          +6
          One of the cheapest and worn-out tricks of the “de-Stalinizer”: “What if they put you on the wall, how do you sing then?”

          If we look at the statistics of repressions, it turns out that for less than 15 years from 1939 until the day of Beria’s arrest in the USSR, 54253 people were sentenced to death (42149 of them in 1941-1945), while in 1937- 1938 681692 death sentences were imposed. One of the accusations against Lavrenty Pavlovich is that he allegedly destroyed the shots of "honest Chekists" brought up by Dzerzhinsky: "It was Beria who was the organizer of the purges of the NKVD and repressions among the diplomatic corps."
          Proponents of this point of view do not disdain direct forgeries. For example, the weekly “Intelligence and Counterintelligence News” weekly tells about the fate of the Soviet intelligence officer Fedor Karpovich Parparov:
          "On May 27, 1938, Parparov was arrested at the direction of Beria and was under investigation until June 1939. He was released due to lack of corpus delicti (espionage)."
          Meanwhile, Beria was appointed 1st deputy. People’s Commissar of Internal Affairs only on August 22, and People’s Commissar - November 25, 1938. Until that moment, he headed the Communist Party of Georgia for 7 years, having nothing to do with the NKVD, and, of course, could not give instructions on the arrest of state security officers. But Beria had the most direct relation to the release of F.K. Parparov, especially since after 4 months he was again enlisted in the foreign intelligence staff. Of course, it is forgivable for the average person not to know that on May 27, 1938, Beria was still at a party job in Tbilisi, but this should be known to the author of the article, Colonel of the SVR Vladimir Karpov on duty.
    2. Berber
      Berber 9 September 2015 16: 16 New
      +11
      The article is written correctly, but only without nuances. For example, my grandfather was sentenced for espionage in 1940, in 41, he died in Tomsk prison. He had three classes of education. The scammer, after the Germans came, became a policeman. After the war he served 10 years and left. So, just a lot of emotions.
      1. ava09
        ava09 9 September 2015 18: 47 New
        +18
        The article dealt with the unifying morality of the people. Your grandfather is sorry, but in this case, who do you blame - Stalin or the policeman who surrendered his grandfather? But he could be a friend of his grandfather, in an extreme case, familiar. Envy, self-interest, hypocrisy - that is what killed people in those years when the country was preparing for war.
        1. CALL.
          CALL. 11 September 2015 17: 11 New
          +1
          The Supreme Commander, condemning his son to death in captivity - simply from this point of view.

          Yakov Dzhugashvili, commander of a battery of 122 mm howitzers, died in battle in the fall of 1941. The son of Stalin, Jacob and the most honest Germans - http://www.ymuhin.ru/node/885
      2. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 24 New
        +7
        Quote: BerBer
        The scammer, after the Germans came, became a policeman.

        and here another problem arises - DONATORS, and in the NKVD after all, too, all sorts of people worked both normal and with a fool and those who wanted to curry favor
  2. Barberry
    Barberry 9 September 2015 15: 04 New
    +50
    The article indicates a very important aspect of the confrontation between social and "private". All the same, we are being slowly prepared for the idea that everything, up to the territory of the country, should be private. Us - I mean - humanity. Hence the ardent attacks on everything Soviet. Until now, the capitalists cannot forgive Stalin the Great Mighty Soviet Union!
    1. dmb
      dmb 9 September 2015 15: 34 New
      -3
      Yes to hell with it with minuses, they excite me only if for business. Ponder what you have written (the author hardly did this when he wrote). If we were talking about the confrontation between the general and the private and the victims that our people suffered in the name of a common cause, I would not say a word. There is no struggle for a just cause without sacrifices. I am now about the victims, not for the sake of a common cause, but for the struggle for power. And not for the Soviet power, because it is a common cause, but for its personal. And no matter from what motives (even from the best), Stalin fought for it. When a person (even a very smart one) is daily told to lackeys that he is God, he sooner or later considers himself to be such.
      1. beer-youk
        beer-youk 9 September 2015 15: 54 New
        +16
        Stalin fought for power to prevent Trotsky from joining her with a company that drowned Russia in blood in the 20s, when Stalin himself "had number 16"
      2. 34 region
        34 region 9 September 2015 15: 56 New
        +41
        Dmb! 15.34. About Stalin. Khrushchev turned to Stalin to return his (Khrushchev) son from the front. Stalin asks him: Are you as a father asking, or as a member of the party? Like a father, Khrushchev answered. Stalin: And what will I say to other fathers?
        1. dmb
          dmb 9 September 2015 16: 19 New
          +4
          Well, what does this example of yours mean in the light of my comment? And if we are to be completely honest, I would like to know the source in which this dialogue is given. Khrushchev was a lackey, nurtured by the Stalinist personnel system. And as is customary among lackeys, he took full revenge on the Master after the death of the latter. The Gorbachevs, Yeltsins and Yakovlevs are also a product of this system.
          1. 34 region
            34 region 9 September 2015 17: 00 New
            +13
            Dmb! 16.19. Stalin did not consider himself a god. Grovel did not like. Frames were selected from the availability at the moment. I don’t remember where the phrase came from, but it struck my memory.
            1. dmb
              dmb 9 September 2015 20: 25 New
              -6
              Well dear, but rather, I will start with the phrase. Stalin, as you know, did not leave his memoirs, and Khrushchev in his own even if he was frank and ..m. I wouldn’t write this. Most likely, this phrase, the fruit of the violent imagination of pseudo-historians a la Prudnikov, Mukhin, Starikov and others. The statement of dislike for servility, it is necessary to justify somehow. "A friend of pioneers and athletes" had a habit of reading the press (this is in the memoirs of his comrades-in-arms), get acquainted with the newspapers of that time and with documentary films. I think questions about lackeys will disappear with themselves. Cadres were selected not from availability, but from the degree of devotion and nevertheless servility. Therefore (I take the party-economic elite) Voznesensky and Kuznetsov were shot, and Khrushchev survived.
              1. Oldwiser
                Oldwiser 9 September 2015 20: 46 New
                -6
                And both (both Kuznetsov and Voznesensky) during execution were hoarse with broken jaws "Glory to the great Stalin!"
              2. victor50
                victor50 11 September 2015 09: 29 New
                +3
                And the current system brings to power extremely decent people and cultivates those in power who hold the highest degree of nobility! And, of course, everyone can sleep peacefully - the Law prevails in the country! And Khodorkovsky was sitting only because he was a thief. But Chubais is not sitting - an honest man! Then at least the state was, whose achievements could be proud of at least some, the order was, security and confidence in the future, worked again not only to survive, but also out of interest. Of course, I would like to do this without chips, or a minimal, single amount of them. But did someone succeed somewhere?
              3. victor50
                victor50 11 September 2015 09: 36 New
                0
                And again: I do not agree that Stalin only brought lackeys, on the contrary, such were rare. Be that as it may, Stalin was a strong man and was not afraid to nominate strong and distinctive people to responsible posts: Zhukov, People's Commissar of Industry (forgot his last name), Beria - although a bastard, he is talented (with an atomic bomb in a short time frame) we got it, and largely thanks to him), and many others. Call me comparable now? Grayness will not tolerate talented and strong near him and under him. The level of her associates (accomplices) is Serdyukov, Medvedev.
                1. dmb
                  dmb 11 September 2015 10: 48 New
                  -1
                  Dear Victor, name at least one of my comments in which I would approvely speak about the capitalist society in general and the current government in particular. When I talk about Stalinism, I do this in order to jointly understand what was the reason for the temporary victory of the counter-revolution, which threw our country back to them. But it is necessary to understand this so that when the revolution wins again (contrary to the wishes of the shopkeepers, who make up the bulk of the fans of the current Leader, then they will not repeat the same mistakes that cost the people a lot of bloodshed in vain.
              4. user
                user 11 September 2015 15: 27 New
                0
                Well, dear, but rather, I will start with the phrase.


                Verbal diarrhea grows stronger. And as for the selection of personnel, Stalin would have to learn something more, by the way, Khrushchev’s elective position (as well as everyone who is now reproaching I.V. Stalin) everyone whom Joseph Vissarionovich picked up worked until the end, almost all died his own death in a very old age, and interestingly everyone was busy with affairs in spite of all kinds of changes in the party leadership (after his death, Khrushchev made an attempt to outrun Stalin - such as a report at the 20th Congress on behalf of the people nominated by him, but no one began to do this, although he was still against the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee act, no one jumped up "what you please," the current critics still need to learn from them), but such as Gorbachev put forward a party apparatus.
                1. theodore rasp
                  theodore rasp 11 September 2015 16: 19 New
                  +2
                  By the way, the entire Khrushchev’s campaign to “debunk the cult of the personality of Stalin” fits perfectly with Lombrazo’s formula: “The killer exposes the victim as a fiend of hell to justify his own meanness.”
            2. theodore rasp
              theodore rasp 11 September 2015 16: 11 New
              +1
              Stalin selected personnel based solely on the professional qualities of the candidates. And, characteristically, party membership was not mandatory.
          2. Starik72
            Starik72 9 September 2015 17: 55 New
            +18
            DMB. I will answer you, Khrushchev, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and others, were not the PRODUCT, as you write, of this system, but simply DIGITS. It is not for nothing that people say: They are not born degenerates, but become in the process of life. And they also say that power and permissiveness give rise to degenerates.
            1. Penzyac
              Penzyac 9 September 2015 20: 28 New
              +6
              Quote: Starik72
              DMB. I will answer you, Khrushchev, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and others, were not the PRODUCT, as you write, of this system, but simply DIGITS. It is not for nothing that people say: They are not born degenerates, but become in the process of life. And they also say that power and permissiveness give rise to degenerates.

              Geeks, they are, of course, geeks, but the System could not defend themselves from them, could not recognize and prevent them, such as they to the top, from coming to ours, and not their regret ...
            2. shershen
              shershen 11 September 2015 09: 23 New
              0
              Heredity is also very influential. You can’t throw chains from DNA. Aspen will not give birth to an orange.
          3. Cleric
            Cleric 9 September 2015 17: 55 New
            +10
            That is why Stalin, from time to time, carried out purges. He would have had the goal of autocracy, would not have put so much effort into reviving the country.
            1. Penzyac
              Penzyac 9 September 2015 20: 40 New
              +2
              Quote: Cleric
              That is why Stalin, from time to time, carried out purges. He would have had the goal of autocracy, would not have put so much effort into reviving the country.

              Unfortunately, the performers of these "purges" themselves were far from always "pure" ...
              What, for example, was the notorious Mehlis better than the "enemies of the people" he cleaned? In my opinion, there was much more harm to the common cause from such “cleaners” than there was any benefit, if at all ...
              But there were, besides the class-correct active idiots, the real, and, as it turned out, most dangerous enemies - opportunists! An enemy lurking is often much more dangerous than an open enemy and an executive idiot ...
          4. Penzyac
            Penzyac 9 September 2015 20: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: dmb
            Well, what does this example of yours mean in the light of my comment? And if we are to be completely honest, I would like to know the source in which this dialogue is given. Khrushchev was a lackey, nurtured by the Stalinist personnel system. And as is customary among lackeys, he took full revenge on the Master after the death of the latter. The Gorbachevs, Yeltsins and Yakovlevs are also a product of this system.

            Unfortunately, you are right too ...
      3. Seryoga DV
        Seryoga DV 9 September 2015 16: 37 New
        +15
        You do not exclude the possibility that when you know what you need to do, then you have to break to power, even
        Curiosity just doesn’t give me rest, but what did Stalin get from the authorities? She did not give him even the opportunity to save her son.
        1. dmb
          dmb 9 September 2015 21: 05 New
          -6
          Dear Sergey, Why are you sure that only the Stalinist version of building socialism was the only true one? And why, along with the suppression of the resistance of the ousted classes, which were really enemies of socialism, yesterday’s comrades-in-arms were destroyed, then those who destroyed the comrades-in-arms, then the next. Or all of them, who went through prisons like Stalin, exile and hard labor at once became German-Japanese. french polish spies. This nonsense is easily perceived by the illiterate fans of Starikov, but for any thinking person, he causes quite reasonable doubts. You ask what Stalin received from the authorities? Yes, he got the main power. For him, power was like money for Rothschild. Well, people of this kind of character cannot say: "Everything is enough, let others." You can talk a lot about this topic, but the scope of the commentary does not allow.
      4. 27091965
        27091965 9 September 2015 18: 00 New
        +6
        Quote: dmb
        I am now about the victims not for the sake of a common cause, but for the struggle for power.



        No one appoints a leader (leader). The leader is one of the most influential individuals as a result of the struggle for power. There can only be one leader in one team (two equivalent leaders can split and, as a rule, split the team into two, three, etc.), therefore, in the struggle for power, the enemy either is destroyed, or recognizes himself defeated and submits to the winner. Only victory in the struggle for power gives the individual the right to dictate his will and implement his plans. True bloodless victories do not happen.
      5. Uncle Joe
        Uncle Joe 9 September 2015 23: 01 New
        +3
        Quote: dmb
        Data?
      6. Dart2027
        Dart2027 9 September 2015 23: 08 New
        +6
        Quote: dmb
        sooner or later he considers himself as such

        But did he consider himself as such? All statements that he was a tyrant come from people whose objectivity, and even awareness, is dubious, to say the least. Of course, he was not an angel, but with clean hands in politics there was nothing to do, but he did not command the globe.
      7. Senior manager
        Senior manager 10 September 2015 06: 15 New
        +4
        And let's look at the results of Stalin’s reign, which, in my opinion, are quite convincing. Power for the sake of power is destructive for the community under its authority, power for the sake of creation is constructive and in the latter case there can be chips, but since a person is essentially a chip, the chips are inevitable.
      8. OlegLex
        OlegLex 11 September 2015 22: 10 New
        +3
        STALIN !!! do we know much about him? really know from sources trustworthy from archival materials?
        Be that as it may, our opinion is not at all subjective, since after his death three generations grew up who poured completely inaccurate information into their ears, where there are ancient Ukrainians with a dug sea, some innocently murdered pyasotmilion gebene.
        And if you remove all the garbage, what happens:
        For seventeen years, he lifted the country from the knees of devastation and won the most bloody and difficult war.
        cleared out all revolutionaries almost without exception, all who stood at the origins of the revolution and took an active part.
        He was a firm and tough leader, was steel without exaggeration. But was he the only one in our history, and Peter Romanov is the first, and Prince Vladimir is the baptist.

        Yes, under the ax with which the tree of history is planed, the chips turn out different and their history is different.
        My grandfathers, the kingdom of heaven to them, have never told me anything bad about Stalin, quite the contrary, despite the fact that one went to war with the 42 to the end in battalion reconnaissance, the other from the same 42 in the concentration camp. Yes, their life was difficult, very difficult, but they lived it with dignity.
    2. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 9 September 2015 15: 51 New
      +17
      Quote: BarBaris
      confrontation between social and "private"

      Someone clings to the personal absolutely not including the head.
      “And my great-grandfather was deported”, for some reason it’s not customary to sort it out yet - for what they deported, where they deported
      A vivid example, my brother and grandfather were shot, and in the "book of memory" he is listed simple school teacher. It sounds wild. But in fact, the grandfather’s brother was not the last participant in the Belarusian analogy of the Skoropadshchina. That is, he participated in the revolution and stood for independent Belarus.
      I understand the essence of the purge for 37 years, despite the loss of even a distant, but relative. But not everyone is given to see. hi
    3. marlin1203
      marlin1203 9 September 2015 15: 55 New
      0
      And then "they are preparing us for thought"? The whole capitalist world lives on the principle of "from particular to general." Having abandoned socialist ideologists, we have chosen the same path, I don’t know whether it’s good or not, but there are so few alternatives in the world. In my opinion, it is impossible to live in a capitalist system according to socialism, where everything earned by yourself and for yourself should be distributed for the common good (so what?). There are examples close to this, for example, the Swedish or Norwegian "evolutionary socialism", but still the basic values ​​there are capitalist, and the whole social paradise, including for migrants, supported by frantic taxes for the indigenous population. This is a material aspect, but everything else is also connected with it - morality, ideology ...
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 29 New
        +3
        Quote: marlin1203
        but it is so and there are few alternatives in the world

        the Russian world was just an alternative to this, the Russian village (80% of the population) always stayed in the community
  3. andr327
    andr327 9 September 2015 15: 11 New
    +11
    Inspired: the soldier is strong in the ranks!
    1. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 9 September 2015 15: 36 New
      +13
      Quote: andr327
      Inspired: the soldier is strong in the ranks!

      It also inspired:
      "Woe to one,
      one is not a warrior -
      every hefty
      him lord
      and even weak
      if two.
      And if the
      to the party
      small crowded -
      surrender, enemy
      stand still
      and lie down!
      The consignment -
      one million hands
      compressed
      into one
      thunderous fist. "
      Mayakovsky
  4. Alex66
    Alex66 9 September 2015 15: 11 New
    +6
    Unfortunately, after the collapse of the USSR, those came to power who have their own shirt closer to their bodies and essentially nothing is changing now.
    1. olimpiada15
      olimpiada15 9 September 2015 15: 48 New
      +7
      May phrase
      "Now those and their followers (mainly relatives) are in power who ruined the USSR, to whom their shirt has always been closer to the body and now nothing is changing and is unlikely to change."
      sounds more accurate?
      1. Sling cutter
        Sling cutter 9 September 2015 15: 52 New
        +31
        Recently, I often regret that I didn’t have a chance to be born in the 1920s, in order to personally become a contemporary of those great people who created a people's republic by blood and then.
        Rise to the attack: “For Homeland”, and then either die, clearly knowing why, or survive, and after the victory rebuild the country, live modestly, but humanly, sincerely be friends, believe in a bright future and spare nothing for it build ....
        But it did not happen ...
        Probably the worst thing for my generation was to live on a break, at the very edge of the transition from Light to Darkness, half life there and half life here.
        Will there be enough for us that inner charge of the Great Victories that nourished Us in order to withstand the current obscurantism and Darkness that has seized our Motherland?
        Is there enough common sense to figure out what is “white” and what is “black”?
        Indeed, it is Our generation that is the extreme that forced the USSR, We are the last “guardians” of its ideals, Our last line, there is nowhere to go “behind Moscow”, and before Us the enemy is cunning, treacherous, deceitful, greedy and merciless and with it only unbridled Darkness.
        And if we ourselves do not give ourselves order No. 227, then there will be no one else to give it!
        Either we are rebuilding the Soviet country, having pushed off from the last frontier, or a shameful slow extinction.
        And here already everyone decides for himself.
        1. 12345
          12345 9 September 2015 16: 41 New
          +8
          support
        2. bastard
          bastard 9 September 2015 17: 57 New
          +11
          Quote: Stroporez
          Either we are rebuilding the Soviet country, having pushed off from the last frontier, or a shameful slow extinction.


          I also see no other way to get the country out of the swamp of liberalism, only the restoration of the socialist system.
          It’s not a topic, but it inspired: in the Kremlin, Putin now has soldiers dressed in old uniforms, such as a tradition, but I had a thought that soon the Duma deputies would soon also wear boyar hats and fur coats with long sleeves and they would write down serf souls, which is also a tradition , However.

          I am a terrible person.
          1. Vasilenko Vladimir
            Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 32 New
            +6
            Quote: villain
            I also see no other way to get the country out of the swamp of liberalism, only the restoration of the socialist system.

            the question is what to understand by this concept, under Vissarionych there were collective farms and artels and a state farm, the bald half-fool completely abolished all the particulars and collective farms essentially turned into state farms
          2. Penzyac
            Penzyac 9 September 2015 20: 54 New
            -2
            Quote: villain
            .
            It’s not a topic, but it inspired: in the Kremlin, Putin now has soldiers dressed in old uniforms, such as a tradition, but I had a thought that soon the Duma deputies would soon also wear boyar hats and fur coats with long sleeves and they would write down serf souls, which is also a tradition , However.

            I am a terrible person.

            Yes, let the fur coats get pulled on, but warmer. The main thing is that after that some simple electrician cut down all the air conditioners in such a Duma, to enlighten the brain ...
          3. Kombrig
            Kombrig 12 September 2015 00: 22 New
            +1
            Quote: villain
            and a thought flashed through me that soon, too, boyar hats and fur coats with long sleeves would be pulled on the Duma deputies and serfs would be written off, too, because it’s a tradition, however.


            Introduced. I recalled a joke ...
            Putin gathered the government and said: “Well, gentlemen, we are all not poor people, we have provided for ourselves and our children for how many lives, is it time to think about people?”
            A cry from the audience: - Yes, Vladimir Vladimirovich, a shower of three hundred would not hurt ....
        3. Starik72
          Starik72 9 September 2015 18: 00 New
          +3
          Sling cutter! I completely agree and support you!
          1. Sling cutter
            Sling cutter 9 September 2015 18: 41 New
            +5
            Quote: Starik72
            Starik72

            Quote: villain
            bastard

            Quote: 12345
            12345

            Boys !!!
            Thank you for your support!
            NOBODY EXCEPT US ! soldier
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tambov Wolf
      Tambov Wolf 9 September 2015 16: 40 New
      +9
      You were a little mistaken. After Stalin, this whole thing started, it came to senility during the Gorbachev years and the USSR was covered with a copper basin under the cries of “cheers” at the congress of the “party” and the Soviet Union. And thugs were executed in Belovezhskaya Pushcha.
    3. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 9 September 2015 20: 01 New
      +9
      Those who ALWAYS come to power are those who, firstly, want to get power, and secondly, they can get it. We have the holy faith in our heads that a person who has won a fierce competition for this very power is eager for it solely for the public good. In Russia, the people always loved to believe in fairy tales and the good king. And you didn’t think that those who are most often eager for power are those who are ready to use it not only for the public good and most often those who are ready to use the most forbidden methods to win are victorious in the competition. Look around, how many decent people have power? Here the majority will talk about good Putin and bad deputies and the thief of officials around him. This is a modern interpretation of the tale of the good king. Although there are still those whom the current situation still does not suit and they believe in a good king - a new Stalin who will not only be good himself, but also disperse the thieves and other enemies of the people around him and then we will certainly be happy. Why in Russia such a strong faith in a good king of the mind I can’t imagine. Our glorious literary classics wrote about it hundreds of years ago, but nothing has changed. How wise words are still true that every nation receives the ruler that it deserves. If you want your ruler to act not in personal interests, but in public ones, you need to create a system in which power is accountable and controlled by society from the bottom to the top, and most importantly, it is up to you to control the power yourself, and not dream of a good king.
      1. noWAR
        noWAR 9 September 2015 22: 44 New
        +2
        Oh Nikolai, your utopia and God’s ears.
      2. Dart2027
        Dart2027 9 September 2015 23: 14 New
        +2
        Quote: Nikolai K
        it is necessary to create a system in which power is accountable and controlled by society from the bottom to the top, and most importantly, it is up to the authorities to control

        And how do you imagine that?
        Offhand, to do this, you need to:
        - had full access to all information regarding state governance processes, regardless of their level of secrecy;
        - was a professional in economics, politics, military affairs, and a host of different disciplines to understand what and how to do.
        Really? The good king is somehow more real.
        1. Nikolay K
          Nikolay K 10 September 2015 08: 48 New
          +1
          If we are talking about the absolute control of the people over power, this is, of course, utopia. The same as faith in a good king. But the greater the control, the higher the likelihood that the king’s actions will coincide with the interests of the people. And for this it is necessary to change the country's governance system and, moreover, change the people themselves, the process is a long, by and large eternal. The current management system was thoroughly redrawn by Putin for himself in order to concentrate power. At that time, it was partly justified. But what do we have now? Instead of direct elections of State Duma deputies, people are offered to vote for abstract parties, from which "worthy" representatives like Kabaeva then fall into the Duma. People no longer choose governors for a long time. In most cities, business powers were taken from the mayors and transferred to the appointed city managers. The entire vertical of power is built from top to bottom, the most important thing is how the budget is distributed. Formally, people directly choose only one person - the president. But in reality, the political field is cleared and there is simply no one to choose from. At the same time, there is no any legitimate form of control over the authorities or just expressing their opinions. Not only rallies and demonstrations are de facto banned, but also the expression of their opinions on social networks. And where are we going next? Suppose now the good king Putin is in power. And if what happens to him? All the fullness of power will pass to some kind of Dima iPhone. How do you like these prospects? Naturally, many of the "elite" will not like this either, a bickering will begin for the imperial throne, and as a result we get the collapse of the country, as is often the case with empires.
        2. Nikolay K
          Nikolay K 10 September 2015 09: 06 New
          +1
          What options do I offer? Firstly, a complete reform of the management system. In reality, people cannot control the governor or president. They can only influence their closest associates, those whom they voted for and who are accountable to them. Therefore, the vertical of power should be built from the bottom up, grow from people. In Russia, it was called the community. People should directly choose those who are directly involved in resolving their household issues. In turn, representatives elected by people choose from among those who will rule the city, then the region, and finally the country. Most importantly, the budget should be distributed from the bottom up. those. if it is necessary to build a hospital on a regional scale, the decision to allocate money for this is made by deputies of the city-regional level. However, given the scale of Russia, such a power vertical will not be very stable. The country will need a single core - a directly elected president, who will perform, first of all, control functions with the subordination of law enforcement agencies, the army, etc. In fact, in Russia there should be two power verticals: economic from the bottom up and controlling from the top down.
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 10 September 2015 19: 07 New
            +2
            Quote: Nikolai K
            They can only influence their immediate environment.

            I can’t vouch for the villages, but in cities people of their neighbors do not always know their names. About a hundred years ago it was somewhat different.
            Quote: Nikolai K
            But in reality, the political field is cleaned up and there’s simply no one to choose from

            And it always happens. Power is a very dirty and dangerous thing, so at the top there will always be their showdowns and the most dangerous ones will reach the peaks, and not the kind and conscientious ones. Machiavelli wrote well about the presence of several parties - the weakest will join the external enemy, and the rest will lose.
      3. bastard
        bastard 10 September 2015 10: 38 New
        +2
        Quote: Nikolai K
        If you want your ruler to act not in personal interests, but in public ones, you need to create a system in which power is accountable and controlled by society from the bottom to the top, and most importantly, it is up to you to control the power yourself, and not dream of a good king.

        It was for an attempt to organize a referendum under the motto “For responsible authority” and “You have chosen - you are to judge” and were arrested by order of Yu. Mukhin, A. Sokolov and V. Parfyonov. Filed under extremism.
      4. MrK
        MrK 10 September 2015 19: 18 New
        +4
        Quote: Nikolai K
        If you want your ruler to act not in personal interests, but in public ones, you need to create a system in which power is accountable and controlled by society from the bottom to the top, and most importantly, it is up to you to control the power yourself, and not dream of a good king.


        Too many Stalin are accused of “craving” power. But there is nothing shameful, bad, negative in the desire for power! In itself, this desire is an understandable thing and in no way worthy of blame. Another thing is that motives, motives and methods can be completely different, from excusable to unacceptable.
        Simply put, a close acquaintance with the life and biography of Stalin allows us to make an unambiguous conclusion: of course, he sought power, but he did not long for it.
        Firstly, he several times resigned from his post as general secretary in the conditions when he did not have full power at all, and they could have accepted the resignation.
        Secondly, which is much more significant, Stalin always chose for himself - or he was entrusted with, and he accepted without any resistance - those areas where it was required that was inconspicuous to the public, completely unknown to the majority, but heavy, hellishly hard work.
        People striving for power for the sake of power, seized by the very thirst for power, behave completely differently. And they choose other areas where a career can be made a hundred times faster, spending a hundred times less labor and sweat.
    4. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 30 New
      +1
      Quote: Alex66
      Unfortunately, those who came to power after the collapse of the USSR came closer to their bodies

      unfortunately they came about the Union and that’s why it fell apart
  5. Kalinvagen
    Kalinvagen 9 September 2015 15: 14 New
    +11
    It is necessary to tell such things in schools, so that from an early age right thoughts are poured into our heads. soldier
    1. KBR109
      KBR109 9 September 2015 15: 18 New
      +2
      Useless. The dissonance between the declared and embodied in life will not lead to anything good.
      1. 34 region
        34 region 9 September 2015 16: 02 New
        +6
        CBD 109! 15.18. The dissonance between the declared and the incarnation ... What is this about? Just recently, they declared capitalist abundance and highly efficient private business. And what are the incarnations of these declarations? Crises, wars, hunger, crime ... Doesn’t this happen under capitalism?
      2. Penzyac
        Penzyac 9 September 2015 20: 56 New
        0
        Quote: KBR109
        Useless. The dissonance between the declared and embodied in life will not lead to anything good.

        But why? Win either one or the other. Vraskaryak will not live long ...
    2. ALEA IACTA EST
      ALEA IACTA EST 9 September 2015 20: 06 New
      0
      Quote: Kalinvagen
      right thoughts poured into my head

      Give people accurate, impartial information, and they will draw their own conclusions.
      1. Vasilenko Vladimir
        Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 35 New
        0
        Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
        Give people accurate, impartial information, and they will draw their own conclusions.

        the question is what conclusions will be drawn, it all depends on education
        today I read a cool article by a dill blogger, he found a photo where the Ishilovites pray in different directions and where the Russians are fighting on the Ishilov’s side, the conclusion from the received impartial information is deadly - the igil was created in the FSB
      2. Uncle Joe
        Uncle Joe 10 September 2015 00: 14 New
        +3
        Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
        Give people accurate, impartial information, and they will draw their own conclusions.


        Gref German Oskarovich

        990-1993 - graduate student of the Faculty of Law, Leningrad University. The supervisor of studies at German Gref was Anatoly Sobchak.

        1991 - Legal Advisor to the Committee for Economic Development and Property of the Administration of Petrodvorets (St. Petersburg).

        992 - Head of the Petrodvorets District Agency of the Property Management Committee of the Administration of St. Petersburg. The Chairman of the Property Management Committee is the Deputy Head of the Administration of the Petrodvorets District of St. Petersburg.

        1994 - Deputy Chairman - Director of the Department of Real Estate, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee for the Management of City Property Administration (KUGI) of St. Petersburg.

        In the March 26, 2000 presidential election, Vladimir Putin won. On May 7, he took office and on May 17 appointed Mikhail Kasyanov as Prime Minister. PDuring the formation of the government, Kasyanov Gref was invited to the post of Minister of Economic Development created specially for him..
  6. emercom1979
    emercom1979 9 September 2015 15: 16 New
    +11
    The article is a huge plus. I imagined if I could do something similar for the sake of the Fatherland ... And I was horrified. I wouldn’t draw much, despite the specifics of my work ... But what about ordinary people for whom the work of rescuers and other extreme, responsible professions is already a feat?
  7. Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 9 September 2015 15: 19 New
    +4
    Konstantin says the right thing.
  8. afdjhbn67
    afdjhbn67 9 September 2015 15: 20 New
    +11
    And Stalin noticed from the taboo topics coming out recently, obviously everyone is tired of the liberals with their snot .. article plus
    1. rf xnumx
      rf xnumx 9 September 2015 15: 35 New
      +21
      Quote: afdjhbn67
      And Stalin noticed from the taboo topics coming out recently, obviously everyone is tired of the liberals with their snot .. article plus
      Time will put everything in its place
      1. marlin1203
        marlin1203 9 September 2015 16: 00 New
        +2
        "Cruel age, cruel hearts"
    2. ALEA IACTA EST
      ALEA IACTA EST 9 September 2015 20: 08 New
      +2
      Quote: afdjhbn67
      Stalin recently leaves taboo topics

      I hope that soon people will forever throw off the shackles, whose name is "taboo."
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. Penzyac
      Penzyac 9 September 2015 21: 10 New
      +3
      Quote: afdjhbn67
      And Stalin noticed from the taboo topics coming out recently, obviously everyone is tired of the liberals with their snot .. article plus

      The main thing is to know and tell the whole truth, from all sides, and not to replace some myths with others, directly opposite (as in dill) ...
      A conscious choice is always better and more reliable than the forced one (in one way or another imposed) ...
  9. 020205
    020205 9 September 2015 15: 22 New
    -15
    . Pavlik placed the interests of society above the interests of blood.
    Personally, I don’t agree, he didn’t like the family, I could have rolled back to where he was comfortable! Personally, I will never give up my blood for the interests of society and the state !!!
    1. 34 region
      34 region 9 September 2015 16: 05 New
      +4
      020205! 15.22. Actually, Dad dumped off Pavlik, leaving them with his mother. You, too, like Pavlik Morozov would have left you dad and go to another.
      1. 020205
        020205 9 September 2015 22: 00 New
        -1
        I didn’t say specifically about Pavlik! He acted as he considered necessary! It’s just that I will never do it anyway !!!
    2. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 9 September 2015 20: 37 New
      +4
      Quote: 020205
      Personally, I will never give up my blood for the interests of society and the state !!!

      that is, you exchange a field marshal for a lieutenant and as a result, ditch a couple of divisions of other people's children ?!
      and most likely you will not face such a dilemma because your son will not be at the front
      1. 020205
        020205 9 September 2015 22: 03 New
        -9
        Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
        that is, you exchange a field marshal for a lieutenant and as a result, ditch a couple of divisions of other people's children ?!
        and most likely you will not face such a dilemma because your son will not be at the front

        I can kill a couple of divisions of other people's children as well, especially if the interests of these divisions threaten my family! I do not care about society and the state if the personal interests of the family are at stake! Family and native blood is what matters !!!
        1. Uncle Joe
          Uncle Joe 10 September 2015 00: 18 New
          +5
          Quote: 020205
          I can kill a couple of divisions of other people's children as well, especially if the interests of these divisions threaten my family! I do not care about society and the state if the personal interests of the family are at stake! Family and native blood is what matters !!!
          Where are you, DMB? Where is your rejection of the "Stalinist" methods? laughing

          Teach 020205 To Love Homeland Properly laughing
          1. Sling cutter
            Sling cutter 10 September 2015 00: 54 New
            +5
            Quote: Uncle Joe
            Teach 020205 To Love Homeland Properly

            Comrade, it would be possible if he got into my platoon lol
          2. 020205
            020205 11 September 2015 10: 31 New
            -1
            Where are you, DMB? Where is your rejection of the "Stalinist" methods? laughing

            Teach 020205 To Love Homeland Properly
            And what are you painting? To love your homeland, first of all, I love my family! Do you have children? Are you ready to sacrifice them for the sake of the whim of a new ruler who says that it should be so? I don’t!
            1. Uncle Joe
              Uncle Joe 11 September 2015 14: 12 New
              +1
              Quote: 020205
              And what are you painting?
              Have you been moonlighting for a long time?

              To love my homeland, first of all, I love my family!
              Yes, nobody cares about your family - and rightly so: because of who you are, with such an approach as yours, you are not able to educate normal people.
              And this means that you and yourself and your family have already been identified as enemies of the people, and I congratulate you on this.
  10. EvgNik
    EvgNik 9 September 2015 15: 23 New
    +7
    "" And what does our “de-stabilizer” see in this story? He sees a terrible, unnatural picture. He sees a country where even close people knock on each other, surrender to each other, renounce each other. ""
    In Europe, in the states, in general in the West, it is commonplace to knock on neighbors. But here we are knocking on someone is considered a shame. I understood that this is an answer to an article I have not read. But for the answer itself +.
  11. am808s
    am808s 9 September 2015 15: 29 New
    +3
    For some reason, it seemed to me that few people think about it and understand it, considered itself a relic of the past era.
    1. the polar
      the polar 9 September 2015 19: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: am808s
      For some reason, it seemed to me that few people think about it and understand it, considered itself a relic of the past era.

      Today, many millions think so, and many more millions think so. And tomorrow, many tens of millions will think so.
  12. pts-m
    pts-m 9 September 2015 15: 33 New
    +1
    it’s not for nothing that they say ... everyone has their own logic of reasoning ... until you feel disbelief in fairy tales in your own skin.
  13. Barberry
    Barberry 9 September 2015 15: 45 New
    +14
    Quote: dmb
    And not for the Soviet power, because it is a common cause, but for its personal. And no matter from what motives (even from the best), Stalin fought for it.

    Power in all hierarchies belongs to one person. Even the issue of community council comes down to a summary of the leader, elder, chief priest, etc. So that the struggle for power is always a struggle of the individual. And here it is very important from what motives a person fights.

    If you take into account your "shadow on the fence", then Stalin fought for power personally for himself. Then the question is: where is the Stalin clan today? Where are the houses, apartments, cottages, yachts, aircraft of Stalin? Where, in the end, are the innumerable riches of Stalin as an attribute of personal gain and superiority for the sake of which they are striving for power?

    And the victims ... this is always a "good" reason to move the arrows ...
    1. corn
      corn 9 September 2015 15: 59 New
      -3
      Quote: BarBaris
      Where, in the end, are the innumerable riches of Stalin as an attribute of personal gain and superiority for the sake of which they are striving for power?

      There, where Khrushchev and Brezhnev.
      They did not fight for personal power out of a feeling of love for their neighbor (especially Khrushchev). Or you will argue with this. Your proof question does not stand the test of logic.
      Psychologically, one can justify the fact that the individual thinks that he will do this (lead) with less evil than others. And this is in the best case. At least some excuse.
      1. Barberry
        Barberry 9 September 2015 16: 52 New
        +3
        Quote: corn
        There, where Khrushchev and Brezhnev.

        G D E ?????
        Quote: corn
        They fought for personal power not out of a love of neighbor

        Please provide an example of the struggle for power because of love for one's neighbor? We will leave Prometheus and Moses as an exception)))
        Quote: corn
        Or you will argue with this.

        Perhaps, but the essence of the dispute is not clear. Prioritize pzhlst.
        Quote: corn
        Your proof question does not stand the test of logic.

        Logic to the studio! Consider.
        Quote: corn
        Psychologically, one can justify the fact that the individual thinks that he will do this (lead) with less evil than others. And this is in the best case. At least some excuse.

        Something primitive. But if such an explanation satisfies you, I have nothing against it, for it is neutral and does not reveal any specific knowledge.
        1. corn
          corn 9 September 2015 17: 14 New
          -4
          Quote: BarBaris
          Consider.

          We, BarBaris, do not know which number.
          In vain you are trying to appropriate the right to speak on behalf of the entire studio.
          Quote: BarBaris
          Something primitive.

          Do you think the psychological explanations of people's actions are primitive? Or am I primitive? Or are you not very competent in psychology?
          "The object of psychology is a combination of various carriers of mental phenomena, the main of which are behavior, activities, relationships people in large and small social groups (from the wiki) "
        2. corn
          corn 9 September 2015 17: 32 New
          0
          Quote: BarBaris
          Quote: corn
          They fought for personal power not out of a love of neighbor
          Please provide an example of the struggle for power because of love for one's neighbor?

          How can I give an example of what I wrote about that cannot be?
          From you, I would like to hear: Why did Stalin need power? The fact that I didn’t argue with you for material benefits and I will repeat: I just noticed that this is not proof of Stalin’s goodness or badness. But for some reason you built a logical chain: If you didn’t get material wealth, then you didn’t fight for personal power. I will quote literally your words: “If you take into account your“ shadow on the fence ”, then Stalin fought for power personally for himself. Then the question : where is the Stalin clan today? ... "
    2. marlin1203
      marlin1203 9 September 2015 16: 02 New
      +6
      To all those who "ruled" in the USSR, taken together, in terms of benefits and profits, they are not even close to standing up with any of the modern oligarchs, even of the middle hand.
      1. corn
        corn 9 September 2015 16: 41 New
        0
        Quote: marlin1203
        not even standing next to any of the modern oligarchs, even the middle hand.

        It is not my fault that the majority measures success or failure only by material goods.
        I heard one interesting phrase: "Money is interesting to a certain limit, and then the power they bring is interesting." Money is one way to gain power. It is impossible to put the ruler in evidence of the goodness or badness: he acquired or did not acquire material wealth for himself and his descendants.
        I think when you will have the opportunity to realize your ideas without material costs for you and your loved ones, you will look at life a little differently.
        And this opportunity gives power. Although Monomakh’s cap is removed with his head, you’ll have to fight for personal power, which in this case is a struggle for life. And here all means are good.
        1. Yuri Y.
          Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 17: 34 New
          +3
          Quote: corn
          You can’t put a ruler as a proof of good or bad - a bird has acquired or not acquired material wealth for himself and his descendants.

          Of course, judged by the achievements of the subordinate system. The power is also different. Power for the sake of business. Power for the sake of power ("I said!"). Power for the sake of profit. Of course, all this can be present immediately in varying proportions and at different periods. The lack of material accumulation and the achievement of the system all the same say why power was needed.
          1. corn
            corn 9 September 2015 18: 06 New
            -2
            Quote: Yuri I.
            Lack of material savings

            It does not mean anything, the presence of huge ones is about dishonesty.

            Quote: Yuri I.
            achievements of the system say all the same for what power was needed.

            Achievements of the system speak about the magnitude and significance of the creators and leaders of the system, but do not talk about the goals of creating the system and the possibility and necessity of reproducing this system in other conditions and with other leaders. God-paradise, Satan-hell. Without God, paradise will cease to be paradise, and without hell, hell will cease to be hell, although the name may remain. Sorry for primitivism.
            1. Yuri Y.
              Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 18: 25 New
              +1
              Quote: corn
              Doesn't say anything

              You translate this value into the category of subjective. Well, if for you there is nothing, then it means nothing.
              Quote: corn
              Achievements of the system speak about the size and significance of the creators and leaders of the system

              Then I spoke only about why power was needed for the creators and leaders (to create and manage). And all about.
              1. corn
                corn 9 September 2015 18: 57 New
                -1
                Quote: Yuri I.
                You translate this value into the category of subjective.

                I will try to explain:
                The appearance of large material values, but also little explained logically, for me speaks of some dishonesty, but the poor (lacking material values) is not a synonym for decency. This judgment cannot be objective, that is, independent of me (the subject). All judgments can only be subjective. As well as personality assessment - any.
                Quote: Yuri I.
                Then I spoke only about why power was needed for the creators and leaders (to create and manage). And all about.

                That is, amuse your own pride? Or am I misunderstanding you?
                1. Yuri Y.
                  Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 19: 13 New
                  +1
                  Quote: corn
                  but a beggar (without material values) is not a synonym for decency

                  We were not talking about the poor, but about the leader of a large state. Take me away.
                  Quote: corn
                  That is, amuse your own pride? Or am I misunderstanding you?

                  Not right. Well, if for you to create and manage it to amuse your vanity, then there are no questions. But of course, self-esteem is always present (in a normal person).
                  1. corn
                    corn 9 September 2015 20: 00 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Yuri I.
                    Well, if for you to create and manage it to amuse your vanity, then there are no questions

                    Quote: Yuri I.
                    Power for the sake of business. Power for the sake of power ("I said!"). Power for the sake of profit.

                    Not about me, about Stalin. We found out: Power for the sake of profit, no. Power for the sake of power, no.
                    There remains power for the sake of business. Who? Creating a strong state? For what?
                    The champion becomes dominant due to the fact that he can say: "I can" note: "And others can not"
                    Quote: Yuri I.
                    about the poor

                    Well, we change the word "beggar" to "ascetic", anyway it will not be synonymous with decency.
                    1. Yuri Y.
                      Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 20: 39 New
                      0
                      Quote: corn
                      There remains power for the sake of business. Who? Creating a strong state? For what?
                      The champion becomes dominant due to the fact that he can say: "I can" note: "And others can not"

                      And that the creation of a strong state is not a matter for an individual of this magnitude. And if you take into account the circumstances and conservation. Selfishness is always present. For the current situation, it may become relevant by the way, looking at Ukraine. Well, God forbid, as you said, his time will not come (in the context of the situation). And where do you get it, although history finds somewhere.
                      Well, we change the word "beggar" to "ascetic", anyway it will not be synonymous with decency.

                      Ascetic is already a principle, at least respect.
                      1. corn
                        corn 9 September 2015 21: 30 New
                        0
                        Quote: Yuri I.
                        And that the creation of a strong state is not a matter for an individual of this magnitude.

                        For what? Do not shirk.
                      2. Yuri Y.
                        Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 21: 40 New
                        0
                        Quote: Yuri I.
                        And if you take into account the circumstances and conservation.

                        That it was. Is always.
                      3. corn
                        corn 9 September 2015 21: 59 New
                        0
                        A strong personality creates a strong state so that it exists.
                        I always thought that the state is a means, not an end.
                        Do not you think that if Stalin created a strong state just for the sake of it, I don’t know what to call it, so as not to offend Stalin, nor you, nor yourself.
                      4. Yuri Y.
                        Yuri Y. 9 September 2015 22: 28 New
                        0
                        Name or think whatever you like. Even as a means, it should be available, at a minimum. But states happen and break up, which almost happened to Russia in the last century (beginning and end). Tell the same Americans or Jews in Israel (especially) that a strong state is a bad target. I see the beginning of the vocabulary is not about anything for me, so I take my leave.
                2. corn
                  corn 9 September 2015 21: 48 New
                  0
                  Quote: Yuri I.
                  Ascetic is already a principle, at least respect.

                  Antonyms: hedonist, epicurean, swinger, lecher, sybarite.
                  The epicurean, the swinger and the sybarite evoke much more respect from me than the ascetic.
                  These three do not reproach me for my some, small pranks and understand that nothing human is alien to us. Ascetic himself does not live and does not allow others to live. I'm not talking about permissiveness.
  14. Cleric
    Cleric 9 September 2015 18: 11 New
    0
    It's funny You push away the argument about the material benefits of power. I agree. What can you say about his act regarding both sons?
    How would you rate the fact that Stalin, being awarded a hero star, almost never wore it, evaluating himself as a star of a social labor hero?
    You correctly refute the arguments in support of Stalin, but do not give your assessment. Let not assessment, but at least a method by which it would be possible to evaluate the activities of such individuals
    1. corn
      corn 9 September 2015 18: 42 New
      +2
      Quote: Cleric
      You correctly refute the arguments in support of Stalin, but do not give your assessment.

      If I could determine a method for evaluating such personalities, I would not sit on this forum.
      I want to hear serious, logical arguments, not the transmission of someone’s thoughts and quotes.
      Stalin is a great person. But the crazy Adik is the same, but the bloodsucker.
      But seriously - Stalin’s time has passed and there is no return and cannot be. And everyone who talks about the need for a return does not cause me a sense of respect.
      Let's talk about what can be done and how. And 99 and 9 tenths of those sitting on the sites will be deep ... I - in the same place. And so there is the opportunity to exercise in dementia, perhaps even wiser.
      Quote: Cleric
      What can you say about his act regarding both sons?

      With regard to my son, I probably would rather, with a high degree of probability, act the same way as Stalin and Jacob, I don’t know, maybe I'm a bad father. I’ll try to ask my son what he thinks about what I would do. Or maybe I won’t ask. Not one Stalin sacrificed his children.
  • Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 9 September 2015 20: 33 New
    +1
    After Hitler, too, there were no endless wealth. Because he, too, was eager for power, not because of money, but for the sake of an idea. But in itself, this fact does not mean that Hitler is good? Not. Why? Well, you tell the whole thing is in the ideas themselves, they were good with Stalin, and bad with Hitler. Therefore, the first killed for the good, and the second killed because the moral and criminal. In this case, this conclusion follows from the axiom that the end justifies the means, which, by the way, were followed by both historical characters, and each of them sincerely believed that his goal was the most correct. The only question is whose purpose was indeed correct, and by whose good intentions the road to hell is lined.
    1. corn
      corn 9 September 2015 20: 59 New
      0
      Quote: Nikolai K
      The only question is whose purpose was indeed correct, and by whose good intentions the road to hell is lined.

      Duc and I are about these two axioms:
      1. A bright future for someone.
      2. Personal power.
      "Axiom (dr. Greek. Ἀξίωμα - statement, position), postulate - the initial position of a theory, accepted within the framework of this theory to be true without requiring proof and used to prove its other provisions ... (From wiki).
      Euclidean geometry is based on the axiom that parallel lines do not intersect.
      Lobachevsky geometry-intersect.
      In a rough approximation.
      But they somehow coexist and in certain cases each bear their own fruits and, most funny, do not cause such reactions as reactions to attitudes towards Joseph the Terrible.
    2. Dart2027
      Dart2027 9 September 2015 23: 19 New
      +1
      Quote: Nikolai K
      After Hitler, there were also untold wealth

      And how do you imagine this? I recall that WWII lost to Hitler, not Stalin
  • tolmachiev51
    tolmachiev51 9 September 2015 15: 49 New
    +4
    The last time, it seems, life has become better — cars, trips abroad, but the worst thing is that we have lost the HUMAN appearance, money, money ..... I remember the times when the door was closed on a stick in the village, now the fence is 2-meter, double metal doors, 2 dogs, and still uncomfortable, which is why nostalgia for the USSR was then respected and loved each other.
    1. arlekin
      arlekin 9 September 2015 16: 11 New
      -1
      Quote: tolmachiev51
      nostalgia for the USSR, then respected and loved each other.


      It’s ridiculous. Milky rivers, sweet and sour banks. Or maybe there were simply no values ​​in the villages in the houses? And why were the zones filled with criminals, mostly thieves? “Old people don’t lie, it seems to them” (c). laughing
      They also say "In the USSR there was a friendship of peoples." Yes, everyone who went through the Soviet Army knows that there was no friendship of peoples, there was only friendship between individual representatives.
      1. Gardamir
        Gardamir 9 September 2015 17: 00 New
        +4
        there were simply no values ​​in the houses
        People were different and others were values.
        the zones were crammed with criminals
        but now they are released according to parole in two months.
        there was no friendship of peoples, was
        We probably served in different army? All the same, they shared on appeals than on fraternities.
        1. arlekin
          arlekin 9 September 2015 17: 55 New
          +1
          We probably served in different army? All the same, they shared on appeals than on fraternities.

          May be. 1987-89 SA, Air Force, OBATO, autorot
          1. corn
            corn 9 September 2015 19: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: arlekin
            Maybe.

            And for Gardamir too.
            In the second half of the 80s the question arose about fraternities in the SA. In a company dominated by one nationality, the "old man" of another nationality could no longer bend the "young" predominant nationality, and this "old man" could be thrown to the "floors" and to the point. I do not say that it was everywhere, but in certain parts - it was.
  • beer-youk
    beer-youk 9 September 2015 15: 49 New
    +1
    The author is a huge plus. The topic is currently more than relevant - burning! And the statement is beyond praise.
  • iury.vorgul
    iury.vorgul 9 September 2015 15: 54 New
    +14
    I put the article a plus, but ... Dear comrade author. Stop following the path of Korotich and Alpervich. If you write about Pavlik Morozov, then at least read Wikipedia first. Yes, Vicki is a garbage dump, but there are plenty of links to the source and you can make up your mind, rather than propagandizing the opinions of people who do not share your views and are the actual enemies of Russia. I already wrote in the comments once again and I will repeat again, Pavel Morozov did not betray anyone and did not write denunciations to his father, but I gave indications of his crimes during the preliminary investigation, as well as many others. Given that the father actually abandoned the family and cohabited with another woman in the same village, and Pavel remained the eldest man in the family, this can hardly be called a betrayal. I do not want to write a big comment, everyone can find the materials and read them.
  • zoknyay82
    zoknyay82 9 September 2015 16: 09 New
    +2
    Quote: dmb
    Yes to hell with it with minuses, they excite me only if for business. Ponder what you have written (the author hardly did this when he wrote). If we were talking about the confrontation between the general and the private and the victims that our people suffered in the name of a common cause, I would not say a word. There is no struggle for a just cause without sacrifices. I am now about the victims, not for the sake of a common cause, but for the struggle for power. And not for the Soviet power, because it is a common cause, but for its personal. And no matter from what motives (even from the best), Stalin fought for it. When a person (even a very smart one) is daily told to lackeys that he is God, he sooner or later considers himself to be such.

    It cannot be assumed that Stalin is personally responsible for the repressions of the innocent, the faceless official is to blame for his selfish interests, ready for an official crime. Putin is also innocent, which is full of innocents in prisons. In the struggle for power, competitors and traitors are established, and not hundreds of thousands or millions of ordinary people.
    1. corn
      corn 9 September 2015 19: 30 New
      0
      Quote: zoknyay82
      the faceless official is to blame

      The commander of the company is not to blame for the unrest in the company ???
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 9 September 2015 23: 21 New
        0
        Quote: corn
        company commander is not to blame

        The company commander is to blame, but the corps commander is no longer at all.
  • screw cutter
    screw cutter 9 September 2015 16: 34 New
    +2
    It’s old as the world of Divide and Conquer, and what difference does it make to separate, it’s easier to kill everybody, this is the meaning of society. And that’s why the West has always lost to Russia. In Russia, people have always lived in villages, and in the West they have farms "own shirt closer to the body" in the genes, they are just different.
    1. corn
      corn 9 September 2015 19: 31 New
      +1
      Quote: screw cutter
      And that is why the west has always lost to Russia

      ??
  • Old warrior
    Old warrior 9 September 2015 16: 39 New
    +5
    Good article, correct. Only now Pavlik Morozov did not betray anyone (thoroughly fucked up with us halfwits, the brains of intellectual creatures). They killed him and his little brother for their father’s share of the inheritance, brutally killed (the criminal case materials help you) and for some reason no one in this case drew attention to this (surprised?). So, it’s possible to kill children like Pavlik it’s necessary, but the fact that his father sat down to help the terrorists is wrong, and the “family is good”: an uncle kills two children by inflicting numerous stab wounds, one in front of the other, grandfather holds them, and grandmother launders blood. Lord liberals! I don’t even wish your children the same.
  • KRIG55
    KRIG55 9 September 2015 16: 39 New
    +2
    It is difficult to predict how a person will behave a minute before his head is cut off ... one starts singing the international, the other starts a terrible diarrhea. In a hopeless situation, a hare can attack a bear.
  • Shurale
    Shurale 9 September 2015 16: 43 New
    +1
    When in the 90 they kicked Pavlik Morozov (traitor, bastard, geek), this ritual scolding also had a special, cunning meaning. Pavlik surrendered his native people, who were hucksters, grain speculators and sadists. Surrendered to the state - because not only his own family suffered from these people. Pavlik placed the interests of society above the interests of blood.


  • tokens2
    tokens2 9 September 2015 16: 43 New
    +2
    Author Konstantin Semin? TV presenter of VGTRK. ?
    Suggested a chip theory? lol
    I propose a bush theory.
    As soon as a separate sliver begins to worry about its own skin, the entire forest is guaranteed to disappear.

    What is a forest? WHERE DOES FOREST BEGIN?
    From a bush. And not from a chip.
    Where each bush "knows" how best to "develop".
    They say the forest knows how to talk ... by mouth.
    With a sliver, the forest can only moan ... in pain.
    Remember the scene when the rear huckster comes to a hospital full of wounded and asks to give him a car - ride with a wench?

    pinching, sliver, woman ...
    article smoothly from the general (five-year plan, GoERLO) grew into a private one.
    by pinching laughing
    History moves in a spiral, as well as weapons invented by humanity.
    They came up with a torpedo. They came up with a rocket.
    We stopped ... we thought, we smoked. And we decided to combine a rocket and a torpedo.
    With the plan and the economy as well. They will think it over. And combine the best with the best.
    Without noise and dust. Without tear and cries of "slivers".
    Like a bush laughing
    1. noWAR
      noWAR 9 September 2015 23: 13 New
      0
      You should write novels for those who like to break the brain.
      1. tokens2
        tokens2 10 September 2015 08: 37 New
        0
        You should write novels for those who like to break the brain.
        Et che
        Engels and Marx steamed ... they broke.
        So to speak thoroughly).
        Lenin, too, was completely covered in his "works."
        And we suffer from these classics, we. People.
        Turning into "capital."
  • Stauffenberg
    Stauffenberg 9 September 2015 16: 47 New
    +1
    I recommend the author to read the book "Sliver" Zazubrina. Informative. And then he had virtually suffered, spilled blood. ..
  • ingenera
    ingenera 9 September 2015 16: 57 New
    +4
    The article is correct and almost on time (a little earlier). But someone will answer the people WHAT are we building? Capitalism? Then everything written in vain. Some kind of "social" state? Then the “rich” should invest more in their own economy, and not in overseas banks. Announce the goal, but it will not rust for us. And then, everything is somehow amorphous and vague.
    1. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 10 September 2015 00: 39 New
      0
      Quote: ingenera
      But someone will answer the people WHAT are we building?
      The goal is to tell us

  • Russian_German
    Russian_German 9 September 2015 18: 24 New
    +2
    Well, the article is correct. Here in Ukraine, the people went to the Maidan not for private, but for public interests. And in Donbas, Lugansk they go to war, not for themselves, but for the public interest. In my opinion, the article promotes elementary fascism, hiding behind the noble prevalence of the public over the private. Of course, the public must be above the private, such is the law of nature, if you want the law of the survival of species. But we are people and all the mass shootings and illegal persecution, transient trio courts, this is fascism. Everything should be within the framework of law and humanity.
    And my great-grandfather was deported ”, for some reason it’s not customary to sort it out yet - for what they deported, where they deported.

    My grandfather and grandmother and their entire family were deported, like 2 million other Volga Germans. Well, of course, all the traitors were asleep and saw how to help Hitler. So let the author explain to me what their fault is? Sent to the Urals. You yourself understand the war, there are no cars, first of all, military trains and trains with evacuated factories passed. Deprotation began in October, the cold was understandable, it took us a long time. They brought, unloaded in the field in the winter. They ordered to build a dwelling, dugouts from auxiliary material. And immediately to work under escort after work home improvement. A lot of people died in five years. Who cares, look in the internet. The bill is tens of thousands. You can minus. But as Aristotle said: - "Plato is my friend, but truth is dearer!" He who has a mind is not guided by emotions.
    1. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 10 September 2015 00: 42 New
      0
      Quote: Russian_German
      In my opinion, the article promotes elementary fascism
      Fascism (Italian: fascismo, from fascio - bundle, bundle, association)
      the political current that arose in the capitalist countries during the general crisis of capitalism and expressing the interests of the most reactionary and aggressive forces of the imperialist bourgeoisie. F. in power is the terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary forces of monopoly capital, carried out with the aim of preserving the capitalist system. The most important distinguishing features of F. are the use of extreme forms of violence to suppress the working class and all working people, militant anti-communism, chauvinism, racism, the widespread use of state-monopoly methods of regulating the economy, maximum control over all manifestations of the public and personal life of citizens, ramified connections with quite significant part of the population that is not related to the ruling classes, the ability, through nationalist and social demagogy, to mobilize and politically activate it in the interests of the exploiting system (the mass base of France is mainly the middle layers of capitalist society).
  • Starik72
    Starik72 9 September 2015 18: 24 New
    0
    Thanks to the author for the article and a deep bow! If only this article and this hour could be published on the pages of the media and shown on TV, maybe people would shake themselves and start thinking. Today they showed on TV and excitedly praised how the Queen of England has been sitting on the throne for 68 years, or broadcasting about princesses and princes , and their children, how great they live. And what good did THEY do for the common people, and why DOES IT BE PURPOSED? I have a question. And why the media and TV do not show and do not ask how life is simple PEOPLE ??? The answer is simple: because THEY are of the so-called BLUE BLOOD, and we are BLACK BONE, and the herd. Excuse me, maybe I wrote rudely and tactfully, but I spoke out because it was painful. Respectfully to all.
  • Weyland
    Weyland 9 September 2015 18: 27 New
    +6
    The article, at first glance, is not bad, but the devil is in the details:

    Even if you knock out your teeth and fry the heels of Giordano Bruno, if you make him choke on blood and abandon all his heresy, the Sun will not begin to rotate around the Earth

    The author actually knows what they burned Giordano Bruno for? fool

    However, Pavlik’s father and grandfather safely sat back from the Gulag. The child was less fortunate.

    The author clearly regrets that Pavlik’s father, who was imprisoned for 10 years, was only for helping fists, "safely leaned back" in parole after three years - moreover, was awarded the order for striking labor? He certainly didn’t kill Pavlik, because during the murder he had long been "pulling"! At the same time, grandfather Sergey (partner in crime killings) did not "lean back", but died in prison, cousin Danil (immediate killer) shot. In 1999, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia came to the conclusion that the murder of Pavlik Morozov is purely criminal in nature, and the killers cannot be rehabilitated for political reasons. And what is the author dissatisfied with?
    I would understand if the article was written 20-25 years ago, when all liberal scum was pouring mud at the unfortunate Pavlik - but now who remembers their vile fabrications (not to mention believing them)? Is it possible that the marsh belolentochniki ...

    PS: As for Stalin, it’s not bad to take an example from the Chinese, with their official assessment of Mao: "70% good and right, 30% bad and harmful". On the one hand, it allows you to reject everything" bad and harmful "- and on the other hand, deservedly recognizes Mao as a great leader (for the balance in his favor is more than twofold, and only he who does nothing is not mistaken!)
    By the way - Attila, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, Dracula, Duke of Alba, Cromwell, Napoleon are considered national heroes in their homeland. Which of them surpassed Stalin in humanity? And if Hitler won - do you think anyone in Europe would dare to expose his crimes? Ha ha ha ...
    1. Oldwiser
      Oldwiser 9 September 2015 21: 18 New
      0
      “The result is the head of everything” is a paraphrase of the same principle about the end and the means. If the result was achieved by criminal means, then the price is worthless. "The moral law within us" is what matters. And the daily hard work of self-improvement - as an approximation to this "moral law" - this is the only acceptable way to serve the common good.
  • soivmser
    soivmser 9 September 2015 18: 33 New
    -2
    Konstantin Semin is one of the Heroes of our time!
  • Russian_German
    Russian_German 9 September 2015 18: 50 New
    -1
    Quote: zoknyay82
    Quote: dmb
    Yes to hell with it with minuses, they excite me only if for business. Ponder what you have written (the author hardly did this when he wrote). If we were talking about the confrontation between the general and the private and the victims that our people suffered in the name of a common cause, I would not say a word. There is no struggle for a just cause without sacrifices. I am now about the victims, not for the sake of a common cause, but for the struggle for power. And not for the Soviet power, because it is a common cause, but for its personal. And no matter from what motives (even from the best), Stalin fought for it. When a person (even a very smart one) is daily told to lackeys that he is God, he sooner or later considers himself to be such.

    It cannot be considered that Stalin is personally responsible for the repressions of the innocent, the faceless official is to blame for his selfish interests, ready for an official crime. Putin is also not to blame for the fact that there are a lot of innocents in prisons. In the struggle for power, competitors and traitors are established, and not hundreds of thousands or millions of ordinary people.

    Stop writing nonsense. Stalin is primarily responsible, as a leader, for unjustified repression. Just like Putin, for the Kushchevsoe affair. Well, I do not believe that Stalin was not up to date on how you write faceless officials. Otherwise, the pot is his price as a leader! It’s the same with Putin, well, I don’t believe that the KGB colonel, head of state, for ten years had not seen what was happening in the village of Kushchevskaya. I myself was the leader, the truth of the workshop, and for the whole mess, if it happened on the workshop, or I was responsible for the people’s lives, and not some faceless deputy, mater or foreman!
    1. Uncle Joe
      Uncle Joe 10 September 2015 00: 45 New
      0
      Quote: Russian_German
      Stalin is primarily responsible, as a leader, for unjustified repression
      What was Stalin the leader of, and what is repression? laughing
  • Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 9 September 2015 19: 28 New
    +1
    I liked the article as a commentary ??? ---- for whom? Probably a very large part of the readers will be close to it initially. Since the "people of interest" have gathered. And who is behind the scenes? How are they with them? I wrote about the methods of disseminating information , as a phenomenon of Svidomo. No one was hooked. Stalin to introduce a model of behavior through a movie screen. And now what? But the United States and ours are untouchable. They use modern workbots. Children are crippled !!
  • ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 9 September 2015 19: 54 New
    +1
    While some earnestly idealize, while others equally diligently pour mud, there will be falsifications, provocations and lies.
  • Indifferent
    Indifferent 9 September 2015 19: 56 New
    +1
    Everything seems to be right! You need to die for the people. And they died, with it, in millions. But it’s very uncomfortable to live in a system with such an ideology! It resembles a jungle, where at any moment the subject can die for their homeland. (In the jungle, everyone suddenly eats each other). Everything happens according to the laws of nature.
    I well remember the "happy" Soviet times, where you are just nobody and you can’t call you. No social and political security! Absolutely! You live like a prisoner in a three-tier bunk in a poorly heated barracks, where in winter it is better to sleep dressed. But the prisoner has much more rights! He even has a daily routine. And you have nothing but a rude shout from your boss. Just getting enough sleep is a pipe dream. And this is not a war, not a natural disaster, not the arrival of the planet Nibiru. It is so ... everyday.
    And if you live like this all your life, why the hell does it even live! You have not seen children for months, the wife has been waiting in lines since four in the morning and writes the line number on her palm. Carrying 30 kg bags of potatoes on himself, because there is no one else.
    Therefore, on the one hand, being with the people and dying for the people is good!
    But on the other hand, about the people, those who lead them, you need to think and not forget that the life of every person is not necessarily a daily feat. It is also necessary to give vacations so that people can come to their senses.
    That is why, when the USSR collapsed, there was not a single large officer who would take power into his own hands and arrest the traitors.
  • DPN
    DPN 9 September 2015 21: 26 New
    +1
    Quote: Vasilenko Vladimir
    Quote: BerBer
    The scammer, after the Germans came, became a policeman.

    and here another problem arises - DONATORS, and in the NKVD after all, too, all sorts of people worked both normal and with a fool and those who wanted to curry favor


    No other problem, The problem is WE, the people I, YOU, HE, IT together turned out to be an unimportant country after the USSR.
  • Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 9 September 2015 21: 52 New
    +2
    Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
    While some earnestly idealize, while others equally diligently pour mud, there will be falsifications, provocations and lies.

    I think our people were not ready for quick changes and that everything became visible. Indeed, even under the Soviet regime, there were a lot of things, but in secret. There was also a gap in material capabilities. A culture was obtained. And this shock continues for some when they find out about the features of our constitution.
  • Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 10 September 2015 00: 25 New
    0
    Everything is correctly noticed: our country is powerful when the ideas of collectivism prevail in it, the prevalence of the social principle over the personal one. The opposite came to us from the West, from Geyropa.
    So were those victims justified or not justified that our people (the people of the USSR, the Russian Empire) made in the 20 century? It is entirely possible that we will never be able to unequivocally answer this question. Is it that important? There is no doubt that the victims were huge, but we do not need to constantly look back - we will then remain a country with an unpredictable past. We must look to the future.
    What have all these sacrifices and trials given us? A huge series of national heroes, people whom we will be proud of for centuries, the understanding that we are strong and will be able to bring everything together.
    And about Pavlik Morozov, I do not agree. Betraying his father, no matter how bastard he is, will still remain a betrayal. And the betrayal of the parent is the destruction of the family. What matters here is not who and what Pavlik’s father was, but the fact of the latter’s betrayal. Without a normal strong family there will be no normal state.
  • Radikal
    Radikal 10 September 2015 00: 31 New
    +1
    Quote: ava09
    The article dealt with the unifying morality of the people. Your grandfather is sorry, but in this case, who do you blame - Stalin or the policeman who surrendered his grandfather? But he could be a friend of his grandfather, in an extreme case, familiar. Envy, self-interest, hypocrisy - that is what killed people in those years when the country was preparing for war.

    I agree, only envy, self-interest and hypocrisy - these eternal vices of mankind, unfortunately, did not disappear with the end of the Great Patriotic War, but by now I think have bloomed even more!
  • North
    North 10 September 2015 00: 32 New
    0
    not bad you talked here. who will survive remember this hour in 25 years when they will discuss the current power.
  • Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 10 September 2015 08: 24 New
    +1
    Honest people lived well under Stalin. 99% of the population was truly happy.
    Well, there were always enough dirty tricks too. If all of a sudden now what begins, we ourselves will shoot the liberals and this will be normal. So when power destroys traitors, compradors, collaborators, thieves, etc. - it is right!
  • Olezhek
    Olezhek 10 September 2015 11: 00 New
    0
    The author is right - man is a collective being.
    Alone can live either Gods or Beasts. WITH.
    Whether we like it or not, we have a need for collective action, work for the good.
    Just a reasonable man - was formed in the tribe.
    In what is the weakness of capitalism in its classical sense - it does NOT provide an opportunity to work for the common good.
    Charity, volunteering - garbage it.
    In addition to personal success and even ahead of him, a normal person needs the victory of his sports team, his army, his country ..
    The situation when you can volunteer, lay down your head, and someone will cut the loot on military supplies is disastrous. Destructive for society.
    When everything is measured for money, everything turns into either a baryg or a prostitute.
    Alas, it is.
    But unconditionally the use of socialist, collectivist ideology in modern Russia (even its elements) is puzzling.

    It's like all the Soviet times often plowed for a small price and for the benefit of the power ..
    Now, when an enterprise has a specific owner, with a specific account in a particular bank, such things look very strange.
    Moreover, he is also in no hurry to pay taxes ...
    What for ?
    All in the family ..

    So the social system in Russia has not yet taken shape.
  • yuriy55
    yuriy55 11 September 2015 03: 15 New
    0
    Correctly said:
    Quote: Starik72
    ... They are not born degenerates, but become in the process of life. And they also say that power and permissiveness gives rise to degenerates.


    And more:
    It is painful and hard to admit, but cranes fly if and only if chips fly somewhere in the neighborhood.

    And if they (the cranes) don’t cut their wings ...
  • Traveller
    Traveller 11 September 2015 11: 17 New
    0
    The author formulated what the majority thinks, mentioned Ain Rand with her “Atlant”, in my opinion one of the most destructive books for our consciousness, in our cultural environment, however, the public was always higher than the personal, on the other hand, the Russian person is resourceful and often forgives, this is all sorts of "hucksters" and use
  • Old warrior
    Old warrior 11 September 2015 14: 10 New
    0
    Russian German In my family, NO ONE WAS REPRESSED, but only I was never a grandson (all took the war). You apparently knew your grandfathers and grandmothers, so maybe you will say thanks to Stalin? Judging by your statements, everything was done right then (some kind of malice, however) and it may be a pity that it is not until the end. I believe that my grandfathers who died in the war were much more worthy of Life than your so-called repressed.
  • Xnumx vis
    Xnumx vis 11 September 2015 22: 12 New
    0
    Listen, gentlemen, do you need Stalin? You want to put fat backs on hard bunks .. for the good of the state, like being guarded under guard. Or is everyone crystal clear and not a gram in their mouths, not a centimeter in the ass? I personally do not want to be a sliver in someone’s good. Only in the name of the Motherland and of my own free will. I can give my life! Maybe beautiful words, but it's true!
  • bunchuk
    bunchuk 12 September 2015 14: 30 New
    0
    Very timely and correct article. Emotional, yes, but what should it be like if the conversation is about our homeland? Nothing personal just business?