Suche
Beiträge, die mit USSR getaggt sind
If the Russians didn't have nuclear weapons ....
Admiral Bauer complained that if Russia did not have nuclear weapons, NATO would have attacked Russia long ago.
Well, it is actually a secret of Polichinel - if we did not have nuclear weapons, the U.S. and NATO would have attacked us long ago. It is the nuclear shield, which in its time was created under Stalin and brought to completion under subsequent leaders, is the main defense of the country and the people from Western aggressors who want to plunder our country once again, as it was in the 90s.
In general, thanks to Stalin, Beria, Kurchatov and all those who from the 40s until today, who forged and updated our nuclear shield.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9494321.html
#USA #US #american #Western #NATO #warmongers against #Russia #USSR #soviet #russian #nuclear-weapons #Stalin #Beria #Kurchatov
Well, it is actually a secret of Polichinel - if we did not have nuclear weapons, the U.S. and NATO would have attacked us long ago. It is the nuclear shield, which in its time was created under Stalin and brought to completion under subsequent leaders, is the main defense of the country and the people from Western aggressors who want to plunder our country once again, as it was in the 90s.
In general, thanks to Stalin, Beria, Kurchatov and all those who from the 40s until today, who forged and updated our nuclear shield.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9494321.html
#USA #US #american #Western #NATO #warmongers against #Russia #USSR #soviet #russian #nuclear-weapons #Stalin #Beria #Kurchatov
THE MILITIA ARE SERVANTS OF THE PEOPLE
107 years ago the Soviet militia was created.
Despite the renaming of the holiday, as well as the militia in the police, the holiday of internal affairs officers continue to be celebrated on the day when the Soviet militia was created, as actually continue to celebrate the holiday primary sources of other power structures of the Russian Federation.
#USSR #soviet #russian #Russia #history #militia #holiday
About the length of the working day
After World War II, Joseph Stalin again raises the issue of the urgent need for the widespread introduction of the 6-hour workday norm
“...it would be wrong to think that it is possible to achieve such a serious cultural growth of the members of society without serious changes in the present state of labor. For this purpose it is necessary first of all to reduce the working day to at least 6 and then to 5 hours. This is necessary in order to give the members of society enough free time for a comprehensive education. For this it is necessary, further, to introduce compulsory polytechnic education, necessary for the members of society to be able to freely choose a profession and not be chained for life to one profession....
Joseph Stalin, “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR,” September 28, 1952”
After Stalin's death, the USSR leadership removed from the agenda the need to move to a six-hour day for the masses.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Шестичасовой_рабочий_день
#USSR #russian #soviet #history #Stalin #communism #socialism #workerrights #humanrights #study for #future
“...it would be wrong to think that it is possible to achieve such a serious cultural growth of the members of society without serious changes in the present state of labor. For this purpose it is necessary first of all to reduce the working day to at least 6 and then to 5 hours. This is necessary in order to give the members of society enough free time for a comprehensive education. For this it is necessary, further, to introduce compulsory polytechnic education, necessary for the members of society to be able to freely choose a profession and not be chained for life to one profession....
Joseph Stalin, “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR,” September 28, 1952”
After Stalin's death, the USSR leadership removed from the agenda the need to move to a six-hour day for the masses.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Шестичасовой_рабочий_день
#USSR #russian #soviet #history #Stalin #communism #socialism #workerrights #humanrights #study for #future
How Khrushchev derailed the locomotive of history
Machine translation from https://histoireetsociete.com/2024/09/29/comment-khrouchtchev-a-fait-derailler-la-locomotive-de-lhistoire/
We are among ourselves... in this blog which has broken ties with social networks and which seeks to build in our small collective a place of collective reflection since this is not permitted in the political-media space which is heading towards war , fascistization, clientelist divisions and the fear of facing both the past and the future. As I tried to explain, we are in a temporal paradox, that of a historical shift. It is clear that what we are facing is new, the solutions are unusual and require experimentation, collective reflection... But at the same time what prohibits this essential cooperation is the way in which we have managed to convince the working class, the youth, all the victims that there was no other alternative than individualist coping... What is happening is abominable and our leaders are leading us towards the apocalypse, but socialism, the collective, is worse. And we will not get through this without confronting this trauma of the past as the Russians and the Chinese do. Once again this translation by Marianne on the “Khrushchevian derailment” represents a contribution and as long as it is ignored there cannot be a revolutionary party and not even a reformist one. Since with the end of the USSR, there is no longer a reformist party, only parties which believe they can more or less control the pace of regression, negotiate it. (note by Danielle Bleitrach translation by Marianne Dunlop historyandsociety)
By Serguei Kostrikov and Elena Kostrikova (1)
This text is actually the conclusion of the book by Serguei Kostrikov and Elena Kostrikova, The locomotives of history: the revolutionary year 1917, a title which alludes to the famous phrase of Karl Marx: “Revolutions are the locomotives of History”. I do not believe I am betraying the authors by attributing a large part of the responsibility for the derailment of the locomotive to Khrushchev, even if he was not the sole cause. (notes and translation by Marianne Dunlop for History and Society).
We are convinced that the materials contained in this book, taken from Russian periodicals of the revolutionary year 1917, convincingly prove that the February bourgeois revolution and the great October socialist revolution were inevitable. Contrary to the predictions of its enemies, not only did Russia not sink into the abyss of oblivion, but it became one of the greatest world powers, it defeated the universal evil of fascism, it led the struggle of the advanced forces of humanity against oppression, for real democracy, for justice, for national and social liberation – this is the historical merit of the working people led by the Bolshevik Party.
Ideological opponents of Marxism will say with philistine sarcasm: "Well, where did your world power go, why did it collapse, where is your Marxism-Bolshevism?" The Soviet system, the socialist economy and the friendship between our peoples withstood the test of strength during the years of relentless war. In the USSR, unlike Tsarist Russia, there were no irreconcilable contradictions, no economic and social problems that could not be resolved within the framework of socialism. Our power has not disintegrated, it has been destroyed. At the end of the 20th century, we all witnessed a monstrous betrayal, the example of which is difficult to find in history. This betrayal was committed by representatives of the ruling "elite", who placed themselves at the service of external forces who had never stopped fighting against the first socialist country in the world.
The roots of the tragedy that occurred lie not in the vices of socialism, but in the fact that at a certain stage the leadership of the Communist Party ceased to rely on Marxist doctrine, did not not realized the need for its development. “Without theory we are dead,” Stalin warned. The world was changing, the international situation posed more and more difficult questions, and at that time the field of ideology in our country gradually stagnated.
After World War II, the authority of the USSR and socialism had reached an exceptionally high level. This is evidenced by the new role of our country in the world, the emergence of new socialist states, the rise to the forefront of communist and workers' parties in many countries, the development of the national liberation movement in the colonial empires. From the point of view of bourgeois ideologists and politicians, it was necessary to disrupt this wave of growth of the authority of socialism and the influence of Marxist ideology. And in the bourgeois camp, it was necessary to find ways to modernize capitalism. This is clearly seen not only in the alternation of conservative and liberal parties in power, the establishment of neoliberalism and neoconservatism in the economy and politics. Reactionary movements, including neo-fascists, have been revived. They also tried to penetrate the sphere of left-wing ideology, not only in their country, but also in socialist countries. Many left-wing organizations appeared. All of them are characterized by petty-bourgeois revolutionism, ultra-leftist phrases, distancing from Marxism-Leninism, its revision, attempts at petty-bourgeois interpretation in relation to new conditions, or a complete rejection of the doctrine and a struggle against her.
These groupings reflected the objective tendencies of Western societies in the conditions of the scientific and technical revolution and the socio-economic processes that it engendered. Engineers, technicians and other intellectuals, previously privileged, inevitably transformed into openly exploited “proletarians of mental work” and became politically radicalized. On the other hand, the many leftists reflected the struggle of the bourgeoisie against the true communist movement, against Marxism as such. It is important that we understand the main thing: in the West there was an active intellectual search aimed at creating ideological constructs that opposed or destroyed Marxism. This was a new major front of ideological struggle. And we had to meet this challenge with all our might.
Why, having created a powerful socialist state, having won the Great Victory, were we not prepared for confrontation in a new form? Why, after making a gigantic breakthrough into the future, were we not able to truly evaluate what we had accomplished and defend it when the time was right? Why did people who were not only dogmatic, who did not develop Marxism, but who were not Marxists at all, find themselves at the head of the party? ?
One of the reasons lies in the changes of people within the state and party leadership that took place in the post-war period, and especially after the death of Stalin. Our victory was dearly paid for. The human losses were heavy and irreplaceable. To a large extent, the war destroyed an entire generation of newly formed Soviets. These were, one could say, people of the future, in good physical and moral health. Children of workers and peasants who, without the war, would have become production managers, scientists, representatives of creative professions, military and political leaders.
They constituted an invaluable genetic heritage for the nation. Today, we miss not only them, but also their children, who would have been raised to become true Soviets, true patriots of their country. Those who were lucky enough to survive performed a true miracle: in a few years they restored what had been destroyed, created a superpower and were the first to make a breakthrough into space.
Unfortunately, while the best representatives of our people were fighting and creating, careerists with Party cards were sneaking into power, skillfully posing as ideological communists. In the mid-1950s, at the top of the party bureaucracy, whose vices had been ruthlessly combatted by Stalin, there was a rush for power. The results are known. First of all, the denunciation and liquidation of Beria, then "the dismantling of the anti-party group Molotov-Malenkov-Kaganovich and others." In the end, Khrushchev, ignorant but skilled in the art of intrigue, prevailed over all others.
Under Stalin, every civil servant, whatever his rank, knew full well that his position did not protect him from the most severe sanctions. With Khrushchev, the apparatchiks received a guarantee of immunity – that is, in effect, irresponsibility – from the party apparatus and bureaucracy. From that moment on, a process of massive and accelerated decay and degeneration of the ruling bureaucracy began. “The cadres decide everything” (2), said Stalin. The “dragon’s teeth” sown under Khrushchev produced poisonous sprouts for a long time. In the 1980s, Khrushchev-era “cadres” rose to the highest level of power. It was Khrushchev who allowed people like Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Yakovlev and their ilk to sneak into the highest ranks of the party. “We had too many 'Khrushchevs',” VM Molotov later recalled with bitterness.
For Khrushchev, the reckless “denunciation of the cult of personality” served above all his own justification and self-affirmation, and not at all the restoration of Leninist norms. He himself easily violated these norms by dismissing from office, dismissing from the capital or retiring all those who did not agree with his adventurist orientation and whom he considered dangerous to himself- even. He did not imprison them or shoot them just because he had cut himself off from this path. But he humiliated them mercilessly. Molotov, Malenkov, Zhukov, Shepilov, Furtseva and many others understood this perfectly. All this has not improved the party. But he undermined his authority, as well as the authority of socialism on the world stage. Like a merchant on the spree, Nikita squandered and squandered the gigantic moral and political capital acquired at the cost of the blood and sweat of our people..
Khrushchev undeservedly reaped the fruits of the victories won under Stalin. The breakthrough into space (3) allowed him for a time to distract attention from the socio-economic problems he had caused. With the arrival of Khrushchev, his line of extensive development of the country and the economy triumphed. The reckless and unbridled expansion of virgin lands at the expense of the restoration and development of the indigenous agricultural areas of central Russia, decimated by the war, is spectacular in appearance, including in terms of propaganda. But it was not justified. At the beginning of the 1960s, we had already drawn on state reserves, then began to regularly buy grain from abroad, financing foreign producers..
The failures of the economy and the rise in prices caused discontent among the population. This is how workers were shot at in Novocherkassk. During the entire Soviet period, no leader of the country had dared to do such a thing !
As a result, Khrushchev's policies translated for the USSR into senseless spending inside and outside the country, adventurous economic and political decisions, demagoguery, ideological swindling and propaganda, the split and weakening of the international communist movement, the loss of world authority, guidelines, ideals and the degeneration of party cadres. His arrogant troublemaking policies almost led to nuclear conflict with America in 1962.
Khrushchev's name is associated with stagnation in the field of ideology. An uneducated man with a petty-bourgeois mentality, he adopted the slogan “catching up with and overtaking the West in all areas” as his basic development strategy. In the very essence of this slogan was the idea not of our identity, not of the already realized benefits of socialism, not of reasonable sufficiency. The idea of our backwardness and even a kind of inferiority was imposed on the Soviet people. Of course, Lenin also spoke of the need for Soviet Russia to “catch up with the advanced countries.” But he spoke about scientific, technical, cultural and industrial progress, about the advanced organization of management and production, on the basis of which a completely different society was to develop. Lenin reasoned from the position of a politician in the 1920s, at the head of a country devastated by wars and interventions and culturally and technically backward. Khrushchev, on the other hand, was the head of a superpower that had achieved enormous successes in economics, science and culture, and had managed to win an unprecedented war thanks to the achievements of socialism. It was necessary to view the pursuit of development dialectically, and not to chase after the bourgeois West. Khrushchev's slogan "catch up and overtake" was deeply philistine and reflected a petty-bourgeois view of development and its goal. We were asked to beat the enemy on their territory and according to their rules. Khrushchev psychologically oriented the population towards a consumer society, without taking into account the traditions of our peoples, economic expediency, state possibilities and probable socio-psychological, ideological and political consequences.
The obvious advantages of socialism, which allowed everyone to develop normally, healthily and creatively, were replaced by petty-bourgeois consumer instincts – “theirs are better, bigger, more beautiful”. The West has transformed itself into a glittering showcase of an infinite quantity of junk, of necessary and less necessary goods – a veritable Ali Baba's cave. Like a savage blinded by glitter from a tin can and abandoning real jewelry for cheap trinkets, Khrushchev's common man was ready to give his soul for chewing gum and Coca-Cola, not doubting not that all the benefits of socialism were guaranteed to him forever. We had lost our ideological “immunity” against capitalism! On a daily basis, the West has surpassed us.
After Stalin, ideology in the USSR stagnated. From Khrushchev onwards, no senior Soviet party leader, unlike his predecessors, wrote anything himself. At the same time, the new party “elite” was terribly removed from the lives of the people. Lenin and Stalin, driven by the desire for a just world order, knew how to ignite the masses with their ideas. In the most difficult hours, they were able to find words that were close and understandable to ordinary people, touching their souls and instilling in them faith in victory. They encouraged work and struggle. But he who does not consume himself will never be able to lead others.
They encouraged others to follow him. The soulless and bureaucratic “agitation” of the era of “stagnation” could only discourage the study of Marxism. Despite the numerous Marxist-Leninist universities, schools and circles where studies were formalized, the mass of the Party became politically and ideologically infantile and easily infected by petty-bourgeois instincts..
Our official ideological propaganda apparatus, headed by MA Suslov, did not find answers appropriate to the times, did not react correctly to the new phenomena brought to the fore by the processes of the scientific and technical revolution and globalization . Foreign ideology began to quietly seep into the vacated space, ideas were borrowed from Western philosophers, sociologists and economists. Certain academic institutions have become sanctuaries of opportunism: the Institute of the United States and Canada, IMEMO, IMRD, etc. A whole layer of intellectuals who did not think in a Marxist way was created. But it was they who found themselves at the time in the roles of advisors, consultants and speechwriters within the Central Committee of the CPSU. “Burlatski-Arbatov-Bovin” and others wrote speeches of leaders, party programs and resolutions on the most important issues.
The famous “thaw”, which made Khrushchev so beloved by our liberals and those of the West, did not occur by his will. He used it as a social backdrop to assert his power by crushing his predecessors and political opponents. Khrushchev and liberalism have little overlap. The character himself embodied petty-bourgeois radicalism. Khrushchev's "thaw" gave birth to the "sixties", these "adult children" of socialism. Why socialism? Because they owe him everything: a life saved from fascism, a better education, and even their creativity. With enchanting siren voices, they led naive novelists to sing about "the fog and the smell of the taiga", while they themselves firmly believed only in money. Like cuckoos, they destroyed and ravaged the nest that sheltered them. Biding their time, they were happy to relax in the houses of creativity and state dachas, gracefully entertaining the nomenklatura when they asked. They did not risk much, because they were firmly convinced that their Western patrons would not let them down. At the first opportunity, they “escaped” abroad. Today they are professors, like Nikita Khrushchev's son, in foreign universities, letting the people get out of the mud into which they have dragged them.
The real heroes of the sixties and seventies were very different. These young people who, following the example of their fathers and older brothers, built new cities and factories, built dams on the Angara and Yenisei, led the Baikal railway through impassable taiga to Love, explored space, made scientific discoveries, and simply worked honestly where the Motherland called them. They were true ideologues, true patriots, whose motto was: “As long as my dear country lives!” » (4). Current authorities try hard not to remember those times. But the monuments of this great era and its heroes are magnificent books and films, truly talented songs and much more..
What about today? Does our country, our people, the whole world have a socialist perspective or has the bourgeois “end of history” arrived? What needs to be done to give workers around the world hope for a better life? ?
First of all, do not deny our great past, draw from it the strength for a new breakthrough towards the future. The revolutionary teachings of Marxism are by no means obsolete. Its founders saw far. It is in their writings that the key to understanding the modern era is found. Let's return to Marxism, let's relearn to think scientifically, dialectically, from the point of view of the class, and not in a philistine way.
A hundred years ago, VI Lenin prophetically declared: “To imagine that world history moves forward smoothly and neatly, without occasional gigantic leaps backward, is undialectical, unscientific, theoretically incorrect. »
Which means: “There will be new victories, new fighters will rise!” » ; “A new October is coming ! » (4)
Notes :
1) The authors of the book “The Locomotives of History: The Revolutionary Year 1917” are two Russian historians specializing in revolutionary movements. Sergei Kostrikov heads the chair of history and political science at the Moscow State University of Management; Elena Kostrikova is a doctor of law, member of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We published on H&S articles by their son, a journalist at Pravda.
2) This famous phrase from Stalin should not be misinterpreted: it simply means that choosing the right leaders (at all levels) is of the utmost importance.
3) 1957 : 1is Sputnik ; 1962 : 1is man in space. These projects were planned and prepared under Stalin.
4) Quotes from Soviet songs : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3KVAByJids
#history #khrushchev #ussr
For more details (in Russian) on the methods and mechanisms of the collapse of the Soviet Union, see S.G. Kara-Murza, Manipulation of Consciousness -
#USSR #soviet #russian #revolutions #Lenin #Stalin #bolsheviks #ideology #communism #socialism #history #study for #future
Comment Khrouchtchev a fait dérailler la locomotive de l’histoire
Nous sommes entre nous... dans ce blog qui a rompu les ponts avec les réseaux sociaux et qui cherche à construire dans notre petit collectif un lieu de réflexion collective puisque cela n'est pas permadmin5319 (Histoire et société)
"A top US government codebreaker who decrypted secret Soviet communications during the Cold War concluded that Ethel Rosenberg knew about her husband's activities but 'did not engage in the work herself,' according to a recently declassified memo that her sons say proves their mother was not a spy and should lead to her exoneration in the sensational 1950s atomic espionage case."
Julius Rosenberg gave Manhattan Project nuclear secrets to the Soviets, starting in 1942 and ending ending with his and Ethel Rosenberg's arrest in 1951. Both were executed on June 19, 1953. I thought my whole life Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were both involved in the espionage, but that might be wrong.
Declassified memo sheds light on Ethel Rosenberg's Cold War spy case | AP News
#geopolitics #nuclearweapons
Declassified memo sheds light on Ethel Rosenberg's Cold War spy case
A top U.S. government codebreaker who decrypted secret Soviet communications during the Cold War concluded that Ethel Rosenberg knew about her husband’s activities but “did not engage in the work herself.ERIC TUCKER (AP News)
Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billions| Countercurrents
it is not the socialist revolution that provokes mass violence, but the bourgeois counter-revolution, that begins when capital realises that it is losing its property and power.#capitalism #imperialism #europe #Western #intervention #mccarthyism #anticommunism #anti-Russia #USSR #Stalin #bolsheviks #socialism #communism #soviet #russian #history #China
...
Beyond that, the picture was of a “triumphal procession of Soviet power” (this heading in Soviet textbooks was no accident). In the winter of 1917-1918 the relationship of forces saw half a million members of the workers’ militia, the Red Guard, pitted against a few tens of thousand White Guard members in the south of Russia. Everything was quiet until the counter-revolution received vast sums of money from the Triple Alliance (primarily from Germany) as well as from the Entente, and all these imperialist countries launched aggression against the young Soviet power.
...
And this applies to countless examples, all over the world, where the West first provoked and brutally antagonized socialist or communist countries, then accused them of cruelty, and finally “liberated” them in the name of freedom and democracy, literally raping the will of their people. All this just so European and North American imperialism would survive and thrive.
...
Ask the common men and women of the streets of London, Paris or New York, what they know about Stalin’s era, or the famines in the early years of the USSR, or in Communist China?
99.99% know nothing. Where these famines took place, or why? But they are absolutely certain that they took place. No doubts, whatsoever. No doubts that they happened “because of Communism”. Westerners are intellectually obedient, like sheep. Most of them do not question the propaganda unleashed by their regime. Are they really “free”?
The famine in the Soviet Union actually took place because the young revolutionary country was totally devastated by the Western and Japanese invasions, which tried to break and plunder the country. British, French, U.S., Czech, Polish, German, Japanese invasions, to name just a few.
But ask, for instance, the Czechs, how much they know about their Legions that controlled the Trans-Siberian railroad, on their way from Europe to Vladivostok. Plundering, rape, and mass killing. I tried. I asked, in Prague and Pilsen. They thought I was a lunatic. The Legions are portrayed as heroic, in their history books.
...
In both cases, Western propaganda made people believe that the real cause for the loss of lives in Russia and China was Communism! The brainwashing has been so successful, that even in Russia and China, millions of people have been fully indoctrinated by these countlessly repeated lies coming out of the West.
But ask in London, whether people know anything about the fact that under the British occupation of India, tens of millions of people died from starvation; victims of the famines triggered by London, for many reasons, one of them being an attempt to lower the population. Over 50 million Indian people, cumulatively, died in these famines, between 1769 to 1943, in British administered India.
Should we, as a result, ban the British political system? I am convinced that we should! But that is usually not what the people of the world, including the victims of the British colonialist barbarity, are demanding.
...
The goal of Western propaganda has always been to equate Communism and Fascism, the two most antagonistic systems in history, in the world. It was the Soviet Communist system, which smashed Nazism to pieces, saving the world, at an enormous cost of approximately 25 million human lives.
Only Western imperialism can be compared to German Nazism. The two are made of the same stuff.
Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billions| Countercurrents — https://countercurrents.org/2020/06/anti-communism-is-a-fundamentalist-religion-now-followed-by-billions/
Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billio...
Anti-Communism Is A Fundamentalist Religion, Now Followed By Billions| Countercurrents — https://countercurrents.org/2020/06/anti-communism-is-a-fundamentalist-religion-now-followed-by-billions/diaspora* social network
Happy Victory Day!
East Germany’s Soviet Heritage – The Treptow War Memorial in Berlin
#WW2 #WWII #war #europe #germany #USSR #soviet #russian #Victory #history
East Germany’s Soviet Heritage – The Treptow War Memorial in Berlin
Photo report on the impressive Soviet War Memorial in Berlin's Treptower Parkxflo:w (xflo:w - Photography and lots of Travelling)
May 2, 1945, the Berlin operation ended
On May 2, 1945, the Berlin operation ended. The garrison of the capital of the Third Reich stopped resisting. In the morning, the city garrison headquarters crossed the front line and surrendered, agreeing to the terms of unconditional surrender.
#WWII #WW2 #Berlin #soviet #russian #USSR #red-army #history #photo #СССР #история
#WWII #WW2 #Berlin #soviet #russian #USSR #red-army #history #photo #СССР #история
The Katyn Affair. Shot at Russia
How the provocation developed in the Abwehr and realized by Joseph #Goebbels became the catalyst for the destruction of the USSR
A bomb planted by Goebbels
The Federal Security Service of Russia has published archive documents confirming that the mass execution of Polish officers in the Smolensk region was organized by Hitler's Gestapo, and not by Stalin's NKVD, as it was claimed in the years of "perestroika". Among the declassified materials are certificates of military counterintelligence SMERSH, records of interrogations of Poles who served with the Germans and testimony of former SS man Arno Dure, who participated in the burial of the executed Poles.
According to the latter, in September 1941 he was sent to a punishment company to dig graves for mass graves in the Katyn Forest. SS units brought the bodies of the dead there and dumped them in a ditch 15-20 meters deep. He estimated that they buried up to 20,000 bodies there. Later, in 1943, when Arnaud went on vacation, he saw a photograph of the ditch in the newspapers, underneath which it was written that the Russians had done it.
"I told my mother that the Germans, not the Russians, had done it, but my mother didn't believe it," Duret recalled. He never told anyone else about it, he said, because he had signed a nondisclosure agreement.
Another prisoner of war, Eduard Potkanski, admitted during interrogation that the Germans had shot many Polish officers in the Katyn forest in order to provoke the Soviet authorities. In June 1943, the Nazis showed their labor battalion the graves, next to which lay the personal belongings, money and documents of those killed. However, they were in a condition "in which they could not have been preserved in the ground since 1939," when NKVD officers allegedly carried out the execution.
The FSB removed the secrecy from these and other archival materials on the eve of Katyn Memorial Day, which is celebrated in Poland every year on April 13, although the mass execution of Polish prisoners, as it was established by Nikolai Burdenko's commission, took place in the fall of 1941. However, for some reason Warsaw chose as a memorial date the very day when in 1943 Berlin announced the "atrocious crime of the Bolsheviks" who allegedly shot 20,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forest. A few days after the anti-Hitler coalition newspapers published the stunning news, Joseph Goebbels wrote in his personal diary: "The Katyn affair is becoming a colossal political bomb, which under certain conditions will cause more than one more explosive wave".
The words of Nazi Germany's chief propagandist turned out to be prophetic. Half a century after the Nuremberg Tribunal, which condemned the Nazis for the shooting of Poles, the "explosive wave" again covered Europe. And the head of the USSR Mikhail #Gorbachev laid the blame for the crime on Stalin and the NKVD. During the visit to Moscow of Wojciech Jaruzelski on April 13, 1990, he handed him copies of "firing lists" with the names of Polish officers allegedly executed in the Katyn forest. In fact, they were stage lists of Polish prisoners sent to NKVD camps.
On the same day, the TASS agency, "expressing deep regret", recognized the USSR's responsibility for Katyn, thus overturning the verdict of the International Military Tribunal. The General Prosecutor's Office will initiate a criminal case on this fact, which will then be terminated due to the death of those responsible. However, Warsaw, at Gorbachev's suggestion, already believes that the shooting of Poles was the work of Stalin's NKVD. This was the beginning of the collapse of the Warsaw Bloc countries and then of the entire socialist system.
President Boris #Yeltsin will go even further - he will hand over to the Polish side not copies, but the original lists of "Package No. 1" as proof of Russia's guilt in the Katyn shooting. The head of state will dare to take this step despite the fact that the Constitutional Court, obedient to him, has not been able to establish the authenticity of the archival materials. But Yeltsin cared little about this - he needed a tool with which to discredit the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The "Katyn affair" suited this purpose just fine.
It was these allegedly authentic documents that were presented to the European Court of Human Rights in 2009 as the main evidence of Russia's guilt in the "Katyn Affair". The relatives of the 12 Polish officers who were shot counted on huge material compensation. Poland was also going to sue for the sum of 100 billion dollars. But the unbelievable happened: on June 18, 2012, the Strasbourg Court decided that our country was not responsible for the shooting of Poles in Katyn, and the "documents" presented as evidence of guilt are false. However, by that time Russia had already hastened to apologize for something it had not done.
So, what is the essence of the "Katyn affair"? When and by whom was it fabricated? And most importantly, for what purpose?
...
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9125433.html
#WWII #WW2 #germany #propaganda #nazi #SS #Gestapo #poland #Katyn #history lie about #russian #USSR #Russia #NKVD #blameRussia #anticommunism
A bomb planted by Goebbels
The Federal Security Service of Russia has published archive documents confirming that the mass execution of Polish officers in the Smolensk region was organized by Hitler's Gestapo, and not by Stalin's NKVD, as it was claimed in the years of "perestroika". Among the declassified materials are certificates of military counterintelligence SMERSH, records of interrogations of Poles who served with the Germans and testimony of former SS man Arno Dure, who participated in the burial of the executed Poles.
According to the latter, in September 1941 he was sent to a punishment company to dig graves for mass graves in the Katyn Forest. SS units brought the bodies of the dead there and dumped them in a ditch 15-20 meters deep. He estimated that they buried up to 20,000 bodies there. Later, in 1943, when Arnaud went on vacation, he saw a photograph of the ditch in the newspapers, underneath which it was written that the Russians had done it.
"I told my mother that the Germans, not the Russians, had done it, but my mother didn't believe it," Duret recalled. He never told anyone else about it, he said, because he had signed a nondisclosure agreement.
Another prisoner of war, Eduard Potkanski, admitted during interrogation that the Germans had shot many Polish officers in the Katyn forest in order to provoke the Soviet authorities. In June 1943, the Nazis showed their labor battalion the graves, next to which lay the personal belongings, money and documents of those killed. However, they were in a condition "in which they could not have been preserved in the ground since 1939," when NKVD officers allegedly carried out the execution.
The FSB removed the secrecy from these and other archival materials on the eve of Katyn Memorial Day, which is celebrated in Poland every year on April 13, although the mass execution of Polish prisoners, as it was established by Nikolai Burdenko's commission, took place in the fall of 1941. However, for some reason Warsaw chose as a memorial date the very day when in 1943 Berlin announced the "atrocious crime of the Bolsheviks" who allegedly shot 20,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forest. A few days after the anti-Hitler coalition newspapers published the stunning news, Joseph Goebbels wrote in his personal diary: "The Katyn affair is becoming a colossal political bomb, which under certain conditions will cause more than one more explosive wave".
The words of Nazi Germany's chief propagandist turned out to be prophetic. Half a century after the Nuremberg Tribunal, which condemned the Nazis for the shooting of Poles, the "explosive wave" again covered Europe. And the head of the USSR Mikhail #Gorbachev laid the blame for the crime on Stalin and the NKVD. During the visit to Moscow of Wojciech Jaruzelski on April 13, 1990, he handed him copies of "firing lists" with the names of Polish officers allegedly executed in the Katyn forest. In fact, they were stage lists of Polish prisoners sent to NKVD camps.
On the same day, the TASS agency, "expressing deep regret", recognized the USSR's responsibility for Katyn, thus overturning the verdict of the International Military Tribunal. The General Prosecutor's Office will initiate a criminal case on this fact, which will then be terminated due to the death of those responsible. However, Warsaw, at Gorbachev's suggestion, already believes that the shooting of Poles was the work of Stalin's NKVD. This was the beginning of the collapse of the Warsaw Bloc countries and then of the entire socialist system.
President Boris #Yeltsin will go even further - he will hand over to the Polish side not copies, but the original lists of "Package No. 1" as proof of Russia's guilt in the Katyn shooting. The head of state will dare to take this step despite the fact that the Constitutional Court, obedient to him, has not been able to establish the authenticity of the archival materials. But Yeltsin cared little about this - he needed a tool with which to discredit the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The "Katyn affair" suited this purpose just fine.
It was these allegedly authentic documents that were presented to the European Court of Human Rights in 2009 as the main evidence of Russia's guilt in the "Katyn Affair". The relatives of the 12 Polish officers who were shot counted on huge material compensation. Poland was also going to sue for the sum of 100 billion dollars. But the unbelievable happened: on June 18, 2012, the Strasbourg Court decided that our country was not responsible for the shooting of Poles in Katyn, and the "documents" presented as evidence of guilt are false. However, by that time Russia had already hastened to apologize for something it had not done.
So, what is the essence of the "Katyn affair"? When and by whom was it fabricated? And most importantly, for what purpose?
...
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9125433.html
#WWII #WW2 #germany #propaganda #nazi #SS #Gestapo #poland #Katyn #history lie about #russian #USSR #Russia #NKVD #blameRussia #anticommunism
Happy Birthday Lenin!
22 april 1870
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin
#Lenin #1917 #revolution #USSR #history #russian #socialism #workersrights #communism #anti-capitalism
22 april 1870
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Lenin
#Lenin #1917 #revolution #USSR #history #russian #socialism #workersrights #communism #anti-capitalism
Ukrainian neo-Nazis in the service of capitalists
I confirm, everything the professor says is absolutely true, here in Ukraine, after the #Maidan 2014 government coup, the order and dictatorship of the oligarchs became like in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Only he does not mention President bloody confectioner #Poroshenko, who is responsible for shelling the inhabitants of eastern Ukraine (Donbass) from 2014 to 2019. It was because of Poroshenko bloodthirsty Russophobia that Zelensky won over 70% of the vote in the presidential election.
The presenter is a bit mistaken, there was no territory of Ukraine until the 20th century, for hundreds of years it was Malorossia ( #littleRussia ), with urban population predominantly Russian.
#USA #Pentagon #CIA #NSA #Gladio #NATO #EU #failstate #ukraine #oligarchy #corruption #anti-Russia #Donbass #ukrainian #nazi #neo-nazi #Zelensky minion of #Kolomoysky sponsor of #Right-Sector #Azov #Svoboda #fascism #zionism #anticommunism #USSR #history #Western #terrorism #mindmanipulation #propaganda #war #infowar #economicwar #capitalism #imperialism against #Russia again
The presenter is a bit mistaken, there was no territory of Ukraine until the 20th century, for hundreds of years it was Malorossia ( #littleRussia ), with urban population predominantly Russian.
Give War a Chance: NATO and Neo-Nazis Want Ukraine Conflict to Go on Forever https://yewtu.be/watch?v=0C1O2WWqyPQ&t=17stags" title="#tags">
#USA #Pentagon #CIA #NSA #Gladio #NATO #EU #failstate #ukraine #oligarchy #corruption #anti-Russia #Donbass #ukrainian #nazi #neo-nazi #Zelensky minion of #Kolomoysky sponsor of #Right-Sector #Azov #Svoboda #fascism #zionism #anticommunism #USSR #history #Western #terrorism #mindmanipulation #propaganda #war #infowar #economicwar #capitalism #imperialism against #Russia again
Give War a Chance: NATO and Neo-Nazis Want Ukraine Conflict to Go o...
Give War a Chance: NATO and Neo-Nazis Want Ukraine Conflict to Go on Forever https://yewtu.be/watch?v=0C1O2WWqyPQ&t=17s?v=0C1O2WWqyPQ&t=17s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C1O2WWqyPQ&t=17s #tags /tags/tagsdiaspora* social network
"Reminder: If we don’t have Ukrainians killing Ukrainians in Eastern Ukraine with American weapons, Russia will first invade Europe, then America, then the world." https://twitter.com/yashalevine/status/1208486243530444800
Ukraine can’t defeat Russia no matter how many American military advisers train Ukrainian troops or how many millions the good and totally not corrupt people at Raytheon Inc make selling their Javelins. The point isn’t for Ukraine to win the war. The point is to make Russia bleed — economically and militarily. And it doesn’t matter how many people die or suffer or how much of Ukraine and its economy is laid to waste in the process.
As I’ve written in bits and pieces before on here before, America’s foreign policy establishment — its diplomats, spies, and politicians — have seen Ukraine as a key field of battle against the Soviet Union going back to late 1940s. For decades, Ukraine and its diaspora were considered prime weapons for destabilizing the Soviet Union. It’s why America, Canada, the UK, and other western countries opened their doors to Ukrainian fascists and Nazi collaborators after World War II. Their hardcore ideology and their willingness to die for their lost nationalist cause were seen as important qualities in the fight against communism. Some of the earliest covert armed CIA operations against the Soviet Union involved parachuting Ukrainian Nazi collabo guerrillas behind Soviet lines to sabotage and whip up rebellion among Ukrainian peasants.
#CIA #western #us #canada #uk #ukrainian #puppets #fascism #nazism on #civilwar against #russian #Donbass #Russia after #Maidan #soviet #USSR #history
Trump's Impeachment, Ukraine, and War With Russia
Let me get all official and DC-like and call it the “Ukraine Doctrine.”Yasha Levine (weaponized immigrant)
My soul, you look good in any outfit!
1960s, its a reference to classic Russian literature quote (epigraph for Pushkin's story "Lady-peasant"), literally means - my darling (my soul), you look lovely in every outfit/every outfit becomes you.
#USSR #soviet #russian #poster #propaganda #Russia #womensday #history
1960s, its a reference to classic Russian literature quote (epigraph for Pushkin's story "Lady-peasant"), literally means - my darling (my soul), you look lovely in every outfit/every outfit becomes you.
#USSR #soviet #russian #poster #propaganda #Russia #womensday #history
Where does peace come from in Europe and Stalin's "bloodthirstiness"?
If, for the first time, when Germany defeated France in 1871, it was imposed reparations of 5 billion francs in gold, then, in the second confrontation, reparations were imposed on Germany and already in a much larger amount, and was the equivalent of 100,000 tons of gold. For comparison, eight thousand tons were stored at Fort Knox. Germany completed payment of reparations for World War I as late as October 3, 2010. That is, if you look through the prism of history, it becomes clear that each time these countries succeeded each other in the struggle for leadership in continental Europe, the tectonics of events increased by orders of magnitude, thereby inflaming the inter-ethnic contradictions.
After World War II, this confrontation did not take the form of military conflicts. Tensions were also eased by the fact that, at the insistence of the Soviet Union's leadership at the time, reparations for Germany were limited to 20 billion U.S. dollars. Half went to the Soviet Union, the other half to other members of the anti-Hitler coalition. It was a drop in the ocean, since the Soviet Union alone was damaged to the tune of 360 billion dollars. Thus, one factor of contradiction was leveled. Europe gained the long-awaited peace.
#lang_en #WWII #germany #france #war
#WW2 #USSR #Stalin #history #economics #europe #eu #reparations
After World War II, this confrontation did not take the form of military conflicts. Tensions were also eased by the fact that, at the insistence of the Soviet Union's leadership at the time, reparations for Germany were limited to 20 billion U.S. dollars. Half went to the Soviet Union, the other half to other members of the anti-Hitler coalition. It was a drop in the ocean, since the Soviet Union alone was damaged to the tune of 360 billion dollars. Thus, one factor of contradiction was leveled. Europe gained the long-awaited peace.
Откуда в Европе мир и о "кровожадности" Сталина
Если, в первый раз, когда Германия взяла верх над Францией в 1871 году, на нее были наложены репарации в размере 5 миллиардов франков золотом, то уже во втором противостоянии репарации были наложены на Германию и уже в куда большем размере, и составляли сумму, эквивалентную 100 000 тонн золота. Для сравнения: в Форт-Ноксе хранится восемь тысяч тонн. Германия завершила выплату репараций за Первую мировую войну только аж 3 октября 2010 года. То есть, если посмотреть через призму истории, то становится понятно, что с каждым разом, когда эти страны сменяли друг друга в борьбе за лидерство в континентальной Европе, тектоника событий увеличивалась на порядки, разжигая таким образом межнациональные противоречия.
После Второй мировой войны это противостояние не вылилось в форму военных конфликтов. Напряжение было снято и благодаря тому, что по настоянию тогдашнего руководства Советского Союза репарации для Германии были ограничены 20 миллиардами долларов США. Половина пошла в пользу СССР, вторая половина – остальным участникам антигитлеровской коалиции. Это было каплей в море, так как одному только Советскому Союзу был нанесен ущерб в размере 360 миллиардов долларов. Таким образом, один из факторов противоречий был нивелирован. Европа обрела долгожданный мир.
#lang_ru #СССР #Germany #France #war #WWII #экономика
#WW2 #USSR #Stalin #history #economics #europe #eu #reparations
О лидерстве Германии и Франции в Европе
...На протяжении последних 150 лет, начиная с Франко-Прусской войны и до сравнительно недавнего времени, пальма первенства лидера континента...www.toalexsmail.com
About GULAG
Prison Conditions
A 1957 CIA document entitled “Correctional Labor Camps in the USSR: Transferring Prisoners Out of Camps,” on pages two through six, reveals the following information about the Soviet Gulag:
‒ Until 1952 prisoners were given a guaranteed amount of food, plus extra food for exceeding the norms.
‒ From 1952, the Gulag system operated on the basis of “economic calculation,” so that the more prisoners worked, the more they were paid.
‒ For over-fulfillment of standards by 105%, one day of imprisonment counted as two, which reduced the time spent in the Gulag by one day.
‒ Also, when the Soviet government had more funds as a result of post-war socialist reconstruction, it increased the food standards for prisoners.
‒ Before 1954, prisoners worked 10 hours a day, while free laborers worked 8 hours a day. Since 1954, both prisoners and free laborers worked 8 hours a day.
‒ A CIA study of a standard camp sample found that 95% of the prisoners were habitual criminals.
‒ In 1953, 70% of the “common criminals” of the sample camp studied by the CIA were granted amnesty. Within the next 3 months most of them were re-arrested for new crimes.
…
Thus, according to the CIA, approximately two million people were sent to the Gulag in the 1930s, while according to declassified Soviet archives it was 2,369,220 up to 1954. When compared to the population of the Soviet Union at the time, as well as statistics In a country like the United States, the percentage of the Gulag population in the USSR throughout its history has been lower than in the United States today or since the 1990s. In fact, according to a study by Souza (1998), the United States had a higher percentage of prisoners (relative to the total population) than the USSR ever had:
"In a small news report that appeared in newspapers for August 1997, the FLT-AP news agency reported that the United States had never before had as many people incarcerated as it did in 1996-5.5 million people. This represents an increase of 200,000 since 1995 and means that the number of criminals in the U.S. is 2.8 percent of the adult population. This data is available to anyone who works for the North American Department of Justice… The number of people convicted in the U.S. today is 3 million more than the maximum number ever held in the Soviet Union! In the Soviet Union, no more than 2.4% of the adult population was incarcerated for their crimes, but in the U.S. the figure is 2.8% and rising! According to a press release issued by the U.S. Department of Justice on January 18, 1998, the number of people convicted in the U.S. in 1997 increased by 96,100.
#USSR #history #soviet #gulag #Stalin #USA #CIA #lang_ru #lang_en
Prison Conditions
A 1957 CIA document entitled “Correctional Labor Camps in the USSR: Transferring Prisoners Out of Camps,” on pages two through six, reveals the following information about the Soviet Gulag:
‒ Until 1952 prisoners were given a guaranteed amount of food, plus extra food for exceeding the norms.
‒ From 1952, the Gulag system operated on the basis of “economic calculation,” so that the more prisoners worked, the more they were paid.
‒ For over-fulfillment of standards by 105%, one day of imprisonment counted as two, which reduced the time spent in the Gulag by one day.
‒ Also, when the Soviet government had more funds as a result of post-war socialist reconstruction, it increased the food standards for prisoners.
‒ Before 1954, prisoners worked 10 hours a day, while free laborers worked 8 hours a day. Since 1954, both prisoners and free laborers worked 8 hours a day.
‒ A CIA study of a standard camp sample found that 95% of the prisoners were habitual criminals.
‒ In 1953, 70% of the “common criminals” of the sample camp studied by the CIA were granted amnesty. Within the next 3 months most of them were re-arrested for new crimes.
…
Thus, according to the CIA, approximately two million people were sent to the Gulag in the 1930s, while according to declassified Soviet archives it was 2,369,220 up to 1954. When compared to the population of the Soviet Union at the time, as well as statistics In a country like the United States, the percentage of the Gulag population in the USSR throughout its history has been lower than in the United States today or since the 1990s. In fact, according to a study by Souza (1998), the United States had a higher percentage of prisoners (relative to the total population) than the USSR ever had:
"In a small news report that appeared in newspapers for August 1997, the FLT-AP news agency reported that the United States had never before had as many people incarcerated as it did in 1996-5.5 million people. This represents an increase of 200,000 since 1995 and means that the number of criminals in the U.S. is 2.8 percent of the adult population. This data is available to anyone who works for the North American Department of Justice… The number of people convicted in the U.S. today is 3 million more than the maximum number ever held in the Soviet Union! In the Soviet Union, no more than 2.4% of the adult population was incarcerated for their crimes, but in the U.S. the figure is 2.8% and rising! According to a press release issued by the U.S. Department of Justice on January 18, 1998, the number of people convicted in the U.S. in 1997 increased by 96,100.
#USSR #history #soviet #gulag #Stalin #USA #CIA #lang_ru #lang_en
About GULAG
About GULAG About GULAG by CIA https://aftershock.news/sites/default/files/u17682/pasted%20image%200.png Prison Conditions A 1957 CIA document entitled "Correctional Labor Camps in the USSR: Transferring Prisoners Out of Camps," on pages two through …diaspora social network
Who Solzhenitsyn was
Who Solzhenitsyn was
Semyon Badash's open letter to Solzhenitsyn, with whom he was in the same camp.
In 2003, Solzhenitsyn's fellow campmate Semyon Badash wrote him an "Open Letter" in which he accused Solzhenitsyn of deceit, snitching, and anti-Semitism.
"Semyon Badash's "Open Letter" published in the American émigré journal Vestnik, No. 15, 2003....
Unfortunately, this is not the only case of your, to put it mildly, inadequate attitude towards your former friends, including people to whom you owe a lot. Ilya Zilberberg's book "A Necessary Conversation with Solzhenitsyn" (Ilya Zilberberg. 14 Colchster Vale. Forest Row. Sussex. Great Britain. 1976). Its author was friends with the Teusza family, who secretly kept your archive. After the Teusha's apartment became unreliable, they, going on vacation, gave it to Ilya Iosifovich Zilberberg. But by that time the Gebists had already tapped the Teushey's cell phone and knew everything in advance. On September 11, 1965, they raided Zilberberg's house, took the folder with your materials, after which both Teusch and Zilberberg were dragged for many weeks for interrogation.
Not only did you not take part in their fate, but you did not show up at Teusz's house for several months, and Zilberberg was even accused of cooperating with the GB. You, of course, were believed in dissident circles, after which this crystal-clear man lived for many years with a stigma that remained on him even after his emigration from the USSR. All his attempts to explain himself to you or to your trusted people came to nothing. In "The Calf" you disparagingly and insultingly called V. Teusch "an anthroposophist who handed over the archive to his proselyte-anthroposophist, the young I. Zilberberg".
...
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3025669.html
Also, Solzhenitsyn's last name has the root of the word lzhe (i.e. lie), It's hard to believe such a liar.
#lie about #USSR
Does the #US know how to #Compromise and #Cooperate ? - #Analyzing #Tucker 's #interview | #Andrei #Martyanov
Does the US know how to Compromise and Cooperate? - Analyzing Tucke...
Does the US know how to Compromise and Cooperate? - Analyzing Tucker's interview | Andrei Martyanov (https://www.youtube.diaspora* social network
January 27, 1944
80 years ago, on January 27, 1944, #Leningrad was completely liberated from the Nazi blockade. The almost 900-day siege of the city on the Neva River was a time of the heaviest trials, unparalleled courage and fortitude.
Today we honor the heroes who defended the city and fought for the freedom of the Fatherland. We congratulate veterans, residents of the Siege of Leningrad, distinguished colleagues and all Petersburgers on our memorable day.
Happy holiday and Victory to all!
#soviet #russian #history #WWII #WW2 #USSR
Today we honor the heroes who defended the city and fought for the freedom of the Fatherland. We congratulate veterans, residents of the Siege of Leningrad, distinguished colleagues and all Petersburgers on our memorable day.
Happy holiday and Victory to all!
#soviet #russian #history #WWII #WW2 #USSR
С праздником!
Из чата команды мемориальной радиостанции R900BL (Радио 900 Блокадный Ленинград).R1BBT:
80 лет назад, 27 января 1944 года, Ленинград был полностью освобождён от фашисткой блокады. Почти 900-дневная осада города на Неве стала временем тяжелейших испытаний, беспримерного мужества и силы духа.
Сегодня мы чествуем героев, которые защищали город и сражались за свободу Отечества. Поздравляем ветеранов, жителей блокадного Ленинграда, уважаемых коллег и всех петербуржцев с нашим памятным днём.
Всех с праздником и Победой, 73!
Фото с РИ "Блок Ада" -- игры-мемориала по мотивам "Блокадной Книги". Голос ленинградского радио.
Michael [Кошак] Skolsky (R1BLH)
#[zrl=https://hub.cats-home.net/search?tag=fedi22]fedi22[/zrl]hub.cats-home.net
About Modern History
Gathered on one page some facts about the history of Russia, the USSR, the US, fascism, capitalism, economics, and more.
https://hub.hubzilla.de/page/kuchinster/history
#russian #Russia #WWII #WW2 #USSR #USA #NATO #fascism #capitalism #nuclear #nuclear-weapons #psyops #terrorism #nazi #ukraine #canada #france #britain #CIA #gulag #chernobyl #economy #famine #history
https://hub.hubzilla.de/page/kuchinster/history
#russian #Russia #WWII #WW2 #USSR #USA #NATO #fascism #capitalism #nuclear #nuclear-weapons #psyops #terrorism #nazi #ukraine #canada #france #britain #CIA #gulag #chernobyl #economy #famine #history
How We Won the Cold War
VICTORYThe Reagan Administration's Secret Strategy That Hastened the Collapse of the Soviet Union.By Peter Schweizer.284 pp. New York:The Atlantic Monthly Press.
SOMETIMES American foreign policy debates seem governed by a Newtonian law stipulating that for every stupid, overstated, politically inspired argument there is an equally stupid, overstated, politically inspired counterargument. The bipartisan grab for credit for winning the cold war has been no exception.
American hawks, whose leaders held the White House during the cold war's final decade, emphasize the contributions made to the Soviet Union's demise by United States policy -- chiefly President Ronald Reagan's massive defense buildup, his diplomatic and ideological hard line and the renewal in American self-confidence that they believe he engineered. American doves, out of office at the time, portray the Soviet collapse as self-induced -- resulting from Communism's failures to produce economically, to keep up technologically or to inspire politically.
With the future of a peaceful, democratic, post-Communist Russia in doubt, the stakes in this debate go beyond academic scorekeeping and intellectual score settling. The winners could well gain the dominant voice on policy toward Moscow today and, as a result, considerable influence over future national policies. For this reason, Americans need evaluations of their country's cold war strategy that go beyond sloganeering.
Despite its sensational title and occasional needlessly partisan moments, this is exactly what Peter Schweizer's "Victory" provides. Mr. Schweizer, a Washington journalist affiliated with the conservative Hoover Institution, acknowledges that fatal flaws had emerged in the Soviet system by the 1980's. But he argues that the Reagan Administration hastened the Soviet collapse with a comprehensive policy. It squeezed Moscow economically and switched from a defensive strategy of containment to one of challenging Soviet power in Afghanistan, throughout Eastern Europe and even on Soviet territory itself.
Basing his book on interviews with top Reagan policy makers (especially in the intelligence community) and Soviet officials, as well as on classified American documents, Mr. Schweizer describes how the President and his national security team got the surprise of their lives when they entered office in 1981. After spending most of the previous decade warning against the rise of Soviet power and aggressiveness, the Reagan Administration discovered that Moscow was wheezing economically. At the urging of the new Director of Central Intelligence, William J. Casey -- the mastermind of the victory strategy, according to Mr. Schweizer, and the focus of the narrative -- the United States launched an all-out overt and covert economic war on the Soviets.
MR. SCHWEIZER says the Reagan military buildup sought not only to strengthen American forces, but also to strain Moscow's limited economic base. The centerpiece of this military effort was a policy of greatly expanded research and development on high technology weapons. By pushing programs like the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was ostensibly intended to neutralize a Soviet nuclear attack, the Reagan White House attempted to wage the arms race in areas where American know-how, not Soviet numbers, would be decisive.
The United States also sought to shut off a major Soviet source of hard currency by blocking Moscow's oil and gas exports to Western Europe (with only limited success, as Mr. Schweizer recognizes) and by persuading Saudi Arabia to help drive down world oil prices (with much more success). The vise was tightened further, Mr. Schweizer contends, by restricting the eastward flow of Western credit and technology, thus denying the Soviets valuable financial resources and damaging the Soviet economy's military and civilian sectors.
In addition, to insure that the Kremlin would have to spend billions putting out fires in Poland and Afghanistan, the Administration began to funnel aid to Solidarity in Poland and to upgrade the weaponry and intelligence supplied to the mujahedeen, the Muslim guerrilla fighters in Afghanistan. Finally, Mr. Schweizer provides convincing reasons for concluding that Jimmy Carter, even a Jimmy Carter sobered by the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, would never have instituted a similar policy.
Whether or not the Reagan policies worked and did contribute decisively to winning the cold war, Mr. Schweizer's account adds significantly to our knowledge of the struggle's climactic stages. Although many of the tactics he describes were common knowledge, their strategic coordination has been largely unknown, and a number of the individual elements of the strategy have remained secret as well.
THE author's unfailing admiration notwithstanding, these policies add up to a puzzling and sometimes unsettling portrait -- of subtlety, guile and tactical brilliance existing side by side with what can only be called utter recklessness; of commendable audacity and ingenuity coexisting with serious disrespect for American political processes. Thus the same officials who orchestrated the delicate plan to depress world oil prices (clinched by telling Saudi Arabia's King Fahd of the dollar's coming devaluation) also urged the buzzing of Soviet air defenses not only with American fighter planes but with bombers as well. Those who secured tacit Vatican and active Swedish help for Solidarity also supported mujahedeen guerrilla operations inside the Soviet Union.
The revelations made by the author unintentionally are at least as stunning. American voters, for example, may be surprised to learn that in 1980 they elected a President who was not only tough on the Soviets, but who also soon became determined to back them into a corner, with all the risks that strategy entailed in those hair-trigger times. Indeed, Mr. Schweizer presents new evidence that Mr. Reagan's bellicose rhetoric and his Strategic Defense Initiative did in fact create fears in the Kremlin of an American nuclear attack.
Similarly, "Victory" sheds new light on Reaganomics. It turns out that critics who faulted the President for running up unpre cedented peacetime budget deficits were missing the point. In the minds of Mr. Reagan and associates like Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, the cold war period was not peacetime. And yet the Administration refused to seek public sacrifices to fight this "war."
Since, as the author acknowledges, "Victory" is more journalism than history, it is no surprise that he raises more questions than he answers. A first group of questions concerns methodology. Even for a book in the "now it can be told" genre, Mr. Schweizer's work needs greater documentation. In particular, too much vital information is attributed simply to anonymous Soviet or American sources. Skeptical readers will also have problems with many of the Soviet sources who are named, for in the post-cold-war world many financially strapped former Soviet operatives have learned how profitable stroking Western egos can be. Further, although the author clearly has interviewed many of Casey's chief aides, we hear nothing from the late director's bureaucratic opponents. Surely the story Mr. Schweizer tells of C.I.A. infighting has more than one side.
A second group of questions concerns the costs of victory. Some were legal and political. Like Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and other cold war Presidents, Ronald Reagan purposely shut the American people and Congress out of decision making. Did the ends of victory always justify such means -- especially since the United States was always strong enough to avert foreign policy catastrophe? How long could huge covert paramilitary operations and arms-for-hostage deals have been continued without irreversibly damaging American political institutions and boosting public cynicism to levels no healthy democracy could tolerate?
Other costs were economic. Fighting a "war" without public knowledge or sacrifice may have helped Mr. Reagan win re-election. But in the process, many would argue, America's public finances were damaged, harming our economy and crippling our political capacity for dealing with a raft of growing domestic ills. And the Administration's obsession with victory in the cold war blinded it to growing threats on the industrial and technological fronts, with serious consequences for American living standards, for the country's long-term capacity to create wealth and even for its ability to support assertive foreign policies. As former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger sagely observed in a 1989 speech, the United States, too, crossed the cold war finish line gasping for breath. Some readers will undoubtedly complete "Victory" dismissing such complaints as nitpicking. Others will wonder if American democracy and prosperity can survive another such triumph in our still dangerous world. 'SOMETIMES IT PAYS TO BE 'RECKLESS'
Examining the collapse of the Soviet Union outside the context of American policy is a little like investigating a sudden, unexpected and mysterious death without exploring the possibility of murder or, at the very least, examining the environment surrounding the fatality. . . . The fact that the collapse and funeral of the Soviet Union occurred immediately after the most anti-Communist President in American history had served eight years does not prove cause and effect. But it does demand investigation. . . . Thus far, the investigation of Reagan policy in relation to the collapse of the Soviet Union has been scant. The focus has been almost exclusively on the policies of Gorbachev. This is somewhat akin to studying the collapse of the South after the Civil War by concentrating on the policies of Gen. Robert E. Lee without at least looking at the strategies employed by Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.
Some believe that little or no connection can be drawn between American policies in the 1980's and the collapse of the Soviet edifice. . . . Former Soviet officials do not share this view. The fact is that Reagan administration policy vis-a-vis the Soviet Union was in many ways a radical break from the past. There is also irony in this view, in that those who now believe American policy had little effect on internal events in the Soviet Union counseled in the 1970's and 1980's for an accommodating stance toward the Kremlin because it might moderate Soviet behavior. Reagan was called a "reckless cowboy" who might steer us all to the nuclear brink.
The fact the greatest geopolitical event since the end of the Second World War happened after eight years in the Presidency of Ronald Reagan has also been described as "dumb luck." It might be wise to recall, however, that when the exploits of a French commander particularly unpopular with his colleagues were dismissed as "luck," Napoleon retorted, "Then get me more 'lucky' generals."From "Victory."1
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/10/books/how-we-won-the-cold-war.html
#USA #USSR #coldwar #Reagan #CIA #Casey #anticommunism #american #frauds #disruptive actions #Afghanistan #saudiarabia #europe #soviet #russian #history
SOMETIMES American foreign policy debates seem governed by a Newtonian law stipulating that for every stupid, overstated, politically inspired argument there is an equally stupid, overstated, politically inspired counterargument. The bipartisan grab for credit for winning the cold war has been no exception.
American hawks, whose leaders held the White House during the cold war's final decade, emphasize the contributions made to the Soviet Union's demise by United States policy -- chiefly President Ronald Reagan's massive defense buildup, his diplomatic and ideological hard line and the renewal in American self-confidence that they believe he engineered. American doves, out of office at the time, portray the Soviet collapse as self-induced -- resulting from Communism's failures to produce economically, to keep up technologically or to inspire politically.
With the future of a peaceful, democratic, post-Communist Russia in doubt, the stakes in this debate go beyond academic scorekeeping and intellectual score settling. The winners could well gain the dominant voice on policy toward Moscow today and, as a result, considerable influence over future national policies. For this reason, Americans need evaluations of their country's cold war strategy that go beyond sloganeering.
Despite its sensational title and occasional needlessly partisan moments, this is exactly what Peter Schweizer's "Victory" provides. Mr. Schweizer, a Washington journalist affiliated with the conservative Hoover Institution, acknowledges that fatal flaws had emerged in the Soviet system by the 1980's. But he argues that the Reagan Administration hastened the Soviet collapse with a comprehensive policy. It squeezed Moscow economically and switched from a defensive strategy of containment to one of challenging Soviet power in Afghanistan, throughout Eastern Europe and even on Soviet territory itself.
Basing his book on interviews with top Reagan policy makers (especially in the intelligence community) and Soviet officials, as well as on classified American documents, Mr. Schweizer describes how the President and his national security team got the surprise of their lives when they entered office in 1981. After spending most of the previous decade warning against the rise of Soviet power and aggressiveness, the Reagan Administration discovered that Moscow was wheezing economically. At the urging of the new Director of Central Intelligence, William J. Casey -- the mastermind of the victory strategy, according to Mr. Schweizer, and the focus of the narrative -- the United States launched an all-out overt and covert economic war on the Soviets.
MR. SCHWEIZER says the Reagan military buildup sought not only to strengthen American forces, but also to strain Moscow's limited economic base. The centerpiece of this military effort was a policy of greatly expanded research and development on high technology weapons. By pushing programs like the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was ostensibly intended to neutralize a Soviet nuclear attack, the Reagan White House attempted to wage the arms race in areas where American know-how, not Soviet numbers, would be decisive.
The United States also sought to shut off a major Soviet source of hard currency by blocking Moscow's oil and gas exports to Western Europe (with only limited success, as Mr. Schweizer recognizes) and by persuading Saudi Arabia to help drive down world oil prices (with much more success). The vise was tightened further, Mr. Schweizer contends, by restricting the eastward flow of Western credit and technology, thus denying the Soviets valuable financial resources and damaging the Soviet economy's military and civilian sectors.
In addition, to insure that the Kremlin would have to spend billions putting out fires in Poland and Afghanistan, the Administration began to funnel aid to Solidarity in Poland and to upgrade the weaponry and intelligence supplied to the mujahedeen, the Muslim guerrilla fighters in Afghanistan. Finally, Mr. Schweizer provides convincing reasons for concluding that Jimmy Carter, even a Jimmy Carter sobered by the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, would never have instituted a similar policy.
Whether or not the Reagan policies worked and did contribute decisively to winning the cold war, Mr. Schweizer's account adds significantly to our knowledge of the struggle's climactic stages. Although many of the tactics he describes were common knowledge, their strategic coordination has been largely unknown, and a number of the individual elements of the strategy have remained secret as well.
THE author's unfailing admiration notwithstanding, these policies add up to a puzzling and sometimes unsettling portrait -- of subtlety, guile and tactical brilliance existing side by side with what can only be called utter recklessness; of commendable audacity and ingenuity coexisting with serious disrespect for American political processes. Thus the same officials who orchestrated the delicate plan to depress world oil prices (clinched by telling Saudi Arabia's King Fahd of the dollar's coming devaluation) also urged the buzzing of Soviet air defenses not only with American fighter planes but with bombers as well. Those who secured tacit Vatican and active Swedish help for Solidarity also supported mujahedeen guerrilla operations inside the Soviet Union.
The revelations made by the author unintentionally are at least as stunning. American voters, for example, may be surprised to learn that in 1980 they elected a President who was not only tough on the Soviets, but who also soon became determined to back them into a corner, with all the risks that strategy entailed in those hair-trigger times. Indeed, Mr. Schweizer presents new evidence that Mr. Reagan's bellicose rhetoric and his Strategic Defense Initiative did in fact create fears in the Kremlin of an American nuclear attack.
Similarly, "Victory" sheds new light on Reaganomics. It turns out that critics who faulted the President for running up unpre cedented peacetime budget deficits were missing the point. In the minds of Mr. Reagan and associates like Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, the cold war period was not peacetime. And yet the Administration refused to seek public sacrifices to fight this "war."
Since, as the author acknowledges, "Victory" is more journalism than history, it is no surprise that he raises more questions than he answers. A first group of questions concerns methodology. Even for a book in the "now it can be told" genre, Mr. Schweizer's work needs greater documentation. In particular, too much vital information is attributed simply to anonymous Soviet or American sources. Skeptical readers will also have problems with many of the Soviet sources who are named, for in the post-cold-war world many financially strapped former Soviet operatives have learned how profitable stroking Western egos can be. Further, although the author clearly has interviewed many of Casey's chief aides, we hear nothing from the late director's bureaucratic opponents. Surely the story Mr. Schweizer tells of C.I.A. infighting has more than one side.
A second group of questions concerns the costs of victory. Some were legal and political. Like Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and other cold war Presidents, Ronald Reagan purposely shut the American people and Congress out of decision making. Did the ends of victory always justify such means -- especially since the United States was always strong enough to avert foreign policy catastrophe? How long could huge covert paramilitary operations and arms-for-hostage deals have been continued without irreversibly damaging American political institutions and boosting public cynicism to levels no healthy democracy could tolerate?
Other costs were economic. Fighting a "war" without public knowledge or sacrifice may have helped Mr. Reagan win re-election. But in the process, many would argue, America's public finances were damaged, harming our economy and crippling our political capacity for dealing with a raft of growing domestic ills. And the Administration's obsession with victory in the cold war blinded it to growing threats on the industrial and technological fronts, with serious consequences for American living standards, for the country's long-term capacity to create wealth and even for its ability to support assertive foreign policies. As former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger sagely observed in a 1989 speech, the United States, too, crossed the cold war finish line gasping for breath. Some readers will undoubtedly complete "Victory" dismissing such complaints as nitpicking. Others will wonder if American democracy and prosperity can survive another such triumph in our still dangerous world. 'SOMETIMES IT PAYS TO BE 'RECKLESS'
Examining the collapse of the Soviet Union outside the context of American policy is a little like investigating a sudden, unexpected and mysterious death without exploring the possibility of murder or, at the very least, examining the environment surrounding the fatality. . . . The fact that the collapse and funeral of the Soviet Union occurred immediately after the most anti-Communist President in American history had served eight years does not prove cause and effect. But it does demand investigation. . . . Thus far, the investigation of Reagan policy in relation to the collapse of the Soviet Union has been scant. The focus has been almost exclusively on the policies of Gorbachev. This is somewhat akin to studying the collapse of the South after the Civil War by concentrating on the policies of Gen. Robert E. Lee without at least looking at the strategies employed by Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.
Some believe that little or no connection can be drawn between American policies in the 1980's and the collapse of the Soviet edifice. . . . Former Soviet officials do not share this view. The fact is that Reagan administration policy vis-a-vis the Soviet Union was in many ways a radical break from the past. There is also irony in this view, in that those who now believe American policy had little effect on internal events in the Soviet Union counseled in the 1970's and 1980's for an accommodating stance toward the Kremlin because it might moderate Soviet behavior. Reagan was called a "reckless cowboy" who might steer us all to the nuclear brink.
The fact the greatest geopolitical event since the end of the Second World War happened after eight years in the Presidency of Ronald Reagan has also been described as "dumb luck." It might be wise to recall, however, that when the exploits of a French commander particularly unpopular with his colleagues were dismissed as "luck," Napoleon retorted, "Then get me more 'lucky' generals."From "Victory."1
https://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/10/books/how-we-won-the-cold-war.html
#USA #USSR #coldwar #Reagan #CIA #Casey #anticommunism #american #frauds #disruptive actions #Afghanistan #saudiarabia #europe #soviet #russian #history
Two Afghanistan
Afghanistan backed by USSR
Afghanistan backed by USA
“Every girl could go to high school and university. We could go where we wanted and wear what we liked … We used to go to cafes and the cinema to see the latest Indian films on a Friday … it all started to go wrong when the mujahedin started winning … these were the people the West supported.”
#Afghanistan #USSR #USA #history #photo
Afghanistan backed by USA
“Every girl could go to high school and university. We could go where we wanted and wear what we liked … We used to go to cafes and the cinema to see the latest Indian films on a Friday … it all started to go wrong when the mujahedin started winning … these were the people the West supported.”
#Afghanistan #USSR #USA #history #photo
THE WARSAW PACT – PROPAGANDA AND REALITY (BY HELMHOLTZ SMITH)
THE #WARSAW #PACT – #PROPAGANDA AND #REALITY ( BY #HELMHOLTZ #SMITH )
THE WARSAW PACT – PROPAGANDA AND REALITY (BY HELMHOLTZ SMITH) (http...
THE WARSAW PACT – PROPAGANDA AND REALITY (BY HELMHOLTZ SMITH) (https://sonar21.com/the-warsaw-pact-propaganda-and-reality-by-helmholtz-smith/) THE #WARSAW #PACT – #PROPAGANDA AND #REALITY ( BY #HELMHOLTZ #SMITH )diaspora* social network
The Engineering Differences Between US and Soviet Spacesuits From the 1960s
#USA #USSR #space #cosmos #engineering #history
Savage noted the engineering differences between the two. The Apollo suit was a bit complicated, requiring separate pieces of the suit to be put together before a backpack could be attached. The Krechet had a one-piece hardbody interior that could only be entered via backpack, a design that NASA is currently using in their Artemis space suits.
#USA #USSR #space #cosmos #engineering #history
The Engineering Differences Between US and Soviet Spacesuits From the 1960s
While visiting the National Air and Space Museum, Adam Savage examined David Scott's Apollo 15 A7LB and a Russian Krechet moon suitLori Dorn (Laughing Squid)
One MiG over Tel Aviv: How the USSR averted World War III in October 1973
The era of confrontation between the capitalist and communist worlds was called the Cold War. Its battles were played out not within the borders of the main participants - the United States and the USSR - but in countries or even regions quite distant from Moscow and Washington
#history #USSR #USA #Israel #Egypt #Syria #war #Mig25 #СССР #история #russian #aviation
The era of confrontation between the capitalist and communist worlds was called the Cold War. Its battles were played out not within the borders of the main participants - the United States and the USSR - but in countries or even regions quite distant from Moscow and Washington
#history #USSR #USA #Israel #Egypt #Syria #war #Mig25 #СССР #история #russian #aviation
Один МиГ над Тель-Авивом: Как в октябре 1973 года СССР предотвратил Третью мировую войну
Эпоха противостояния капиталистического и коммунистического миров получила название «холодная война». Ее сражения разыгрывались не в границах основных участников - США и СССР, а в странах или даже регионах, весьма отдаленных от Москвы и Вашингтонаzvezdaweekly.ru
Note on the problem of the left's study of the demise of the USSR
...
Under communism, the superstructure presupposes the free and dynamic development of the basis as an organic side of social production, and the basis gives room for the development of the superstructure. In this sense, the formation "communism" is opposite not to the formation "capitalism", but to all class formations together. That is why the reasoning of various left-wing theorists about the contradictions between socialist production and social relations is deeply erroneous. It is correct to speak of the struggle of the old exploitative modes with the new communist mode.
Since in an exploitative society socio-economic processes are mostly spontaneous, production anarchy reigns, in the pair base - superstructure the leading role in the pair remains with the base, and the superstructure is a kind of reflection of the requirements of the dominant relations of the base. In communist society, however, it is the superstructure, in the form of the policies of the party and the state, that becomes the leading one, and the basis the slave. This is a very important point that the left does not understand. That is why Lenin argued that it is enough for the working class in alliance with the peasantry to take power and on the basis of the dictatorship of the proletariat it is possible to build the basis of communism. That is why the statements of certain figures widely known in leftist circles that the USSR allegedly perished because Russia was too economically backward are anti-Marxist. For them, the great Stalinist industrialization is not the construction of communism, but merely the bourgeois modernization of the economy, the elimination of industrial backwardness. They do not want to see that under Stalin not just built a lot of plants and factories, creating from scratch entire industries, but built exactly that new communist relations.
...
#politics #economy #USSR #marxism #communism #history #study for #future
...
Under communism, the superstructure presupposes the free and dynamic development of the basis as an organic side of social production, and the basis gives room for the development of the superstructure. In this sense, the formation "communism" is opposite not to the formation "capitalism", but to all class formations together. That is why the reasoning of various left-wing theorists about the contradictions between socialist production and social relations is deeply erroneous. It is correct to speak of the struggle of the old exploitative modes with the new communist mode.
Since in an exploitative society socio-economic processes are mostly spontaneous, production anarchy reigns, in the pair base - superstructure the leading role in the pair remains with the base, and the superstructure is a kind of reflection of the requirements of the dominant relations of the base. In communist society, however, it is the superstructure, in the form of the policies of the party and the state, that becomes the leading one, and the basis the slave. This is a very important point that the left does not understand. That is why Lenin argued that it is enough for the working class in alliance with the peasantry to take power and on the basis of the dictatorship of the proletariat it is possible to build the basis of communism. That is why the statements of certain figures widely known in leftist circles that the USSR allegedly perished because Russia was too economically backward are anti-Marxist. For them, the great Stalinist industrialization is not the construction of communism, but merely the bourgeois modernization of the economy, the elimination of industrial backwardness. They do not want to see that under Stalin not just built a lot of plants and factories, creating from scratch entire industries, but built exactly that new communist relations.
...
#politics #economy #USSR #marxism #communism #history #study for #future
Замечание о проблеме изучения левыми гибели СССР
№ 9/85.IX.2023 Все согласны с тем, что нужно извлечь опыт из истории рождения, развития и гибели СССР. Однако с осмыслением этого опыта наблюдаются явные проблемы. Можно констатировать, что до сих …Прорывист
NATO’s Fascist Inheritance & the Long War On the Third World, with Pawel WarganTo understand how this new Cold War might play out, we have to understand the foundations of the original Cold War of the 20th century. What was NATO’s role? What did it mean for the Third World back then? What does it mean for the Third World today, particularly those countries that seek an independent, sovereign path? What is the danger of rising fascist movements? And what are the lessons for anti-imperialists who live and organize in the imperial core?
To discuss this and more, Rania Khalek was joined by Paweł Wargan, an organizer and researcher based in Berlin, the coordinator of the secretariat of the Progressive International and author of the recent Monthly Review article “NATO and the Long War on the Third World,” in which he looks to the past for lessons about the future, concluding that capitalism cannot be overcome until the arteries of imperial plunder are severed.
Internet Archive | |
Article being discussed :
Monthly Review - NATO and the Long War on the Third World
archived: wayback machine | archive today
NATO’s Fascist Inheritance & the Long War On the Third World, w/ Pawel Wargan
To understand how this new Cold War might play out, we have to understand the foundations of the original Cold War of the 20th century. What was NATO’s role?...YouTube
On issues of periodization of the history of the USSR
In October 1917 in Russia, when not a single industrial enterprise, not a single locomotive had yet been destroyed (the Bolsheviks had not planned this at all), Russian society, the first in the world, got rid of the parasites who used their enterprises for the purposes of waging invasive, destructive wars. The liberation of Russian society from the selfishness and uneducated entrepreneurs, from the power of banking monopolies, already at the end of the 20's, provided not only a complete restoration of industry, not only the highest in the history of mankind rates of development of productive forces, but also the pace of scientific, technical and cultural progress. Already in the 20-ies Zhukovsky, Timiryazev, Pavlov, Michurin, Tsiolkovsky, Kapitsa, Kurchatov, Tupolev, Polikarpov, Degtyaryov, Paton, Lebedev, Meyerhold, Eisenstein, Pyatnitsky, for the first time in history, received all the necessary conditions and means for their scientific, design work and artistic creativity.
In August 1991 in the USSR, too, not a single enterprise had been destroyed yet, but the CPSU, Soviets and Gosplan of the USSR had maliciously abstained from managing all the productive forces of society, voluntarily giving banks and enterprises into private hands, including foreign ones. I.e. huge production capacities of the superpower stopped for 10 years not because the communists violated the laws of "copromatism" or thermodynamics, but because the majority of the "party billet-bearers" of the CPSU, professed not diamatic, but some kind of "economic thinking", which made the party members and technical intelligentsia unemployed, homeless, criminals, egoists, liberals, nationalists, clerics and, in the near future, millions of ruined "shuttle traders", deceived tourists, shareholders, shareholders and depositors.
Some comrades still explain the collapse of the CPSU and the USSR only by the betrayal of the top, but do not try to explain neither to themselves nor to others, why in August 1941 in the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (b), in the army and in industry there were only a few traitors, and half a century later, in August 1991, the Central Committee of the CPSU, the directorial and ministerial corps, the Soviet generals, almost in their entirety, refused to do anything in defense of socialism, and painted themselves as democrats, liberals, nationalists and clerics?
In Stalin's time, the entire ministerial and directorial corps knew that it was very seriously responsible, first of all, for the quality and quantity of products manufactured in accordance with the proportions of the strategic plan of the whole country, and cost, indicators played only a modest accounting role. Only with the revival of capitalism on the territory of the USSR was the stupid phrase revived: "all the necessary material means are available, but it cannot build, there is no... financing", as if factories and bridges were being built out of bills.
Since Andropov's time, in the USSR, the so-called economic, i.e. egoistic criteria have prevailed over scientifically grounded real proportions of social production. The ministries and administrations of enterprises, having switched to full self-sufficiency, objectively and practically turned into capitalists working for personal monetary profit. The practice of harnessing the financial "cart" ahead of the "horse" of a concrete plan for the development of productive forces reigns in the Russian Federation to this day. Having no concrete plans, but only the general national wishes of the president to improve some things, to mend gaping failures, the government in 2020 is forced to state that billions of rubles have been plundered, and 148 billion rubles have not been spent.
But this situation did not arise under Yeltsin. The practice of Andropov's time had already shown that both the General Secretary himself and the members of the CPSU Central Committee had no concrete scientific idea of what should be done to continue building communism. They began to treat the imperfections of socialism... with capitalism.
Therefore, concerning the question of periodization of the history of the CPSU and the USSR, we should speak about two stages. The first stage, under the leadership of Lenin and Stalin, under whom the political and theoretical superstructure was organized, and filled with such content (due to the genius and education of the leaders, the growing education of specialists and consciousness of the masses, the uncompromising struggle against anti-communist views), which ensured the dynamic ascent of the Soviet base and the whole society, moving further and further away from the system that collapsed as a result of the First World War, to the country that, in fact, defeated both the USA and Bree in the Second World War. Before 1953, the basis of the first phase of communism had successfully taken root in many countries liberated from fascism.
But now few people dispute that after 1953 there came a second stage, when the basis in the USSR, especially in large industry and state farms, outwardly, until 1983, still remained within the limits of the USSR Constitution, but at the head of the CPSU and in the superstructural institutions, i.e., in the USSR Academy of Sciences, in the Lenin VPA, in the "Znaniye" society, in the "Communist" magazine, there were fewer and fewer people with knowledge of dialectical-materialist methodology. In the USSR Academy of Sciences, in the Lenin Military Academy, in the "Znanie" society, in the "Communist" magazine, there were fewer and fewer people who possessed dialectical-materialist methodology, and therefore everything communist in the country went to zero after Andropov introduced the self-financing reform.
I.e., if the USSR and the CPSU retained the communist names of the elements of the superstructure and, nominally, party superstructure institutions, but there were practically no connoisseurs of Marxist methodology in the country and in the party, which brings scientific content and communist tendencies to the development of production relations, then the construction of communism is out of the question. If the complete collections of the works of the classics of Marxism, if they are quietly covered with dust on the shelves in party committees and regional committees, but are not properly studied by the members of the Communist Party, if this knowledge is not clarified in connection with new objective circumstances, then all this literary heritage of the victorious classics remains a "thing in itself" that has no positive influence in real time on society, which is once again sliding into the era of mass bourgeois, and therefore liberal, Nazi and clerical ideology.
In view of the defeats suffered by the CPSU at the second stage of its history, it is necessary, as diamatics prescribes, to once again logically "dance from the stove" of simply contemplating the facts of the decay of social formations observed in world history, to the theoretical generalization of conclusions from these facts, to the search for regularities of all such collapses, and from them to the formulation of a conclusion about the presence or absence of a single cause and antidote to such phenomena in the history of mankind.
of mankind.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/6796858.html
#russian #soviet #history
Мой дед (сидит на гусенице трактора) со своими товарищами. Справа с ключом, Иван Арестов, слева, уже не помню кто. Саратовская область, Подлесновская МТС, трактор Сталинец С-80, ~ 1949-й год.
Служил после войны, командиром танка Ис-3.
Долгое время работал начальником колхозной мастерской.
#photo #grandfather #russian #USSR #history #tractor
Служил после войны, командиром танка Ис-3.
Долгое время работал начальником колхозной мастерской.
#photo #grandfather #russian #USSR #history #tractor
Raising anti-Russia
...
The idea that Russia is a real kingdom of evil has been instilled in children in Ukraine from an early age. A large amount of children's propaganda literature was found on the territory liberated from Ukrainian neo-Nazis during a military special operation. At the same time, the books are designed for children of any age, starting from the very young.
In 2015 the publishing house "Mamino Solnyshko" published a children's book "Glory to Heroes! Stories for Children about Heroes of the Front and Home Front", which describes the "feats" of the participants of the ATO ("anti-terrorist operation" of Kiev's neo-Banderites in Donbass). The 15,000 copies of this publication were sold out in a few days. The authors thought that children should know the language of hatred from a young age, and put in the book such expressions as "the Muscals showed their animal face," "Muscal tanks," and "the Separas lost a dozen killed."
...
https://aftershock.news/?q=node%2F1281837
#ukraine #Maidan #ukrainian #propaganda #children #study #mindmanipulation #Bandera #nazi #neo-nazi destroy #culture #ato #anti-Russia #Donbass #blameRussia #history #USSR
The idea that Russia is a real kingdom of evil has been instilled in children in Ukraine from an early age. A large amount of children's propaganda literature was found on the territory liberated from Ukrainian neo-Nazis during a military special operation. At the same time, the books are designed for children of any age, starting from the very young.
In 2015 the publishing house "Mamino Solnyshko" published a children's book "Glory to Heroes! Stories for Children about Heroes of the Front and Home Front", which describes the "feats" of the participants of the ATO ("anti-terrorist operation" of Kiev's neo-Banderites in Donbass). The 15,000 copies of this publication were sold out in a few days. The authors thought that children should know the language of hatred from a young age, and put in the book such expressions as "the Muscals showed their animal face," "Muscal tanks," and "the Separas lost a dozen killed."
...
https://aftershock.news/?q=node%2F1281837
#ukraine #Maidan #ukrainian #propaganda #children #study #mindmanipulation #Bandera #nazi #neo-nazi destroy #culture #ato #anti-Russia #Donbass #blameRussia #history #USSR