Can Leonid Brezhnev be considered the best ruler of the 20th century: opinions. Was there stagnation?

Political portraits. Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov Medvedev Roy Alexandrovich

Soviet and Western politicians about Brezhnev

In the last few years, memoirs and interviews have appeared in our press, the authors of which, who met or even worked with Brezhnev for many years, share their impressions and assessments with readers. I already had to talk about the point of view of the famous Soviet publicist and journalist Melor Sturua, who disputes my and Fyodor Burlatsky’s opinion about Brezhnev as a “weak leader.”

“The first person in a state where the cult of personality dominated,” wrote M. Sturua, “was not appointed, much less elected. The first person made himself. It has always been what in English is called a “self-made man”, literally translated - a person who made himself. After all, Georgy Malenkov was chosen as the first person in the state immediately after Stalin’s death. But he did not resist... Brezhnev resisted, survived and won, and ruled for almost two decades. And not because it was a product, a mediocre product of consensus. Roy Medvedev’s scheme falls apart if we remember even the events lying on the surface without delving into the darkness of the corridors of power. As you know, Brezhnev did not become the sole leader overnight. After the overthrow of Khrushchev, what essentially came to power was a triumvirate: Brezhnev – Kosygin – Podgorny.

Only over time did Brezhnev prevail in him. And what about eliminating Kirilenko, who was too carried away? And the taming of the obstinate Shelest? What about the reprisal against the rebellious Yegorychev? And what about Mazurov’s departure “for health reasons”? No, Brezhnev was not made from the clay of sentimentality mixed with tears of tenderness and emotion. He was a merciless fighter with fists of steel, albeit wearing velvet gloves. The intellectual mediocrity of a politician should not be confused with his ability to become a leader. These two hypostases do not always coincide, and most likely and most often do not coincide... The talent of a leader presupposes, first of all, will, determination, rigidity, turning “if necessary” into cruelty, and the absence of prejudices. Brezhnev possessed these qualities more and better than his rivals, and therefore prevailed. The weak filling of his intellectual pulse and hedonism, bordering on debauchery, corruption and embezzlement, should not obscure this circumstance... There were two Brezhnevs - sentimental and merciless, epicurean and master political intrigue, a healthy lover of life and a human wreck. If the first pair of poles are two sides of the same coin, then the last pair is the work of nature.”

After everything that I wrote about Brezhnev above, it is very difficult to agree with M. Sturua’s opinion about Brezhnev as a strong leader"With with iron fists" Brezhnev's former assistant A. Bovin, who repeatedly met with his boss under a variety of circumstances, wrote:

“Unlike Stalin or Khrushchev, Brezhnev did not have bright personal characteristics. It is difficult to call him a major political figure. He was a man of the apparatus and, in essence, a servant of the apparatus. If we keep in mind human qualities, then, according to my observations, Brezhnev was, in general, a good person, sociable, stable in his affections, a cordial, hospitable host... This was the case until approximately the first half of the 70s. And then - further Brezhnev began to collapse, fall apart as a person and as a politician. All power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. But what was once a tragedy has now become a farce.”

It would also be useful to get acquainted with the review of Brezhnev by that same “obstinate” P.E. Shelest, whom the stronger, in Sturua’s opinion, L.I. Brezhnev managed to remove from power. Objecting specifically to Sturua, Shelest said in one of his interviews:

“I would never say about Brezhnev as a strong, wise, iron-clad politician. Never. He was a typical apparatchik. He is incomparable with Khrushchev. Brezhnev played to the public all the time. There was an artist. He could shed a tear if necessary. He adored the Order, it’s no longer a secret. Podgorny told him: “Enough, Leonid Ilyich, they’re already telling jokes - Brezhnev, they say, went into surgery, his chest is expanding, there’s nowhere to hang stars.” All in vain... Well, I couldn’t live without the stars, I couldn’t, what are you going to do. There's nothing behind the soul. Just as he came as an upstart, he left. But I held out because the environment was like that. In politics, the environment matters a lot. In politics, one man can only last if he is a dictator. Brezhnev was not a dictator. It was an impersonal cult."

About the same thing was said about Brezhnev and K. T. Mazurov:

“How did it happen that Brezhnev remained at the helm for so many years?.. How did it happen? When Khrushchev was relieved of his post, no replacement was seen. The question arose - who? The second secretary was Brezhnev. Approachable, imposing, knew how to communicate with people, never exploded... It seemed the right person. But the main thing came to light later - that he was a very incompetent leader... Leonid Ilyich really did not in any way possess the qualities outstanding figure, he was a good student of the very system we were talking about. And, using her methods, he managed to transfer the Politburo to the second echelon, depriving it of the decisive vote... The fact is that Brezhnev relied on the Secretariat, and not on the Politburo. Traditionally, the Secretariat was involved in organizing and verifying the implementation of decisions and placing management personnel. And now everything was decided by a group of secretaries. And there were Suslov, Kirilenko, Kulakov, Ustinov and others... The Secretariat considered problems before the Politburo. And it often happened like this - we come to a meeting, and Brezhnev says: “We have already consulted here and think that this and that should be done.” And then the secretaries’ voices: “Yes, that’s right, Leonid Ilyich.” The members of the Politburo could only agree... And the main concern of our leader, unfortunately, was the concern for creating personal authority.”

We must assume that Soviet figures, and even more so former members The Politburo knew Brezhnev better than others. Nevertheless, it is interesting to recall some of the reviews of Western leaders about Brezhnev, because to evaluate a politician, it is important not only who and what he really is, but also what impression he is able to make on others. I already wrote that soviet people and in the 70s, despite all the praise of Brezhnev, they continued to treat him with indifference that was insulting to any leader. In the majority of his fellow citizens, Brezhnev did not evoke any feelings of warm sympathy, nor feelings of fear, nor distinct hostility. But foreign politicians, who, since the early 70s, had been conducting many hours of negotiations with Leonid Ilyich and his entourage, tried to understand this man as best as possible. I'm not even talking about the fact that all the details related to Brezhnev were carefully studied and analyzed by Western intelligence services. In the first half of the 70s, three people most often met with Brezhnev: Western politics- German Chancellor Willy Brandt, assistant to the US President, and soon US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and American President Richard Nixon himself. In their memoirs, published during Brezhnev’s lifetime, they all left detailed descriptions of meetings with Soviet leader. I will give only a few representative quotes from these multi-page descriptions. For example, former German Chancellor W. Brandt wrote:

“Unlike Kosygin, my direct negotiating partner in 1970, who was mostly cool and calm, Brezhnev could be impulsive, even angry. Changes in mood, Russian soul, quick tears are possible. He had a sense of humor. In Oreanda he not only swam for many hours, but also talked and laughed a lot. He talked about the history of his country, but only about the last decades... It was obvious that Brezhnev tried to take care of his appearance. His figure did not correspond to the ideas that might have arisen from his official photographs. He was in no way an imposing person and, despite the weight of his body, he gave the impression of an elegant, lively, energetic and cheerful person. His facial expressions and gestures gave away the southerner, especially if he felt relaxed during the conversation. He came from the Ukrainian industrial region, where various nationalities mixed. More than anything else, the Second World War affected the formation of Brezhnev as a person. He spoke with great and slightly naive excitement about how Hitler managed to deceive Stalin...”

V. Brandt also noted the obvious growth of Brezhnev’s power and influence among other Soviet politicians.

“There are a number of relationships,” wrote Brandt, “from which I felt what changes had occurred in the position of my counterpart. Above all, his status as the dominant member of the Soviet leadership could hardly be more clearly demonstrated... he displayed the greatest self-confidence when discussing international affairs."

The future Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Helmut Schmidt, who served as the Minister of Defense of the Federal Republic of Germany, was also present at the negotiations between Brezhnev and Brandt. In his memoirs he also noted constant desire L. I. Brezhnev return to events Patriotic War. Schmidt does not forget to note that Brezhnev also paid tribute to a variety of drinks during conversations, preferring the Polish Zubrowka. Even the rather dry A. A. Gromyko grinned when he saw that Brezhnev, holding a glass of vodka in his hands, sat down in a chair near the bookcase, where forty volumes of the works of K. Marx and F. Engels stood on the shelves.

Henry Kissinger's first and very long meeting with Brezhnev was secret. The assistant to the US President arrived in Moscow shortly after his and R. Nixon's trips to China, trips that greatly worried the Soviet leadership. G. Kissinger's task was to conduct confidential negotiations on a possible visit of the US President to the USSR. After his time in the Soviet Union, Kissinger drafted for Nixon and narrow circle American leaders a detailed note about the personality of Brezhnev and some people from his inner circle. This note, of course, was not published. But even during Brezhnev’s lifetime, Kissinger, who left The White house after the victory of the Democratic candidate J. Carter in the elections, he published two volumes of memoirs, in which many pages are devoted to his meetings and negotiations with Brezhnev. This is how Kissinger describes his first meeting with Soviet leaders:

“Brezhnev was waiting for us in the largest guest house in the villa complex on the Lenin Hills where we were staying. Gromyko and Dobrynin stood at his side, his assistant Andrei Alexandrov stood unobtrusively a step behind. The heir to Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev greeted me enthusiastically. Clearly torn between the advice to behave prudently and with restraint and his own inclination to communicate, he alternated vigorously patting me with a stern face... He tried to hide his uncertainty with noisiness, frenzy, loudness, and the deeply hidden feeling of his inadequacy with unexpected outbursts of harshness. Appearance meant a lot to Brezhnev. During my secret visit, he showed me, with great joy, the series of spacious and elegant rooms where Nixon would live, clearly awaiting approval... With an interval of two months, I met face to face with the two powerful heads of two communist giants... Surely, no one had reached the top communist hierarchy solely due to rudeness, but charm Chinese leader hid the presence of this quality, while Brezhnev’s rude “assault” distinguished him. The Chinese, even in situations of the greatest cordiality, kept their distance. Brezhnev, who possessed physical magnetism, crushed his interlocutor. His mood changed quickly, and he did not hide his emotions... His hands were constantly in motion, he twisted his watch, knocked the ash off an ever-smoking cigarette, rattled his cigarette case on the ashtray. He couldn't keep calm. While his remarks were being translated, he tirelessly got up from his chair, walked around the room, explained himself loudly to his colleagues, and even left the room without explanation and then returned. Therefore, during negotiations with Brezhnev there was a feeling of eccentricity... One day he brought a toy cannon, usually used, according to him, at Politburo meetings. She didn't fire. Fussing around with it to make it work cared him much more than the importance of what I was saying. Finally the thing worked. Brezhnev with important look began to walk around the room like a man who had defeated his opponent... In short, Brezhnev was not only the General Secretary of the CPSU, but also a genuine Russian. He was a mixture of roughness and warmth, at once crude and charming, cunning and disarming... He seemed at the same time full of energy and exhausted... He experienced enough emotions for one life. He often spoke, at times agitating his interlocutor, about the suffering of the Second World War... Maybe all Brezhnev's actions were completely a game?.. I believe that he was sincere in his desire to give his country a break. What I'm not sure about is the price he was willing to pay for it."

These were Kissinger's first impressions of Brezhnev. Then they met many times over several years, and almost every time Brezhnev surprised his negotiating partner with something. In the second volume of his memoirs, Kissinger wrote about one of his meetings with the Soviet leader:

“Brezhnev came to my residence shortly after my arrival and greeted me vigorously. A little later, he invited my colleagues and me to dinner at his villa, which he showed off with the pride of an entrepreneur who had gone from bootblack to millionaire. He asked me how much all this would cost in the US. I stupidly and erroneously assumed the amount was $400,000. Brezhnev's face fell. My assistant Helmut Sonnenfeld was more experienced psychologist. “Two million dollars,” he corrected, probably being closer to the truth. Brezhnev perked up and, beaming, continued his excursion. He showed us, with boyish pride, a file of newspaper clippings and telegrams from various communist leaders on the occasion of his being awarded the Lenin Peace Prize. A ruler with almost absolute power seemed to see no inconsistency, boasting of rewards from his own subordinates and congratulations from those whose careers and political survival depended on him."

Former US President R. Nixon also left extensive memoirs, in which a lot of space is devoted to his meetings with Brezhnev. I have already given above individual quotes from these books. About his last meeting with Brezhnev in 1974, Nixon wrote:

“This meeting gave me the opportunity to get to know Brezhnev better and study him as a leader and as a person. I spent 42 hours with him in 1972 and 35 hours in 1973. No matter how superficial contacts of this kind may be, they provide an opportunity for important observations. I found Brezhnev more interesting and impressive than when we first met. Outside the restrictions imposed by the Kremlin, his political and human qualities seemed more tolerable. At one of the signing ceremonies, when his antics made him the center of attention, I jokingly said, “He best politician in this room". He seemed to take my words as the highest praise. His behavior and humor were almost mischievous at public meetings. As much as possible, I acted as his partner in such situations, but sometimes it was difficult for me to maintain the balance between politeness and dignity. Brezhnev demonstrated a typically Russian combination of high discipline in some cases with her complete absence in others. A funny symbol of this incompatibility was his new funny cigarette case with a built-in counter that automatically dispensed one cigarette per hour. This was the way he fought smoking. At the beginning of each hour, he ceremoniously took out the allocated cigarette and closed the cigarette case. Then, after a few minutes, he reached into his jacket pocket and took out another cigarette from a normal pack, which he also carried with him. In this way, he could continue his habitual chain smoking until the counter went off and he could take a well-deserved cigarette from the cigarette case... I could not resist the temptation to mentally compare Brezhnev and Khrushchev... They were both similar in the sense that they were tough , stubborn, realistic leaders. Both punctuated their conversations with anecdotes. Khrushchev was often completely vulgar and quite simple-minded. Where Khrushchev was ignorant and boastful, Brezhnev was expansive but more polite. Both had a developed sense of humor, but Khrushchev seemed to use it much more often at the expense of those around him. Khrushchev seems to have been quicker in his mental reactions. Brezhnev could be harsh, but was always very deliberate in his actions where Khrushchev was more explosive and more impulsive. Both had a temperament, both were emotional.”

Similar reviews about Brezhnev by Western politicians we can go on and on. They are most often inaccurate and clearly exaggerate Brezhnev’s abilities as a diplomat, as a politician, and as a person. But in these reviews, dating back to 1971–1974, Brezhnev and his “team” appear in a relatively favorable light, as people who are able to conduct international affairs and negotiations. In the second half of the 70s, foreign leaders who met with Brezhnev saw before them a completely different person, whose appearance and politics I intend to write about in the second part of the book. Brezhnev's regime quickly became decrepit along with him and began to frighten everyone with its irrationality. If in the early 70s Western leaders who visited Moscow or received Leonid Ilyich in their countries still saw a man capable of self-assessments and, as it seemed to them, sincerely striving for peace and relative disarmament, then in the second half of the 70s they faced a man who very poorly understood the events taking place in the world and headed political group, which ruled on his behalf one of the superpowers according to the principle “after us, even a flood.” This degradation of man and the regime headed by him, the encouragement of universal lies and the strengthening of total silence crippled the consciousness of an entire generation. From this point of view general consequences Brezhnevism turned out to be no less severe than Stalinism. And we have not yet done too much to overcome these consequences in all spheres of society.

From the book Medieval France author Polo de Beaulieu Marie-Anne

From the book History government controlled in Russia author Shchepetev Vasily Ivanovich

Government bodies authorities. State and political figures of the 20th century. Chairmen of the State Duma (representative legislative institution Tsarist Russia in 1906–1917) Muromtsev Sergei Andreevich, cadet, chairman of the 1st State Duma (April 7 – 8

From Lezgina's book. History, culture, traditions author Gadzhieva Madlena Narimanovna

Historical, political and statesmen Haji-Davud Myushkursky - Khan of Shirvan and Kuba (1723–1728) and other territories of Lezgistan with the capital in Shemakha. Large statesman in the history of the South Caucasus. Organizer and leader of the people's liberation movement

From the book of Kumyks. History, culture, traditions author Atabaev Magomed Sultanmuradovich

Political, military and economic figures Apashev Daniyal - head of the first capital of Dagestan - Temir-Khan-Shura, chairman of the parliament of the Mountain Republic and the Dagestan Milli-Committee during the Civil War, a famous organizer and socio-political

From the book History of the KGB author Sever Alexander

Chapter ten. Political repressions under Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev official history Soviet Union Nikita Khrushchev remained as a liberal. He is given credit for: the report “On the cult of personality and its consequences” at the 20th Party Congress in February 1956, trial

From the book Elizaveta Petrovna. Daughter of Peter the Great author Valishevsky Kazimir

Chapter 4 Close Empresses. Political and military figures I. Foreign elementNationalism, according to some historians, which supposedly elevated Elizabeth to the throne, is only fiction and nonsense. The empress who ascended the throne relied on her name and

From book Battle of Grunwald. July 15, 1410. 600 years of glory author Andreev Alexander Radevich

Outstanding political figures of the Middle Ages The Code of Noble Honor was created in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania under Vytautas the Great. “Faithfully and truly I serve the Fatherland, I answer to God. Good is a reward, evil is retribution. You must - so you can. Honor is more valuable than life. With a blow to

From the book History of Russia author Munchaev Shamil Magomedovich

From the book History with a Question Mark author Gabovich Evgeniy Yakovlevich

Soviet historians: Western colleagues in the service of ideology World histories serve as excellent objects for historical and analytical research. Soviet " The World History"she names some of them, for example, those of the 19th century, written by famous German

From the book Russian Holocaust. Origins and stages of the demographic catastrophe in Russia author Matosov Mikhail Vasilievich

10.7. STABILITY UNDER THE “QUIET” BREZHNEV Brezhnev replaced Khrushchev at the pinnacle of power in Russia in October 1964. Like Khrushchev, Brezhnev had full personal power. In its features and character it was still the power of a dictator, since in relations with

From the book Rulers of Russia author Gritsenko Galina Ivanovna

Political and government figures AXELROD Pavel Borisovich (1850–1928) - a leader of the Russian Social Democratic movement, one of the leaders of Menshevism. Born in Chernigov province in the family of a small merchant. After graduating from the Mogilev gymnasium, he studied at

From the book Russian Archive: The Great Patriotic War: T. 15 (4-5). Battle of Berlin (Red Army in defeated Germany). author Collection of documents

From the book Adultery author Ivanova Natalya Vladimirovna

Chapter 6. Entrepreneurs and politicians Information about scandals in the family life of politicians and entrepreneurs until recently was kept, as they say, top secret. After the archives were opened relatively recently,

From the book History of Ukraine author Team of authors

Western and southwestern lands of ancient Rus' as part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Zhemoit and Russian in ancient Russian chronicles and in modern literature is called Lithuania. The inhabitants of the principality themselves often called it Russia. And that's why they were

From the book The Imperial Idea in Great Britain (second half of the 19th century) author Gleb Marina Vladimirovna

Appendix British politicians and statesmen second half of the 19th century V. Asquith, Herbert Henry, Earl of Oxford (1852–1928) - English statesman, liberal. 1892–1895 - Minister of Internal Affairs; 1905–1908 – Chancellor of the Exchequer; 1908–1916 –

From the book Oral History author Shcheglova Tatyana Kirillovna

18. Political, state and party figures of Soviet and post-Soviet history in estimates of the population (rural, urban) 1. Which of the Soviet or post-Soviet leaders of the country, in your opinion, did the most for ordinary people? Whose policy was it?

04/02/04, Golem
He was a cool guy! He loved women, and they loved him. And how he kissed - you won’t see this in any porn films - Sylvia Saint is resting! And then, of course, he raised a cohort of blackmailers, demo talkers (all sorts of Gaidars and Sobchaks) and thieves, but it was not he, but Gorbachev who let go of the power of the organs so that these DEMONS would weigh themselves! He simply enjoyed life and would have left back in 1976 to have a good rest (like Yeltsin now), if not for scum like Ponomarev the scoundrel or the gray spot Solomentsev...

02/06/04, Karas Markelych
He may be an old man with insanity and a stagnant person, but unlike today's pot-bellied officials with ties, he was not a thief. EBN and GDP and his little finger are not worth it.

10/09/04, user
“an era sometimes requires weak rulers” - it wasn’t me, but someone smart who said it. So, Brezhnev was not a super-duper genius, but still the country existed normally and was not going to fall apart! One thing I don’t understand is why they sent troops to Afghanistan.

12/04/05, tolyan
and Patama sho he spoke very funny and not everyone can boast of this! politicians and comedians were only in the Council of Deputies!

17/06/05, OPOSSUM
oh! there are people like that! In my opinion, all the leaders of the USSR, except Chernenko and Andropov (we didn’t have time to laugh here) are simply caricatured personalities. that the "corn grower" Khrushchev, that the paranoid Soso, that dear Leonid Ilyich... so much has not been created about anyone funny jokes, so much about him... many of them are taken from life. and all kinds of birthday orders? By the end of his life, he looked like a Christmas tree with a poorly made false jaw, thanks to which Leonid Ilyich produced immortal masterpieces like “fucking sausages” (socialist countries), “Russia is going to shit” (foot to foot), “tit to tit” ( systematically). and his “memoirs”? in his diary he wrote something like “finally read my memoirs.” Brezhnev himself is a walking joke. but about neo-Stalinism, stagnation and others serious things I prefer not to think. Why get upset and angry about something you can’t change?

25/08/05, Obivan Kenoby
Because with such a quiet, peaceful and, in to a certain extent, modest person The USSR achieved perhaps the peak of its development in various fields National economy.

14/09/05, Dbys
And I like the idea of EDBE (the economy should be economical). Relevant to this day. I often use the idea of EDBE in my life, while remembering dear LIB.

11/12/05, Mega
Because under him the USSR was able to really compete with the growing USA, because people were not so fixated on money, there was healthcare, normal human relations between people, films, cartoons, on which I will raise my children, and not stinking second-rate Pokemon - Snickers and Sex in big city. I agree, there was a lot of insanity, but there was more good, people lived without sausage and lived together, and did not scream. And the disunity between people was not so glaring.

08/12/06, Chila
Eighteen years of the reign of L.I. - the most stable period in the life of the USSR. An era in which nothing seemed to change, nothing happened... Soon, on December 19, Brezhnev will turn one hundred years old. Whatever one may say, the date is significant.

08/12/06, Agent
Yes, 18 years of stable socialism, after death another 3 years of stability and that’s it...1985-1991 is a paddling pool, not the USSR. This man convinced that socialism is possible, and that humanity should strive for this, and not drink coca- cola and wear jeans and all sorts of chemical snickers.

12/12/06, Mikhail Voloshin
Very positive opinion. He loved to live himself and let others live. After the scum of Stalin and the schizophrenic, Khrushchev calmed the country. He is certainly not a genius and did not claim to be. And all the good stuff, etc. - just an old man's whim...

17/12/06, Radagst
At one time, Catherine II was awarded the title “Great”. As far as I remember, besides her, only Peter I and Frederick of Prussia were called “Great”. Why was Catherine “called” the Great? She didn't do anything. She maintained the existing order of things! And Brezhnev did the same. Both Catherine II and Brezhnev are conservatives in in a good way this word. So if we call Catherine “The Great,” maybe we can apply this epithet to Brezhnev?

14/02/07, Recluse
I remember a phrase I read on some website dedicated to Brezhnev: Don’t judge us harshly for the liberties we took, history should know its heroes! So Lenchik is a cool dude! My grandfather also said that Brezhnev was loved in those days, and there is no need to shame him for the fact that he awarded himself a bunch of orders and medals, including the Order of Lenin, and yet Brezhnev was a brilliant General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, he respects deserves ironclad! May he rest in peace!

22/03/07, Metalkiller
Well, I really love this passenger! Such a wicked humorist, the brightest clown in the arena of the political circus, could become the head of state only in our Union! With all this, people say that life under him was quite good in many respects. Now, it’s true, it’s very fashionable to criticize the USSR - especially those who have never lived there and have read Novodvorskaya and Solzhenitsyn like to do this. Of course, there was plenty of stupidity in the USSR, but there were also positive features and that's a fact. And Lenya Brezhnev, may he rest in heaven, was a positive, laughing grandfather who slowly read reports from a piece of paper, mentioning punctuation marks and rattled his countless medals :))))) I have absolutely nothing to hate Comrade Brezhnev for - on the contrary, I love how funny he is , a unique, hilariously funny image, I also like parodies of him, I always laugh. I didn’t find him and I can’t say anything bad about the time during which he led the country. And there’s already so much good stuff!

06/10/07, Aurora Nikolaeva
Brezhnev was an excellent custodian of what Lenin and Stalin created. Those are the creators of the USSR, Brezhnev was the guardian, and for this role he was almost ideal. But as soon as he died, clouds gathered over the country....

06/10/07, Nekonosan
no, I love this grandfather. He was very kind and never took offense at his friends. And they already ruled the country so much that the evil bourgeoisie gritted their teeth. Brezhnev was also the first emo - although he didn’t wear pink, he always wore a bunch of badges and medals on his black suit.

07/10/07, orelkondor
My grandfather has a very high opinion of him, and I, too, began to understand that not everything is as simple as we are told. Apparently, he really was a very wise leader; under him there was stability and economic growth. There were no such senile actions as under Khrushchev. In the world, we strengthened relations with fraternal countries, and we lived in peace with capitalist countries - Brezhnev was a peacemaker, under him there were fewer military parades, he was a more pragmatic leader than Khrushchev, he did not knock his boots on the podium. In fact, there was no stagnation in culture. The theater developed under him, the cinema was also wonderful - by the way, it was Brezhnev who let some comedies pass in spite of the censorship.

04/11/07, turlough_rodgers
I have always written only from myself and I write the same way - only my personal opinion. it will be incomprehensible to young people, of course... they didn’t feel something... so, without references to food. With the passing of the Brezhnev era, I personally did not feel anything at first. then there was the loss of a person, then a leader... and, a week later, a MASTER. whatever it may be... well, not in a week... that's it... I'm already there again... don't write me your opinions, please, what's the difference on this Internet... I'm there again... I'm worried again. that's all, that's why...

18/02/08, creasot
Brezhnev was a wonderful ruler, but the introduction of troops into Afghanistan erases all his achievements. Of course, in 1979 he was already a living corpse, but the responsibility still lies with him. The entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan was the beginning of the end of the USSR.

25/03/08, Orome
Previously, I had a bad attitude towards Brezhnev, I thought that he had driven the country into Stagnation and that was bad. But after reading more detailed literature about stagnation, I realized that stagnation was not so bad. Stability was maintained. Unlike Stalin's times it was free education. There were no mass shootings. I wouldn't say that the economy has stood still. The economy was developing and it was evident from the statistics that production was growing every year. And economists generally call the eighth five-year plan golden. Brezhnev's mistake was the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. But it was necessary to send our troops into Chile and overthrow Pinochet.

13/05/08, Starling
I was not a fan of his, I told jokes about him (and now I like to remember them). But, by the way, people wrote good-natured jokes. I saw him in the honor box during the Spartak - Traktor hockey match in 1979. Seeing his funeral on TV, to my surprise, I almost burst into tears. After all, I was born under him. Yes, boyar king at gray cardinal Suslov. But then, after a rise accompanied by inevitable costs, the country lived the best period (so far) of its history.

28/03/09, sergeyl
Here I am with Gregory. He himself was not a bad person, but his position was vile. He repeatedly asked to resign, but his comrades did not let him go. 06/29/00, Grigory As the new dissidents will say, under Brezhnev they beat more carefully. There was authoritarianism, but in Moscow you could take pictures everywhere, even in the Lubyanka, but now try to take a photo in any respectable side street... A democratic mug will come up and offer to remove the lens. The downside of Brezhnev's rule is the commodity shortage (not wild, as under Gorbachev, but humiliating). This is not the bloodsucker Stalin. I don’t have any ardent love for him, but he was just as much a cog in the socialist system as the rest of the population. He reduced armaments at the very least, was friends with the 3rd world - there are still good, special and privileged relations with many countries there and Russian influence - this is his merit. All the troubles are greater in socialism, and not in the individual - little depends on him, even in the post of the 1st person in the country.

28/03/09, sergeyl
And here is the opinion of opponents: Tough guy, 03/06/09 Brezhnev is a arrogant fool. All he did was award the seed with orders and promote himself in positions. It was under him that a catastrophic shortage of goods began in the country, life was very boring, Brezhnev unleashed bloody war in Afghanistan, strangled Czechoslovakia in 1968. I’ll take just one opinion as an example. 1) "Brezhnev is a proud fool." He was not one because he was better informed than an ordinary citizen. Yes, and at the top you can hold out for so many years without being untied mass repression under socialism, when all the repressive instruments are in your hands, you must be able to do this. 2) “All he did was award the seed with orders and promote himself in positions.” We didn’t get to the North Korean option. Read their magazine, a lot will become clear. 3) “It was under him that a catastrophic shortage of goods began in the country.” Yes, it is inevitable under socialism. Again, it was possible to get it, but at a price that was unaffordable for most. And now the ruble is falling, prices are rising,

28/03/09, sergeyl
the ruble is growing - they are still growing, although during a crisis they should fall, as in the whole world. Previously, the State Planning Committee controlled everything, but now I. Artemyev’s department does not have enough strength, even if everyone there were multi-armed Shivas." Life was very boring," This is who How. It’s boring in Switzerland, everyone admits that it’s just fun here, but “it’s not fun,” as L. I. Brezhnev noted:) “Brezhnev unleashed a bloody war in Afghanistan,” - he had such a sin, I don’t argue . However, I don’t notice any signs of vegetarianism in the actions of the United States and its allies there and in Iran: (Whether he was wrong is another question. “Strangled Czechoslovakia in 1968.” - yes, that’s true, a disgusting act. However, that is. The civilized world did not resist too much. They recognized this as a zone of Soviet interests, sheltered refugees who were able to get there - and forgot. If we compare with all his successors and their actions in Peaceful time When there are human losses, devastation and homelessness like after the war, the picture is not very rosy. Russia choice between bad and worst

02/04/09, Queenomaniac
Under Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev there was a wonderful system called socialism! There were no poor people; everyone had enough to dress, eat and support their family. Of course, in his old age, Leonid Ilyich became a little incapacitated, but still, what he established in the state lasted until his death.

19/04/09, Avdotya
Brezhnev democratized our system, but to a reasonable extent (he did not destroy it at all, like Yeltsin). I believe that Leonid Ilyich just chose the most appropriate balance at that time between freedom of speech and discipline, as well as between public and personal.

21/06/09, Aprilis
Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev was the best ruler in the USSR, I shake his hand. He did a lot of good for the country and the people: factories were built, space was driven at full speed, the economy grew incredibly, prices fell, we armed ourselves, the ruble rose, 1 ruble was worth 2 dollars, the country prospered. Brezhnev Communist I adore him, it’s a pity life is short, he could still live. Under Brezhnev, we could be proud of the great independent country of the USSR, everyone envied and feared us, we had the highest quality products and they were delicious. Perhaps the best during the period of the RSFSR were: Lenin, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, they did a lot of good things for the country. Stalin and Khrushchev also had a positive influence on the country, but to a lesser extent.

09/08/09, Fyvaprold
Because his reign was the best period in the existence of the USSR. And the fact that he collected awards and cars is a forgivable weakness that cannot be compared with what today’s rulers and the “business elite” do. The Brezhnev period was, in fact, not stagnation, but a flourishing - both in terms of state power and in terms of the development of culture, not only official, but also dissident. And normal dissidents, such as Brodsky, were not particularly touched at that time, but were released abroad. Well, people like the Ukrainian Nazis, for example, were treated so gently back then. The privileges of the nomenklatura and corruption of that time are simply ridiculous against the backdrop of today's "charms". And in general, why did you decide that people with power should not have privileges? If people live with dignity, then they have every right to do so. Well, to those who love Stalin but don’t like Brezhnev, I’ll say: I couldn’t Stalin period last forever. People wanted to relax, so liberalization was inevitable.

Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev was in power for 18 years - a whole era for Soviet state. You can treat his personality and the years of his reign as you please, calling them “stagnation” or a “golden age,” but Brezhnev is part of our history, and no one can cancel this.

Domestic policy

Considering the pros and cons of the “Brezhnev” years, you begin to understand the pensioners who remember those years with such warmth. This is not just nostalgia for the long-gone times when they were young, it is a longing for a truly good and stable life.

Main advantages:

Economic recovery of the country. Brezhnev's rule began with changes in the country's economy - enterprises were transferred to self-financing to pay for their products and improve their quality through economic incentives for employees. Simply put, Brezhnev tried to make plants and factories profitable and increase the material incentives of workers. It was a real reform, but it gradually died out. However, within a few years, industrial production increased by 50%, national income increased, and by the 1970s, almost 2,000 enterprises were built in the USSR.
Stability in the country. An adult working person in the Soviet Union could be confident in his future - he would always have a roof over his head, a job and some material benefits.
There was no unemployment. At all. There have always been jobs.
Social sphere. Social spending under Brezhnev increased 3 times. Salaries increased, the birth rate too, general medical examination of the population was introduced, life expectancy increased, education was the best in the world, the number of communal apartments gradually decreased - a lot of housing was built. Yes, you had to wait 10-15 years for your own apartment, but the state provided it for free!
Standard of living of ordinary citizens. Yes, we lived well. Are the salaries low? So there is no need to strain yourself. Housing, education, healthcare are free, utilities are pennies, and sausage is 2-20.
Liberal regime. The fact that Brezhnev is accused of a sentimental character and inability to make firm decisions explains his rather loyal attitude towards dissent. Yes, there was censorship, communist demagoguery, dissidents were persecuted and punished, but there was no “witch hunt”. There were only a few people convicted under “anti-Soviet” articles; more often, dissidents were simply expelled from the country.

"Stagnation". The economy practically stopped developing in the 1970s. She demanded reforms, but the general welfare of the country (thanks to the oil “boom”) allowed Brezhnev not to think about it. The growth of industry and agriculture ceased, a food crisis was brewing, and in technology the Soviet Union lagged behind developed countries for many decades.
Corruption. Corruption under Brezhnev reached appalling proportions, especially in the last years of his rule. The army of Soviet officials, inspired by the Secretary General's connivance towards the unseemly actions of his family members, stole and took bribes in the millions.
Shadow economy. The shortage of basic goods and products contributed to the emergence of a “black” market. Speculation flourished, theft at state enterprises reached unprecedented proportions, and underground production emerged.

Foreign policy

Brezhnev's foreign policy was quite contradictory, and yet his undeniable merit is the easing of international tension, the reconciliation of the socialist and capitalist camps of countries. If he had not pursued an active policy of “mine clearance,” who knows whether the world would exist today at all.

Pros of foreign policy:

The policy of "détente". By the mid-1970s nuclear forces The USSR and the USA became equal. Despite the fact that the Soviet Union had become a superpower by this time, it was Brezhnev who initiated the policy of “détente” international relations. The Non-Proliferation Treaty was concluded in 1968 nuclear weapons, in 1969 - the agreement “On measures to reduce the risk of nuclear war between the USSR and the USA." In 1972, a completely unprecedented event happened - President Nixon visited Moscow. An economic “thaw” between the USSR and the West also began.
Strategic and political power of the country. In the 1970s, the Soviet Union was at the zenith of its power: it had overtaken the United States in nuclear power, created a fleet that made the country a leading naval power and the strongest army, and became a country that has not just authority, but a leading position in the creation of international relations.

Main disadvantages:

Invasion of Czechoslovakia. In 1968, mass anti-Soviet protests began in Czechoslovakia, and the country tried to deviate from the socialist model of development. Brezhnev decided on “armed assistance.” Czechoslovakia entered Soviet troops, there were several clashes with Czech soldiers and militias. The Czechs, who twenty years ago celebrated the liberation of the country by Soviet troops from the Nazis, were shocked by the invasion of the same army to quell the unrest. The occupation of the country prevented Czechoslovakia's possible exit from the Soviet bloc. The deployment of troops was condemned not only Western countries, but also Yugoslavia, Romania and the People's Republic of China.
Deteriorating relations with the People's Republic of China. Under Brezhnev, relations with China greatly deteriorated, laying claim to the border areas that were transferred to Russia before the revolution. It came to major armed conflicts on the border and capture by the Chinese Russian territories. War was brewing. Only a personal meeting between Chairman of the Council of Ministers Kosygin and the Prime Minister of China made it possible to avoid it, but Soviet-Chinese relations remained hostile. And only in 1989, after Brezhnev’s death, they were normalized through negotiations.
Intervention in Afghanistan. In 1978, a civil war broke out between the government Democratic Republic Afghanistan and the Western-backed opposition - the Mujahideen and Islamists. In December 1979, Soviet troops were brought into the country to support the government. The seizure of power by the opposition was prevented, but the war with the participation of the Soviet military continued for another 10 years.

Brezhnev died in 1982. Many years later. Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. Having coped with many troubles, she survived. Putin's long rule has given the country relative stability. In addition, Russia has become freer and more civilized. But has it become better to live there?

Illustration copyright RIA Novosti

30 years ago, on November 10, 1982, Leonid Brezhnev, who headed the CPSU and, first de facto and then de jure, the Soviet Union, died for 18 years and 27 days.

Brezhnev's death was easy. Just three days earlier, he was still standing on the platform of the Mausoleum during the November parade, and then he simply fell asleep and did not wake up. The servants at the Zarechye-6 dacha discovered the body at about 9 am.

Of course, rumors began to spread earlier. Foreign correspondents suspected something was wrong, noticing that the windows in government buildings on the night of November 10-11 until dawn did not go out.

Ideological conservative

Brezhnev left this world showered with ridicule, and in the mid-2000s, according to polls, he turned out to be the most popular ruler of Russia in the 20th century.

“The main groan and cry of the majority is: “Don’t stop us from living as we are used to!” wrote Maxim Gorky.

Brezhnev expressed this sentiment consistently and consciously.

Under him, Soviet society found itself in a systemic crisis. Talk about communism and world revolution finally ceased to be taken seriously. The inefficiency of the planned economy became obvious. Both bread and technology had to be purchased from the “decaying” West.

Brezhnev basically did not notice all this. A capable political tactician and psychologist, he did not like, and most importantly, did not want to think globally and look far ahead. If he had been a medieval knight, he would probably have chosen as his motto the words: “Don’t wake up the trouble while it’s quiet!”

Everyone remembers the helpless old man who was being led somewhere by the hand, and he was, undoubtedly, a talented leader, Gavriil Popov,
economist and speechwriter for Brezhnev

“Everyone remembers a helpless old man who was led somewhere by the hand, and he was undoubtedly a talented leader. In the mid-1970s, Nikolai Inozemtsev, Georgy Arbatov, Alexander Bovin, Abel Aganbegyan and I worked on materials for the next congress of the CPSU Already then they were talking about acceleration scientific and technological progress and self-financing, and Brezhnev, having received the next portion of papers, used to joke: “Well, what did my Social Democrats write here?” That is, he understood where we were going and, it seemed, had nothing against it,” economist Gavriil Popov shared his memories with the BBC Russian Service.

But the court liberals celebrated in vain. In practical matters, Brezhnev was a convinced and consistent conservative.

There was an unspoken taboo on the very word “reform” in relation to the USSR for many years. To avoid the questions: “When will there be communism?” came up with the concept of developed socialism. We have already built the most perfect society in the world, and that’s it!

The communist leader of the GDR, Walter Ulbricht, was the first to speak about “full socialism.” Former employee of the International Department of the Central Committee, historian Mikhail Voslensky recalled how one of his colleagues, clearly conveying the opinion of the top, told him: “The idea is good, but the Soviet leader must come up with it!”

To create the impression of a new word in Marxism-Leninism, the word “complete” was replaced first with “mature” and then with “developed”.

In general, Brezhnev shunned any theory and abstract reasoning, in his own words; did not try to pretend that he had read Marx, and approached all questions practically. For routine work this was perhaps not bad, but for determining a development strategy it was clearly not good. But he did not set such a task for himself.

Earth man

Brezhnev's character had many attractive features. He was not cruel or vindictive and did much less evil than his position allowed. He lived himself and let others live. He loved life with its small joys: friendly company, delicious food, hunting, fast driving, and, according to many testimonies, women. In an authoritarian country, it is better to have such a leader than a dry ideological fanatic who is merciless to himself and those around him.

Pushkin’s words about Catherine II: “If to reign means to know the weakness of the human soul and to take advantage of it, then in this respect Catherine deserves the surprise of posterity. Her friendliness attracted, her generosity attracted” relate to Brezhnev one hundred percent. He knew how to be pleasant and make friends.

For many years, he spent an hour and a half every day calling regional committee secretaries one by one, asking about the prospects for the harvest, health and grandchildren. The Secretary General could find out everything he needed this way, but attention was expensive.

And Brezhnev was not arrogant with little people. The guards, drivers and servants loved him.

Boyar Tsar

Brezhnev's reign rested on two pillars.

He entered into an unspoken agreement with the people: he allowed them to think about personal well-being, work half-heartedly, drink and steal from production what is in bad shape - in exchange for external loyalty. Propaganda, just for the sake of order, continued to periodically remind us of the behests of Pavka Korchagin and that “in life there is always a place for heroic deeds.” In fact, there is no room left in life not only for a feat, but also for simply an extraordinary act.

Private initiative was still suppressed, but the Soviet government no longer demanded self-sacrifice and extreme efforts. Life rolled along a well-established rut and became absolutely predictable. People did not expect changes for the better, but they knew that it would not be worse than it was.

This suited many people, after the Soviet government constantly broke and remade something for half a century.

Brezhnev guaranteed the nomenklatura immunity, practical irremovability and the ability to pass on their position by inheritance. The dream of the elite to “make things easier for themselves” after the Stalinist and Khrushchevian shake-ups came true, and they rallied around Brezhnev, like the old guard around the throne of Bonaparte. Even when Brezhnev became clearly inadequate and stopped managing anything, those around him wanted one thing: for this man to live forever!

“You just live and don’t worry about anything. Your comrades are strong, we won’t let you down,” said Yuri Andropov, when the ill secretary general once again started talking about rest.

Illustration copyright RIA Novosti Image caption Under Brezhnev, the USSR had a collective leadership

Brezhnev had less power than Vladimir Putin has today. He had to wait 13 years to add the highest state post to the post of Secretary General, and 16 years to promote his protege Nikolai Tikhonov to prime minister. He could not appoint a successor, who as a result was not an old friend close to his family, Konstantin Chernenko, but Yuri Andropov.

But Brezhnev did not strive for sole power. He had another super task: to die at his post. He successfully dealt with it, little by little squeezing out all the most ambitious and promising people from the Politburo and surrounding himself with sick old people like himself.

The fact that this was not an accident, but a well-thought-out policy, is evidenced by a conversation with Todor Zhivkov.

The Bulgarian leader intended to retire two members of his Politburo, who had fallen into complete insanity.

“I wouldn’t do this if I were you,” Brezhnev said. “Why are they bothering you? The young members of the Politburo will create a restless environment.”

Architect of détente

Unlike most of his colleagues who led something during the war and educated the people in the spirit of selfless patriotism in the deep rear, Brezhnev went through the front “from bell to bell.” Of course, he did not run under fire to attack and did not meet German tanks with a bunch of grenades, but knew the horrors of war firsthand.

Once in high positions, he often said that he had two main concerns: bread and peace.

Brezhnev apparently considered Eastern Europe to be legitimate Soviet territory by right of the winner.

Brezhnev had no irrational hostility towards the West, he enjoyed traveling there and communicating with foreign leaders, he loved American cars, Marlboro cigarettes and the address “Mr. President,” and in his circle he once said that since his youth he had dreamed of climbing the Eiffel Tower.

Apparently, he did not share the inherent anti-Semitism inherent in a significant part of the nomenklatura, although he saw in Israel an “unsinkable US aircraft carrier” and an ideological temptation for Soviet Jews.

Historian Leonid Mlechin cites a conversation that he claims took place between the Secretary General and Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko shortly after the unsuccessful 1973 war for the Arabs. Brezhnev said that lasting peace must be established in the Middle East by taking part in international guarantees of Israel's borders and "in due time" establishing diplomatic relations with it. To Gromyko’s objections - that the Arabs would be offended - he replied: “We gave them the latest equipment, and they again fled and screamed to be saved. We will not fight for them. I am not going to start a world war because of them.”

However, these thoughts were not realized. Brezhnev understood the limitations of his ability to shape foreign policy and did not want to conflict with his environment.

When, on the eve of the 25th Congress of the CPSU at the beginning of 1976, Brezhnev’s advisers wrote a report for him in Zavidovo, he suddenly spoke to them about détente: “Not everyone likes this line. Not everyone agrees.”

Assistant General Aleksandrov-Agentov tried to console the boss: they say, 250 million people live in the USSR, someone will always be dissatisfied with something. Brezhnev waved it off: “Don’t be cool, Andryusha. You know what I’m talking about. Those who disagree are not somewhere among two hundred and fifty million, but in the Kremlin!”

Leonid Ilyich was very upset about the death of détente - his beloved brainchild, but Valentin Falin could not do anything,
former secretary of the CPSU Central Committee

In 1976, Brezhnev's health deteriorated sharply. Foreign policy The conservative troika took control: Andropov-Ustinov-Gromyko.

“Leonid Ilyich was very upset about the death of détente - his beloved brainchild, but there was nothing he could do,” recalled Valentin Falin, deputy head of the international information department, later secretary of the Central Committee.

According to historians, it was Andropov and Ustinov who dragged the USSR into the Afghan war. Important role The future member of the State Emergency Committee Vladimir Kryuchkov, who then headed Soviet intelligence, also played.

It was still impossible to do without the consent of the Secretary General. The “hawks” were able to attract him to their side after the assassination in Kabul of the Afghan leader Nur Muhammad Taraki, whom Brezhnev treated cordially and more than once assured of his support.

"Who will believe Brezhnev now?" - he lamented.

Autumn of the Patriarch

The most powerful ruler and the most cunning politician cannot defeat nature.

With age, Brezhnev's advantages turned into disadvantages: condescension - connivance, love of life - sybaritism, addiction to flattery and trinkets.

According to Leonid Mlechin, his environment consciously cultivated these traits in him: let him have fun and not interfere with us living for our own pleasure.

Having lost all self-criticism, Brezhnev not only published memoirs that were not written by him, but also did not object when he was publicly called a great writer and awarded the Lenin Prize for Literature.

Having gone through the war as a political commissar, he awarded himself the rank of marshal in 1977, appeared at a meeting with fellow soldiers from the 18th Army in a brand new uniform and declared with obvious pleasure: “Here, I’ve achieved the rank!”

This seemed not enough, and Brezhnev was awarded the highest military order of Victory, established by statute for the successful conduct of front-line operations. After his death, he was deprived of this award - the only time in history.

Along with Georgy Zhukov, he became four times Hero of the Soviet Union, and also counting the title of Hero Socialist Labor- the only owner of five gold stars. “It’s good that the chest is wide!” - the citizens sneered.

Before his visit to Germany, Brezhnev doubted whether it was worth appearing in Europe with such an iconostasis. “Why should you be ashamed of honestly earned awards?” - Gromyko answered.

Subsequently, they talked a lot about the monstrous corruption under Brezhnev, although from the standpoint today Those stories are reminiscent of children's pranks. Well, what special did his daughter Galina allow herself? Just think, she wore diamonds and dresses from Cardin!

In recent years, Brezhnev, as people joked, “ruled without regaining consciousness.”

The 75-year-old Secretary General had plenty of aging diseases. Mention was made, in particular, of sluggish leukemia. However, it is difficult to say what exactly he died from.

Illustration copyright RIA Novosti Image caption “What a time it was, damn it! What kind of people are you! There are no epics written about them, but there are still jokes.”

According to available data, it began with ordinary senile insomnia. Brezhnev convinced himself that long and sound sleep was the key to health and began to abuse strong sedatives and sleeping pills, which caused a general weakening of the body, memory loss, loss of coordination and speech disorder.

Brezhnev was politically killed by television. In earlier times, his condition could have been hidden, but in the 1970s, regular appearances on screen were avoided, including in live, it was impossible, although the TV crews tried their best.

On September 29, 1982, at a ceremonial meeting in Baku, Brezhnev began to read out a speech, instead of “Azerbaijan” he said “Afghanistan”, saw that something wrong was happening and began to apologize.

It turns out that he was mistakenly given a text intended for another occasion. The assistants ran and brought new sheets of paper and placed them on the podium. All this time, the cameras showed the audience wildly applauding.

The obvious inadequacy of the leader, combined with the complete lack of official information, caused an extremely negative reaction from society. Instead of pity for the sick man, the people responded with ridicule. Along with the mischievous Vovochka and Vasily Ivanovich Chapaev, the head of state became the character of numerous jokes.

In the 1970s there was a joke: the Rossiya train stopped - the track ahead was dismantled. Leaders tried to solve the problem in different ways. Brezhnev ordered everyone to close the curtains on the windows more tightly and sway rhythmically, saying: “knock-knock.”

Such a life can be called stability or stagnation. At first, society, tired of half a century of revolutionary disruption, was grateful to Brezhnev. And then I got fed up with stability to the point of nausea. "Change, we are waiting for change!" Some dreamed of Western freedom, others dreamed of Leninist justice or Stalinist order, but even the KGB started talking about the fact that it was impossible to live like this any longer.

Another joke became the most popular: about a plumber who came to the Central Committee building and announced: “The entire system needs to be changed here!”

According to many, history is now repeating itself.

Brezhnev and Putin

In the first half of Brezhnev’s “reign” he had Kosygin’s economic reform and detente. And Vladimir Putin had ideas and goals, no matter how you looked at them: doubling GDP, reforms in the electric power industry, army and education, monetization of benefits, national projects, “maternity capital”, nanotechnology, pacification of Chechnya, “equidistance of oligarchs”.

Today, the Kremlin, as in the late 1970s, lives and offers the nation to live by the principle: “If only things don’t get worse.”

Comparisons modern Russia with the Brezhnev USSR began back in the 2000s: fatigue from social experiments, sky-high oil prices, lack of real politics and “a feeling of deep satisfaction.” And after the United Russia congress last September, where Vladimir Putin announced his intention to run again, they began to flow.

Particular attention was drawn to the fact that by the end of his third term, Putin will have served just 18 years under Brezhnev. And given his age, theoretically this is not the limit.

Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov responded by saying that Brezhnev "was a huge plus for the country."

Now the president and his entourage do not touch on this topic. They probably understand that given the state of mind that has changed over the past year, comparison with Brezhnev is not a plus.

In 2008, having decided not to change the constitution and nominating Dmitry Medvedev as his successor, the “national leader” said famous phrase about the “galley slave” and further spoke in the spirit that, they say, power is a drug, a person himself understands what is harmful, but cannot refuse, but he is not like that.

Subsequent events showed that Vladimir Vladimirovich, to put it mildly, was somewhat disingenuous.

The example of Brezhnev and many others proves that holding on to power for too long is the most the right way not to enter, but to get caught up in history. A politician, like an athlete, must leave on time.

“If Nikita Sergeevich retired, we would erect a golden monument to him,” Politburo member Alexander Shelepin told Khrushchev’s son-in-law Alexei Adzhubey.

They said much the same about Brezhnev.

Perhaps Putin would have deserved a monument if he had stabilized the country after transition period, and then laid down the tradition of a democratic change of power in Russia.

But he preferred the momentary to the eternal.

“Brezhnev is rapidly rushing forward, ahead of Stalin...”

Sandra Novikova, journalist and blogger:

It is impossible to be the best, the best ruler of the 20th century was J.V. Stalin, but Brezhnev can, perhaps, be put in second place. And these people who called Brezhnev the best can also be understood: Stalinism is a harsh system, under Stalin people lived modestly and worked hard, but under Brezhnev they accumulated fat - it’s not for nothing that Brezhnev’s “stagnant” period is jokingly called the feast period. So from the point of view common man, the average person, Brezhnev is truly the best.

In general, here it is appropriate to again recall the comparison of Stalin with the captain of a ship that received a hole. The captain forced the team to work in an emergency manner, and the team, at the cost of enormous efforts, not only saved the sinking ship, but also turned it into a mighty nuclear aircraft carrier. But at the same time, part of the crew was washed overboard, and some had to be shot in order to nip the rebellion on the ship in the bud. So, we bow to the feat of the great helmsman and are grateful to his team. But no one wants to end up on a sinking ship again. Well, if we continue the comparison, then we will get that under Brezhnev, the mighty nuclear aircraft carrier called the USSR still proudly plowed the vastness of the world's oceans, and its crew, in principle, received good rations and a good salary. But this was not enough for the crew, and they looked with envy at the cruise ships, where they walked, danced and sat at tables on the decks carefree people. Upon returning to her home ports, she fled to sell foreign clothes and speculate in currency, and believed foreign voices that sweetly hinted that if this bulky aircraft carrier was cut up and sold, then everyone would be able to buy themselves a yacht. And the team captain was getting old and stupid, and the team began to slowly laugh at him and tell jokes. And then another captain came, who sold and betrayed. And the team has now come to its senses and is nostalgic for Brezhnev’s “table socialism.”

Sergey Sibiryakov, political scientist, coordinator of international expert group IA REX.