Historian Andrei Zubov is one of the first Russian intellectuals to speak out openly against the annexation of Crimea. On July 1, a professor who is in opposition to the Kremlin's official line was fired from MGIMO.
Nevertheless, Andrei Zubov launched an on-line history department on the Novaya Gazeta website. Together with his colleagues, he tries to explain the historical background of the current situation in Russia, the danger of the syndrome of greatness and the need for decommunization.
Explain everything that is still poorly perceived by Russian society.
"If you see that a friend is delirious in a dream, in no case should he be woken up abruptly, he should quietly begin to say something pleasant, then the dream will change and he will wake up in a good mood. This is exactly what we are doing with our sick society, "- says the historian.
Some of the lectures are devoted to Ukraine. Historians talk about how the Ukrainian national movement arose, who the "Bandera" people are, how alternative forms of political outlook were formed on the territory of our country.
- Why is it important for Russians to know who the Banderaites were right now?
In our common country, the Soviet Union, the technology of creating myths was highly developed. Huge historical stages and important facts were either hushed up or distorted. We hardly knew the real story.
And at different times in different ways: in the 20s, some facts were distorted, in the 40s - others. We are not accustomed to the invaluable historical fact.
Until now, the attitude to history in Russia is not as a science that needs to be studied and which only under this condition is beneficial, but as an ideology that needs to be created.
In the Soviet Union, in order to stigmatize something, especially after World War II, one simply had to call it fascism. This is how the "Bandera" people were called fascists, although, of course, this was not true.
It was a typical nationalist organization of the war period with its own army, with its own terrorist wing. Then many acted in this way. Certainly, some leaders of the Ukrainian national movement were carried away by the idea of \u200b\u200bMussolini's corporatism. But Mussolini still called Joseph Stalin his best student. I think that Stalin was a greater fascist than Bandera and even Mussolini.
| photo: novayagazeta.ru |
Soviet troops were at war with a powerful rebel army in Ukraine. How do you call it?
To say that these were Ukrainian patriots meant to cross out ourselves. The Soviet government was very proud of the fact that it gave all peoples the right to national revival.
Everything was attributed to the Banderaites: the genocide of the Ukrainian people, and the destruction of Jews, and cooperation with Hitler and all imaginable atrocities. The Banderaites are an example of the great lie of the Soviet system.
Although from the point of view of the science of history, it was a national liberation movement, anti-communist.
Stepan Andreevich Bandera was born and lived in that part of Ukraine, which until 1939 was part of Poland. And he saw all the Soviet horrors from the peaceful and wealthy (in comparison with Soviet Ukraine) Galicia. He saw how during the Holodomor, when people dying of hunger rushed across the border into Polish territory, they were shot by Soviet border guards. And for this he hated the Soviet regime.
Any nationalism is a terrible joke, especially with a weapon in hand. But Bandera was a hundred times less cruel than the Beria or Abakumov NKVD, which fought against the Bandera.
Therefore, any attempt to free them from this state was already an element of justice. And in this sense, the Bandera movement is more justified from the point of view of morality than the Stalinist Soviet state.
This needs to be explained - consistently and systematically.
70 years later, the myth about Bandera turned out to be extremely relevant. Suddenly, the Russians began to hate the Bandera people en masse. They were also supplemented with myths about the right sector, Ukrainian punishers. All of these myths that prevent Russians from thinking critically.
This includes Soviet ideological attitudes.
And this is understandable. For the descendants of the NKVD officers, their grandfathers really fought with the Bandera. There are especially many such descendants in Crimea, where former NKVD officers were sent to retire.
- Is there an antidote against this ideological mechanism?
We must calmly explain what the Ukrainian organization of nationalists really was, who Stepan Bandera was, who were his associates. And why did the Soviet authorities hate him so much that they were not even too lazy in 1959 to send their agent to kill him with an ampoule of potassium cyanide.
Now, "Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!" Has returned to the cultural circulation. With these words, Ukrainian nationalists greeted each other, and now we are. Doesn't that scare you?
Look, now Tatars, Jews and Russians who live in Ukraine call themselves Ukrainians.
I myself happily spoke these words in Moscow. For me, your revolution is the liberation of Ukraine from the Soviet thieves' regime.
This is a great achievement. Moreover, in a way, I believe that this is an example for us.
Because Ukraine for us is some part of this large former state. And she now manages to break through to something more worthy and this is a great lesson for us. Ukraine is being liberated from the Soviet.
 |
| photo: novayagazeta.ru |
But this is how a very small number of Russians think. The majority, judging by the ratings of the authorities, want us to return to the stall, under the influence of a certain myth about the "Russian world".
A month and a half before the start of your revolution, one Ukrainian political scientist from Kharkov in a conversation gave a very clear definition of the difference between Ukraine and Russia.
“We are ruled by bandits and the SBU is on their parcels, and you have the KGB, and they have bandits on the parcels,” he told me then. And I must admit, this is an unfortunate truth.
You have a chance to break out of this.
You are now going to Europe. I believe that the Russian Federation should also go to Europe. There is no alternative to the European way.
Do you see the prerequisites for this? It seems that Russia is just confidently stepping into the past. There are no free media, civil rights are violated, but Putin's rating is growing. How do you explain this?
Everything is much more complicated. First, this is not a return to the USSR. All property is owned not by the state, but by a dozen people.
All who cooperate with the authorities receive their share of the property.
By all economic parameters, our regime is not socialist. It is much more like the regime of a fascist state, where private corporations were created under state control. It is no accident that the fascist state was called corporate.
This corporate capitalism is now being built in Russia.
Will Putin be able to build a state of the fascist type? I think no, not the world context. At the beginning of the century, after the defeat of the triple alliance powers in the First World War, everyone on the continent was fond of fascism.
The peoples of these countries had a complex that they were deceived, robbed and that these peoples needed to achieve revenge.
When it comes to revenge, there is always a need for a national leader and mobilization of the economy. And hence the totalitarian regimes that, to one degree or another, have emerged throughout Europe.
And after 1945, the Western part of Europe came to a completely different concept - from "man is a cell of the national organism" to "man is the main value". This completely different mentality has made it possible to build a new democratic Europe.
Now you are approaching this understanding.
Why is a different ideology still in demand in Russia, in which a person is a cell of a state organism? Is the field of ideas weak?
Because in our country, as well as in your country, the det-totalitarianization of consciousness has not been carried out.
In Germany, Austria, Italy, the denazification and defascization of consciousness was carried out. Moreover, this process has been going on for many decades.
And relapses occurred even back in the 90s, when the famous dispute between historians in West Germany and those who actually justified Nazism took place.
In the 90s, the process of decommunization began in the Baltic States and Bulgaria. Similarly, the communist period was declared criminal, and the ideologists and leaders of communism were people who committed crimes, and the fighters against communism were heroes. Property taken by the communists was also returned. This is a whole range of measures.
We had none of this. And so we remained carriers of the Soviet mentality. What the world condemns, we do not even consider bad. And this affects the perception of reality.
Since 1993, I have been talking about the need for decommunization in Russia and in general throughout the post-Soviet space.
- The fact that the Ukrainians began to destroy the monuments of Lenin, can it be considered a request for de-Sovietization?
You started this process intuitively. But in order to systematically approach this issue, it is necessary to study the experience of Eastern Europe.
One cannot be limited to monuments. Now lustration is being actively discussed in your society.
This is very good, but lustration should be not only those who committed crimes under Yanukovych, but also those who committed crimes before 1990.
They are already old, but at least their crimes must be condemned. The issue of restitution also needs to be addressed. This issue has already been resolved in Poland, the Czech Republic, the Baltic States. Serbia passed a proprietary restitution law two years ago.
By recognizing the confiscation of private property by the Soviet system, one cannot enter a Europe where human rights, including property rights, are respected.
Therefore, Ukraine faces the same tasks. If you do not set them and work in this direction, then you will have a Soviet relapse.
- In Russia, on the contrary, they glorify the Soviet. Is this the relapse you're talking about?
Yes, all the same Soviet people are sitting in government offices. They want to justify the "Soviet" as the basis for the country's current course.
And, of course, all this talk about de-communization is in their throats, on the contrary, they praise Andropov. And hence the relevance of the myths of the Soviet period - both about Bandera and the hand of the West.
Crimea is also a Soviet relapse.
Those regions of Ukraine in which the Soviet mental forms have been preserved to the greatest extent - Eastern Ukraine and Crimea - they are the ones that gather near the Lenin monuments.
It would seem that Lenin ruined you, killed you, took property and land from your grandfathers. But people do not think critically, they are again guided by Soviet cliches.
- A myth has been created that Ukraine is ruled by a junta, but rather a junta can be called a regime that rules in Russia?
We have rigged elections in 2007, 2008, 2011 and 2012. We are ruled by an illegal illegitimate regime, we do not stop repeating this.
The regime that came to power in your country is, of course, revolutionary. He did not have full legitimacy. But you tried to return to full legitimacy as soon as possible by holding the presidential elections in compliance with all rules and regulations.
The Ukrainian politicians who have now come to power were called "junta" because they did not want to deal with them. With Yanukovych, who represented the same thieves' regime as in Russia, it is easy to deal with.
And it is dangerous for the Kremlin regime to deal with politicians who are elected by the people and who see it as their task to build a real democratic state in Ukraine.
It is dangerous for such a state to be close at hand. After all, this is a different Russia.
Ukraine has been a different Russia for many centuries. In Ukraine, under the Lithuanian-Polish state, Magdeburg Law is approved.
This is a different Russia, more European, cultural. In the 17th century, under the first kings of the Romanov dynasty, there was a terrible fashion for Ukraine. Ukrainian scholars-monks, Ukrainian boyars, politicians came to Russia, created schools and taught tsarist children. Another Russia was inoculating Muscovy with culture.
And now there may be a repetition. Not in the sense that Russia will take over Ukraine. And in the sense that independent Ukraine, being very close in culture, language, religion, will be able to give a lot after it has passed this difficult path in European integration and the restoration of those cultural forms that were destroyed during the communist regime.
- How long do you think the "construction" of the new Ukraine will take?
I am already an old man, and I can tell you that I have been working at a construction site all my life: I write, teach, speak. But this is our way. Be prepared to devote your entire working life to this.
Formally, you will be able to carry out the reforms in five years. But in order to change the structures of consciousness, you will need more time.
But you can look back and say: "We have built a new Ukraine." You see how hard it is for me in my years to look back and see that so far we have not built anything.
And instead of building the future, we are constantly fighting the past. Wonderful prospects are now open before you, continue to act.
During the election campaign, the liberals agreed to sing the praises of the Fuhrer
"Hitler is the angel of Russian history."
No, these words, blasphemous for everyone in our country, do not belong to the odious Goebbels, but they were uttered just the other day.
And it was not at all some fan of Bandera who had taken a sip of vodka, and not a scumbag with a swastika shaved on the back of his head, but a completely fine-looking gentleman with a sleek professorial beard, living in Moscow Andrey Zubov (on the picture).
By occupation, Zubov is, in fact, a professor, a doctor of sciences and not just any, but historical ones. And today he is no longer just a historian, but a political activist who is listed as the third in the electoral list of the liberal party PARNAS.
And the professor uttered this ode to Hitler not in his kitchen, but in an interview with the American Radio Liberty. Franking with a reporter about the details of his biography, Zubov admitted that in his youth he was a zealous anti-Soviet.
“I,” he said, “back in the“ Coffee Maker ”of our institute, told my friends how annoying it was that Stalin did not lose the war to Hitler. Because all the same, in the end, the allies would free us, but then the British and Americans would establish democracy in our country and replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime. "
Considering that this is not enough, Zubov, answering the questions, then "gave a couple of things", adding:
"Compared to Stalin, Hitler is the angel of Russian history."
The liberal historian explained this monstrous comparison by the fact that Stalin exterminated more people than Hitler. However, this does not change anything. To call the possessed Fuhrer an "angel" in any context is blasphemy and cynical mockery of the memory of millions of his victims.
However, such a statement was made by Zubov, of course, not by accident. The professor had already mentioned Hitler before, back in 2014, during the annexation of Crimea to Russia.
"In Germany, -wrote professor Zubov,- 99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire - 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day became the German Memel.In all these lands, the majority of Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation of the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West ... And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician? And six years later Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all began so radiantly! ... History will repeat itself ", - Zubov concludes with false pathos.
The professor's hints from history are clear.
He compares Russia's actions in the matter with the return of Crimea to the capture of European states by the Nazis, threatening her with defeat and death, recalling the defeat of Germany.
But wouldn't he, as a doctor of historical sciences, not know that we are talking about completely different events that cannot be compared under any circumstances? That Crimea revolted only after a coup d'etat was carried out in Kiev and a pro-fascist junta came to power in Ukraine? What on the peninsula, if its inhabitants had not made their historical choice, would have been arranged the same bloody massacre, which the Kiev punishers then staged in the Donbass?
Of course, Zubov knows all this very well, he can not help but know, as a man who taught at MGIMO for many years and, of course, has become quite adept in politics. But why, then, does he turn everything upside down?
And the answer is simple. This is the usual method of liberals - if there are no weighty arguments against the current government, which they call to overthrow, then they must be thought up.
Compare, for example, the actions of the Russian leadership with Hitler, and portray the expression of the will of the people of Crimea as "Russia's aggression."
And Zubov has been doing it for a long time and methodically. Here's what, for example, he said at one time on "Echo of Moscow" about Nadezhda Savchenko:
“Nadezhda Savchenko is a person who clearly did not want to become a hero - she was an ordinary hero of Ukraine, one of thousands of people who stood up to defend their country from Russian aggression then, in the spring and summer of 2014. But God gave her a special fate - she was seized and accused, as everyone knows, of having had some part in the deaths of Russian journalists ... But in any case, it is quite clear that among the thousands of victims and incredible lawlessness that took place in the eastern and southeastern Ukraine over the past two years, even if the Savchenko case has something under it, it drowns in this sea of \u200b\u200bcrimes, which, naturally, were committed by both sides, but the aggressor, of course, was Russia, not Ukraine ... "
But Zubov and his associates are trying in vain. In response to his words of praise about Hitler, a whole storm of indignation broke out on the network.
Here are just some of the comments:
User Dmitry Ermakov wrote: "Nothing new. Read The Brothers Karamazov. Smerdyakov: "In the twelfth year, there was a great invasion of Russia by the emperor Napoleon the first of France ... and it would be good if these very French conquered us then: an intelligent nation would have conquered a very stupid one and annexed it. There would even be other orders, sir."
Alexei Safronov: “It is not for nothing that Zubov is a member of an anti-people party with foreign funding. This can only be said by a traitor to his own people, who must be prosecuted for propaganda of the genocide of our people, desecrating the memory of the dead, and for openly calling for the betrayal of the Motherland. The war was not fought by Stalin, but by the people who were sentenced to extermination by the very sponsors who financed Hitler and today are financing PARNAS ”.
Elena Ivanova: “Pluralism, in this case, is inappropriate and seems to be prosecuted. And for how many years did this unfinished Vlasovite teach? "
Answering Elena's question, let's say that Zubov taught for a long time. And not just anywhere, but in one of the most privileged educational institutions in Moscow - at MGIMO. From where he was finally expelled recently.
As can be assumed, due to the too original interpretation by the former professor of modern history of Russia. Here he, as you can see, hit politics, deciding to break into the State Duma under the wing of PARNAS. What for? And, probably, in order, as his friends, the liberals, urge, "to return Crimea to Ukraine."
Andrey Sokolov
During the election campaign, the liberals agreed to sing the praises of the Fuhrer
"Hitler is the angel of Russian history." No, these words, blasphemous for everyone in our country, do not belong to the odious Goebbels, but they were uttered just the other day. And it was not at all some fan of Bandera who had taken a sip of vodka, and not a scumbag with a swastika shaved on the back of his head, but a quite fine-looking gentleman with a sleek professorial beard, Andrei Zubov living in Moscow (on the picture).
By occupation, Zubov is indeed a professor, a doctor of sciences and not just any, but historical ones. And today he is no longer just a historian, but a political activist who is listed as the third in the electoral list of the liberal party PARNAS. And the professor uttered this ode to Hitler not in his kitchen, but in an interview with the American Radio Liberty. Franking with a reporter about the details of his biography, Zubov admitted that in his youth he was a zealous anti-Soviet. “I,” he said, “back in the“ Coffee Maker ”of our institute, told my friends how annoying it was that Stalin did not lose the war to Hitler. Because all the same, in the end, the allies would free us, but then the British and Americans would establish democracy in our country and replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime. "
Considering that this was not enough, Zubov, answering the questions, then “gave a couple”, adding: “In comparison with Stalin, Hitler is an angel of Russian history”.
The liberal historian explained this monstrous comparison by the fact that Stalin exterminated more people than Hitler. However, this does not change anything. To call the possessed Fuhrer an "angel" in any context is blasphemy and cynical mockery of the memory of millions of his victims.
However, such a statement was made by Zubov, of course, not by accident. The professor had already mentioned Hitler before, back in 2014, during the annexation of Crimea to Russia.
In an article published in the Vedomosti newspaper, he compared this fateful event for Russia with ... the Hitlerite Anschluss of Austria. “In Germany,” wrote Professor Zubov, “99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire, 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day became the German Memel. In all these lands, the majority of Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation of the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West ... And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician? And six years later Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all began so radiantly! ... History will repeat itself, ”Zubov concludes with false pathos.
The professor's hints from history are clear.
He compares Russia's actions in the matter with the return of Crimea to the capture of European states by the Nazis, threatening her with defeat and death, recalling the defeat of Germany.
But wouldn't he, as a doctor of historical sciences, not know that we are talking about completely different events that cannot be compared under any circumstances? That Crimea revolted only after a coup d'état was carried out in Kiev and a pro-fascist junta came to power in Ukraine? What on the peninsula, if its inhabitants had not made their historical choice, would have been arranged the same bloody massacre, which the Kiev punishers then staged in the Donbass?
Of course, Zubov knows all this very well, he cannot but know, as a man who taught at MGIMO for many years and, of course, has become quite adept in politics. But why then does he turn everything on its head?
The answer is simple. This is the usual method of liberals - if there are no weighty arguments against the current government, which they call to overthrow, then they must be thought up.
Compare, for example, the actions of the Russian leadership with Hitler, and portray the expression of the will of the people of Crimea as "Russia's aggression."
And Zubov has been doing it for a long time and methodically. For example, he said at one time on "Echo of Moscow" about Nadezhda Savchenko: “Nadezhda Savchenko is a person who clearly did not want to be a hero - she was an ordinary hero of Ukraine, one of thousands of people who stood up to defend their country from Russian aggression then, in the spring and summer of 2014. But God awarded her a special fate - she was captured and accused, as everyone knows, of having had some part in the deaths of Russian journalists ... But in any case, it is absolutely clear that among the thousands of victims and incredible lawlessness that took place in the eastern and southeastern Ukraine over the past two years, even if the Savchenko case has something under it, it drowns in this sea of \u200b\u200bcrimes, which, naturally, were committed by both sides, but the aggressor, of course, was Russia, not Ukraine ... "
But Zubov and his associates are trying in vain. In response to his words of praise about Hitler, a whole storm of indignation broke out on the network.
Here are just some of the comments:
User Dmitry Ermakov wrote: “Nothing new. Read The Brothers Karamazov. Smerdyakov: "In the twelfth year, there was a great invasion of Russia by the Emperor Napoleon the first of France ... and it would be good if these very French conquered us then: an intelligent nation would have conquered a very stupid one and annexed it. There would even be other orders, sir."
Alexei Safronov: “It is not for nothing that Zubov is a member of an anti-people party with foreign funding. This can only be said by a traitor to his own people, who must be prosecuted for propaganda of the genocide of our people, desecrating the memory of the dead, and for openly calling for the betrayal of the Motherland. It was not Stalin who fought the war, but the people who were sentenced to extermination by the very sponsors who financed Hitler and today are financing PARNAS ”.
Elena Ivanova: “Pluralism, in this case, is inappropriate and, it seems, is prosecuted. And how many years did this half-finished Vlasov teacher teach? "
Answering Elena's question, let's say that Zubov taught for a long time. And not just anywhere, but in one of the most privileged educational institutions in Moscow - at MGIMO. From where he was finally expelled recently.
As can be assumed, due to the too original interpretation by the former professor of modern history of Russia. Here he, as you can see, struck into politics, deciding to break into the State Duma under the wing of PARNAS. What for? And, probably, in order, as his friends, the liberals, urge, "to return Crimea to Ukraine."
Especially for the "Century"
Friends. We are on the doorstep. We are on the verge of not including a new subject in the Russian Federation. We are on the verge of complete destruction of the system of international treaties, economic chaos and political dictatorship. We are on the verge of a war with our closest, most related people of Ukraine, a sharp deterioration in relations with Europe and America, on the verge of a cold, and possibly a hot war with them.
After all, all this has already happened. Austria. Early March 1938 The Nazis wish to round off their Reich at the expense of another German state. The people are not very eager for this - no one infringes upon them, no one discriminates against them. But the idea of \u200b\u200ba great Germany is turning the head of the radicals - the local Nazis. To put an end to the dispute over the fate of Austria, its chancellor Kurt Alois von Schuschnigg announces a plebiscite on March 13. But the Nazis in Berlin and Vienna are not satisfied with this. What if the people speak out against the Anschluss? Chancellor Schuschnigg is forced to resign on March 10, the president appoints the leader of the local Nazis, Arthur Seyss-Inquart, in his place, and the German divisions are already entering Austrian cities at the invitation of the new chancellor, whom he himself learned from the newspapers. Austrian troops surrender. The people either greeted the Nazis with enthusiasm, or sat in their homes in irritation, or urgently flees to Switzerland. Austria's Cardinal Innitzer welcomes and blesses the Anschluss ... Arrests began on 13 March. Chancellor Schuschnigg was arrested the day before. The plebiscite was held on April 10. In Germany, 99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire - 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day turned into the German Memel. In all these lands, most of the Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation from the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West.
“We must not deceive, let alone hopelessly small weak states, promising them protection from the League of Nations and appropriate steps from our side,” Neville Chamberlain said in the British Parliament on February 22, 1938, “since we know that nothing this cannot be done. "
And Adolf Hitler spoke quite differently on March 23, 1939 from the balcony on Teatralnaya Square, which had just been joined by Memel. Two hours earlier, he had sailed theatrically aboard the newest battleship "Germany" to the Memel port. “... The Germans are not going to do anything bad to anyone in the world, but it was necessary to end the suffering that the Germans suffered from the whole world for 20 years ... Germany once abandoned the Memel Germans to their fate, when it resigned itself to shame and dishonor ... Today the Memel Germans ... are again becoming citizens of the mighty Reich, determined to take their fate into their own hands, even if half of the world does not like it. "
And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician?
And six years later, Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all began so radiantly!
Friends! History repeats itself. There are indeed Russians living in Crimea. But did anyone oppress them there, were they second-class people there, without the right to language, to the Orthodox faith? From whom should the soldiers of the Russian army protect them? Who attacked them? The introduction of troops of a foreign state into the territory of another state without its permission is aggression. The seizure of parliament by persons wearing unmarked uniforms is arbitrary. The adoption of any decisions by the Crimean parliament in such circumstances is a farce. First, the parliament was seized, the prime minister was replaced by a pro-Russian one, and then this new prime minister asked Russia for help, when the assistants were already here, already a day ago, they were controlling the peninsula. Like two peas in a pod it looks like the Anschluss of 1938, and even a referendum-plebiscite a month later under friendly bayonets. There - April 10, here - March 30.
Has the Russian government calculated all the risks of this incredible adventure? I’m sure not. Like Adolf Aloizovich, he did not calculate it at the time. I would have counted - I would not rush about the bunker in April 1945 under Russian bombs, I would not eat an ampoule of poison.
What if the West does not act like Chamberlain and Deladier in 1938, but introduces a complete embargo on the purchases of Russian energy resources and freezes Russian holdings in its banks? The Russian economy, already moribund, will collapse in three months. And trouble will begin here, in comparison with which the Maidan will seem like a paradise garden.
And what if the Crimean Tatars, who are categorically against the Russian government, who remember what this government did to them in 1944 and how they did not let them back until 1988, if the Crimean Tatars turn to the co-religionist and consanguineous Turkey for the protection of their interests? After all, Turkey is not across three seas, but on the other side of the same Black Sea. And it owned Crimea longer than Russia - it owned it for four centuries. The Turks are not a chamberlain and not a deed: in July 1974, defending their fellow tribesmen, they occupied 40% of the territory of Cyprus and, ignoring all the protests, they still support the so-called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which no one recognizes except them. Maybe someone wants to have the Turkish Republic of South Crimea? But if the hot heads of the Crimean Tatars rise to fight, then Muslim radicals from all over the world will gladly join them, and especially from the North Caucasus and the Volga region. Will we not bring a storm from the ruined Crimean resorts to our Russian home? What are we - our own terrorist attacks are not enough?
And finally, having acquired the Crimea, torn apart by internal strife, we will forever lose the people of Ukraine - the Ukrainians will never forgive the Russians for this betrayal. What do you think will not happen, that this is too much, will grind - there will be flour? Do not hope, dear Russian chauvinists. At the end of the 19th century, Serbs and Croats considered themselves to be one people, only separated by borders, confession and alphabet graphics. They strove for unity - how many books were written about it then, smart, kind books. And now there are few peoples who are so angry with each other as the Serbs and Croats. How much blood was shed between them, and all for some pieces of land, some towns and valleys in which they could live together richly and joyfully. They could, but they could not. Greed for brotherly land made brothers enemies. And in everyday life, isn't it? Is it worth losing a brotherly people forever because of ghostly desires? And a split in the Russian Church was already inevitable then. Its Ukrainian half will split off from Moscow's forever.
But the Kremlin's success in annexing Crimea will turn out to be an even more terrible defeat. If everything goes well, then tomorrow the regions of Kazakhstan inhabited by Russians, there, you see, both South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and North Kyrgyzstan will be requested to Russia. Austria was followed by the Sudetenland, the Sudetenland - Memel, Memel - Poland, Poland - France, France - Russia. It all started small ...
Friends! We need to come to our senses and stop. Our politicians are dragging our people into a terrible, terrifying adventure. Historical experience says that nothing will go wrong. We must not be led, as the Germans were led in due time to the promises of Goebbels and Hitler. For the sake of peace in our country, for the sake of its real revival, for the sake of peace and true friendliness in the territories of historical Russia, now divided into many states, let's say no to this insane and, most importantly, completely unnecessary aggression.
We lost so many lives in the twentieth century that our only true principle should be the principle proclaimed by the great Solzhenitsyn: the preservation of the people. Preserving the people, not collecting land. Lands are collected only with blood and tears.
We no longer need blood or tears!
During the election campaign, the liberals agreed to sing the praises of the Fuhrer
"Hitler is the angel of Russian history." No, these words, blasphemous for everyone in our country, do not belong to the odious Goebbels, but they were uttered just the other day. And it was not at all some fan of Bandera who had taken a sip of vodka, and not a scumbag with a swastika shaved on the back of his head, but a quite fine-looking gentleman with a sleek professorial beard, living in Moscow, Andrei Zubov
By occupation, Zubov is indeed a professor, a doctor of sciences and not just any, but historical ones. And today he is no longer just a historian, but a political activist who is listed as the third in the electoral list of the liberal party PARNASSUS... And the professor pronounced this ode to Hitler not in his kitchen, but in an interview with the American "Radio Liberty". Confessing to the correspondent about the details of his biography, Zubov admitted that in his youth was a zealous anti-Soviet. « I, - he declared, - back in the "Coffee Maker" of our institute, he told his friends how annoying it was that Stalin did not lose the war to Hitler. Because all the same, in the end, the allies would free us, but then the British and Americans would establish democracy in our country and replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime ».
Considering that this is not enough, Zubov, answering the questions, then “gave a couple of things”, adding: “ Compared to Stalin, Hitler is an angel of Russian history».
The liberal historian explained this monstrous comparison by the fact that Stalin exterminated more people than Hitler. However, this does not change anything. To call the possessed Fuhrer an "angel" in any context is blasphemy and cynical mockery of the memory of millions of his victims.
However, such a statement was made by Zubov, of course, not by accident. The professor had already mentioned Hitler before, back in 2014, during the annexation of Crimea to Russia.
In an article published in the Vedomosti newspaper, he compared this fateful event for Russia with ... the Hitlerite Anschluss of Austria. “In Germany,” wrote Professor Zubov, “99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire, 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day became the German Memel. In all these lands, the majority of Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation of the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West ... And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician? And six years later Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all began so radiantly! ... History will repeat itself, ”Zubov concludes with false pathos.
The professor's hints from history are clear.
He compares Russia's actions in the matter with the return of Crimea to the capture of European states by the Nazis, threatening her with defeat and death, recalling the defeat of Germany.
But wouldn't he, as a doctor of historical sciences, not know that we are talking about completely different events that cannot be compared under any circumstances? That Crimea revolted only after a coup d'état was carried out in Kiev and a pro-fascist junta came to power in Ukraine? What on the peninsula, if its inhabitants had not made their historical choice, would have been arranged the same bloody massacre, which the Kiev punishers then staged in the Donbass?
Of course, Zubov knows all this very well, he cannot but know, as a man who taught at MGIMO for many years and, of course, has become quite adept in politics. But why then does he turn everything on its head?
The answer is simple. This is the usual method of liberals - if there are no weighty arguments against the current government, which they call to overthrow, then they must be thought up.
Compare, for example, the actions of the Russian leadership with Hitler, and portray the expression of the will of the people of Crimea as "Russia's aggression."
And Zubov has been doing it for a long time and methodically. For example, he said at one time on "Echo of Moscow" about Nadezhda Savchenko: “Nadezhda Savchenko is a person who clearly did not want to be a hero - she was an ordinary hero of Ukraine, one of thousands of people who stood up to defend their country from Russian aggression then, in the spring and summer of 2014. But God awarded her a special fate - she was captured and accused, as everyone knows, of having had some part in the deaths of Russian journalists ... But in any case, it is absolutely clear that among the thousands of victims and incredible lawlessness that took place in the eastern and southeastern Ukraine over the past two years, even if the Savchenko case has something under it, it drowns in this sea of \u200b\u200bcrimes, which, naturally, were committed by both sides, but the aggressor, of course, was Russia, not Ukraine ... "
But Zubov and his associates are trying in vain. In response to his words of praise about Hitler, a whole storm of indignation broke out on the network.
Here are just some of the comments:
User Dmitry Ermakov wrote: “Nothing new. Read The Brothers Karamazov. Smerdyakov: "In the twelfth year, there was a great invasion of Russia by the Emperor Napoleon the first of France ... and it would be good if these very French conquered us then: an intelligent nation would have conquered a very stupid one and annexed it. There would even be other orders, sir."
Alexei Safronov: “It is not for nothing that Zubov is a member of an anti-people party with foreign funding. This can only be said by a traitor to his own people, who must be prosecuted for propaganda of the genocide of our people, desecrating the memory of the dead, and for openly calling for the betrayal of the Motherland. It was not Stalin who fought the war, but the people who were sentenced to extermination by the very sponsors who financed Hitler and today are financing PARNAS ”.
Elena Ivanova: “Pluralism, in this case, is inappropriate and, it seems, is prosecuted. And how many years did this half-finished Vlasov teacher teach? "
Answering Elena's question, let's say that Zubov taught for a long time. And not just anywhere, but in one of the most privileged educational institutions in Moscow - at MGIMO. From where he was finally expelled recently.
As can be assumed, due to the too original interpretation by the former professor of modern history of Russia. Here he, as you can see, struck into politics, deciding to break into the State Duma under the wing of PARNAS. What for? And, probably, in order, as his friends, the liberals, urge, "to return Crimea to Ukraine."
Andrey Sokolov