James Adams:
Dear Russian gentlemen! Stand up to defend the constitution! The peoples of Libya, Tunisia, Egypt have already done this! Now it's your turn!!!
McCain:
We are confident that the people of Libya today are an inspiration to people in Tehran, Damascus and even Beijing and Moscow. They inspired and inspire the whole world
And off we go - a gradual increase in sentiment towards the cherished election day is ensured as external factors(activation of the same external enemy, which does not exist because it can't be), and internal (political discredit by the party in power of the expediency of its existence - the guys were not taught not to cut the branch on which you are sitting). And this is not to mention the savory spitting of the candidate tandem in the face of the electorate at the recent United Russia congress. The seething of shit has engulfed our entire multinational community - both on the Internet and off it.
The illogicality of such a straightforward and stupid gesture can only be explained by the invisible gopher (meaning), which is - United Russia as a tool for making legislative decisions has completely exhausted itself. The applause, excitement and general rejoicing reminded me of another excerpt, but not from the book of Comrade. Budyonny (it seems), about which I already told our silent readers earlier, but some other source, whose ISBN I can hardly remember. So, I’ll retell it: I didn’t follow Comrade’s lead. Stalin, who wished to step aside a little to “let go of the control mechanisms” and accepted with glee the fact that the cargo universal responsibility will continue to rest on the shoulders of I.V. The 20th Congress is a different story, but the chewing irresponsible herd did not disappear anywhere and just as successfully accepted the other kind of information. Crowd elitism in action. However, using the Google search engine, let me add a couple of quotes.
...on Malenkov’s face I saw a terrible expression - not so much fear, no, not fear, but an expression that could be on a person who is clearer than all others, or clearer, in any case, than many others who have realized that mortal danger, which hangs over everyone’s heads and which others have not yet realized: you cannot agree to this request of Comrade Stalin, you cannot agree that he resign this one, the last of his three powers, it is impossible. Malenkov’s face, his gestures, his expressively raised hands were a direct plea to everyone present to immediately and decisively refuse Stalin’s request. And then, drowning out the words that were already heard from behind Stalin: “No, we ask you to stay!” or something like that, the hall buzzed with the words “No! No! Please stay! Please take your request back!”
And Stalin did not insist on his request.
It can be done another way:
Comrades! We must all unanimously and unanimously ask Comrade Stalin, our leader and teacher, to continue to be Secretary General Central Committee of the CPSU.
Stormy applause followed.
Stalin:
- There is no need for applause at the Central Committee Plenum. It is necessary to resolve issues without emotions, in a businesslike manner. And I ask to be relieved of my duties as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. I'm already old. I don't read papers. Choose another secretary.Marshal S.K. Timoshenko stood up and said in a loud voice:
- Comrade Stalin, the people will not understand this. We, all as one, elect you as our leader - General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. There can be no other solution.Everyone stood and applauded his words. Stalin stood looking into the hall, then waved his hand and sat down.
“Why this retreat?” - Misha wouldn’t ask similar question, due to its obvious absurdity (and I would immediately remember the recent congress, I know for sure)) - after all, over all these years, absolutely nothing (globally and fundamentally) has changed: neither the system of exploitation and oppression of workers, nor the system collective irresponsibility and conscious submission to people who know how to take responsibility for both popular (including populist) decisions and unpopular (including rational) decisions.
Performance Russian leader was interrupted by stormy applause from the delegates. The audience gave a standing ovation.
“This applause gives me the right not to explain what experience and
Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin has authority,” Medvedev said.
Medvedev is not fumbling now, just as he was not fumbling these four years that flew by so quickly. A simple rule: “don’t do shit and don’t work with idiots” doesn’t work Russian conditions. Even shooting criminals in batches various kinds we are not getting rid of, excuse me, fools. There is no doubt that everyone is naive and unintelligent in their own way, in their own field and within the framework of their own worldview. The idea-fix of the absolute extermination of all-encompassing ignorance on this moment utopian, although not without meaning: obedient fools (the herd) are cool exactly until the moment they are fooled, thereby sending them into opposite direction- against the system that gave birth to them.
In this context, “fools” act as an ideal weapon for “overthrowing the system”, because we all know the expression “you cannot arrest an idea”, and there will be those who want to believe in yet another piece of nonsense, a matter of technique. The 21st century has its place.
It would seem that this has nothing to do with it modern system Russian education?
P.S. Returning to our gophers, sheep and the motives for such mockery of the electorate, we should predict the subsequent strengthening of the role of the newly created ONF (from those who do not stew in United Russia shit), communists (from those whose ideals are somewhat different from the dominant ones) and the liquidation of United Russia as a meaningless gang. . Whether this will actually be the case - time will tell. orange mood among the politically active population and those who go to rallies “out of nothing to do.”
We need to speak more simply
and not in an intellectual way,
otherwise they won’t understand.
I.V. Stalin
"1938, no later than May 19
Handwritten note by I.V. Stalin
Speech by Comrade Stalin at a reception in the Kremlin for employees of the Higher School on May 17, 1938.
Comrades! Allow me to propose a toast to science, to its prosperity, to the health of the people of science.
For the prosperity of science, that science that does not fence itself off from the people, does not keep itself away from the people, but is ready to serve the people, is ready to pass on to the people all the achievements of science, which serves the people not under coercion, but voluntarily, willingly (applause).
For the prosperity of science, that science that does not allow its old and recognized leaders to smugly withdraw into the shell of the priests of science, into the shell of monopolists of science, which understands the meaning, significance, omnipotence of the union of old workers of science with young workers of science, which voluntarily and willingly opens all doors science to the young forces of our country and gives them the opportunity to conquer the heights of science, which recognizes that the future belongs to the youth from science (applause).
For the prosperity of science, that science (hereinafter in angle brackets - crossed out by Stalin - Ed.) which, understanding the power and significance of the traditions established in science and skillfully using them in the interests of science, still do not want to be slaves to these traditions who has the courage and determination to break old traditions, norms, attitudes when they become outdated, when they turn into a brake on moving forward, and establish new traditions, new norms, new attitudes (applause).
Science has in its arsenal a lot courageous people who knew how to break the old and create the new, despite any obstacles, despite everything. Such men of science as Galileo, Darwin and many others are well known. I would like to dwell on one of these luminaries of science, who is at the same time greatest man modernity. I mean Lenin (applause). Remember 1917. Based scientific analysis social development Russia, based on analysis international situation Lenin then came to the conclusion that the only way out from the situation is the victory of socialism in Russia. This was a more than unexpected conclusion for many people of science at that time. Plekhanov, one of outstanding people science, then spoke with contempt about Lenin, claiming that Lenin was “delirious.” Other, no less famous people in science, argued that “Lenin had gone crazy” and that he should have been hidden somewhere far away. Then all and sundry people of science howled against Lenin, as against a man destroying science. But Lenin was not afraid to go against the flow, against inertia. And Lenin won (applause).
Here is an example of a man of science, boldly leading the fight against outdated science and paving the way for new science.
It also happens that new paths in science and technology are sometimes paved not by people known in science, but by completely unknown people in the world. scientific world People, simple people, practitioners, business innovators. Comrades Stakhanov and Papanin are sitting at the table here. People unknown in the scientific world, without academic degrees, practice your own. But who doesn’t know that Stakhanov and the Stakhanovites in their practical work in the field of industry, the old established famous people science and technology as outdated, and introduced new standards that meet the requirements real science and technology? Who doesn’t know that Papanin and the Papaninites, in their practical work on a drifting ice floe, casually, without much difficulty, overturned the old idea of the Arctic as outdated, and established a new one that corresponds to the requirements of real science? Who can deny that Stakhanov and Papanin are innovators in science, people of our advanced science?
Here are some other “miracles” in science.
I was talking about science. But there is all sorts of science. The science I was talking about is called advanced (underlined text inserted by Stalin - Ed.) science.
For the prosperity of our advanced science!
For the health of people of advanced science!
For the health of Lenin and Leninism!
For the health of Stakhanov and Stakhanovites!
For the health of Papanov and the Papaninites! (Applause.)"
RGASPI. F. 558. Op. 11. D. 1087. L. 5-13. Autograph. The text is written in pencil on one side of 1/8 paper
"1938, May 19
Shorthand recording by A.A. Khatuntseva
Allow me, comrades, to raise a glass to the health and prosperity of science, to the prosperity of a science that does not separate itself from the people, that is ready to serve the people, that understands that science that serves the people and has the support of the people is invincible.
For science, which is ready to transfer the property of science to the people not by coercion, but by good will.
Allow me to raise a glass to the health of science, that science that does not withdraw into its shell, that does not turn into a caste of old priests. I ask old people not to be offended - I am an old man myself (stormy, prolonged applause). For science, which does not withdraw into the shell of old priests, monopolists of knowledge, and which with love, willingly extends its hand to young people, who are still weak in science, but have a great future.
For science, which does not close the way to the so-called laymen, inexperienced young forces, but, on the contrary, opens the way for them and raises them to the heights of science.
Therefore, for science, which understands the meaning, significance and omnipotence of the union of the old people of science with the young people of science (stormy applause, turning into ovation).
Allow me to raise a glass to science, which does not grovel before traditions, which, in the interests of the development of mankind, is not afraid to break old traditions, which understands the value and power of traditions that must be used, but which knows at the same time that if traditions have gone across the road, across moving forward, since traditions are outdated, they must be broken.
For science, which is not afraid, in the interests of truth, in the interests of the advancement of all humanity, to break old traditions and create new, revolutionary traditions in science (warm ovation).
Among the great men of science, I would like to name one of the greatest, who was not afraid of old traditions and who in 1917 went against the grain. I mean Lenin, a man who, despite everything, was not afraid to say that the way out of the trap in which Russia had fallen was socialism. Recognized people Science then spoke about Lenin: he is delusional. Plekhanov is one of large quantities science - said: Lenin is delusional. Whole line People - luminaries of science said: Lenin has gone crazy. This is what they always say about men of science who are not afraid to break old traditions in order to move science forward. This was the case before with Galileo, with Darwin, and this will continue to be the case with people who are not afraid to move science forward, contrary to tradition.
So, of these people of science and thought, I would like to remind you of Lenin - a great man, my teacher and our educator.
Here I would like to remind you of another person - Stakhanov, who was not afraid to break the old norms established by representatives of outdated science and establish new, revolutionary norms that meet the requirements of real science.
I would like to remind you of one more person whom I will also not be afraid to call a man of science, Papanin, who also broke old norms, turned some deep-rooted views and ideas upside down... (those gathered give a warm ovation in honor of Comrade Papanin) ┘ He turned the old norms upside down and gave science new perspectives. A simple man - Comrade Papanin.
As you can see, the people who move science forward in spite of old traditions, morals, customs, and inertia are those who managed to pluck the flowers of science, like Lenin, and those who have not yet gotten their hands on science, like Stakhanov, Papanin.
So, the science that I was talking about is called advanced science, revolutionary science.
For advanced science! For Lenin! For Stakhanov! For Papanin! (The words of Comrade Stalin are covered with a storm of applause.)"
RGASPI. F. 558. Op. 11. D. 1087. L. 16-18. Typescript.
* * *
The main sources on the content of I.V.’s dinner speech are: Stalin at a reception for higher education workers on May 17, 1938. for a long time were a newspaper report and the memories of its participants.
During the compilation work on the Works of I.V. Stalin On February 5, 1946, employees of the IMEL under the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks went to the director of the institute, V.S. Kruzhkov with a proposal to request materials about this reception from the archives of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. In the layout of the 14th volume of works, the text of Stalin’s speech on May 17, 1938 is given according to a newspaper report, therefore, the management of IMEL most likely never received the requested materials.
On May 19, 1938, official Stalinist stenographer A.A. Khatuntsev forwarded to the Assistant General Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks A.N. Poskrebyshev transcript of this speech. In the accompanying note, Khatuntsev admitted that he had made an obvious mistake. He noted with regret the delay in deciphering the transcript, which he explained as follows: “┘they thought that the speech would not be published.” A.A. Khatuntsev promised to “take this into account for the future,” that is, not to allow this kind of oversight in the future. At the same time, he drew Poskrebyshev’s attention to the fact that the transcript he prepared contained material that was not reflected in the official publication of May 19, 1938, and therefore proposed to preserve it 1. Obviously, without waiting (for the above-mentioned reason) from A.A. Khatuntseva shorthand recording, I.V. Stalin wrote the text with his own hand, which was published in central newspapers as a summary of his speech at a reception for workers High school.
Since I.V. Stalin spoke at a reception on the evening of May 17, and a summary of his speech appeared in the central newspapers on May 19, then it remains to be assumed that the leader was working on a version of the text of his speech intended for publication in the time interval between these two dates. The title of Stalin's autograph published in the collection, the corrections that were made by Stalin, the remark "applause" neatly written after almost every paragraph - all this indicates that the document dates back to the time not before, but after the delivery of a dinner speech at a reception for higher education workers. Written by I.V. Stalin not only used the text as the basis for a newspaper publication, but also included it in the layout of the 14th volume of his works.
An additional basis for the assumption that this text was written after the speech itself was given is the transcript of A.A. Khatuntseva. As follows from the aforementioned accompanying note from Khatuntsev, the transcript was not known to Stalin at the moment when the leader wrote down from memory the content of his speech at the reception of the Higher School workers.
The transcript records words and expressions that, as often happened in Stalin’s oral presentations, did not fully comply with the norms and rules of the Russian language. So, the leader raised a glass to the “health and prosperity” of science. According to him, science not only “willingly extends its hand to the youth,” but even “understands the meaning, significance and omnipotence of the union of the old people of science with the young people of science.”
Stylistically, Stalin’s note, in which the leader post facto recorded the content of his table speech on May 17, 1938, looks more verified than the text presented by Khatuntsev. I.V. Stalin clearly tried to correct his oral statements, fit them into frames existing rules Russian language. It turns out that he was toasting not “to the health of science,” as his stenographer recorded this phrase, but “to the health of the people of science.” However, as already noted, Stalin never managed to get rid of the phantom of science, “living” its full-blooded “life.” It turned out that science was not only “ready to serve the people,” as the stenographer recorded this Stalinist thought, but “served the people” by no means “not under coercion, but voluntarily, willingly.”
The indicated stylistic “flaws” of I.V. Stalin managed to “compensate” in that part of the record that relates to the characterization of V.I. Lenin. Mentioning one “of the luminaries of science, who is at the same time the greatest man of our time,” Stalin clarified: “I mean Lenin, our teacher, our educator.” Thus, the successor of Lenin’s work in the text, which was intended for publication, and, therefore, for familiarization with it to a multi-million audience, prudently “removed” the careless wording (in A.A. Khatuntsev’s entry it was: ┘ “my teacher, our educator”). Now everything fell into place: Lenin continued to “be a teacher” not only of Stalin, but also of other adherents of communist ideas.
Israeli literary critic M. Weiskopf called Stalin's toast “To the health of Lenin and Leninism!” “amazing.” It supposedly recalled the ancient funeral feast or folklore “feeding of the dead.” In this regard, it should be noted that, according to the recording of A.A. Khatuntseva, I.V. Stalin simply offered to drink “For Lenin.” It is unclear, however, why, when copying by hand the text of his dinner speech to representatives of university science, the leader “supplemented” this toast with the word “Leninism.”
I.V. Stalin did not reproduce in the recording of the table speech on May 17, 1938 the reasoning that he was already an “old man”, as well as the flirtatious request he addressed to other “old men” “not to be offended” about this. The leader also refused the ambiguous definition of “a union of old people of science with young people of science,” recorded in A.A.’s transcript. Khatuntseva. In the final (Stalinist) version of the recording of the speech to the workers of the Higher School, the wording “union of old scientists with young scientists” is used.
SPEECH AT THE 19TH PARTY CONGRESS
(The delegates greet the appearance of Comrade Stalin on the podium with stormy, long-lasting applause, turning into a standing ovation. Everyone stands up. Shouts: “Hurray for Comrade Stalin,” “Long live comrade Stalin!", "Glory to the great Stalin!)
Comrades!
Allow me to express gratitude on behalf of our congress to all fraternal parties and groups whose representatives honored our congress with their presence or who sent greetings to the congress - for friendly greetings, for wishes of success, for trust. (Stormy, prolonged applause, turning into ovation).
This trust is especially valuable to us, which means a willingness to support our party in its struggle for a bright future for the peoples, in its struggle against war, in its struggle to preserve peace. (Stormy, prolonged applause)
It would be a mistake to think that our party, which has become a powerful force, no longer needs support. This is not true. Our party and our country have always needed and will continue to need trust, sympathy and support fraternal peoples abroad.
The peculiarity of this support is that any support for the peace-loving aspirations of our party from any fraternal party means at the same time support for one’s own people in their struggle to preserve peace. When the English workers in 1918-1919, during the armed attack of the English bourgeoisie on the Soviet Union, organized the struggle against the war under the slogan “Hands off Russia,” it was support, support, first of all, for the struggle of their people for peace, and then support Soviet Union. When Comrade Torez or Comrade Tolyatti declare that their peoples will not fight against the peoples of the Soviet Union (stormy applause) then this is support, first of all, support for the workers and peasants of France and Italy fighting for peace, and then support for the peace-loving aspirations of the Soviet Union. This feature of mutual support is explained by the fact that the interests of our party not only do not contradict, but, on the contrary, merge with the interests of peace-loving peoples. (Stormy applause). As for the Soviet Union, its interests are generally inseparable from the cause of world peace.
It is clear that our party cannot remain in debt to the fraternal parties and it itself must, in turn, provide support to them, as well as to their peoples in their struggle for liberation, in their struggle for preservation? peace. As you know, she does just that. (Stormy applause). After our party took power in 1917 and after the party took real measures to eliminate capitalist and landlord oppression, representatives of the fraternal parties, admiring the courage and successes of our party, awarded it the title of “Shock Brigade” of the world revolutionary and labor movement. By this they expressed the hope that the successes of the Shock Brigade would ease the situation for the peoples languishing under the yoke of capitalism. I think that our party justified these hopes, especially during the Second World War, when the Soviet Union, having defeated German and Japanese fascist tyranny, freed the peoples of Europe and Asia from the threat of fascist slavery. (Stormy applause).
Of course, it was very difficult to fulfill this honorable role while the “Shock Brigade” was the only one and while it had to fulfill this advanced role almost alone. But it was. Now it's a completely different matter. Now that new “Shock Brigades” have appeared in the people’s democratic countries from China and Korea to Czechoslovakia and Hungary, now it has become easier for our party to fight, and the work has become more fun. (Stormy, prolonged applause).
Particularly noteworthy are those communist, democratic or worker-peasant parties that have not yet come to power and that continue to work under the heel of bourgeois draconian laws. It is, of course, more difficult for them to work. However, it is not as difficult for them to work as it was difficult for us, Russian communists, during the period of tsarism, when the slightest movement forward was declared a grave crime. However, the Russian communists survived, were not afraid of difficulties and achieved victory. The same will happen with these parties.
Why will it not be so difficult for these parties to work in comparison with the Russian communists of the tsarist period?
Because, firstly, they have before their eyes such examples of struggle and success as are available in the Soviet Union and people's democratic countries. Consequently, they can learn from the mistakes and successes of these countries and thus make their work easier.
Because, secondly, because the bourgeoisie itself - main enemy liberation movement, - became different, changed in a serious way, became more reactionary, lost contact with the people and thereby weakened herself. It is clear that this circumstance should also facilitate the work of revolutionary and democratic parties. (Stormy applause).
Previously, the bourgeoisie allowed itself to be liberal, defended bourgeois-democratic freedoms and thereby created popularity among the people. Now there is no trace left of liberalism. There is no more so-called “personal freedom” - individual rights are now recognized only for those who have capital, and all other citizens are considered raw human material, suitable only for exploitation. The principle of equality of people and nations has been trampled, it has been replaced by the principle of full rights for the exploiting minority and the lack of rights for the exploited majority of citizens. The banner of bourgeois-democratic freedoms has been thrown overboard. I think that you, representatives of the communist and democratic parties, will have to raise this banner and carry it forward if you want to gather the majority of the people around you. There is no one else to lift it. " Stormy applause).
Previously, the bourgeoisie was considered the head of the nation; it defended the rights and independence of the nation, placing them “above all else.” Now there is no trace left of the “national principle”. Now the bourgeoisie sells the rights and independence of the nation for dollars. Banner national independence and national sovereignty thrown overboard. There is no doubt that you, representatives of the communist and democratic parties, will have to raise this banner and carry it forward if you want to be patriots of your country, if you want to become the leading force of the nation. There is no one else to lift him. (Stormy applause). This is how things stand at present. It is clear that all these circumstances should facilitate the work of communist and democratic parties that have not yet come to power.
Consequently, there is every reason to count on the success and victory of the fraternal parties in the countries under the rule of capital. (Stormy applause).
Long live our fraternal parties!
May the leaders of the fraternal parties live and live well! (Prolonged applause).
Long live peace between nations! (Prolonged applause).
Down with the warmongers! (Everyone stands up. Stormy, long-lasting applause, turning into ovation. Shouts: “Long live comrade, Stalin!”" Hurray for Comrade Stalin!", "Long live great leader workers of the world, Comrade Stalin/", "Hurray for the Great Stalin!", "Long live peace between nations!" Shouts: "Hurray").
In the Brezhnev USSR during the era of decline, “stormy and prolonged applause” was often heard - at least that’s what the newspapers of that time wrote.
And I'll tell you about other applause.
The other day I watched the play “ Devilry" By famous novel Pikulya.
There the action takes place against the backdrop of old newsreels. And every time they showed Stalin, there was applause in the hall.
Stalin is loved and popular today - opinion polls testify to this. Moreover, he is loved not by calloused senile pennies, who can be ignored, but by young people. This is news.
In the 90s and even in the 2000s, it was different: young people stood for the novelty coming from the West, and the old people stood for Soviet antiquity, which Stalin embodied.
The implication was: the old people will leave and Stalinism will go away. But 65 years after the death of the Father of Nations, what’s happening: it’s getting stronger, as they put it in Soviet time, ideological and political unity of Soviet society. Today this is the unity of “grandfathers” and “grandsons,” but there are also many “fathers” among them. And the center of crystallization is the powerful figure of Stalin. This is the banner around which there is a quick gathering people's militia. It’s ideological for now, but the hour is not far off - organizational unity will begin.
The impression is that fate itself contributes to Stalin’s popularity. Judge for yourself. In the 80s, when the anti-Stalin howl was launched, the main plot was repressions, 1937. It’s night, ruthless security officers break into the apartment of the peacefully sleeping People’s Commissar, take the father of the family to the Lubyanka, the children cry, the wife wrings her hands: “Damn him, bloody tyrant, forever and ever!”
Indeed, quite a few of them were taken away: on the House on the embankment there are so many memorial plaques with the last number 1937. But here is the irony of history: having promoted the theme of repressions against presumptuous “boyars,” the detractors and denouncers of Stalinism unexpectedly worked in favor of the Father of Peoples. The fact that, according to the plan, should have turned people away from Stalin forever, is today widely perceived as a very attractive side of his activities! Chairman Mao called such events “fire at headquarters.”
Today in Russia, many ordinary people view repressions against presumptuous leadership as a useful and inevitable matter. Recently one pensioner told me: “Until they are all transplanted, there will be no sense; Stalin is just not on them".
Another thing that makes the Generalissimo kind to the people is his selflessness and everyday modesty. He himself lived simply and pulled down his boyars. Today there is unbridled material inequality, to which Russian people, unlike the inhabitants of India or Latin America, not used to it - he works for Stalin.
Under Stalin many people came forward talented people: Without them, the breakthrough that amazed the whole world would not have taken place. Today, with all the fuss around the “new leaders” to the common man the way up is very difficult. This happens all over the world, but we live not all over the world, but in our own country. And, naturally, we remember the times when it was not so.
What else do people look for in Stalin? It seems to me that it is true. All memoirists, recalling their work with Stalin, unanimously say: most of all, the Leader punished for lies. Not for a mistake - for lies and misinformation. He demanded from his employees subject knowledge facts, personal insight into the subject. This the only way to achieve results in any activity - to know how the fragment of reality that we are trying to influence works. In the old days, this was well understood - and in the process of raising children, lying was punished most severely. But it was a long time ago.
Young people entering life want to understand how the world works - and they cannot. The school does not give a clear picture of the world, and it itself does not have one. This guy graduated from school - and where? He enters the so-called university, where he is supposed to be taught something useful. And it often turns out that all this is make-believe: they are not going to teach him, and the teachers themselves know little. Everyone cheerfully and energetically lies: about rights, opportunities, success. And the boy would workplace by specialty, as it was in the time of our grandfathers. That would be a real success!
Young people want to become specialists, to advance, but the world of toxic fog forces them to become a precariat - people without specific occupations. They catch the stories of their grandfathers about their youth and call on Stalin.
For all these reasons, Stalin's appearance is greeted with applause. They are waiting for him, and he will appear - in a new guise, give it time.
And when Stalin himself declares that it was he who wrote “ Short course history of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks),” then this cannot but cause at least surprise and bewilderment. How can a Marxist-Leninist write about himself like that, raising the cult of his personality to the skies?
Or let's take the question of Stalin Prizes, (Movement in the hall.) Even the tsars did not establish such prizes that they would call by their own name.
Stalin himself recognized that text as the best National Anthem Soviet Union, in which there is not a word about Communist Party, but there is the following unprecedented praise to Stalin: Stalin raised us - to be loyal to the people, inspired us to work and to exploits.
In these lines of the anthem, all the enormous educational, leading and inspiring activities of the great Leninist party are attributed to Stalin alone. This, of course, is a clear retreat from Marxism-Leninism, a clear belittlement and belittlement of the role of the party. For your information, it should be said that the Presidium of the Central Committee has already decided to create a new text of the anthem, which would reflect the role of the people, the role of the party. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)
But without Stalin’s knowledge, his name was assigned to many of the largest enterprises and cities; without his knowledge, Stalin’s monuments were erected throughout the country - these “monuments during his lifetime”? After all, it is a fact that on July 2, 1951, Stalin himself signed a decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, which provided for the construction of a monumental sculpture of Stalin on the Volga-Don Canal, and on September 4 of the same year he issued an order to release 33 tons of copper for the construction of this monument. Anyone who has been near Stalingrad has seen the statue that stands there, and in a place where few people visit. And a lot of money was spent on its construction, and this at a time when our people in these areas were still living in Dugouts after the war. Judge for yourself - did Stalin write correctly in his biography that he “did not allow even a shadow of conceit, arrogance, or narcissism in his activities”? At the same time, Stalin showed disrespect for the memory of Renin. It is no coincidence that the Palace of Soviets, as a monument to Vladimir Ilyich, the decision to build which was made over 30 years ago, was not built, and the issue of its construction was constantly postponed and consigned to oblivion. We need to correct this situation and build a monument to Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. (Stormy, prolonged applause.) One cannot help but recall the decision of the Soviet government of August 14, 1925 “On the establishment of V. I. Lenin Prizes for scientific works" This resolution was published in the press, but still Lenin Prizes No. This also needs to be fixed. (Stormy, prolonged applause.) During Stalin’s life, thanks to known methods, about which I have already spoken, citing facts, as it was written at least “ short biography Stalin,” all events were covered in such a way that Lenin seemed to play a secondary role even during the October Revolution socialist revolution. In many films, in works fiction The image of Lenin is illuminated incorrectly and unacceptably belittled.
Stalin really loved watching the film “The Unforgettable Year 1919,” where he is depicted riding on the running board of an armored train and almost hitting enemies with a saber. Let Kliment Efremovich, our dear friend, pluck up courage and write the truth about Stalin, because he knows how Stalin fought. Comrade It is, of course, difficult for Voroshilov to start this business, but it would be good for him to do it. This will be approved by everyone - both the people and the party. And the grandchildren will thank you for this. (Prolonged applause.)
When covering events related to October Revolution And civil war, in a number of cases the matter was portrayed in such a way that the main role everywhere seemed to belong to Stalin, that everywhere and everywhere he was telling Lenin how and what to do. But this is slander against Lenin! (Prolonged applause.)
I will probably not sin against the truth if I say that 99 percent of those present here knew or heard little about Stalin before 1924, but everyone in the country knew Lenin: the whole party knew, the whole people knew, from young to old. (Stormy, prolonged applause.)
All this must be reconsidered decisively in order to find our correct reflection in history, literature, works of art, the role of V.I. Lenin, the great deeds of our Communist Party and Soviet people- the people-creator, the people-creator. (Applause.)
Comrades! The cult of personality contributed to the spread of vicious methods in party building and economic work, giving rise to gross violations of internal party and “Soviet democracy”, naked administration, various kinds perversions, covering up shortcomings, varnishing reality. We have a lot of sycophants, hallelujahs, and defrauders.
It is also impossible not to see that as a result of numerous arrests of party, Soviet and economic workers, many of our cadres began to work uncertainly, with caution, to be afraid of the new, to be wary of their own shadow, and began to show less initiative in their work. And take the decisions of the party and Soviet authorities. They began to be drawn up according to a template, often without taking into account the specific situation. Things got to the point where speeches by party and other workers, even at the smallest meetings and meetings on any issue, were made according to a crib sheet. All this gave rise to the danger of turning party and Soviet work, bureaucratization of the apparatus.
Stalin's isolation from life, his ignorance of the actual state of affairs on the ground can be clearly demonstrated by the example of the management of agriculture. Everyone who was even the slightest bit interested in the situation in the country saw the difficult state of agriculture, but Stalin did not notice this. Did we tell Stalin about this? Yes, they said, but he did not support us. Why did this happen? Because Stalin did not go anywhere, did not meet with workers and collective farmers and did not know the actual situation on the ground. He studied the country and agriculture only from films. And the movies embellished, varnished the state of affairs in agriculture. Collective farm life In many films, it was depicted in such a way that the tables were bursting with an abundance of turkeys and geese. Apparently, Stalin thought that this was actually the case.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin looked at life differently; he was always closely connected with the people: he received peasant walkers, often spoke at factories and factories, traveled to villages, and talked with peasants.
Stalin cut himself off from the people; he did not go anywhere. And this went on for decades. His last trip to the village was in January 1928, when he went to Siberia on grain procurement issues. How could he know the situation in the village? And when Stalin was told in one of his conversations that the situation in our agriculture is difficult, the situation in the country is especially bad with the production of meat and other livestock products, a commission was created, which was tasked with preparing a draft resolution
"On measures to further development livestock farming on collective and state farms." We have developed such a project.
Of course, our proposals at that time did not cover all the possibilities, but ways to improve public livestock farming were outlined. It was then proposed to raise procurement prices for livestock products in order to increase the material interest of collective farmers, MTS and state farm workers in the development of livestock farming. But the project we developed was not accepted; in February 1953 it was postponed.
Moreover, when considering this project, Stalin made a proposal to increase the tax on collective farms and collective farmers by another 40 billion rubles, since, in his opinion, peasants live richly and, by selling only one chicken, a collective farmer can fully pay off the state tax. Just think, what did that mean? After all, 40 billion rubles is an amount that the peasants did not receive for all the products they handed over. In 1952, for example, collective farms and collective farmers received 26 billion 280 million rubles for all the products they delivered and sold to the state.
Was Stalin’s proposal based on any data? Of course not. Facts and figures in such cases did not interest him. If Stalin said something, it means it is so - after all, he is a “genius”, and a genius does not need to count, he only needs to look to immediately determine how everything should be. He said his word, and then everyone should repeat what he said and admire his wisdom.
But what was wise about the proposal to increase the agricultural tax by 40 billion rubles? Absolutely nothing, since this proposal did not come from real assessment reality, but from the fantastic fabrications of a person divorced from life. ... Now in agriculture we have begun to gradually get out of plight. The speeches of the delegates to the 20th Party Congress make each of us happy, when many delegates say that there are all conditions to fulfill the tasks of the sixth five-year plan for the production of basic livestock products not in five years, but in 2-3 years. We are confident in successful completion tasks of the new five-year plan. (Prolonged applause.)