Military Review

Lessons from the First Civil (1917 – 2016)

80
Lessons from the First Civil (1917 – 2016)


Who knows about the Ossetian war? And about the Karabakh war? Everything? And how was the first Chechen war lost, and how was the second won? I'm talking about those that happened in 1920 year. Do you want to know what will end the war in the Donbas and Ukraine? Then you need to study very well. history first civil war in Russia, which like two drops of water repeats the current situation.

The first civil war in Russia was so similar to modernity that many people are trying to forget it today. Forget that inconvenient analogies and comparisons are not made, and that no far-reaching conclusions are made on the basis of them. Each of the participants and trends of mixed ethnic groups, Bolsheviks, White Guards and interventionists in that first Civil War have their own prototypes today. Yes, and the problems of the war was similar to the present. The same problems give rise to the same solutions that have already been found once.

What ruined the Russian Empire

The reasons why the Romanovs' 300-year-old empire fell was a mass, and in this article it is pointless to dwell on them. Because, in fact, its foreign "partners" split it on one basis - the national one. Everything else was just the background and part of the search within Russia for the path that we should go on.

To verify this, just look at the political map of the year 1918. Poland, due to the German occupation, actually fell out of the empire, and in its depths were preparing forces ready to begin to restore the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth "From Sea to Sea". Finland quickly went into free swimming, simultaneously destroying the "Russian invaders" where they sluggishly risked lingering. In Ukraine (about which more detailed below), following the impotent Central Rada, Germany brought Hetman Skoropadsky to power. At the same time, the Belarusian People’s Republic was proclaimed, but the Kaiser also did not need her services, and therefore she was not able to express herself fully. The Baltic States, as at the beginning of 1990, quietly separated themselves, and began to eradicate the remnants of a "totalitarian past." Transcaucasia immediately plunged into a series of internecine wars (Azeris and Armenians habitually slaughtered each other in Karabakh during their independence) from which there was no way out. And the Georgians tried to solve the Abkhaz and Ossetian problems that they had immediately after the coordination of territorial issues in the south. In the spaces of the newly annexed Central Asia, with the help of "English comrades", "independent" emirs, who did not want any republics, but simply wanted power independent from anyone, lifted their heads.

All this happened before General Denikin or Admiral Kolchak appeared on the political arena, and even before the Czechoslovak Corps launched its famous uprising.

The role of Kiev in the Civil War

Kiev was the third largest city in the empire. It was from here that “Christianity went”, it was Kiev princes who first united Russia, and by the beginning of the 20 century, the city had grown into a rather large industrial and commercial center. And besides, it was around Kiev that they managed to create the most powerful national "minority" of the Russian empire, which declared its independence. 30 of millions of Ukrainians - that's exactly what was written then.
Yes, I was not mistaken. For some reason in Russia it is considered that in the 1918 year in Ukraine everyone considered themselves to be Little Russians or Russians, and only stupid Bolsheviks consciously created this “problem” for themselves - Ukrainians. Here is a census of Kiev residents for March 1919, where the population itself determined who they were and who they felt like:



If anything, everything is taken hence.

As we understand, the main "sermon" on the education of Ukrainians was much earlier: at the end of 19, the beginning of 20 centuries. An indirect confirmation of this is the belated and ineffective actions of the central government to limit the spread of such a phenomenon as “Ukrainian nationalism” (it is clear that at that time it was called differently).

The first such documents appeared in 1870's. That is, before the UNR was still 40 years. At the same time, it is noteworthy that only an insignificantly small part of Kiev residents in 1919 (less than 10%) owned Ukrainian grammar (ibid.). And what about the Bolsheviks - they simply headed the process (in this case, it’s not good or bad). It is important to note that the nationalization of Ukraine began long before the fall of tsarism and that the Central Council and the attempt to oppose Ukraine and Russia were well prepared for several decades.

At the same time, it is possible to say with 100% that in 1919, Kiev was for the most part a Russian city.

It was he who, according to the German plan, was to become “Anti-Russia”. Rather, the center of pro-German Russia, which no longer matters how is it called: Kievan Rus, Ukraine, or Hetmanat Skoropadsky. The main thing is to never again have the idea of ​​combining these two parts. That is why he didn’t complain about the accelerated consciousness of the Ukrainian nation and the search for points of separation of society.

Moreover, in Great Russia itself, then matters with the national question were not important. She threatened to break up into several warring states with (just do not laugh) different nations: Cossacks, Siberians, Vyatchevs, Kuryans, Permians, etc.

Great Russia or Russia

Strange question? It is today, but if we figure out the terms and find out what 100 was meant by them years ago, we will again see the modern problem of Russia.

“With Germany or with Russia” is a little-known geopolitical sketch of the situation in the middle of 1918, published in Petrograd, in which the author pays much attention not only to the division of the empire and the separation from it of “national suburbs”, but also talks about the “intra-national” split in Great Russia.
Moreover, the author deliberately contrasts the concept of Great Russia and Russia, implying at the same time completely different concepts.

Having translated it into modern concepts, it is synonymous with the Russian Federation (Great Russia) and a certain Union of Nations (Russia).

So, Siberians, Perm citizens, Vyatichi, kurians. The question of the Don, Kuban and Crimea in the work of a contemporary VI. Lenin was generally raised on the basis of their “national” autonomy. That is how Russia lived then. Internal disorganization of political life and at the same time not a word about the white movement, which was only created underground. Perhaps to some citizens, the war that would break out in just a few months seemed then also impossible, just like the war in the Donbas for the people of Ukraine in December of 2013. Russia's political thought lived with problems, how to live on with those countries that were already formed: Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland. Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan (I give their modern names for a better understanding). Their existence has already become a fact, and the probability of their absorption back (as it seemed at the time) was tending to zero.

I repeat, at the time, and this is interesting. Until the refusal of the German attack on Marne in July 1918 of the year, it was believed that by the end of the year Germany would finish the allies and impose a world advantageous for them. No wonder that the French themselves then called their victory "a miracle on the Marne."

The very end of the book is also remarkable, where the author gives his assessment of the processes that took place at that time:

“And if it was a historical crime of the Russian social forces that they could not put the limit of oppression by the authorities in the old days, it would be a completely irreparable trouble if these forces are currently in the net, or, even worse, if they embark on the path of betrayal of small nations, on the path of salvation of one Great Russia, at the cost of betraying the cause of Russia, on the path of "Great Russian separatism", alas, no less real and effective than the separatism of the marginal peoples. "

Familiar picture? Is not it?

By the way, the independence of Chechnya was proclaimed in the years of the civil war. At first it was the North Caucasus Emirate, headed by Emir Imam Sheikh Uzun-Haji. And then there was a rebellion of the Highlanders headed by Seyid-Sheikh (a descendant of Shamil). Everything is as it should be with the cutting out of all the Russians who did not run away, with awkward attempts to pacify - in December 1920 of the year. To suppress the rebels, an army was thrown from the 9 of thousands of soldiers of the Red Army, who were stopped everywhere and thrown back with the loss of only those killed and only for the last month of that fatal year, 1372 people. And then it began: in 1922, the population of the region was allocated 110,5 thousand pounds of grain, 150 thousand pounds of oil. 1 billion rubles was allocated for the restoration of the economy. Nothing like? What about the inclusion of the most influential imams in 1924 in the revolutionary committees and executive committees? All this was the reason that by the end of 1925, the war in Chechnya was over.

So the picture of correspondences, the further - the fuller. There will be more.

European Union and Middle Europe

And what is this “Middle Europe”, so often mentioned in the book, but unknown to us in history?

As we understand, at that time, without the existence of a Eurocentric idea, no split in the Russian Empire was possible. Only the creation of a powerful pole of attraction in the West could give the nationalists enough strength to resist the old imperial center. And such a center at the end of 1917 of the year was Kaiser Germany, in the depths of which the idea of ​​“Middle Europe” was born in 1915.

This concept is unfairly forgotten today, became the basis of the worldview of German politicians from Kaiser Wilhelm to Adolf Hitler (a man whose propaganda is prohibited in the Russian Federation).

That is why so often in the book 1918 of the year (link above) we read about “Central Europe”. Then it was not just a trend. At that time, it was considered only a matter of time to create it. The authors of the concept believed that for the common good it was only necessary to find a place for all the peoples of Europe in this education and under the leadership of Germany (Chapter “German orientation and“ Middle Europe ”).

Basically, after the collapse of Kaiser Germany, this concept was developed and developed by the outstanding German geopolitics Karl Haushofer (1869-1946). It was he who introduced such a concept, the axis Berlin-Moscow-Tokyo and its opposition in the form of "Great Sushi" to "Great Islands" in the person of Britain and the USA. All European countries, except Britain and, possibly, Scandinavia, should have entered this union, and its basis should be: “Middle Europe”, “Heartland” (Eurasia) and the Japanese Empire, which at that time was considered the full owner in the Far East . The new union of three equal centers of power was to become the basis of an invincible world order. But he did not, because the "Great Islands" were quick.

By the way, the author of this theory did not like the Fuhrer Adolf very much and considered him a poorly-educated upstart, who led Germany in the wrong direction. His son was shot in the case of the attempted assassination of Hitler, and he was in a concentration camp until the end of the war.

Meanwhile, without Britain, the idea of ​​the EU degenerated into the concept of "Central Europe". How it is all modern and interesting.
Two stages of the victory of the Bolsheviks in the Civil War.

Suppression of internal Russian separatism and the creation of a unifying idea.

If we look at the history of the Civil War 1917-21, we will encounter some discrepancies with its official assessment.

We will see a bloody clash between supporters of reds and whites on the territory of modern Russia and those territories that climbed into this confrontation: the Cossack territories of Asia and southern Russia, Donetsk-Krivoi Rog Republic, Crimea, Tavria.

It was generally completed by the start of the 1920 of the year, and only Crimea was taken a little later.

Having defeated the internal opposition and having become stronger, the government of the RSFSR proceeded to the second stage of the civil war: the return of the “marginal lands”, which had fallen away during this new Russian turmoil. There, the war took a completely different turn: hybrid - a combination of diplomacy, agitation and pinpoint strikes.

An example of such operations is the landing of parts of the Red Army in Baku (1920) to help the “insurgent Azerbaijani people.” The coming to power of a revolutionary government in Armenia in December 1920, and in Georgia, the analogies were just ridiculously similar to the recent history of the post-Soviet space:
Already 28 May 1918, Georgia and Germany signed an agreement under which the three-thousandth expeditionary force under the command of Friedrich Kress von Kressenstein was transferred by sea from the Crimea to the Georgian port of Poti; it was subsequently reinforced by German troops transferred here from Ukraine and Syria, as well as by liberated German prisoners of war and mobilized by German colonists. United German-Georgian garrisons were deployed in various parts of Georgia; Germany’s military aid in June 1918 eliminated the threat from the Russian Bolsheviks, who proclaimed Soviet power in Abkhazia.

About the analogies of a hundred years ago the South Ossetian conflict can be found here. Wikipedia

Now it is clear from what the Russian army saved the Ossetians in 2008 year? It all ended with a lightning campaign of the Red Army in February 1921 of the year on Tiflis and the establishment of Soviet power there.

Nothing like that? If this were all, I would not write this article.

From a completely different angle, I propose to consider the seemingly well-studied Soviet-Polish 1919-21 war.

To begin with the list of participants. "For Poland" fought: the Polish Republic, the Ukrainian People's Republic, the Belarusian People's Republic, the Republic of Latvia with their full military and technical support from the governments of the Entente.

Regarding BNR, you can simply read the mass of available materials and see how similar these two sisters were then (Belarus and Ukraine). Create something similar in 1990-s prevented the "last dictator of Europe" Alexander Lukashenko. That is why, unlike Ukraine, the merging of the “BNR governments in exile” and the “democratic government” in Minsk in a single ecstasy did not happen.

The creation of an independent Ukraine under the German protectorate in 1918 and the center of German influence based on it on the western borders of Russia failed. The power of the Rada, and then of the hetman, fell along with German power, and Ukrainian “statehood” fell into complete insanity.

Only the creation of a new center of forces in Warsaw and the defeat of the Galicians of ZUNR by the army of Pilsudski allowed the Entente countries to think about creating a new belt of independent states against the still weak Russia by the beginning of 1919, the main objectives of which were war with the RSFSR or the whites.
Whoever wins, this belt would be hostile to the new Russia, and so it was valuable.

Poland and its younger allies, Ukraine, Byelorussia, and Latvia, had to become the main strike force against Russia. Lithuania, for obvious reasons, could not be. We again saw the familiar picture of the confrontation, where the role of cannon fodder by the West today is assigned to Ukraine.

Isn't it because Poland understands this well, they so zealously support the nationalist Ukraine. They understand that if the regime in Kiev falls, then they will have to become the “shield of Europe” against Russia - with all the ensuing consequences.

The campaign of the Red Army in Warsaw in 1920 failed, and finally all questions of the civil war were lifted only in 1939-40, when Soviet units were met with flowers in Tallinn, Riga, Vilna and even Lviv.

This is a historical fact, and the enthusiasm of the local population about it at that time was not disputed by anyone. Then there were the SS division "Galicia" and many similar units in the Baltic States, but this is another story that has not yet logically ended.

It is precisely by implying the difficulty of solving the arisen national problems in Ukraine and Belarus, the Transcaucasus and Central Asia, as well as the unresolved nature of this problem following the civil war, which forced the government in Moscow to give the green light to the creation of the USSR as a union of republics, not autonomies within the RSFSR .

In relation to the Ukrainian SSR it will be interesting to consider the example of the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic. In order to strengthen the influence of an element foreign to Ukrainian nationalism throughout Ukraine, at the "suggestion" of the head of the Council of People's Commissars and the Council of Defense of the RSFSR, VI. Lenin in February 1919 of the year, its structure included (without the consent of the population and with some opposition from the local authorities) the territory of Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic. And the capital of the Ukrainian SSR, before 1932, was in Kharkov - in the city, where the Soviet (pro-Russian) Ukraine, alternative to nationalist, was proclaimed.

An interesting way to solve the "Donetsk-Ukrainian" conflict? And 100 years ago, it was resolved that way.

That's all. It's time to start drawing conclusions.

Findings. We will never be brothers?

As we saw in the mass of examples above, the scenario of the Civil War in Russia 1917— ... is remarkably similar to the scenario of today's confrontation (1991- ...). The same painful nodal points and the same problems. Matches sometimes just to the smallest detail. And when some very “patriotic” citizens along both lines of the front really want to read aloud the poem of Anastasia Dmitruk again and again “We will never be brothers”, I want to ask them: “What do you understand in civil wars and how well do you know your story? "
Author:
Originator:
http://politrussia.com/istoriya/uroki-pervoy-grazhdanskoy-544/
80 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Korsar4
    Korsar4 9 July 2016 06: 07
    +13
    Extremely interesting selection. To my shame, I understand that I know very little about the Civil War.
    1. co-creator
      co-creator 9 July 2016 06: 53
      +1
      I am ashamed to take this nonsense on faith.
      1. 4ekist
        4ekist 9 July 2016 15: 45
        +6
        Read my dear, Bulgakov's novel "The White Guard" is a very entertaining and instructive work.
        I would gladly put a dozen minuses.
        1. co-creator
          co-creator 10 July 2016 12: 48
          +1
          You apparently do not know how to read. This opus is not connected with Bulgakov at all, and it’s nonsense to write that the KDR was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR in order to prevent Naziism. There are three pieces of such nonsense. Maybe you wrote this hren?
          1. Hlavaty
            Hlavaty 12 July 2016 09: 12
            +1
            Can you give at least some arguments instead of the words "nonsense" and x.ren?
    2. Ivan Slavyanin
      Ivan Slavyanin 9 July 2016 07: 11
      +1
      Do you know what is happening in Russia now?
      1. co-creator
        co-creator 9 July 2016 07: 20
        +23
        I know. In summer, aggravation also begins in madmen.
        1. Ivan Slavyanin
          Ivan Slavyanin 9 July 2016 07: 38
          .
          I didn’t ask you a question! I'm not interested in you! Go past.
          1. co-creator
            co-creator 9 July 2016 11: 00
            +3
            What an evil dill however. hyyyyyy
        2. fennekRUS
          fennekRUS 9 July 2016 11: 12
          +3
          Quotation: blooded man
          Summer and crazy begins exacerbation.

          vacation just
      2. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 9 July 2016 07: 29
        +19
        Quote: Ivan Slavyanin
        Do you know what is happening in Russia now?

        Without you, of course, we don’t know. Although some call themselves Sirians, but nothing, the doctor will cure everyone.
        1. captain
          captain 9 July 2016 09: 44
          +18
          I liked the article, the analogy in my opinion is correct.
          1. co-creator
            co-creator 9 July 2016 11: 05
            0
            ------- In order to strengthen the influence of an element foreign to Ukrainian nationalism throughout Ukraine, on the “proposal” of the head of the Council of People's Commissars and the Defense Council of the RSFSR V.I. Lenin in February 1919, its composition included (without the consent of the population and with some opposition from the local authorities) the territory of the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Republic. And the capital of the Ukrainian SSR until 1932 was in Kharkov - in the city where Soviet (pro-Russian) Ukraine, an alternative to nationalist, was proclaimed .------

            Do you agree with this too? This is generally Jurasum’s personal nonsense. It is reliably known and documented that the DKR was transferred to Ukraine so that the proletariat and industry would be from an agrarian country. The author dragged in nationalism.
          2. Nagaibak
            Nagaibak 9 July 2016 16: 16
            +2
            captain "I liked the article, the analogy is correct in my opinion."
            I agree.))) Only the author did not mention the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic and the Mugan Soviet, etc.)))
            And so yes the USSR fell apart at the same seams as the Russian Empire.
            1. co-creator
              co-creator 10 July 2016 12: 51
              -1
              That is, after the collapse of the USSR, an attempt to create the Nizhny Novgorod Republic (money was already printed by the way) was on the national line?
    3. Beefeater
      Beefeater 9 July 2016 09: 51
      +3
      Quote: Korsar4
      Extremely interesting selection. To my shame, I understand that I know very little about the Civil War.

      It is because of this that the selection seems interesting to you.
      It was not the interest in the national suburbs that was taken away, and the idea of ​​reunification moved the Bolsheviks. They were driven by the idea of ​​a world revolution. They didn’t go to Poland, but to Germany and not to Azerbaijan but to Persia. Throughout the 20s, emmissars with currency and subversive literature in suitcases scurried around Europe and around the world.
      1. Korsar4
        Korsar4 9 July 2016 11: 47
        +3
        Do you perceive the Bolsheviks as a whole? And can you name the date when the ideas of the world revolution stopped?

        If you look through the prism of fiction - what do we have? "Quiet Don"? Ice Camping? "Days of the Turbins"? Serafimovich?

        The mosaic of these pieces does not add up for those who are not seriously involved in this time.
        1. kalibr
          kalibr 12 October 2016 15: 48
          0
          You do not read fiction, but go to the library and take the truth files from ... 1920 and at least read the headlines. You see how long it took MR owned the minds of the Soviet press.
    4. sherp2015
      sherp2015 9 July 2016 13: 03
      +7
      Quote: Korsar4
      I understand that I know very little about the Civil War.

      The Civil War is a terrible grief and genocide of the Russian people inspired by usurers and traders Rockefellers and other Rothschilds
  2. knn54
    knn54 9 July 2016 06: 37
    +16
    -As applied to the Ukrainian SSR, it will be interesting to consider the example of the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Republic.
    The idea of ​​DKR has ripened for several decades. And the FIRST contribution to its formation was made by a very influential (at one time) structure - the Council of Congresses of Miners of the South of Russia (SSGYUR). We see the names of its leaders: Alchevsky, Ilovaysky, Gorlov, Rutchenko in the names of large cities of the region.
    Industrialists were burdened by the fact that the whole Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih industrial region was divided into three administrative units - the Yekaterinoslav, Kharkov provinces and the completely autonomous Region of the Don Army. Already from the end of the XNUMXth century. entrepreneurs began to constantly talk about its "economic indivisibility" - of course, as part of Russia.
    Already by the February Revolution of 1917 in the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih region, there was a steady unanimity of economic and political elites regarding the need to unite the coal and metallurgical regions of the region into a single region. actually did not cause disagreements.
    The Bolsheviks in the spring of 1917 were in the south of Russia ABSOLUTELY in no way influenced the decision-making process. The idea of ​​administrative allocation of the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Territory was born long before the Bolsheviks and Artem came to power.
  3. avia12005
    avia12005 9 July 2016 06: 44
    +7
    Carthage, that is, the united West must be destroyed. He will never let us live in peace.
  4. venaya
    venaya 9 July 2016 06: 51
    +10
    The 300-year-old Romanov empire fell ... in fact, it was split by its foreign "partners" on one basis - national. Everything else was just a backdrop ...

    Indeed, in every country, not even an empire, but in a country, many nationalities live, and sometimes people belonging to different racial groups, for example: the same USA. But if someone has set himself the task of defeating the country, it is more profitable to divide it first, most conveniently according to the national sign, and if this is difficult, another mechanism is activated - the creation of new nations within the same people, which was done on the territory of the Russian Empire or just Russia - Russia.
    1. co-creator
      co-creator 9 July 2016 06: 59
      .
      The West is to blame for everything, the main thought of the marsupial. In fact, the empire itself split the empire when they came up with three united Russian people as part of the Great Russians, Belarusians, and Little Russians. In Europe, on the contrary, different nations were united into one, and our elite divided it. In fact, they themselves created the ground for a split.

      Talking about the rest of the outskirts is ridiculous, since there was a big mistake for the king to attach them as provinces, not colonies.
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 9 July 2016 07: 13
        +12
        Quotation: blooded man
        In Europe, on the contrary, different nations were united into one,

        You go to France and ask a Frenchman in English to point you to a toilet. Most will tell you "I don't understand!" French! Such a united people!
        Ask the Catalan: "Do you speak Spanish?" "No, only in Catalan"
        In the Netherlands they will tell you - we are Flemings, and these ... Germans. There is even the Army of the Liberation of Flanders, and in Canada, the Army of the Liberation of Quebec. Nationalism is very strong in Europe, and you are "one people".
        1. co-creator
          co-creator 9 July 2016 07: 30
          0
          In Germany, the Germans were united with great zeal and almost achieved their goal, only the Bavarians were isolated there. The French simply forcibly dissolved in themselves many nations that were not French at all. The same thing happened in other countries.

          How can we compare completely different Catalans and Spaniards, Quebec Ayran Coyotes and Anglo-Canadians, Flemings and Germans with 99% Russians and Ukrainians? What do you think of the Kuban Cossacks forced to record Russian or Ukrainians in Ukraine to speak Russian in everyday life? Any small effort makes one nation out of Ukrainians, Belarus, Russians. An example is Belarus where 90% of the population does not know the Move and do not want to know being essentially Russian, and they themselves almost all think so
          1. M0xHaTka
            M0xHaTka 9 July 2016 15: 27
            .
            No need to cite today's Belarus. 300 years of forced Russification have done their job. The punitive campaigns of Suvorov, Muravyov and Dzerzhinsky, and then general education from the Bolsheviks, destroyed the Belarusian language.
            And the fact that we have forgiven this does not mean that we forgot.
            1. AK64
              AK64 9 July 2016 17: 18
              +17
              No need to cite today's Belarus. 300 years of forced Russification have done their job. The punitive campaigns of Suvorov, Muravyov and Dzerzhinsky, and then general education from the Bolsheviks, destroyed the Belarusian language.
              And the fact that we have forgiven this does not mean that we forgot.


              Renounce the right to be called Russian?

              Great, but what do you get in return? Will you become second-rate Poles (and, accordingly, third-rate Europeans)? Are you sure that they will take you at least second grade? Or "independence"?
              And what about your independence? You do not have an autonomous culture, but you refuse the great Russian (along with the language). That is, instead of the great Russian culture, you will have a rural culture, so tiny. And you will be proud of it and "develop" it with all your might.

              Well, since there is actually nothing to "develop" there, you will simply conserve the archaic, funny and ridiculous. Well, Europeans will come and look at funny Papuans (only white ones) in embroidered shirts ...

              Here, in fact, your future ...

              Even the Poles do not have a normal European level of culture, and you ...
              But as Russians (and wherever you go and no matter how you get out - but you are Russian) you have the right to a great Russian culture (to which your ancestors also contributed).

              Amusing you, secessionists: you are trying to sell the birthright for a lentil stew - so you won’t get stew, either.
            2. co-creator
              co-creator 10 July 2016 12: 54
              -1
              You have your own republic and your own language, what prevents you from speaking it? But it hinders the fact that people do not want to talk and teach their children in the rural dialect. They, unlike you, want to live like people, not saluki.

              You can remember anything, only to everyone at cha.
        2. AK64
          AK64 9 July 2016 08: 21
          +13
          Quotation: blooded man
          In Europe, on the contrary, different nations were united into one,


          Nationalism is very strong in Europe, and you are "one people".

          To what Shpakovsky said, I will add that they were "united into one" as a rule by violence: in France they imprisoned for the use of Oscitan or Breton. Not to mention the fact that those who spoke these languages ​​could not count on any career in the Republic. In Spain, quite recently, they could have been arrested for talking in a katala. Anyone who wishes can read what happened in Austria-Hungary. But in Germany, the last islets of the Slavs disappeared as a result of WWII. And before that they "fought successfully" with them (much more successfully than the Spaniards with the Catalans or the Basques). Slavic language in Germany? Don't tell my sneakers! Those who did not speak and wrote only and only in German had the right only to sit in their village.

          Or gaelik in Velikaya in Britain ... When was it allowed to use?

          These are the methods used to "unite the peoples."

          Storytellers, damn it, network ....
          1. AK64
            AK64 9 July 2016 13: 33
            +5
            By the way, this
            You go to France and ask a Frenchman in English to point you to a toilet. Most will tell you "I don't understand!" French! Such a united people!

            certainly true and fair.

            But I, by my kindness and sincerity, will give advice on how to be.
            It's simple.
            (1) Go up to the Frenchman
            (2) Say to him "Bon zhur" or there "bon sua"
            (3) and then "Sorry mi pliz, ay em from Russia (exactly like that, not Rasha), ay doo note spik french. Do you spik english?"

            And you get from this Frenchman all the necessary information in English.

            But it doesn’t work in the province, it’s only for Paris - the government really doesn’t speak.

            PS: In Catalonia, even in Barcelona, ​​it’s hard to speak English ... And even in the villages ... Despite the fact that they often do not want to speak Spanish ...
        3. Turkir
          Turkir 9 July 2016 21: 20
          0
          Flemings live in Belgium ...
        4. Anglorussian
          Anglorussian 10 July 2016 01: 57
          0
          Liberation army of flanders
          The number of personnel in this amusing army, so to speak? Is VanHool enough?
  5. parusnik
    parusnik 9 July 2016 07: 36
    +7
    Interesting parallels, if you add that they were created in Europe in the 30s, under the auspices of England and France - the Balkan Entente, the Baltic Entente, although they assured of their peaceful goals, the activity was directed against the USSR ..
    1. bondarencko
      bondarencko 12 July 2016 01: 27
      0
      Everything is natural in history, it’s never too late to refresh it. Here we must never forget why the Tower of Babel was not built. The Lord has punished!
  6. Hammer
    Hammer 9 July 2016 07: 43
    .
    The reverse side of freedom of speech, you can pour on the fragile minds of insanity about the evil Anglo-Saxons. Just like Hitler in the 30s, Jews were to blame for everything
    1. RexMVDshny
      RexMVDshny 9 July 2016 17: 42
      +6
      And tell me, dear, what good did the Anglo-Saxon nation do for our country ??. There’s more than enough for that - The Revolution of 1917, the military intervention of 1920, the Great Patriotic War too, are few ???
    2. Makarov
      Makarov 9 July 2016 19: 05
      +4
      This is the geopolitical enemy of Russia over the past 4 hundred years ... they are not evil, they are enemies, and not understanding this means not understanding geopolitics and history ...
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 9 July 2016 20: 17
        0
        Well, you turned down for 400 years. And you see, they’re writing without hesitation ... Ask what Amtorg is - there was an article here and how much he gave us.
        1. AK64
          AK64 9 July 2016 20: 35
          +1
          Ask what Amtorg is - there was an article here and how much he gave us.


          No need to laugh at people - they confuse the British with the Americans.

          But these are two completely different ... even races, for that matter. And the level of mutual hostility is not very small (although over the past 50-60 years, the British have crawled and caressed with affection ... They say that the gender of the Federal Reserve Bank belongs to the Windsor)
          1. Makarov
            Makarov 11 July 2016 17: 01
            0
            This is a joke ... my friend, read the history of the United States ... there after 1815 it was not that there were no wars between these countries, they already very quickly created "special relations", as Churchill said ... I don't understand why interfere with relations between people and relations between countries?
        2. Makarov
          Makarov 11 July 2016 16: 56
          0
          Ask what we gave our "assistants" for this. Considering that the USSR "good friends" declared a golden blockade, the trade turnover was as follows: grain for equipment ... so your Amtorg gave us equipment for the famine in the Volga region and Ukraine ... quite an honest deal ...

          Well, at the beginning of their activities, these gentlemen exported from Russia tsarist gold, caviar and furs for wheat ... this was done by Hammer's Allied American Corporation (Alamerico), which they "forget" to mention when talking about the merger of a very interesting Products Exchange Corporation (Prodexco), whose legs (probably) grow out of money honestly stolen by Mr. Bakhmetyev and Arcos-America Inc. (which was British) ... this is to that "Spaniard" who includes a fool and tries to tell what different "races are American and British" ...
  7. Hammer
    Hammer 9 July 2016 07: 45
    +7
    Quotation: blooded man
    Talking about the rest of the outskirts is ridiculous, since there was a big mistake for the king to attach them as provinces, not colonies.

    Where are all the British colonies now? Do not remind me, special. for royal mistakes?
    1. co-creator
      co-creator 9 July 2016 11: 07
      +6
      Quote: Hammer
      Quotation: blooded man
      Talking about the rest of the outskirts is ridiculous, since there was a big mistake for the king to attach them as provinces, not colonies.

      Where are all the British colonies now? Do not remind me, special. for royal mistakes?

      In the same places as the outskirts of the USSR, they are independent. Only the Britons, unlike us, did not feed them, but on the contrary they raised their industry.
      1. pimen
        pimen 9 July 2016 12: 37
        +5
        Quotation: blooded man
        Where are all the British colonies now?

        so in the "British Commonwealth of Nations" At the same time, the Britons themselves are "almost in white", unlike us
        1. co-creator
          co-creator 9 July 2016 14: 09
          +2
          Here I am about this. They fed, watered and got a spit in the back. All the same, Europeans are smarter than us in these matters.
    2. 4ekist
      4ekist 9 July 2016 16: 01
      +2
      The British colonies became known as the British Commonwealth. Take a look at their state flags and money (I don’t take India into account).
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 9 July 2016 20: 20
        +3
        Well, in India today both the morality of the Victorian era and the habit of drinking tea with milk at 5 o'clock. Ask Indian students about England? The answer is "We owe everything to the British!" Ask about the Sepoy Rebellion. Confused faces and the answer: "Bad people are everywhere!"
    3. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 13 July 2016 00: 57
      0
      Quote: Hammer
      Where are all the British colonies now?

      Mostly in the British Commonwealth of Nations. If anything.
  8. aleks700
    aleks700 9 July 2016 07: 58
    +4
    The author wrote very interestingly. There are some features. The Bolsheviks resolutely cleared Georgia, Medvedev-Putin turned away from Tbilisi. There was a war in Europe. Germany supporting anti-Russian regimes was defeated. And again, the Bolsheviks resolutely and firmly crushed the resistance. The current government is not capable of this. And there were no 25 years of anti-Russian propaganda.
    1. ammunition
      ammunition 9 July 2016 09: 45
      0
      Quote: aleks700
      The current government is not capable of this. And there were no 25 years of anti-Russian propaganda.


      If we draw an analogy, then we must multiply by three. fellow So .. now the moment is somewhere in the 1925 region of the year.
      And Putin's strengthening of the army is "Our response to Chamberlain" laughing
      ------------
      With all the coincidences of "pain points", the situation now .. is still fundamentally different. Throughout. .. The difference is like a chickenpox disease in a three-year-old child and a forty-year-old bruiser.
    2. ZAV69
      ZAV69 9 July 2016 11: 31
      +6
      At the beginning of the 20th century, the country was essentially autonomous, could survive on internal resources, and God himself ordered to clean Georgia. Now fraught with a full-blown economic blockade, which will provoke real riots. It was impossible to clean the teddy bear at 0. Over there, they are doing quite legitimately annexed Crimea ... And this is when we became stronger, and in 2008 we obviously did not pull.
      Now Ukraine essentially needs to be taken while there is no semi-legitimate power there ...... Now, there the power will decay to a new Maidan, then ..... I hope there is enough strength.
  9. cdznjckfd
    cdznjckfd 9 July 2016 08: 02
    +8
    The article is not indisputable, but a plus deservedly.
    1. M0xHaTka
      M0xHaTka 9 July 2016 15: 31
      0
      I agree. Very interesting parallels are given.
  10. Aleksander
    Aleksander 9 July 2016 09: 14
    +11
    The political thought of Russia lived on problems of how to live on with those countriesthat have already formed: Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland. Latvia, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan (I give their modern names for a better understanding). Their existence has already become a fact, and the probability of their absorption back (as it seemed at that time) tended to zero.

    Wow, the author suggests studying alternative story: what, in ., "country Ukraine?
    Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih and Odessa Republic in the composition of the RSFSR of that time, moreover INDEPENDENTLY DEFINING YOURSELF IN RUSSIA, the author, obviously, is uncomfortable to know, because it does not fit into the concept? But this is 70% of today's Ruins! And they wanted to spit on ukrosoznanie and're coming out "nation". Yes, and Kiev gladly met the Russian troops.
    And the "ukrostate" itself, to which the author refers, according to Bronstein's apt expression, "was limited to the territory of the room (carriage) in which his" leaders "sat. And his caricatured interpretations were accelerated and fought with ease all: white, red, green, Germans, Poles and bandits of all stripes.
    There was NOT a country of Ukraine, it was created by the Bolsheviks, by force stuffing New Russia there.
    About the country "Belarus", the author generally made fun of: OCCUPIED by the Germans (!)territory a handful of inadequate proclaimed a "state" -without territory (they themselves could not decide how many lol ), governing bodies, the army, that is, apart from the "government" and the "declaration of the BPR", nothing else. They were even pushed aside by the invaders with disgust, who needs these clowns?
    Nonsense...
    1. co-creator
      co-creator 9 July 2016 11: 12
      -4
      It’s marsupial. It works in the Russian Federation for comrades who want to leave independent Ukraine and write this nonsense on order. Everyone has fallen from it, and the rest come to hit.
  11. Kotyara Fat
    Kotyara Fat 9 July 2016 09: 40
    0
    Interesting idea...
  12. antivirus
    antivirus 9 July 2016 09: 52
    0
    "as well as liberated German prisoners of war and mobilized German colonists." --- The reason for the exile of the Volga Germans in the future?
    "OUR FRIENDS" created so many problems in 1917-21. Cooked for decades.
    The reason for the creation of the Ukrainian SSR and BSSR: our weakness against Poland. (The simplest demography, it was not enough in terms of population density from Vladivostok to Smolensk or Brest or Warsaw / as there are enough forces /).
    And they supported these entities.
    And we have solved the problem of POLAND in 20 years. And now we coexist in the world for 25 years and "substitute yourself" for what we are hanging out.
    "Kiev is the 3rd city of the empire" - after Moscow, Warsaw, and St. Petersburg, or vice versa?
    Poland -75% of coal Ros empire 1913 where Yuzovka, the Ural digs, D east.
  13. Aleksander
    Aleksander 9 July 2016 10: 02
    +6
    By the way, during the years of the civil war, independence of Chechnya was proclaimed. At first it was the North Caucasus Emirate, headed by the Emir-Imam Sheikh Uzun-Haji. And then there was an uprising of the highlanders led by Seyid Sheikh (a descendant of Shamil). Everything is as it should be with the cutting out of all Russians who did not run away, with clumsy attempts to pacify - in December 1920 of the year. To suppress the rebels, an army of 9 thousands of Red Army soldiers was thrown, who were everywhere stopped and thrown back with the loss of only those killed and only 1372 people in the last month of that fateful year. And then it began: in 1922, the population of the region was allocated 110,5 thousand pounds of grain, 150 thousand pounds of oil. 1 billion rubles was allocated for the restoration of the economy. Reminds nothing?


    Absolutely nothing!
    The author again stubbornly refuses to KNOW history, but only pulls out individual facts to fit his "theory".

    And here are the uncomfortable FACTS that deny him nonsense:

    1. Decisions of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RCP (B.) adopted on October 14 1920:
    "On the issue of agrarian to recognize the need for return Highlanders of the North Caucasus lands taken away by the Great Russians

    2.
    Order No. 01721 (under the heading "secret"), signed by A. Medvedev, temporarily acting commander of the Caucasian Labor Army: “... Member of the PBC Kavfrontov. Ordzhonikidze ordered: the first - Art. Kalinovskaya burn; the second - the villages of Yermolovskaya, Zakan-Yurtovskaya, Samashkinskaya, Mikhailovskaya - to give to the poorest landless population, and first of all, always to the former devotees of Sovvlast, upland Chechens: for what purpose should the entire male population of the above-mentioned villages from 18 to 50 be loaded into echelons and sent to the North under escort for heavy forced labor;

    3. From a telegram from a member of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Caucasian Labor Army, G.K. Ordzhonikidze and I.V. Stalin from 1 on November 1920: «Eviction of the villages is successful ... Today I had a meeting with Chechens - representatives of villages. Chechen mood is excellent, they are happy indefinitely and declare that our act is for them great historical event».

    It remains to add that during these events the Bolsheviks and the "Red Highlanders" killed tens of thousands of russian cossacks by carrying out the GENOCIDE of Russian people.

    Thus the Bolsheviks destroyed natural defense of the Caucasus and Russia-Cossackswho lived there for centuries, served and held back bandits of all stripes. Thus, it gave free rein to all inadequate nationalists. Then they began to fight with their recent highland allies .... D., B.!


    And how is the situation like today? Did the authorities destroy the Russians in Chechnya in the 90? Not.

    And the Cossacks, who could resolve everything, agree and protect, were destroyed by the Bolsheviks back in the 1920's ...
    This happened EVERYWHERE in the Cossack regions.
    1. Igor39
      Igor39 9 July 2016 10: 31
      +5
      Since the beginning of the 90s, the Chechens have surpassed the most violent fascists in atrocities, in Achkhoy-Martan, Gudermes, in every self-respecting family, slaves were kept in basements and zindans, well, even if some slave owners were destroyed and condemned, but not all, they are there they still live on federal money, but I am sure that sooner or later Kadyrov will be overwhelmed by their own people and Chechnya will drink more blood.
  14. V.ic
    V.ic 9 July 2016 10: 33
    +4
    Until the German offensive on the Marne was repelled in July 1918, it was believed that by the end of the year Germany would crush the allies and impose a favorable peace on them. No wonder the French themselves then called their victory "a miracle on the Marne." Author yurasumy

    With the second battle of the Marne in mind, the author attached the expression "miracle on the Marne" referring to the first battle of the Marne in 1914, when the German advance was halted. Each vegetable / fact / has its own place, otherwise the vinaigrette turns out!
  15. kotvov
    kotvov 9 July 2016 13: 19
    +1
    for some reason, some perceived the article as a prophecy. It seems to me that the author simply gave an analogy, for reflection.
  16. nvd5
    nvd5 9 July 2016 15: 47
    +3
    The Miracle on the Marne is 1914, not 18.

    Everything else is at the same level. Superficial and weak.
  17. a housewife
    a housewife 9 July 2016 16: 05
    +2
    And to me on a drum - who of what nationality - everywhere there are people, but there are sv ... chi. But governments, politicians, big business are all one, a special nationality. People - they wouldn’t .. oh, many, especially not too educated, do not understand anything, therefore they lend themselves to propaganda, deception, go on about any rubbish. Only an ordinary person needs little. Well, really. Stable work, so that earnings allow you to eat, dress, be treated, study (Yes, in fact, even uneducated people often value education), have reliable housing, and sometimes some entertainment. But others strive to row gold with a shovel. It just doesn't happen that way. So they will rob. Who? Again ordinary people. And under what only theories do not fail. Involuntarily, you think about what people always dream about - about the ideal world order, that is, about utopias. What do they offer? Any rubbish that constantly ends in wars. There is no way out of this. and the building of socialism in one particular country — also from the realm of utopias. I’m silent about communism. The idea is very good, even the apostles tried. Only impossible. Alas...
  18. Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 9 July 2016 18: 08
    -2
    (translation) ... among the Polish youth, mainly of gentry origin, a cultural movement arose - the so-called. "Cotton-loving". <...> The hype fans did not share the ideas of the 1863 rebels, believing that their place was not in the Polish camp, but with the Ukrainian people. A group of clappers led by a student of Kiev University Vladimir Antonovich declared themselves Ukrainians, left the Polish organization and, together with the students of the Left Bank Ukraine, founded the "Hromada". <...> V.Antonovich himself later became an outstanding historian of Ukraine, the founder of the historical school. P. 316-317. Natalia Polonska-Vasilenko. Istory of Ukraine. Volume 2. Kiev, "Libid", 1993 (Reprint reproduction of the book published in Munich Ukrainische Freie Universität und Ukrainischer Verlag, München, 1976)
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 13 July 2016 01: 03
      0
      Quote: Lyubopyatov
      Khlopomaniacs did not share the ideas of the rebels of the 1863 of the year,

      Well, this rebellion was the weakest of all.
  19. Makarov
    Makarov 9 July 2016 19: 02
    -1
    According to the text: they have already spoken about the Marne ... the question of the landing of the British in Murmansk and their "strange" trade union movement towards Peter is not said, but this is a thread to the "allies" in the Entente and their agreements with the Bolsheviks, whites, Germans, etc. ...

    What are the conclusions? Well this is the main thing ... but they essentially are not ...
  20. Turkir
    Turkir 9 July 2016 21: 33
    +2
    Statistics are for 1919. And about the nationalism in Ukraine that Makarenko faced can be read in his "Pedagogical Poem" and this, I am writing from memory, in 1931.
    It is interesting to know who conducted the census in Kiev in 1919? Tsarist generals?
    It is also interesting to compare, for example, with surveys before 1917.
    For example, in the newly formed state of Slovakia more than one hundred thousand Rusyns appeared, and in Czechoslovakia there were about ten thousand of them.
    We do not find answers to these questions in this article.
  21. Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 9 July 2016 21: 43
    +2
    The Kiev census was allegedly carried out in 1919, and the report was published in 1920 - and in the Trotskyist spelling, i.e. already published by the Bolsheviks. Probably, the survey was conducted by them. Thus, to the question-call of the commissar with burning eyes: "Are there any Ukrainians?" - was the answer: "Yes, but what about, the commissar!"
  22. Zulu_S
    Zulu_S 9 July 2016 22: 04
    +2
    The author, in support of his idea, tugged at the facts, and a third-rate agitation was obtained.
  23. Lord blacwood
    Lord blacwood 9 July 2016 22: 57
    +1
    The author is very mistaken at the very beginning of the article. The causes of the revolution and the collapse of the Russian Empire are mostly government mistakes. Yes, the British took advantage of the situation, but the reasons were the mistakes of our bureaucrats. Due to the high level of corruption, the unwillingness of the authorities to carry out reforms, the economic crisis (in connection with the war), dissatisfied appeared who turned into revolutionaries. And the British, as always, took advantage of this, as they always looked for weaknesses, and then pressed on them.
    If the authorities of the Russian Empire had carried out reforms a little earlier, there would have been no revolution.
    1. AK64
      AK64 10 July 2016 08: 49
      0
      The causes of the revolution and the collapse of the Russian Empire are mostly government mistakes.

      Yah? And which ones, for example?
      Name a couple. Yes, at least one call!
      Due to the high level of corruption,

      The fact did not have a place.
      That is, corruption naturally existed (this is human nature), but its level was much lower than even under Stalin, not to mention "now". Yes Yes.

      unwillingness of the authorities to carry out reforms,

      / Slid under the table /
      Wow! To school, to study and study (as the great bequeathed, you know-who bequeathed)

      I did not comment further.

      But I’ll say I’m saying: how much can you live with fairy tales that Mary-Vanna told in the first grade? All life?
      1. Lord blacwood
        Lord blacwood 10 July 2016 09: 52
        +1
        Yah? And which ones, for example?
        Name a couple. Yes, at least one call!

        1) A weak economy, which already in 1915 began to fail. In 1916, this led to the fact that strikes and strikes became widespread, and peasants, as a result of depreciation of money, stopped supplying grain and other agricultural products to the cities.
        2) Constant change of government. The people called the government "somersault collegium", as there the portfolios of ministers passed from hand to hand.
        The fact did not have a place.
        That is, corruption naturally existed (this is human nature), but its level was much lower than even under Stalin, not to mention "now". Yes Yes.

        On the contrary. Corruption was high, and in the middle of the war it went off scale. Everywhere reigned bribery, betrayal. Due to the fact that there were many German nobles in the army of the Russian Empire and at the imperial court, the Germans quickly managed to learn our military secrets. They even recognized our code in the early days, and many soldiers died because of this.
        / Slid under the table /
        Wow! To school, to study and study (as the great bequeathed, you know-who bequeathed)

        We spent less on education than all developed countries (the USA, Japan, Germany, Great Britain), since if Nicholas II could and wanted to carry out reforms, but there are no officials at the provincial levels. The nobles continued to regard commoners as second-class people, and enjoyed privileges, which they got rid of in all developed countries.
        Everything is taken from the official history of Russia. You can check.
  24. EDP
    EDP 10 July 2016 02: 22
    0
    The article is, in principle, correct. Development is spiraling. At the present stage of development, we have come to a period called the civil war. If the political will does not disagree with historical realities, we are waiting for the creation of an analogue of the USSR.
  25. Alisher
    Alisher 10 July 2016 09: 27
    +1
    If there is a strong central authority (first of all, it concerns governance, not money or the number of security officials), with ideas that resonate with the general public, the EU and the USA will have their own big internal problems (crisis, migrants, ...) , then unification in the style of the USSR (with a different ideology) will become possible. Even if it is first called the EAEU.
    Otherwise - a slide into civil / nationalist economic, and then real wars, and the seizure of control of external forces.
  26. zav
    zav 10 July 2016 15: 48
    0
    I don’t understand what we should remember and what should not be forgotten? The fact that the development of society (history) is spiraling is well known to everyone from school. The fact that any nation is looking for a place under the sun, entering into conflicts with its neighbors, is also nothing new. Each nation seeks ways to isolation, to its "self" - this is based on the properties of human nature. Because it’s more convenient for any person to live among their own people than to feel “come in large numbers”.
    The author put the term “civil war” in the headline, and writes about the struggle of the nationalities. And what if in our time the struggle of the central government with the struggle of the nationalities is going on according to an already tested scheme. So what? So it was and it will be so. Or should we (Russia) use some other means? Does the author have other options?
    The struggle against separatism of the national suburbs can be won only by destroying its carriers, that is, this problem nation itself. If the colonization of the Caucasus, Central Asia, Kazakhstan and Siberia were modeled on the colonization of North America by Europe, then national problems would certainly be less.
  27. dmitrymb
    dmitrymb 10 July 2016 20: 45
    0
    on the difference of religions conflicts arise, it is necessary to unite religions, languages, people ...
  28. victorrat
    victorrat 2 October 2016 22: 37
    0
    Full crap !!! What kind of Kiev princes created Russia. This author is a clear Bandera. There was no Kievan Rus in nature, how many times should I repeat? In the 19 century, the term was introduced by the historian Solovyov, and Karl Marx supported it.
    Let him repeat the nonsense that the Prince of Kiev of Kiev built when he was not Kiev, but Rostov! Prophetic Oleg went from Novgorod with little Igor and united the Russian lands, beat the Khazars, made Kiev his mother and nailed the shield to the gates of Tsar-grad, having signed an agreement with him in 2 languages. Although such as this author claim that the Slavs were illiterate)))) And why did the Ukrainians appear during the 1918 census? Again the author is disingenuous !!
    The Bolsheviks banned being called Little Russians !!!!! And after all, Comrade Blank knew why Ukraine supported the name and began to create a nation of Ukrainians, which in life was not. And therefore, why Rusyn Ivan Franko was offended when he was called this filthy word. A Ukrainian is a traitor to the Orthodox faith (Catholic Encyclopedia for the 1913 year, take an interest) Better let the author analyze how the Russian Putivl was included in this trash.
  29. den-protector
    den-protector 3 December 2016 20: 58
    0
    This proves once again that we need a unitary country, without any republics (according to the Constitution of the Russian Federation - states within the Russian Federation). The Russian Empire, too, was not formally in the full sense of a unitary country (autonomous Finland, Central Asian khanates, etc.), however, the imperial power, especially under the "Saint" Nikolashka II, was frankly weak.