Proof that history is written by the winners. History is always written by the winners

In the museum modern history V Once again hit the topic complex issues in the history of Russia. After all, it is knowledge of history that gives us an understanding of the uniqueness of Russian civilization, the strength of spirit to confront the enemies of our people.

About the positive

Putin quite accurately noted that “attempts are being made to recode society in many countries, including recoding the society of our country, and this cannot but be connected with attempts to rewrite history, to comb it into someone’s geopolitical interests.”

Indeed, the war in Little Russia-Ukraine became an excellent lesson in what happens when history is rewritten for someone’s political interests. Until the beginning of the 20th century, Russians were a single people, which, due to their peculiarities, historical development had local, ethnographic differences. Let's say, the residents of the Ryazan and Novgorod regions differed from Muscovites, Russian Pomors and Siberians, but they were all Russian people. Based on these local differences (in dialect, clothing, way of life, etc.), the concept of the existence of Great Russians, Little Russians and Belarusians - three branches of a single Russian people - was created in the Russian Empire. Bolshevik internationalists, for political purposes, created the Ukrainian and Belarusian republics, “the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples.”

For almost a century, the Ukraine project has been actively developing. Since 1991, the project has entered the final stage. The enemies of the Russian people were able to create a “Ukrainian chimera” - millions of Russian people became “Ukrainians,” a completely artificial nation, with a fictitious history and a language created on the fly. The only goal of the “Ukrainian people” is the weakening of Russian civilization and the Russian people (the loss of one of the centers of Russian statehood, ancient sacred centers, tens of millions of Russian people, a blow to the economy) and death in a war with the rest of Russia. Some Russians are pitted against other Russians. Society in Little Russia has undergone a total recoding, “Ukrainization.” Distortion cultural code people led to war, a surge of violence, atrocities that are reminiscent of the worst atrocities of the Nazis.

The head of state pointed to the fact that Karamzin’s version that “statehood came from outside” still prevails (including at the latest exhibition dedicated to the Rurikovichs). Thus, within the framework of the Norman theory of origin Russian state Statehood in Rus' was created by the Varangian finders, Vikings, and warriors of German-Scandinavian origin. From this theory, a whole myth was created about the “savagery” of pre-Christian Rus', the “natural backwardness” of the Slavs, and the cultural mission of the Germans in Russia (). In fact, the continuation of this black myth is the idea that Russia, Russian culture and history are secondary in relation to Western Europe. They say that Russia is the periphery of Europe, its eternally backward outskirts, which must be returned to the “true” path of European civilization.

At the same time, the facts that statehood in Rus', in the same Novgorod, took shape even before the calling of the Varangians, recede into the background. That pre-Varangian Rus' already had all the signs of a state. They also completely forget that there is a Slavic theory of the origin of the Varangians and Rurik (), that Rurik and his “Russian Varangians” were Slavs from Central Europe. After all, the majority of modern Russians do not even know that in those days Central Europe, in the lands of present-day Germany, Austria, Northern Italy lived our direct ancestors - the Slavs. They founded cities such as Berlin, Vienna, Dresden, Brandenburg, Rostock, Oldenburg, Leipzig, Venice and many others. Rurik and the Varangians were not strangers in the lands of Eastern Rus' - they were brothers from Western Rus', who were called out of necessity ().

Unfortunately, Western Rus' fell in a heroic and tragic centuries-long struggle with Rome (then the main control point of the Western project). And our enemies rewrote history. ABOUT Slavic Europe forgot. Millions of Slavs were martyred or recoded (“zombified”), assimilated, turned into “Deutsche” (German: Deutsche), became “Germans” - “mute”, unable to speak clear language. The Slavs were deprived native faith, language and culture.

Don’t think that something new is happening in Little Russia; these technologies have already been developed a thousand years ago. The technique is old, but very effective. The attack on Russian civilization has been going on for more than a thousand years. The Slavs were destroyed in Central Europe, or made slaves of Rome and other centers Western project(like the Poles), now they want to destroy the Russian spirit in Little Russia. Deprive us of the great Russian river - the Dnieper, one of ancient centers Russian statehood - Kyiv.

Putin explained Stalin's tough management style.“It’s just hard to say, would we have been able to win the war if the government had not been so tough, but would it have been the same as under Nicholas II? It's very difficult to say. What would be the consequences if we lost? The consequences would be simply catastrophic. It was just about physical extermination Slavic peoples, and not only Russian, but also many other peoples..."

Putin also justified the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The President noted that Poland itself participated in the division of Czechoslovakia together with Germany. And then she received a “response puck”. There was nothing wrong with Moscow signing a non-aggression pact with Germany. First, as Putin said, “what’s bad here if the Soviet Union didn’t want to fight?” Secondly, Moscow knew about the inevitability of war and the country “had a nosebleed, it needed time” to modernize its armed forces. Every month and even day was important for the development of weapons and the delivery of new systems to the army.

Putin noted the role Soviet Union in World War II. To see the falsity of a statement Western media about the leading role of the Western powers in the victory over Nazi Germany and its allies, one only has to look at what sacrifices the Soviet Union made on the altar of common victory. Remember how many divisions Berlin kept on the Eastern Front for most of the war, and how many on the Western Front. The Soviet Union lost about 27 million people in the war, the United States - 418 thousand people, Great Britain along with the dominions, colonies and India - 412 thousand people, France - about 600 thousand people.

Putin not only defended the pre-war strategy of the Soviet leadership, but also noted the depth of Russian roots in Crimea. Thus, he said that “Crimea for Russians... also has some sacred meaning.” After all, it was in the Crimea, Chersonese-Korsun (present-day Sevastopol) that Prince Vladimir was baptized, who then baptized Rus'. As a result, Crimea is “Russia’s primary baptismal font.” They prefer not to remember this depth of origins, the significance of Crimea and Sevastopol for Russia. In fact, the Russian people have been fighting for centuries to “stand firmly at their historical spiritual font.”

Therefore, Sevastopol is not only a city of Russian and naval glory. This is just the tip of the iceberg of Russian history. And if you dig even deeper, you can remember the fact that Crimea was part of Great Scythia, the great northern civilization, which was the predecessor of Russian civilization. After all, Rus', according to historians who defend the Slavic, Russian version of history, and not the Western theory, according to which the Slavs “came out of the swamps” only in the 9th-10th centuries, is the direct heir of Scythia. The Russian people continue the millennia-old line of statehood that existed in the vastness of Northern Eurasia ().

Errors

Putin’s key mistake was the assertion that the Bolsheviks “cheated society.” Their slogans: “Land to the peasants, factories to the workers, peace to the people!” were a hoax. The Bolsheviks did not give peace, a civil war began, “factories and land were taken away and nationalized, so it’s a complete scam, one hundred percent.”

Suffice it to remember that the Bolsheviks kept two key promises. They brought Russia out of the imperialist war. There is no point in mentioning the “straits” and Galicia here. The Februaryist liberals, having staged a coup in February 1917, had already caused death blow old Russia. Russia could no longer fight, its army was rapidly falling apart. The Bolsheviks made peace later, when the German Empire collapsed, and returned part of what was lost (under Stalin they would return the rest). True, then the Civil War began. But the Bolsheviks were not its organizers. The civil war in Russia was organized by her external enemies, primarily the USA and England, which soon began intervention with the aim of seizing and dividing key areas of Russian land. The second most important culprits for inciting the civil conflict in Russia were the defeated Februaryist liberals, the extreme left (Socialist Revolutionaries, anarchists), and nationalist separatists. Moreover, almost all of them were sent from the West, to to a lesser extent from the East (Japan). Therefore, the Bolsheviks were not the main culprit Civil War. On the contrary, they created a new Russian statehood, gave Russia a second life, and revived it from the ashes.

The Bolsheviks promised land to the peasants, and they gave the land to the peasants. During collectivization, land remained in collective ownership, in collective and state farms, rather than in state ownership. That is, the peasants received the land. As for factories, this is an open question. Industry was nationalized, it became popular. That is, we can assume that this point has been fulfilled.

It is worth remembering that it was the Bolsheviks who realized the epoch-making tasks that faced Russian Empire during the reign of Nicholas II. They carried out literacy eradication. Under them, Soviet Russia carried out an amazing project for those times to electrify the country, which became the basis for future industrialization, projects for the development of colossal territories, construction of infrastructure, due to which there is a modern Russia. At the same time, the Bolsheviks made a colossal breakthrough in the development of education, science, technology and medicine. The Bolsheviks, having eliminated the “fifth column” in the person of the Trotskyist internationalists, were able to prepare the country for World War II (the tsarist regime could not do this), win it and create the Red Empire, a civilization of a special, creative type, which offered humanity a different path of development, fundamentally different from the slave-owning, Western “New World Order”. We live on the foundation created by the Bolsheviks. Without their achievements, we would have been crushed long ago.

A colleague of Vvdom, after a long silence, finally published material about the mythologization of very recent history. Wonderful stuff.

This is not an analysis by a professional historian, no, this is journalism written by a caring person. We feel this concern, its emotional intensity throughout the entire text. Which we are happy to present to our readers.

One of our compatriots, who worked in Japan for three years, had such a hobby - he conducted surveys of young Japanese about their knowledge of history. I interviewed as many as 10 thousand (!) and discovered that the Japanese’s ideas about the historical process are radically different from the knowledge of the Russians.

What shocked him most of all was that they drew their knowledge exclusively from movies. So 70% are sure that the Americans won in Vietnam - after all, there was a hero, Rambo. 100% of respondents said that the Americans launched the first satellite, they were the first to go into space (the movie "Armageddon").

History is a myth: impossible to lay down real life, including history in its entirety in a strictly scientific direction, so even scientific historians live in myths. And this is normal, it is not normal when a myth is absolutely inconsistent with firmly established facts, such as, for example, the Japanese idea that atomic bombs Soviet troops dropped on their cities.

And this is understandable: history for the Japanese is written by the occupiers - the Americans, who do not at all benefit from keeping themselves in the role of ruthless killers, so the mythology was corrected.

And anyone who thinks that anything is different in Russia is mistaken. No, it’s the same here: history is written by the victors, with the hands of those who like to crunch French bread like Nikita Mikhalkov or faithful guides of the “party line” like Yuri Ozerov. The same.

And the separation of mythological ideas, the ideas of the average Russian, from real facts is no less than that of the Japanese.

After all, what myth exists about the collapse of the USSR? The traitor Gorbachev surrendered the USSR to Yeltsin, who drunkenly signed the Belovezhskaya Pact, and the USSR collapsed. If this were so, then the liberals are right in asserting that the USSR was a non-viable entity - one that collapsed with a blow of the wind. Where is the separation from the facts here? And here’s where: the Belovezhskaya Agreement was suffered through, prepared and desired by the winners - this piece of paper could have been wiped clean if it had not been for the practically unanimous ratification by the parliaments of the three republics.

Thus, in Belarus, only one parliamentarian spoke out against ratification in the debate. And it was not Lukashenko. And according to the results of the secret ballot in Belarus, only one vote was cast against. Do you believe that it was not the only one who openly opposed it? Me not.

And so it is always and everywhere, including in Russia - historical mythology is created by the conquerors, in Russia - by the “children” of the Khrushchev-Zhukov “thaw” - the beneficiaries of the 1953 coup d’etat. It was then that the reforging of the conscientious human creator into a consumer began. Yes, Fursenko did not invent the “literate consumer”; Fursenko only legalized a process that had been going on for more than half a century.

Our ideas about the recent history of Russia are shaped, among other things, by the films of Nikita Mikhalkov, nostalgic for the “crunch of French bread,” or Yuri Ozerov, who filmed his opupeia in accordance with the “party line.”

Here is Nikita's recent film " Sunstroke". It’s true - life was not bad for the lieutenants then, and Nikita’s nostalgia about “The Russia they lost” is sincere.

But when the young lieutenant was “picking up” another whore on the ship, he might well have seen something nearby that they stubbornly avoid showing in “bulk crunch” films:

And here is this one, which drowned “Russia, which they lost,” these “cadets” with their balls and lackeys:

Isn't he the one running in this threesome, gracefully exploding loose snow heel":

Candy-lambs are like swan-sleighs!

A mediocre director during the Soviet era took up a disproportionate amount of space during these times when the “winners” emerged like shit in the hole. When Muslim Magomaev disappeared behind the shine of Filka Kirkorov's golden toilet.

Nothing like “Kuban Cossacks”, “Belorussky Station”, “Only “old men” go into battle”, “ Captive of the Caucasus", "The Irony of Fate" Nikita did not film. By the way, in order to film "Belorussky Station", which Nikita never grew up to, you don’t need to have any special talent: the director who shot it said that the damned totalitarian system forced him to film such shit .

If there was no system, there were no more masterpieces. “A sonorous drunken apprentice has died among the people of the tongue-maker.” And those who filmed masterpieces did without estates and servants with them. Numerous servants and mansions can be supported solely on unearned income, which is what we see in the case of Nikita.

No, I'm not saying that the films I listed are best movies USSR, no, we are not talking about the fact that Nikita has not grown up to them either. He just ended up in the service of the “winners” who generously reward their lackeys: where the dog hairdresser earns more than the rocket scientist Academician Korolev in the USSR.

What's in Ozerov's films? When the party decided that Stalin was planning military operations on the globe, they began to pull Zhukov onto the globe.

Every year, a few months before Victory Day, no matter what channel you look at, you will come across the bald head of Mikhail Ulyanov in the image of Marshal of Victory. And this brainwashing has been going on for decades - so is it any wonder that there is no indignation among ordinary people about the installation between the Red and Manezhnaya Square a monument to this mythologized personality.

In general, the framework of the mythology that Ozerov, and now Mikhalkov, nurtured, was created by Zhukov himself.

At the base of the house of cards, on which all the aces of the universal nonsense rest, there is a six, bungled by the conspiracy of two scoundrels - Nikita Khrushchev and Georgy Zhukov. From a secret letter from G.K. Zhukov dated May 19, 1956 addressed to another scoundrel of that time, perhaps the main one - N.S. Khrushchev:

« Due to Stalin’s ignorance of the obvious threat of an attack by Nazi Germany on the Soviet Union, our Armed Forces were not promptly brought to combat readiness, were not deployed at the time of the enemy’s attack, and they were not given the task of being ready to repel the impending attack of the enemy, so that, as Stalin said, , “not to provoke the Germans into war” »

If you pull out this six, the whole thing will collapse House of cards, and all the aces resting on it will play against them, against the counterfeiters. If we remove the thesis that Stalin prevented the troops from being put on combat readiness on the eve of the war, then there remains only one reason for the disaster in the summer of 1941 - betrayal. And then patriots will not need to deny the obvious, which is what Russo-haters and liberals are pointing in their noses - with the beginning of the war there was a total mess.

Now we’ll “pull” the Zhukov-Khrushchev “six”.

First, I will cite just one point of the famous Directive No. 1 of June 21, 1941, signed by Tymoshenko and Zhukov:

"2) The task of our troops is not to succumb to any provocative actions that could cause major complications.

At the same time, the troops of the Leningrad, Baltic, Western, Kyiv and Odessa military districts should be in full combat readiness to meet a possible surprise attack from the Germans or their allies."

21st of June. Now we know that “tomorrow there was a war,” but on the 21st it didn’t happen yet!!! And, as the liberals, the exposers of the “bloody regime,” assure us, Stalin firmly believed in Hitler, trains were still going to Germany and he hoped to further delay the war, but they didn’t: “ troops... be in full combat readiness ". So it’s a lie that Stalin interfered!

But maybe the “bloody tyrant” realized the gravity of the situation too late, and only saw the light in the evening of June 21, when it was already too late?

Well, let’s translate the phrase “to be on alert” from the language of professionals into the language of ordinary people. In order for the troops to “be” in some state, they must first be brought into this state, and for this a special order is needed - to bring the troops into this or that state.

And there were such orders, they came to the border districts from June 12 to 18, i.e. at least almost a week before the Nazi attack.

And they were brought not only to the command of the border districts, but also to the party leaders of the border regions.

Khrushchev and Zhukov, having broken through to power, pretty much cleaned up the archives, and the order itself of June 18, of course, can no longer be found, but traces of it cannot be cut out with an ax.

Well, how will they disappear from the archives of the investigation into the collapse of the front under the command of Pavlov, these are the words of the head of communications of the ZapOVO, General Andrei Terentyevich Grigoriev:

"AND after the boss's telegram General Staff from June 18 District troops were not put on alert"By the way, the Chief of the General Staff is Zhukov. A scoundrel.

"Report of the Red Banner Commander
Baltic Fleet Commander
Leningrad and Baltic Special
Military districts, chief of the Border Troops:

Since June 19, 1941, units of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet have been put on combat readiness according to plan No. 2, command posts have been deployed, and patrol service at the mouth of the Gulf of Finland and the Irbe Strait has been strengthened.

Commander of the Red Banner Baltic Fleet
Vice Admiral Tributs."

The commanders of the Black Sea and Northern Fleets reported according to a similar pattern.

Let's note who they report to, i.e. to whom the fleets are subordinate on the eve of the attack: the head of the Border Troops, Deputy Lavrentiy Beria, whom the army elite, after their coup in 1953, will declare to be an “English spy”. The inflated myth that the People's Commissar of the Navy Kuznetsov, contrary to the will of Stalin, brought the fleets into combat readiness ahead of time - there is the same vile fiction in the vein set by Zhukov and Khrushchev, simply Lavrentiy Beria honestly served his country and in this case didn’t do anything extraordinary - like a professional bureaucrat he did it on time decision and monitored the execution.

By the way, the border troops, all the NKVD and NKGB agencies subordinate to Beria were put on full combat readiness already at 21.30 on June 21, that is, 6 hours before the start of the aggression!

Tymoshenko and Zhukov sent the General Staff directive only on June 22, at half past one o’clock. They deciphered it in the districts already to the hum of the fascist "Junkers".

From the note of the Secretary of the Brest Regional Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus M.N. Tupitsyn “On the situation at the front of the Brest-Kobrin direction” to the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus of Belarus dated June 25, 1941: “ In the Brest Fortress, on the very border, there were two rifle divisions, which, even in peaceful conditions, required a lot of time to leave this fortress and deploy for military operations.

In addition, despite the military danger signal, the command staff lived in apartments in the city. Naturally, at the first shots, panic was created among the Red Army soldiers, and a powerful barrage of German artillery fire quickly destroyed both divisions. According to the stories of the Red Army soldiers who managed to escape, the fact that not all units and formations had cartridges, and the soldiers did not have cartridges, also deserves attention.

Here I have highlighted in bold something that previously either flew past consciousness or was interpreted at random: “a signal of military danger” - the party secretary was referring specifically to the order of June 18, which “someone” ignored.

In the late 40s - early 50s, on the initiative of Stalin, under the guise of studying and summarizing the experience of concentrating and deploying troops of the western border districts according to the plan for covering the state border of 1941 on the eve of the Great Patriotic War, a secret investigation was conducted into the causes and circumstances incredible tragedy the beginning of the war. This work was carried out under the leadership of the head of the Military Scientific Directorate of the General Staff, Colonel General A.P. Pokrovsky.

“General Pokrovsky’s five questions” were formulated, which were asked to participants in those events who occupied various command positions in the troops of the western border districts during the initial period of the war.

In the wake of “perestroika” and “glasnost”, the Military Historical Journal, starting with No. 3 of 1989, began publishing answers Soviet generals to these questions, alternately devoting one article in the issue to answering one question. It was possible to publish the answers of the generals only to the first two questions, because as soon as the turn came to the answers to the question “When was the order received to put the troops on combat readiness?”, the publication was stopped without any explanation, Chief Editor received a slap on the wrist and a slap on the cap.

1. Has the plan for the defense of the state border been communicated to the troops, as far as they are concerned; when and what was done by the command and headquarters to ensure the implementation of this plan?

2. From what time and on the basis of what order did the covering troops begin to reach state border and how many of them were deployed before the outbreak of hostilities?

3. When the order was received to put troops on alert in connection with the expected attack by Nazi Germany on the morning of June 22; what and when were the instructions given to carry out this order and what was done by the troops?

4. Why most of artillery was in training centers?

5. To what extent were the headquarters prepared for command and control of troops and to what extent did this affect the course of operations in the first days of the war?

The questions posed clearly indicate that Stalin seriously and not without reason suspected the betrayal of part of the generals, including in the issue of bringing troops to combat readiness, which led to an unprecedented tragedy, the price of which was the death of 27 million citizens of the Soviet Union.

Well, yes, well, yes: it was a “suspicious, evil Kremlin dwarf.” Let's look at the revelations of the "combat general" who surrendered a million of his fellow citizens to the enemy near Vyazma, by the way, the Hero of Russia, in short, one of the typical "winners" - Lukin.

This is what he sang, in particular, after surrendering: “Everything that has risen against the Red rulers for two decades has been destroyed, exiled, or died. And the commander of the army, who may even think in the depths of his soul about organized resistance, cannot risk taking a step in this direction.

He is surrounded by commissars, spies and his own military council. Suppose he can talk frankly with some comrades, for example with division generals (most often this is not possible) - what will this give him? Those generals have their own spies, regiment commanders, etc. So practically a thought cannot be translated into action...

Even prominent Russian leaders are probably thinking about this, maybe even those who can still do something. After all, not all leading figures are sworn adherents of communism, but today they see no other way out. There are two people so popular and powerful that they could cause a change in circumstances: Budyonny and Timoshenko. Budyonny is a man of the people, but he considers himself a very “cultured” and very charming person. And it is unlikely that he forgot 1938, when he was out of favor with Stalin. If you could, for example, attract these people, unnecessary bloodshed could be avoided."

This is the opinion of the then generals not of the “Stalinist satrap” Lavrentiy Beria or Pavel Sudoplatov, this is the opinion of a typical general who was entrusted with four armies when he committed treason! So the “evil dwarf” had every reason not to really trust these “glorious winners.”

By the way, after the successes near Moscow, A. A. Vlasov in the troops, following Stalin, is called nothing less than “the savior of Moscow.” On instructions from the Main Political Directorate, a book is being written about Vlasov called “Stalin’s Commander.” If the military council had continued to look after him, then who knows who would have hosted the Victory Parade on Red Square in 1945, who would have blamed all the sins on Stalin - Stalin received brilliant descriptions of him at the very beginning of the war precisely from Khrushchev.

On May 24, 1941, at an extended meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, in which the highest command staff of the Red Army participated, including Zhukov and Khrushchev, Stalin bluntly stated: “The situation is worsening every day, and it looks very likely that we We may be subjected to a surprise attack from Nazi Germany.”

I think the above is enough to understand that the postulate that Stalin did not expect an attack in June 1941 is a blatant, vile, unscrupulous lie, born of two scoundrels - Zhukov and Khrushchev.

Now, knowing that Stalin acted adequately to how the real situation developed, taking into account and weighing intelligence data, taking into account that the same data was on the table of the Minister of Defense and the Chief of the General Staff, much of what was written and said about the beginning of the war, starts to look completely different.

Let us turn to the study of D.N. Egorov “June 30, 1941. Defeat Western Front"The author provides a lot of tables and data that are difficult to interpret even for a specialist. But there are things that are accessible to any layman, even those completely ignorant of military affairs.

Here, for example, is an extract from there: “... a lot of command personnel were caught up in the war anywhere, but not at their combat posts.

And it was not the enemy who was to blame for this, but his own leadership and circumstances. Here are lines from the military diary of Konstantin Simonov, who had to get to Grodno to work in the newspaper of the political department of the 3rd Army: “Mostly commanders returning from vacation were traveling in the carriage. It was difficult and strange. Judging by our carriage, it seemed that half of the Western "The military district was on leave. I didn't understand how it happened."

Summer holidays of 1941 played out cruel joke with troops covering the state border. However, they very convincingly indicate that the USSR was not preparing for an attack on Germany in June-July 1941."

Very much! Let’s just ask ourselves what the conclusion “The USSR was not preparing for an attack on Germany in June-July 1941” might mean?

Is it that in order to disguise the plans, the border districts were beheaded? It seems to me that someone clearly did not intend to not only attack Germany, but to fight at all!

A month before the start of the war, the political leadership expressed concern to the military leadership about the possibility of an attack by the Nazis on the USSR in the near future, as very likely? - Expressed: “The situation is worsening every day, and it looks very likely that we may be subject to a surprise attack from Nazi Germany.”

And what, how is it that it was after this that it happened that “Judging by our carriage, it seemed that half of the Western Military District was on vacation. I did not understand how this happened.”

Simonov “didn’t understand” and died “not understanding”, listening to the stories of the “Marshal of Victory”. - Is it really not clear who is directly responsible for where officers and generals should be when there is a threat of an attack on the country - on vacations, business trips, promotion courses and in general, God knows where, but not at combat posts?!

The USSR was preparing for war, living it, war was in the air.

Here are the poems of those years by that same Konstantin Simonov:

Holy fury of attack,
Fighting cruel suffering
Our generation will be tied up
In an iron knot, forever

Us they sell that Stalin beheaded the Red Army with his repressions. But the number of “innocent victims” is simply tiny compared to those who were granted leave by Defense Minister Tymoshenko and Chief of the General Staff Zhukov, who dispersed the command of the border districts under various pretexts on the eve of the enemy attack. Well, it wasn’t Stalin who issued travel certificates!

Was the country ready for war?

Thundering fire, sparkling brilliance of steel
The cars will go on a furious march

By July 10, 1941, our armed forces had lost 11,783 tanks, only 1,731 remained in the active army, of which 1,214 were light [Lopukhovsky, refers to Porokhin S. Independent Military Review. N2 39 dated 3 October 1, 2003]. When Hitler was informed about the number of destroyed and captured Russian tanks, he declared in a narrow circle of his entourage that if he had known about their quantity and quality, he would never have started a campaign to the East.

What lies behind this statement by Hitler? And the fact is that if the Russians used tanks minimally, then the whole “Blitzkrieg” and other “Barbarossa” would have been covered with a copper basin, and the example of plywood flying over Paris would have been a blue dream for the Krauts!

The country was preparing for war, lived by war, everything was aimed at protecting the gains of the people, but someone was definitely not going to fight, but was going to hand over everything created by the people along with the people.

On the very first day, all aviation was handed over, well, okay, aviation is a fragile, delicate thing, tied to a place - you can’t land planes just anywhere, you need an airfield, but here are the tanks! Tanks to be delivered in two weeks!

In 1931, Stalin said that “...we are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries. We must cover this distance in ten years. Either we do this, or we will be crushed.”

The country did the impossible - with incredible efforts, it really not only “ran”, but also pulled ahead, demonstrating the incredible capabilities of a liberated, emancipated people.

And the main priority was the army - as a guarantor of the survival of the young state, a state of a new type. A generation of advanced engineers was created, a working class was created, and agriculture moved away from the plow.

The army was given a sufficient amount of weapons, which were superior in quality to the weapons of any possible enemy in the world.

And all these titanic efforts for two weeks - down the drain!

Seasoned liberal Yulia Latynina once wrote: KV tanks were practically indestructible for the advancing Germans, and they could simply trample all their “wedges” along with the supporting infantry. The people simply did not want to fight for Stalin.

Both Latynina and Hitler are right about one thing: the Germans would not have been able to fight this steel Stalinist armada.

Historical example: the 6th Panzer Division of the Wehrmacht fought for 48 hours with only one Soviet tank KV-1 (“Klim Voroshilov”).

"The irretrievable losses of the Red Army exceeded 380 thousand people; Over 600 thousand people were captured. The road to Moscow was open. The Soviet command took emergency measures tostrengthening the Mozhaisk defense line and restoring the damaged front, throwing poorly armed militias and military school cadets against German tank divisions".

But here The magic of the German "wedges" is over! Ended with " poorly armed militias"Moscow and Tula.

The magic “the Germans broke through the defenses and...” did not happen where the front was 140 km away, in a tank-hazardous direction, which according to the regulations was supposed to be defended by an entire army, only one division was defending it! Hastily collected from residents of Alma-Ata, the villages of Nadezhdinskaya and Sofia and residents of the city of Frunze. And “they” didn’t pass!

The world is ruled by Symbols. And there is no way to get away from this.

Here are some symbols of the Stalin era - a “girl with an oar” against the background of a parachute tower:

Below is a photo of Vera Voloshina. This is also a symbol of the era, and not because it was from it that Shadr sculpted that sculpture with the oar.

Yes, she is an athlete, a Komsomol member, simply a beauty, but there were many beauties, even more Komsomol members, she is a symbol because she stood in the same ranks with Nikolai Sirotinin, Nikolai Gastello and thousands of others, whose ashes are buried with reverse side Kremlin from the grave of "Marshal of Victory", in whose honor it burns Eternal Flame and there is a guard of honor.

This is her fiancé Yura; before the war they decided to get married in 1942:

This is the willow tree on which she was hanged. Before being hanged, she sang "Internationale". Her life ended on the same day as the life of her younger friend, who went out on a mission with her:

Who, before her death, uttered words that flew around the country:

You can't outweigh everyone - there are 170 million of us! Stalin is with us!

And this is also a symbol, a symbol of a new era - Nikita, the chronicler of the “winners”, sculpts an “artistic” image of Stalin
villain.

Creepy image" Stalin's repressions“flows into our brains with hereditary dish-licking: this image of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich was created by Nikita Sergeevich’s great-grandfather, of whom he is very proud:

And his dad - yesterday he wrote a hymn with Stalin, today - he changed Stalin to God. Well, the son is a complete exposer of the “horrors of Stalinism,” which is as much an “artistic” fiction as Ivan the Terrible’s murder of his own son.

And like this impudent mug who plays himself best in films:

Making films with glamorous whores, cadets, lackeys and nostalgia for the “crunch of a French bread”, one can look these girls in the eyes:

P.S. After the war, listening to the conversations of village men who had returned from the front, I remembered one story.

Crossing, there is a convoy of trucks. Suddenly there is movement. And then Zhukov comes with his retinue.

What's the matter? A beardless boy jumps out of the cab - the engine has stalled, Comrade General! Zhukov unfastens the holster, shoots, kicks, the corpse falls into the water.

Put away! - the car is pushed into the water.

About the incredible disregard for human life, the unjustified cruelty of the “butcher,” as he was called in the troops, was written by many in their memoirs, including generals and even Konstantin Rokossvsky. It was indicative to shoot in front of a formation without trial or investigation, just like that, for the sake of warning, it was a common thing for him.

It didn’t matter to the “butcher” - one mother would not live to see her son, or a thousand, or even a million.

But he took care of his accomplices: in the first days railway trains, instead of the front, were driven pointlessly. So the train with fuel, due to the lack of which, in particular, the tanks of the traitor Pavlov did not fight, was sent to Maykop. Two echelons with the latest tanks disappeared completely unknown where. After the investigation and trial, this beast was shot. So, Zhukov wrote in his memoirs that he took care of his family, and after the war he achieved rehabilitation.

Well, as you know, after the coup, which they finally carried out, all their accomplices were rehabilitated - Tukhachevsky, Pavlov and many more traitors.

Moreover, for example, Tukhachevsky was rehabilitated without considering the merits of the case, but based only on the fact that he was ruined by a criminal regime. Well, to overthrow the “criminal regime” nothing is spared - not even one’s own people.

General Lukin went out to surrender himself, on his own two feet, taking with him, as the Germans appreciated, “valuable cartographic materials.” At the same time, one of the headquarters officers shot himself. And he hit a scoundrel in the leg with a rifle bullet Unknown Soldier, for whom the war, unlike the general, ended with his last breath.

But too many marshal generals fought for the cadets, that is, the brats, and for them to have lackeys, and Marshal Zhukov’s entire dacha is covered with books with gold embossing in an imported language, in which he is like a goat in musical notation.

But those girls went to fight so that there would be no bar or lackeys at all.

RIA Novosti columnist Sergei Varshavchik.

Once in Germany, while visiting some German friends, I came across a school history textbook, which I leafed through with interest. First of all, I was interested in the section dedicated to the Third Reich and World War II. I was surprised to discover that German schoolchildren were offered one small chapter of six pages to study these events, which left a deep mark on world history.

Well, no wonder. History is written by the winners. The defeated try to remember defeats less often.

Stefan Schauer, who will turn 83 this summer, is a good friend of mine. His older brother died in September 1942 near Novorossiysk. Stefan was luckier. In the summer of 1944, upon reaching the age of 18, he was drafted and sent to the Eastern Front, where he managed to fight quite a bit. In 1945 he was captured by us, after which he literally words, he was driven “beyond Mozhaisk” - after the war he built some fortifications near Mozhaisk. Then he returned to Germany, built a house and worked all his life as a postman, delivered mail, ran a farm, and is now retired.

Stefan is actively interested in history, he has books on World War II, but even he was surprised to learn from me that it turns out that there was more than one attempt on Hitler’s life by his compatriots.

What can we say about young Germans, to whom the horrors of that war seem infinitely far from the realities of today’s politically correct and prosperous Bundeslife?

The Germans would be fine, but here’s a paradoxical fact: in our country, which bore the brunt of the fight against fascism on its shoulders, defeating the best military machine of that time, young people also know very little about war.

This unfortunate fact was made public by VTsIOM Communications Director Olga Kamenchuk, whose agency conducted a number of sociological research, including among young Russians, surveying them on the topic of the Great Patriotic War.

According to her, the younger the respondents, the less they know their recent history. In particular, few of these age group was able to correctly answer when the blockade of Leningrad was broken or when the Battle of Kursk began.

“The older the respondents, the better they know the history of the Great Patriotic War,” the sociologist stated.

On the one hand, this is true. We grew up watching wonderful films, books, and plays about the war. Such as "The Living and the Dead", " Hot Snow", "Battalions ask for fire", "Five Earths", "Only "old men" go into battle", "Rise", "Come and See". On the other hand, in Soviet times, along with stories about real heroes, we were largely fed myths. They often continue to stuff them with them today, while forgetting about real heroes and real exploits, about the truth, no matter how bitter it may be.

Let us remember the textbook feat of 28 Panfilov heroes on November 16, 1941 and the legendary words of political instructor Klochkov “Russia is great, but there is nowhere to retreat - Moscow is behind us!”

What turns out to be true if you understand this story?

Neither the commander of the 2nd battalion (which included the 4th company), Major Reshetnikov, nor the commander of the 1075th regiment, Colonel Kaprov, nor the commander of the 316th division, Major General Panfilov, nor the commander of the 16th 1st Army Lieutenant General Rokossovsky.

German sources did not report anything about it either (although, according to “Red Star,” which contained a series of essays about this, the Nazis lost as many as 18 tanks in one battle).

Later, after the war, the Main Military Prosecutor's Office of the USSR conducted a thorough investigation into the history of the battle at the Dubosekovo crossing, as a result of which it turned out that the story about 28 heroes was a fiction.

In particular, the former commander of the 1075th Infantry Regiment, Ilya Kaprov, told military investigators that “... there was no battle between 28 Panfilov men and German tanks at the Dubosekovo crossing on November 16, 1941 - this is a complete fiction. On this day, at the Dubosekovo crossing, as part of the 2nd battalion, the 4th company fought with German tanks, and they really fought heroically. Over 100 people from the company died, and not 28, as was written about in the newspapers. None of the correspondents contacted me during this period; I never told anyone about the battle of 28 Panfilov’s men, and I couldn’t talk about it, since there was no such battle. I did not write any political report on this matter. I don’t know on the basis of what materials they wrote in newspapers, in particular in Krasnaya Zvezda, about the battle of 28 guardsmen from the division named after. Panfilov."

The interrogated secretary of the Red Star, Alexander Krivitsky, in turn, testified that “during a conversation at the PUR with Comrade Krapivin, he was interested in where I got the words of political instructor Klochkov, written in my basement: “Russia is great, but there is nowhere to retreat - Moscow is behind “, I answered him that I invented it myself... As for the feelings and actions of the 28 heroes, this is my literary conjecture. I didn’t talk to any of the wounded or surviving guardsmen.”

So think about it. On the one hand (according to myth) there were 28 Panfilov heroes, but in reality there were over a hundred.

Another example of mythologization is the feat of Nikolai Gastello, who at the beginning of the war sent his burning plane into a column of enemy equipment. What, they say, was the world's first ramming of a ground target.

In fact, the first ram in the history of aviation was carried out by Russian pilot Pyotr Nesterov on September 8, 1914 against an Austrian aircraft. The authorship of the first ram against a ground target belongs to Soviet pilot Mikhail Yuyukin, who on August 5, 1939 sent his SB bomber engulfed in fire at the enemy during the battle on the Khalkhin Gol River. Etc.

To the point that at the site of the supposed death of Captain Gastello and his crew after the war, the remains of another crew were discovered, Captain Maslov, who served in the same regiment as Gastello and also flew out on a combat mission on the same day.

Gastello's remains (as well as the place where his plane crashed) have not been found to this day, and the very fact of ramming enemy ground troops with a downed Soviet plane - by Gastello or Maslov - has not yet been confirmed by facts.

There are many similar examples that can be given.

For example, one of the topics that in Soviet historiography, to put it mildly, was not very common to expand on was the panic in Moscow on October 16-19, 1941 (stopped by the introduction of a state of siege), when crowds of people tried to escape by any means from the city, which was , in their opinion, is already practically doomed. At the same time, the “race” was led by various kinds of bosses, including employees of the apparatus of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks.

I will refer to the memorandum of the deputy head of the 1st department of the NKVD of the USSR, senior state security major Shadrin, dated October 20, 1941, who described what he saw: “...5. Complete chaos reigned in the offices of the Central Committee apparatus. Many desk locks and the desks themselves were broken into, forms and all kinds of correspondence were scattered, including secret ones, directives of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and other documents. 6. Completely rendered secret material left in heaps in the boiler room for burning, not burned. 7. More than a hundred typewriters were left behind different systems, 128 pairs of felt boots, sheepskin coats, 22 bags of shoes and clothing, several tons of meat, potatoes, several barrels of herring and other products. 8. In the office of comrade. Zhdanov five top secret packages were discovered..."

It’s not entirely clear with the numbers either. In particular, what losses did our army suffer during the war?

Leading Russian military historian Alexey Isaev, to whom I asked this question, replied that there are no exact figures today. There are approximately 8.6 million people, emphasizing that according to the Generalized Computer Data Bank at the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, which contains information about dead and missing Red Army soldiers, there are at least 13 million people.

The same ambiguity is with the battle losses of the Germans, who, for all their pedantry and accuracy, by the end of the war had no time to count.

As a result, it is quite difficult to understand exactly how well or poorly we fought. The same Isaev believes that the ratio of German and Soviet losses fluctuates somewhere around 1:3-4.

The writer Viktor Astafiev, who went through the entire war as a soldier, whose book of letters “There is no answer for me...” is now being published, wrote: “It was not you, not me, and not the army that defeated fascism, but our long-suffering people. It was in his blood that they drowned fascism, showered the enemy with corpses... Only criminals could waste their people like that! Only enemies could lead the army like this during hostilities, only scum could keep the army in fear and suspicion... Having shot down Bismarck’s grandson, having beaten the sixth army of the Germans, why don’t you boast that the Germans immediately rounded up this figure and defeated it near Kharkov (by luring obvious bag) six of our armies? Only your valiant comrades-stripes near Kharkov were taken prisoner at the same time, 19 of them, because they were accustomed to attacking from behind and retreating from the front, so they themselves ended up in the zone of a closed ring. In 1943!

There was everything in that war: both heroic and vice versa. And the generals were different. For example, Alexander Vasilyevich Gorbatov is a brave, thoughtful military leader, a passionate follower of Suvorov, who did not drink, did not smoke, did not swear, and was not afraid to defend his views before any high authorities (it was not for nothing that Stalin said about his stubborn character that “Gorbatov’s grave will correct ").

Or the best pilot of the Allied forces, the first three times Hero of the Soviet Union, Alexander Ivanovich Pokryshkin, who skillfully fought from the first to last day war and was proud that not a single bomber or attack aircraft, which he, as a fighter, accompanied on a combat mission, was shot down.

Everyone has their own war. And not only among veterans - among us, their descendants. Unfortunately, among young people, it is becoming less and less. Maybe it’s worth revising history textbooks, removing myths from them and adding stories about real people?

By God, it's worth it. For those who do not know their history well are doomed to repeat it.

History is always written by the winners. And when a clash of two cultures occurs, the loser is, as it were, crossed out, and the winner begins to write new history books, books glorifying his deeds and humiliating the defeated enemy.
As Napoleon once said: “What is history but a fable that has been agreed upon to be believed?” By its nature, history is always a one-sided assessment of events."

D. Brown "The Da Vinci Code"

Information systems should be considered a revolution of the same magnitude in its consequences as the advent of the printed book." "A people who do not find their place in modern information systems will fall out of history"

R. Khakimov

Let's take a little look at what history or the history of history is.
Stories are different, after all. For example, the history of the development of objects, technologies, and machines has little to do with the “winners.”
Relationship history various countries, domestic social developments really depend on the winners - the rulers of the nations.

For centuries, what fathers told their children was called history. But it was not written, it was transmitted by thousands, millions of lips.
Such stories began with a narration about their own origin. Then, stories about his time, his actions, and his living conditions were dedicated to each of the ancestors. Thus, the history of the family, clan, and entire people was passed on from generation to generation.
With the advent of writing, books began to be published with their own sophisticated technology from information collection, editing, censorship to distribution. Information has become manageable and dependent on manufacturers of books and other printed materials. This is how a controlled ideology emerged. He who has won, who rules, writes these “fables”.

D. Brown and Napoleon wrote about this time.

Currently, modern technology is radically changing the information environment. Firstly, it is now difficult to determine the winner. Yes, somehow the people don’t need him.

Secondly, anyone can write. Including our people.

We have returned to the system of transmitting information from father to son in a new capacity.
We can describe every word, every thought and put it into the machine’s memory and pass it on to our offspring. To systematize such numerous stories, a single time scale can be used, used in the United Shezhir of the Kazakhs.
Thousands, millions of subjective stories and descriptions can be the basis for objectively reflected history, including social development.
A single shezhire can be not just a collection of names, but also a means of displaying objective history.
Therefore, we invite visitors to submit not just names, but also their own autobiographies, memories and memoirs of their fathers. In addition, you can add photos and videos.