Текст книги "Ford and Stalin. How to Live in Humaneness"
Автор книги: (IP of the USSR) Internal Predictor of the USSR
сообщить о нарушении
Текущая страница: 29 (всего у книги 32 страниц)
[276] Real patronymic is Antipovitch.
[277] The worst lie was the thesis: «Stalin is to be blamed for everything which happened in the USSR while he was head of state».
The point is that the statements «it happened while Stalin was head of state» and «Stalin is to blame» are not necessarily equivalent and complementary. Much of what was typical of the Stalin’s bolshevism era and is now condemned was caused by events that had happened even before J.V. Stalin was born.
Historic processes proceed with phase shifts – the events are retarded in respect of their causes as it happens in all natural processes. The statement «Stalin is to blame for everything that happened in the USSR while he was head of state» ignores the retardation of events in respect to their causes and is therefore a folly, which allows lying while reporting sound facts. Yet this folly is the basis of the entire “denunciation of J. Stalin” matter brought up in the times of Khrushchev and perestroika.
[278] The same goes to the accusations against J.V. Stalin and the post-Stalin USSR brought by A. Sakharov, psychical Trotskyite and anti-Marxist, and his followers: as sociologists and historians they are all barren flowers and perverts, who were not intellectually countered by the regime of Brezhnev and Gorbachev simply because it chose not to.
[279] Andre Gide gave a negative comment in his book “Return from the USSR”, while Lion Feuchtwanger gave a positive comment in his book “Moscow. 1937”. See the book “Two looks from abroad”, Moscow, “Izdatelstvo Politicheskoi Literaturi”, 1990. For comments on both of the above-mentioned reports of the trips to the USSR see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “On imitating and instigating activities”.
[280] The only thing to praise Rezun for is that he was the first to show the great and diverse work, which was carried out by Stalin to win the war, imposed on the USSR in 1941. (Rezun even gives the justification of the repressions against top commanders of Workers and Peasants’ Red Army in his book “Purification” («Очищение»). However he draws some unauthentic data while covering this subject.
See the collected articles “Intelligent Viewpoint” (1996) for the comment of the Internal Predictor of the USSR on the books “Icebreaker” by V. Rezun, and “Operation «Storm»” by I.L. Bunich.
[281] The Soviet power was overthrown in Finland in 1918 under the military support of Hitler. Before that, Soviet power was developing in Finland as well as on the rest of the territory of the Russian Empire, which stayed free from the German occupation until November 1917.
[282] At that time the political scenarios of the «world backstage» did not allow the Baltic States to become independent bourgeois democracies. It was only the question of which country – Germany or the USSR – would take them under its jurisdiction.
The leaders of the USSR were faced with a dilemma, and it was not a dilemma of occupying the Baltic States or letting them develop on their own. The dilemma was between letting Hitler occupy the Baltic States under the support of the local Nazis and preventing this variant by means of the Soviet Union’s occupation of them.
It was natural for that epoch that pro-German and pro-capitalist elements were repressed with the inclusion of the Baltic States in the USSR and that it was accompanied by abuses.
Bourgeois democracies in these countries were unable to prevent the immerging uncompromising oppositions and were likely to give way to Nazism. Even nowadays the democracies in these countries are nothing but hopeless conceit of their “elite”. They should be wiser. They complain about Stalin and even regret that Hitler did not occupy their country instead of thinking about what was vicious inside the bourgeois democracies of the Baltic states and made them be «the grass on the battlefield» and the victims of the divine connivance.
[283] Except in the USSR where the fifth column was mainly wiped out during the prewar repressions. However its activity would occasionally reveal itself and sometimes bring rather harsh consequences.
[284] The biggest repressions against Hebrews in Europe were also performed after the German invasion to the USSR.
[285] The most serious incident of those happened when general D.G. Pavlov did not perform the directive to put on the alert the troops of the Western Special Command. It became one of the major reasons for the catastrophe of summer 1941. During the investigation Pavlov admitted his parricide but at the court he recanted his evidence. The inquest considered his confession of guilt enough evidence and did not take pains to make any proper evidence base. As a result the investigation could prove only the negligence of functions. For this Pavlov was sentenced to death by shooting. Later, after his death, he was discharged by the neo-Trotskyite Khrushchev’s regime to support the myth of «surprise attack» and to place all the guilt for it personally on Stalin.
In reality, it is a notorious fact that the Navy of the USSR met the «surprise attack» at the battle alarm, i.e. it was not a surprise for them. If one branch meets the “surprise attack” at the battle alarm while units and formations of other branches are really taken off guard by this attack it speaks for the criminal negligence of many of the top commanders at the minimum or for organized parricide at the maximum.
Aware of this fact the neo-Trotskyite regime persecuted the former commander in chief of the Navy, admiral N.G. Kuznetsov, in the post-war period. Marshal of the USSR G.K. Zhukov, whose level of intellect and proficiency contributed to the above mentioned consequences and who was partly responsible for the catastrophe of summer 1941 (he was the head of the General Staff and deputy Defense People’s Commissar of the USSR from July 30, 1940), took part in creation and support of the myth of the «surprise German attack».
[286] But do not be quick to lament that the above-mentioned scenario did not take place in history. At that time Great Britain was the center of the global colonial empire and suppressed millions of people around the world. The welfare of her own people was provided by the policy of colonialism and slave ownership as prescribed by the biblical doctrine. This is a cocktail of Judaic internazism and Anglo-Saxon Nazism. We will not dispute here which Nazism – German or British – is «better».
[287] According to some publications, on June 22, 1941, after the outbreak of hostility the Soviet government contacted Berlin over the radio proposing to stop the German troops (on the assumption that it was not the German invasion to the USSR but a provocation aimed at initiating a war between Germany and the USSR, despite the agreement between their governments).
[288] Both the plans were developed as plans of real military operations to be carried out. At the same time both of them could serve as a misinforming and diversionary maneuver versus each other. Both of them were rather adventurous and because of this each of them would be considered by many foreign military specialists as deliberate misinformation, which could not be the basis for real military operations.
[289] The world community did not forgive the USSR for placing its rockets on Cuba although they were not against the military and rocket bases as well as aerodromes of strategic aviation of the USA and its allies that surrounded the USSR and its allies. This speaks of «the world community».
On the other hand placing the rockets on Cuba was a political provocation. There was no military need for it. This circumstance speaks of the USSR government: political shortsightedness and the atmosphere of error that allowed the appearance of the puppet Khrushchev’s anti-bolshevist regime (the puppet regime for the «world backstage»).
[290] The development of socialism went so far in the USA that a former soviet citizen Victor Fridman, who left the USSR for the United States to escape from the soviet socialism, discovered the unacceptable socialism in the country of his dream. He wrote the book “The Socialist States of America” on this (see the article of Victoria Averbuch “Comrades Cowboys” published in “Rossiyskaya Gazeta”, № 37 February 28, 2002).
[291] The abstract humanists who complain of the immoral cooperation with the fascist regime of Germany either do not understand the global historical process or are hypocrites for they consciously or subconsciously agree to live under the Doctrine (which we draw in the Supplement 1).
From the point of view of Bolshevism both Nazism and internazism have to be eliminated. For this it is necessary to interact with both – to interact to an acceptable extent for Bolsheviks.
Let the abstract humanists answer why they are not indignant about the whole global civilization living under the Doctrine? (See the Supplement 1 of this book for the doctrine)
[292] The motivation of Germany to initiate the war against Poland: the Polish government impeded the land communication over its territory between Western Prussia (now Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation) and the rest of the Germany. As far as the mutually acceptable agreements on this are concerned both parties obviously tried to avoid them acting under the pressure of the «world backstage».
During the period between the two world wars Germany several times offered Poland to arrange the terms of exterritorial transit through its territory (i.e. visa regime and customs supervision of German cargos and passengers by the Polish side), but Poland refused flatly to work out the terms of such a transit. According to the recollections of the Germans who had to go from Germany to Germany through Poland in that period, the Polish officials were often ready to swagger while issuing visas and during passport and customs supervision. At last, after another refusal by Poland to settle this problem Hitler decided to get rid of it by means of force.
The repetition from history is seen in today’s situation around the Kaliningrad region, which borders with the countries of European Union who are reluctant to arrange the exterritorial transit from Russia to Russia. The fact that this problem has arisen means that the representatives from the European Union are as stupid and impudent as those of the bourgeois Poland in the period between the two world wars of the 20th century. However Russia is different from Germany.
[293] This version is very much to the liking of the anti-Stalin intelligentsia. The attempts to create the cult of marshal G.K. Zhukov are caused by hatred of Stalin by the will to explain to the crowd the reasons of the victory in the Great Patriotic War. They want this cult to overshadow the truth about Stalin and that epoch: as though Zhukov is the main, and almost the only, creator of the victory who was unjustly suppressed by Stalin in the post-war years.
Those who believe in this delirious thesis forget that Zhukov was only a professional officer and the victory in the Great Patriotic war required a pre-war preparation in both global and internal politics, preparation of the country’s economy and coordination of the actions at the fronts and in the back areas during the war. It was Stalin who controlled all this ever since the late 1920’s, during the war and till the end of his days. It was Stalin who controlled the activity of Zhukov too. Later, during the «denunciation of the cult of personality of Stalin», this aspect was enveloped in lots of legends and historically inadequate lies (especially concerning the early stages of the Great Patriotic War). Zhukov was one of those who contributed to the creation of this myth.
It was not an end in it self for Zhukov to become a legitimate successor to Stalin or a usurper like a soviet Bonaparte after the Great Patriotic War was over. But there was a trend for intrigue and anti-bolshevism among the post-war generals. Due to his self-conceit and ambitions Zhukov was a good figure to be placed as the head of the state at least for the initial period of the new regime in case of a successful conspiracy by the generals against Stalin. Stalin actually saved Zhukov by sending him away from Moscow and intimidated other generals by repressing some of the top officers for abuse of their positions and breach of Bolshevist ethics (which manifested itself in the «love of trophies»).
As far as the post-war activity of marshal Zhukov is concerned, his personal and business qualities (taken alone his complicity in badgering the former People’s Commissar of the Navy N.G. Kuznetsov is very speaking) proved him to be incompetent in commanding anything bigger than a district. The maximum for which he was suited was the position of the Commander-in-Chief of the Land Forces because neither before the war, during the war or after it did he find an opportunity to inquire into the matters of aviation and the navy. That is why he could not professionally control the combat training, development and usage of the whole armed forces of the USSR in the times of war and peace.
Zhukov was exactly what he was and he deserves praising for all the good that he has done. But it is unacceptable to exaggerate his merits and to build false myths making him a cult – but, in fact, a caricature – figure in history.
[294]V.B. Rezun gives readers the idea that the USSR was a parasitic social system that was incapable of developing using only its internal resources. Thus it was destined to break-up in case of failure of further expansion. According to Rezun that is why in trying to preserve his dictatorship till the end of his days «bandit» Stalin was in favor of conquests under the slogans and ideas of the world socialist revolution.
[295] We do not recognize this building in the status of Christ the Savior Cathedral because it was built with budget money by a regime that robbed the people under the guise of reforms unlike the genuine cathedral built on the people’s donations.
Besides, the new building is slapdash from the point of view of building culture. Especially catching to the eye is the careless finish of the lower room as compared to the upper room in the cathedral. But even the demonstratively stately upper room, which everyone knows from the solemn worship services broadcast on church holidays, is not blameless and these defects suggest the negligence and inability to work.
In the original cathedral the paintings were directly on the walls. In the reconstructed model there is steel lining along the walls, approximately 10cm removed from them. The paintings are placed on this lining and thus are removed from the walls and are not subject to the temperature difference. In theory this surface must consist of planes and smooth patterns, which all together repeat the inside of the cathedral. But the steel jacket deformed during welding and it distorted many lines and surfaces designed in the project.
Deformations are natural no matter what technology of welding you use. But the scale of them in the model-cathedral goes beyond any aesthetic norm because they are visible with the naked eye, cause undulations and distort the ideal lines and surfaces. If such deviations from the designed position and configuration took place while assembling a ship hull at a shipyard (several centimeters inaccuracy!) such savage imprecision would not pass through the inspection department.
This is one of the many facts speaking of absolute lack of conscientiousness while building the model of Christ the Savior Cathedral. This model building embodies the pretense of the epoch of stagnation and self-seeking.
[296] See the memoirs of aircraft designer A.S. Yakovlev, artillery designer V.G. Grabin, former People’s Commissar of the Navy N.G. Kuznetsov.
[297] The only difference between the «leadership» views of Hitler and Lev Gumilev’s “Theory of Drive” is that Hitler saw himself as a candidate for that leadership and he fulfilled his wish, but Gumilev, not being a candidate for that, just gave an opportunity to other candidates for leadership to ground scientifically their claims with the help of his “Theory of Drive”.
This circumstance arouses the following questions:
Is Anna Akhmatova, the great poet of the «Silver Age» and the mother of Lev Gumilev, personally responsible for bringing up such a man who scientifically grounded the necessity of the «leadership» modification of Fascism?
Was it wrong to send Gumilev to GULAG although it did not prevent him from creating the “Theory of Drive”? Maybe it prevented him from writing something even more dangerous than the “Theory of Drive”?
On the inconsistency of the “Theory of Drive” read the corresponding chapter in the first volume of the work “Dead Water” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[298] On the inhumane principle of «democratic centralism», which makes people resemble zombies see the work “On Imitating And Instigating Activities” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[299] The entire history of the Party before Stalin became its leader in the late 1920-s was the history of struggle between personal ambitions of the leaders of the narrow circle, each of whom pretended to give the only true interpretation of the texts by Marx and Engels and to assure the veritable development of their ideas in the environment of Russia. This struggle of the leaders for personal or corporate domination had nothing to do with selfless work of implementing the ideals of communism into life.
[300] As a result of the better literacy and skills level of the population, some of the numerous people’s letters to the Central Committee, the People’s Commissariats (ministries), and personally to the Party and State leaders were really of big social significance. They would concern important issues of social life and would offer rather a professional set of measures to solve the problems. One can see it even from the «filtrate» of letters that A. Strelyany reads with ironic sorrow on Svoboda radio station from time to time.
[301] Besides, sessions of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and its republics were held regularly. And the members of Soviets of all the levels were a better representation of the society than the Party activists who would be sent as delegates to the Congresses.
[302] See the work “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR
[303] See the works “Brief Course …”, “Dead Water” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR.
[304] Refusal to finish the construction of the Palace of Soviets is also part of the policy to overcome the leaderism, which is a modification of crowd-“elitism”. The Palace of Soviets was necessary for the masters of Psychical-Trotskyites as an instrument of social magic. First, it was an instrument to support the personality cult of the current leader and his associates. Second, it would help to govern the society moved by gregarious instincts effecting in the crowd. The more delegates of the common people from provinces can be present in the conference-hall and the bigger is their emotional excitement in expectation of such an assemblage, the deeper is the personality suppression by the herd and the heavier is the person loaded with the idea to subdue to the leader, which he can transfer to the surrounding people upon his or her return home.
In recent decades the police got acquainted with the destructive force of the herd psychological effects from the football fans in all the countries. Only the direct communication between people can produce such powerful effects. It cannot be caused by the television (at least not at the point of its development on the verge of the 21st century): there are very few cases of mass football fanaticism leading to destruction of people’s own domestic surroundings.
But the very same herd psychological effects can turn «productive» if they are evoked by a special policy and the audience is specially selected and ideologically prepared. Then these people from the audience can be used to govern the life and activity of the crowd-“elitist” society. This was the goal of the Psychical-Trotskyites from Communist International when they began the project of the Palace of Soviets. A similar function was performed by a complex of buildings, which Hitler built in Nuremberg, Germany, to mesmerize the crowd in the direct communication with it under the guise of the Congresses of the NSDAP.
But the Bolsheviks did not need the building to perform such kind of social magic in. That is why the Palace of Soviets project was stopped as soon as the circumstances allowed. First, the beginning of the war in 1941, and later the dissolution of the Communist International in 1943 left nobody to insist on the construction of the Palace in 1945.
[305] Anecdote that was imprudently and proudly told by a Hebrew-student in the end of 70-s:
Volodarsky and Sverdlov walk along the hall of the Smolny Palace and all of the sudden Volodarsky pushes a not tall, bold, reddish man with a pointed beard. The man darkly smiles and passes by…
Sverldov: «Hey, man?! That was Lenin!!!»
Volodarsky: «Look, Yasha, I am fresh from the States, who is this Lenin?»
Sverdlov: «Hush…!!! The whole gesheft is assigned to him … »
Being a contemporary and the participant of the events Stalin knew much more about it than a Soviet Hebrew student in the end of 70-s.
[306] But after this or that Jew is informed about the guilt, the inverted commas are not needed anymore, because starting from that moment of notification about the assigned to him by the «world backstage’ mission he is free to make a conscious choice: to continue backing up this meanness or actively oppose to it. In this choice there is a key to the solution of the problem of «anti-Semitism», first of all the Jews themselves.
[307] The following shows how out of place this word is: Arabs – Semites, in spite of many Jews whose ancestors are obvious non-Semites – Turks, Khazars, Ethiopians and other at some point accepted Judaism as their religion. According to this historically real circumstance, opposing to the creation of the Arab state in Palestine, Israel manifests anti-Semitism.
[308] In order to be all covering alternative it was necessary for the alternative to operate a wider majority of terms, and, therefore, definitions, than did those who were against it.
But if to remain in the frames of the historically formed at that time cultural terminology all the actions of J.V. Stalin that were not commented by him, could and can be interpreted by different people as mutually exclusive, depending on their understanding of the character of the global historical process and management in it. Because of this point of view for some people Stalin is a contemptible marionette of zid-masonry; from another point of view he is an «anti-Semite» more artful and dangerous than Hitler; the third think he is an ignorant, sly and cruel power-loving man who managed to manipulate almost all (only Hitler was able to deceive him in 1941), including zid-masons, «anti-Semites», due to this and in spite of his mean essence he undeservedly appeared in the first lines of the list of the outstanding politicians and statesmen of the XX century. One see him as a Satanist, others – as a lost son of the Orthodox church who all his life looked for ways to come back to its bosom, etc. But all the commentators of his deeds in the majority are too lazy to read and understand the written heritage of J.V. Stalin and correlate it with the common to us all history.
[309] This is one of the reasons why J.V. Stalin contributed to the creation of the Israel state, which in perspective was suppose to be a bulwark of the multinational Bolshevik socialism in the Far East
[310] «Party! Let me rule!» – is the slogan that thoughtless masses screened the coming of the bourgeois democratization to the power during the Gorbatchev’s perestroika. The slogan goes back to the words of one of the famous festive songs «Party is our – man at the wheel». People holding a mass meeting under that slogan did not relies that man at the wheel is an ordinary subordinate, a sailor on board and that the course is laid by a navigator, it is a task given by a captain (in the marine) and by a captain of the ship in Navy. In other words, man at the wheel makes little difference. If «Party is our man at the wheel», then it is not party that is responsible…
[311] The problem of a successor of J.V. Stalin in the so-called «conjunctive mood of the history» and in the vain dreams about the future of the politically dependant part of the society is still so vital that the authors of the version of «Memories» of J.V. Stalin that are under the power of the aggregor that was formed on the basis of the teaching of E.P. Blavlatskaya and the Rerikhs took their understanding out to the cover of the book «… I want to tell about the main sin against the people. And I am to ask my people for forgiveness because I did not stand the test; I did not left a trustful man after myself». (A.G. Karpova, N.I. Siyanov-Starodubtsev, “Memories of J.V. Stalin. Recollections of Russia”, book 3, Moscow, 2000)
In our opinion such views about the succession of the upper power in society, that are arrogated to J.V. Stalin later, only express the understanding of this matter by the aggregoriously possessed authors of «Memories». With such a primitive and not objective conceptions about the power in society J.V. Dzhugashvili would not have been J.V. Stalin: the history would have known nothing about these names.
[312] Only it appeared that «it is caviar to the general»: in the party and in society morality and expressing it ethics still reigned that constantly created crowd-“elitism”. That is why during the «palace revolution» in the end of February – beginning of March of 1953, the power was taken over by the lovers of the powers of office; they are also careless and irresponsible self-seekers-“elitists”, those who perverted the Bolsheviks’ work on building a society where the fair worker would be free from any parasitism on his work and life.
[313] That acted in majority at the expense of the state, as any other public organization in the USSR.
[314] So-called, though based on the word “Hebrew”.
[315] The 1st try of the suppression of the internazism took place from the middle of 1920-s up to the beginning of the second world war of the 20th century under the name of «fight against Trotskyism» and in its essence it took place by default. It suppressed the activity of the structurally perfect, organized by mafia internazism of the true Marxists in the party and in the state.
[316] We’ll remind you once again that it is the definition to the sociological term «crowd» given by V.G. Belinsky.
[317] The fight against «groveling before the West» in its essence was directed exactly against the Bible doctrine. «Groveling before the West» in reality expressed that the Russian bearers of the servile psychology envied fed slaves of the Bible internazi doctrine of buying the world on bases of Jewish upper state usury and that they were physiologically ready to betray the work on the building a new global civilization for the sake of illusion of the possibility easily have a full belly and a comfortable life.
«Groveling before the West» sprung up during the liberation campaign of the Red Army in Europe. There during that campaign many soldiers – servile bearers of the crowd-“elitist” mentality – saw a highly consumer welfare of the population of the West countries.
These people who did not root out in themselves the servile psychology were not interested in the fact that the consumer welfare of the West population historically really was provided by nothing else but means of internazi conception of management: usury that whipped up the development of the technology and the level of education, parasitism of the metropolises on colonies, etc. This consumer welfare was reached in several centuries in the condition of the undivided reigning of the Bible culture in the West counties that lost their gentile constituent part. It was typical for Russia where the trust was on the way of the development of the technology, techniques and education overtaken the development of morality. Contiguity of the soviet bearers of the servile physiology with the «leading» culture of consumers of the West evoke in many envy and caused a wave of looting, including the one organized in the form of the «trophy campaign».
In the conditions of the post-war USSR this envy of the unrighteous welfare of the West stood on the way of deliberation of our own creative potential and, consequently was an obstacle in the work of the building of a new civilization on basis of the anti-crowd-“elitist” morally-esthetic principals of the humanity.
[318] Precisely, Hebrews, since on Russian here stands Hebrewish “nationality”.
[319] About this see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “On Racial Doctrines: Unfounded, but Plausible”..
[320] Not without reasons: see the work of the Internal Predictor of the USSR “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”.
1 Here K. Simonov means one of his diary’s records.
2 Though the sin was to keep this plenary session secret during all the Khrushchev-Brezhnev era.
3 When the USSR existed there was such a notion as a «party secret». Some issues concerning the state and society life were examined at the so-called «closed» party meetings, plenary sessions and Congresses. Non-party people couldn’t attend «closed» meetings, and the materials of the «closed» meetings, plenary sessions and Congresses were not published in the mass media.
[324] This concerns the question how during decades cult of J. Stalin’s personality was created.
[325] J.V. Stalin reminds of the time when the conflict of «bolshevism and socialism in a separate country – «world backstage» and the world revolution» was the most acute one. The situation of 1918 was in many respects similar to the situation of 1952.
