Military Review

From officers to conspirators

29
The transfer of the tsarist army to the side of the provisional government caused its end


27 February 1917 of the year after the manifesto on the dissolution of the Duma of the deputies of opposition views was formed by the Provisional Committee. He announced that he was taking into his own hands the restoration of state and public order, and expressed confidence that the army would help in the difficult task of creating a new government. The hope of the Chairman of the Duma, M.V. Rodzianko, who signed this appeal, was justified by the military.

Some military commanders closest to the Supreme Commander for official position — the elite of the army, having broken the oath, supported the Provisional Committee. Perhaps then they did not represent the scale of the catastrophe that would befall - primarily through their fault - the entire officer corps of the Russian Imperial Army.

Epaulets torn off


Even some members of the dynasty hastened to salute the Provisional Committee. March 1, Grand Duke Kirill Vladimirovich with his subordinate Guards naval the crew reports to Rodzianko about their readiness to be at his disposal. The Chief of Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, General M. V. Alekseev, did not show loyalty to the sovereign (for more details, see “Orange Technologies of the February Revolution”).

The path chosen by the higher ranks for the salvation of the army — treason against the sovereign and the commander-in-chief led to the end of this army. They began to bring him closer with the release of Order No. 1 by the Petrograd Soviet, which undermined the fundamental principle of military discipline — unity of command. The order addressed to the troops of the Moscow garrison became the property of the whole army and caused a previously unheard-of decomposition of the troops.

Having lost the supreme leader, the army received from the Provisional Government a new, mockingly defamatory name — the Revolutionary Army of Free Russia, which quickly lost its sense of continuing the war, and no rulers could save it from collapse. Most of all it affected the officers. The cleaning of personnel, detentions, arrests, mob lawsuits and shootings of gold miners became common. Only in the Baltic Fleet by mid-March 1917, more than 100 people were killed.

The officers tried to somehow save the army and themselves by creating public organizations as an alternative to the soldiers' committees, romantically supporting the political slogans of freedom, equality, fraternity and expressing confidence in the Provisional Government, but it acted with caution on the political preferences of the Soviets, and the soldiers did not show readiness to be with former gentlemen. This was shown by the failure of the idea of ​​creating an organization called upon to restore the destroyed unity, the "All-Union Union."

The democratization of the army, coupled with the lack of success at the front, led it to decomposition, and the officer corps to death. By order of the temporary military and naval minister A. I. Guchkov No. 150 of April 21 of 1917, naval officers were deprived of epaulets. They were replaced with the insignia of distinction.

From smokers to Decembrists


Everything that happened testified to a deep spiritual and moral crisis among officers. Since the time of Peter I, the Russian nobility was under the ideological influence of the West. By the beginning of the XIX century in the average lordly library there were 70 percent of the literature of French authors. The nobles themselves not only spoke, but also thought in a foreign language. The Decembrists, for example, testified in French during the trial. The misunderstanding between the highest class of society and the people who continued to keep traditions grew.

The moral beginning of the military oath of allegiance, which became a formality that could not be observed for certain purposes, was gradually lost. One of the reasons for this is the abolition by Peter I of the ancient custom of transferring the royal throne to direct descendants through the male line, which caused constant revolutionary ferment in the upper echelons of power and the army during the next shift of the king. The nobility coups entailed a violation of the oath, weakened and shook the foundations of the monarchy.

In 1725, with the accession of the Russian throne with the help of the first foreigner's guard, Catherine I, the Supreme Privy Council was formed, which limited the power of the Empress so that no of her decrees could come out until they "took place" in this 18th century politburo. The next action to weaken the monarchy was the “conditions” developed by the Supreme Privy Council in 1730, which seriously limited the authority of the monarch, reducing them to representative functions. But this time the "constitutional monarchy" lasted only a few days. Most of the nobility and the guard was not ready to support such a reform.

While in the 1725 and 1730 coups, the officers involved in them did not violate the oath, then in the two subsequent years they already went to perjury, overthrowing the baby Emperor John VI in favor of Peter I’s daughter Elizabeth and in 1741 –– Peter III for the accession of his wife Catherine.

For many years of the monarchs' rule, erected by the upper layer of the nobility, it was corrupted by its leading position in the coups. And it was assured that the fate of the emperors in his will, because the conspirators did not receive punishment for their oath to the perpetrators, but regular freedoms and signs of gratitude, given with the expectation of future loyalty bestowed. The discipline of the guard officers fell, they turned into idle, spoiled by the luxury of dandies, who were only listed as regiments, and instead of combat training and order, they preferred haunting.

Participation in palace coups made a corrupted caste of sovereign servants - the kings paid officers for loyalty.

Paul is not a decree

An important step for the termination of these iniquities was made by Paul I, restoring the previous procedure for transferring royal power and taking measures to strengthen military discipline. In order to raise the significance of the military oath to the proper moral height, he personally was solemnly encouraged by conferring military ranks to Major General inclusive and retired Prime Minister Abramov, who was retired by Anninsky ribbon, refused to swear allegiance to Catherine II, remaining loyal to the former Emperor Peter III.

From officers to conspirators


This moral lesson has long been the subject of discussion in society, and yet the highest dignitaries and guards did not learn it. Having lost the opportunity to influence the choice of the rulers and not having time to wean the former liberties, they once again changed them, staining their uniforms with the villainous murder of the emperor.

For the military noble 14 coup of December 1825, an interregnum was chosen to create at least the appearance of non-violation of the oath. However, it looked like this for the majority of conspirators who did not know the true state of affairs. The organizers, who were members of secret societies, knew that their activities were anti-state in nature, but they took on other obligations that they put above national ones.

In 1917, the generals did not take another oath, but at the decisive moment they did not firmly declare support for the sovereign. And very soon, for their infidelity, they felt the “gratitude” of the temporary and long-time leaders, as well as the liberated people and the soldiers' masses, who had come out of obedience.

Calculated as a servant


The commander-in-chief of the armies of the Western Front, General A. E. Evert, who made his choice after hesitation, realized his guilt: "I, like other commanders-in-chief, betrayed the king, and for this atrocity we all have to pay with our lives."

Four of the eight top army officials paid dearly. The first was the commander of the imperial Baltic fleet, Vice-Admiral A. I. Nepenin, who, on his own initiative, sent a telegram to the Tsar on March 1 with a request to support the demand of the State Duma, and 4 was already arrested by revolutionary sailors for not wanting to hand over the case commander, and shot in the back.

Vice-Admiral A.V. Kolchak, who headed the Black Sea Fleet, did not leave a written testimony indicating his infidelity to the oath, but having all the information about the opinions of the commanders-in-chiefs of the front-line armies, he did not say anything and expressed his support for the sovereign. Arrested already as a former supreme ruler, giving evidence to the investigation, he said that he fully welcomed the fact of the transfer of power to the State Duma. So his silence can be considered as solidarity with the opinion of the top military leaders of the army and navy. On the night of February 7 1920, Kolchak was shot.

The most tragic was the fate of the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Northern front, General N. V. Ruzsky. Having made an offer during personal contact with the tsar in Pskov to surrender to the winners (for more information, see The Chronicle of High Treason), the general lost the forgiveness of Nicholas II. In October, 1918 in the number of hostages he was hacked to the Pyatigorsk cemetery.

In August, 1920 was shot in Crimea by the “green” 1917-th dismissed in April and retired assistant to the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Romanian front, General V.V. Sakharov.

MV Alekseev was entrusted to lead the revolutionary army, which provided support to the Provisional Committee and immediately after the sovereign left the Stavka who swore allegiance to the new government. Feeding illusions about the salvation of the army, he tried to do it, but did not get the understanding and support of amateurs from the Provisional Government. Soon after his appointment, realizing the futility of his efforts, the commander-in-chief frankly spoke at the constituent assembly of the Union of Officers being created: “The military spirit of the Russian army fell. Just yesterday, menacing and powerful, she now stands in some kind of fatal impotence before the enemy. ” The next revolutionary commander-in-chief, A. A. Brusilov, gave a similar assessment. In his memoirs, he admitted that by May 1917, the troops of all fronts had completely gone from obedience and it was impossible to take any measures.

The words of two military leaders who saw the salvation of the army and Russia in the abdication of the sovereign, but were unable to do it without him, became a moral sentence for infidelity. The new government no longer needed their services, and therefore "calculated it as a servant," Alekseev said bitterly about his resignation. With Brusilov, temporary workers also did not stand on ceremony. Glavkovver and could not show his military talent in the onset of June 1917, which undermined his credibility. Therefore, it remained in stories only as a hero of the Brusilov breakthrough, awarded and marked by those who, in a difficult moment, refused to be faithful.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/29710
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Blondy
    Blondy 27 March 2016 07: 08
    +1
    Yes, after all of our Russian upheavals, you already perceive these slogans in a completely different way, as an internal justification of those who were being manipulated and changed.
  2. venaya
    venaya 27 March 2016 07: 16
    +2
    On February 27, 1917, after the manifesto on the dissolution of the Duma, a Provisional Committee was formed by a part of the deputies of the opposition.

    Who wondered even for a moment - by what principle a certain part of the Duma and adhering to such oppositional views did not form a Provisional Committee for no reason. On what basis? If we understand these grounds, then their (or not their) purpose of creating such an illegal authority will become more clear to us.
  3. sergo1914
    sergo1914 27 March 2016 07: 45
    +8
    Now the marshals will run in and, as "twice two" will prove that Lenin and the Bolsheviks are to blame for everything. And the "lieutenants golitsyny" and "obolinskie cornets" have nothing to do with it. They sing romances

    PS And the great princes with red bows are an illusion.
    1. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 27 March 2016 08: 50
      -1
      Lenin slept through the February revolution while vacationing in European resorts. But then he skillfully took advantage of the anarchy in the country and the diversity of numerous revolutionaries and made a new coup d'etat, establishing the dictatorship of the Bolsheviks. In the events of 1917, there are very clear analogies with the recent Ukrainian Maidan. The general dissatisfaction of the motley crowd with the "tyrant and despot" orchestrated in the West, the weakness and indecision of the current government and, as a result, the "peaceful seizure of power." Now imagine that the Bolsheviks are the Ukrainian right-wing sector, the most radical part of the revolution. In Ukraine, they were not the main force of the Maidan, but clearly wanted to seize power, using weapons and general confusion. So far they have not succeeded. And the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, did it in October 1917.
    2. avt
      avt 27 March 2016 09: 15
      +2
      Quote: sergo1914
      PS And the great princes with red bows are an illusion.

      The Grand Duke and future immigrant tsar Kiryukha with a red bow is not an illusion, but a bike. No one specifically saw him with a bow, when he, at the head of the sponsored guards crew, "took under protection", and in fact took Nikolashka's family under house arrest, just like
      The most tragic was the fate of the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Northern front, General N. V. Ruzsky. Having made an offer during personal contact with the tsar in Pskov to surrender to the winners (for more information, see The Chronicle of High Treason), the general lost the forgiveness of Nicholas II. In October, 1918 in the number of hostages he was hacked to the Pyatigorsk cemetery.
      practically blocked / arrested his supreme commander in chief and the tsar concurrently at the Bottom station (classic putsch) and knocked out a letter to Alekseev under the telegrams of the rest of the commanders, to whom the various Rodziankoshulgins attached the headline - "Manifesto" they make
      The commander-in-chief of the armies of the Western Front, General A. E. Evert, made his choice after hesitation, realized his guilt: “I, like the other commanders-in-chief, betrayed the king, and for this atrocity we must all pay with our lives”
      and what is it called. So, to some extent, the violent death of some, well, the same Ruzsky, Nepenin, Sazarov, Kolchak and others like them, can be safely regarded as retaliation for a crime committed earlier during the hostilities. But actually how did the servicemen want that?
      Quote: parusnik
      ..February 1917 the matter is very dark ..

      Come on ! Muti are catching up with the newly-minted liberal bar, “historians” of the brewing and brewing spill. Yes, various Radzin glitches are catching up about the omnipotence of Grishka Rasputin's charms. , well, after all, with white thread embroidered - to throw your shit to the Bolsheviks, and themselves in white dress coats "sufferers".
    3. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 27 March 2016 11: 18
      +2
      Quote: sergo1914
      Now the marshals will run in and, as "twice two" will prove that Lenin and the Bolsheviks are to blame for everything. And the "lieutenants golitsyny" and "obolinskie cornets" have nothing to do with it. They sing romances

      PS And the great princes with red bows are an illusion.

      Well, firstly, the Bolsheviks played a role, the Bolshevik agitation was widely deployed in the army. The slogan about turning the imperialist war into a civil war is a Bolshevik idea.
      However, it is not so much about them as the position of a significant part of the intelligentsia, the then educated, wartime officers (who came from the same educated people) for whom the word "tsarism" was like a red rag for a bull, who dreamed of "freedom" and universal happiness. Such views were carefully nurtured in Russian society for decades, through the works of Russian classics, the Herzen Bell, etc. ... The whole society took up arms against the tsar, went mad.
      Having come to power, the Bolsheviks did not strive for universal equality, creating an island of prosperity in the Kremlin against the backdrop of a raging sea of ​​devastation and famine. Kremlin canteen, Kremlin hospital .... appeared just then.
      Sverdlov collected currency and diamonds in a well-known safe, Trotsky from the 21st year led the life of a landowner walking with a gun in the surrounding groves ... the new Russian rulers did not think about the country, they cherished and cherished themselves ...
      1. AK64
        AK64 27 March 2016 13: 19
        +6
        Well, firstly, the Bolsheviks played a role, the Bolshevik agitation was widely deployed in the army.


        Do not exaggerate: until February, no one knew the word "Bolsheviks" like that. Well, there was a small parliamentary faction in the Duma - and that was all.

        It all started with a direct general's conspiracy, and the key figure (not the "main" - the "main" were in London, namely the key one) was Alekseev.
        (Alekseev seems to be a good general, but as a person, he is an absolute insignificance with an inferiority complex. Hence the problems)
      2. avt
        avt 27 March 2016 14: 40
        +5
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Well, firstly, the Bolsheviks played a role, the Bolshevik agitation was widely deployed in the army. The slogan about turning the imperialist war into a civil war is a Bolshevik idea.

        “I showed you how to shoot.” Well, I repeat once again - the Bolsheviks, the main working core of the active fighters of the party, who worked on the “ground”, and not in Zurich broadcast about the transfer of the Imperialist to the Civil, sat behind the Ural ridge. Almost all overfished and physically CANNOT agitate the army! And the Bolsheviks turned around only after the amnesty and order number 1, when the death penalty, ranks and ranks were abolished in the army and the election of commanders was introduced. Well, what Trotsky signed this order !? With three attempts to answer not hunting? But even with such a scenario, the Bolsheviks, even after October 1917, did not take full strength, but shared power with the then even more powerful party of the SRs, the brightest representative of this movement generally hung around in the Provisional Government, and even tried to twist tricks with Kornilov. So - "Study, study and once again - study communism" Then nonsense about
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Having come to power, the Bolsheviks did not strive for universal equality, creating an island of prosperity in the Kremlin against the backdrop of a raging sea of ​​devastation and famine. Kremlin canteen, Kremlin hospital .... appeared just then.
        Sverdlov collected currency and diamonds in a well-known safe, Trotsky from the 21st year led the life of a landowner walking with a gun in the surrounding groves ... the new Russian rulers did not think about the country, they cherished and cherished themselves ...

        You don't have to write and you will also learn about the "fight against komchvanstvo" and about why and how the distribution system was introduced, when the working day was not standardized, and the system itself for nishtyaki implied RESPONSIBILITY right up to the tower, no comparison I did not go with the same fatty loaf of crows who were shooting out of boredom - Nikolashka No. 2, the commander-in-chief, and his kaiarilla, who received this by birthright and lost this right in 1917. And also the understanding will come that the degenerate communist elite gave a shit about their beliefs and sold it in 1991 for the right - "so that we had everything, but we had nothing for it."
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 27 March 2016 08: 06
    +1
    ..February 1917 the matter is very dark ..
  5. yahont
    yahont 27 March 2016 08: 27
    +3
    "Since the time of Peter I, the Russian nobility was under the ideological influence of the West. By the beginning of the 70th century, the average lord's library contained XNUMX percent of the literature of French authors. The nobles themselves not only spoke, but also thought in a foreign language."

    This is really a worship of everything Western, in 1813 after the capture of Paris, many Russian officers joined secret Masonic circles in Paris. Perhaps then it was an "interesting curiosity", which ended up being the end of 1918-1922, the officers were destroyed in the first place, ... then ended with peasantry
  6. creak
    creak 27 March 2016 09: 11
    +1
    After all, this is practically a reprint of an article by the same author (with minimal changes), posted on VO on March 24 this year. but under a different title: "In those days when we all fell so low ..." ...
    She commented quite actively ....
    What is the point of publication even today - the lack of materials on historical topics?
  7. Kaiten
    Kaiten 27 March 2016 09: 35
    0
    For completeness, another nationality is missing .....
    1. avt
      avt 27 March 2016 10: 13
      +4
      Quote: Kaiten
      For completeness, another nationality is missing ....
      laughing
      Do you want songs? I have them - read the materials of the 2nd Congress of the founder of the RSDLP, from which the group then flew off by adding the letter "b", well, the statement of the comrades-in-arms in the struggle there, speaking from the Bund. They quite frankly said that without our money they would not have gathered , not that they fought.
      1. Kaiten
        Kaiten 27 March 2016 19: 07
        0
        Quote: avt
        Do you want songs? I have them - read the materials of the 2nd Congress of the founder of the RSDLP, from which the group then flew off by adding the letter "b", well, the statement of the comrades-in-arms in the struggle there, speaking from the Bund. They quite frankly said that without our money they would not have gathered , not that they fought.

        It is good that the Bund has not yet demanded circumcision. We would have sung then at school not "soar with fires", but "Agitsin steam locomotive".
        1. avt
          avt 27 March 2016 19: 31
          +2
          Quote: Kaiten
          It is good that the Bund has not yet demanded circumcision to pass.

          To whom? What for ? I beg of you ! laughing Oh, Wei! Look at the list of riders of a sealed wagon, if you still need to trim them .... then what is there to trim? Root only wassat but then it’s possible to be neutered - why are they needed in such matters? wassat So
          Quote: Kaiten
          "Agitsin steam locomotive".

          quite worthy for choral singing on the way from Zurich to Peter through Sweden, for which a separate merci Parvus / Gelfand from Odessa, that through party member Krasin helped with travel money, and without so much spending a penny of his money, he didn’t disturb the party cash desk - he massaged German General Staff. laughing
  8. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 27 March 2016 10: 29
    -2
    Sooner or later, the monarchy had to fall.
    1. Cap.Morgan
      Cap.Morgan 27 March 2016 11: 27
      +4
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      Sooner or later, the monarchy had to fall.

      However, a good half of European countries are monarchies.
      Someone can say that they lived poorly all these last 100 years?
      1. ALEA IACTA EST
        ALEA IACTA EST 27 March 2016 12: 19
        +1
        Monarchs in those countries are just a decoration and a tribute to tradition.
        In fact, these are ordinary parliamentary republics.
        1. AK64
          AK64 27 March 2016 13: 21
          0
          Monarchs in those countries are just a decoration and a tribute to tradition. In fact, these are ordinary parliamentary republics.


          No. This is a guarantee of compliance.
          If parliaments / ministers suddenly start to fool around - the monarch will put them in their place directly relying on the people.
          1. Rastas
            Rastas 27 March 2016 16: 39
            +1
            What do you mean start to fool? What is it like? If from the series "parliament is not a place for discussion", then calm down, in their parliaments serious passions boil, so that "making a fool" there is normal. And people are taken to rallies. But the monarchies have survived, that they do not climb into governing the country.
            1. AK64
              AK64 27 March 2016 17: 02
              0
              What do you mean start to fool?

              Yes so. Napri England in the 17th century.


              What is it like? If from the series "parliament is not a place for discussion", then calm down, in their parliaments serious passions boil, so that "making a fool" there is normal. And people are taken to rallies.

              But am I worried?

              But the monarchies just survived that do not go into the government of the country.

              It only seems to you.
              If desired, compare the amount of nonsense done by Republican France and monarchical Britain.
              Just for comparison.
              1. Rastas
                Rastas 27 March 2016 21: 00
                +1
                After the "glorious revolution" of 1689 and the expulsion of the last Stuart, Britain ceased to be autocratic-monarchical. After that, the king cannot pass laws without the consent of parliament. Moreover, the kings preserved the main achievements of the English revolution. And there will be enough nonsense for France and England, regardless of the system.
                1. AK64
                  AK64 27 March 2016 21: 26
                  0
                  And there will be enough nonsense for France and England, regardless of the order.


                  So you don’t see the difference? Well ... That’s what they would say.

                  "Do you see a gopher? And he is!"

                  After the "glorious revolution" of 1689 and the expulsion of the last Stuart, Britain ceased to be autocratic-monarchical.


                  Parliament was under Charles the 1st, and it has remained under the current ones, and almost unchanged. That is, in the sense of building, the "glorious revolution" did not change anything - only the dynasty was replaced (the Stuart Catholics for the Windsor Protestants).
      2. Lord blacwood
        Lord blacwood 27 March 2016 16: 35
        +1
        Quote: Cap.Morgan
        Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
        Sooner or later, the monarchy had to fall.

        However, a good half of European countries are monarchies.
        Someone can say that they lived poorly all these last 100 years?

        But in European countries there is a constitutional monarchy. As the British say, "The queen should reign, but not rule." We also tried to limit the power of the emperor by the constitution, but it did not work, and in fact there was absolutism.
  9. Taoist
    Taoist 27 March 2016 14: 32
    0
    Of course, IMHO, but personally it seems to me that it was renunciation and destruction as a result of the oath that led to such sad results.

    "You take a new oath - involuntary thrill lived.
    Serve the tricolor from now on banner, as the red served.
    Belief in the gray-haired messiah and in the holiness of the new bonds,
    you will save Russia in the same way as you saved the Union. "(c)
    1. Rastas
      Rastas 27 March 2016 16: 37
      +1
      Listen, your verse sounds kind of pessimistic. Especially the half-last line "you will save Russia in the same way as you saved the Union." Look, for this you can be held accountable for calls for the collapse of Russia.
  10. Pitot
    Pitot 27 March 2016 17: 25
    -2
    Betrayed the bloody nicholas? There he is dear to this stinking gorptrfsky (or whatever) diving duck. Skotina, his family, how much was hungry over Russians. Easy cattle got off. In general, the entire Romanov cattle family ruled for too long. The blood began to end in blood. The church also made him a saint. My question is - is it a church with the people or the same cattle office for fooling people?
    1. Warrior Hamilton
      Warrior Hamilton 27 March 2016 20: 57
      -1
      On the next branch, the guys celebrate the 205th anniversary of the Russian Internal Troops, created by the ducks, Romanov cattle, apparently without a church .... winked
      1. Warrior Hamilton
        Warrior Hamilton 28 March 2016 19: 41
        0
        Here is an excerpt from an article dedicated to the 205th anniversary of BB6 "The date of celebration of the Day of Internal Troops was not chosen by chance. It was on this day 205 years ago, by the decree of Alexander I, the regular provincial companies were redeployed to the centers of the then Russian provinces with the simultaneous formation of military battalions of internal guards. In his congratulations, he mentioned Viktor Zolotov, Commander-in-Chief of the Internal Troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. Then (in March 1811) a document appeared, which was a list of tasks for new military formations. This is the "Regulation on internal guard."
  11. Amper
    Amper 27 March 2016 20: 32
    +3
    The army is an armed people, it must be understood by all. Neither power nor a country can exist without an Army, unless it (a country) is a limp satellite of the outside world (a geyrop, for example).
    When political power brings the country's life to the point of absurdity, the military intervenes, not the venal commander-in-chief and general, but the colonels or other effective forces (USA, NATO) ...
    There are many examples in modern history.
    Although there are options, and there are an infinite number of them.
    It all depends on the identity of the People, or he is a flock, or ....
  12. Nikto-74
    Nikto-74 29 March 2016 22: 11
    0
    a strange sensation arises when a fact (incidentally confirmed by some serious research or an assumption or logical conclusion !!! ???) of the presence of French literature in the libraries of nobles and events in the army during the February Revolution are linked into a logical chain. I think it’s worthwhile to re-read Ray Bradbury, or at least to review the footage of the chronicle with the burning of books in Nazi Germany, if there is a persistent aversion to Western literature.
    Obviously, the degree of decomposition of the state apparatus and the general structure of the country in 1917 was such that nothing could preserve it in the form in which it had been before. VI Ulyanov (Lenin) really said: "The upper classes cannot, but the lower classes do not want to."

    But on the other hand ... looking back in an attempt to analyze the events in Ukraine in 2013/2014. Were there an army with the police and special services? - there were none. Babos on the uncle / aunt revolution gave? - given. with all this, could Yanyk give a kick to whom should they manage with broken noses? - Probably could. why didn’t you give it? - and there was no will for it .... or maybe not the will, but the betrayal of associates? But did Nicholas ii have the will and true associates? questions, questions .... questions