This malenkiy.primer perfectly illustrates the profound transformation that has occurred in such a kutsee time in the minds of people of my generation and even younger — in relation to the role and place of Stalin in the history of our country, in the history of the world revolutionary movement. I can say that I have passed the way to Stalin personally — not the exception.  "The citizens of the Russian Federation more positive view of the role of Stalin" — panicking now Russian bourgeois newspapers. Even the official, pro-bourgeois polls 45% of the population appreciates the role of Stalin in our history is positive. This number is immediately increased by 6 points, as President Medvedev announced the need to campaign "de-Stalinization." "Name of Russia" — a project of TV channel "Russia", implemented in 2008, to put its own selection of important personalities associated with Russia, by a vote of Internet users, viewers and listeners. It was the British equivalent of "100 Greatest Britons" and Ukrainian "Great Ukrainians".  Despite the desperate efforts of the authorities and the founders of the project, Stalin entered the driven three names. For a long time, Stalin was the leader in general, with a wide margin, and the organizers of the project only barely managed to push him out of first place with the help of "administrative resources", moving in a more benign favorites for the bourgeois regime of the Russian Federation Alexander Nevsky. "Of course, not old retired crushed the web its sympathies to the totalitarian regime, or simply to the time when they were young. I can not imagine veterans massively having a computer and do not get out of the web. Means we litsezreem choice of the middle generation, and nation the Young "
It is significant today as panic Russian authorities are afraid of Stalin — and that after almost 60 years after his death! Now they are beginning to "de-Stalinization" — an important condition to discredit socialism, desperate attempt to deter people from becoming increasingly popular and more than the benefit of socialist thought. But the fact that so successfully — for the capitalists and opportunists worked in the late 80s, it is now no longer works.
Overestimate the importance of the role of Stalin's forced us to the very reality that surrounds us — better than any books, movies, and other means of propaganda. Comparing the results of his tenure as manager of our country with the tragic fruit of "activity" of the entire ruling Russia for the last 20 years "clique" , it is simply impossible not to come to a positive attitude towards it.
As of early childhood and youth, the vast majority of people of my generation about Stalin simply did not think. For us, it was only just a historical figure, an integral part of the history of our country, as, for example, and Peter first, but we are not particularly thought about the role Stalin played in the construction of socialism in our country, in the development of our society the same as it was at the time of our youth. Little by little, even then, in the Brezhnev years, we were taught the same idea, which is trying to suggest at this point — that the people "by itself" socialism or built into a sublime beat Russian war. Naturally, the victories and accomplishments of these people have been carried out, but still, the people that were completely certain executives. And belittle their role should not be.
The LCD TVs in the Brezhnev era, Stalin arose only in the context of stateliness Russian war — in films, both documentary and art. Showed he was there with enough respect for its historical role in this period of our history, but that's about the pre-war and post-war periods of his activity was said almost nothing, as if during those periods, as opposed to the war, our people did not have a certain control, not generalized word "party and the government." Such half-way contributed to the perception of Stalin and our school history books of that period, on the one hand, they have moved away from the extremes of Khrushchev's time, on the other — left position of the "cult of personality" and "repression", but only in one paragraph, though devoted to the death of Stalin . In general, the role of Stalin in the building of socialism in the Soviet Union in the Brezhnev era was evaluated positively, but preferred to read about it as little as possible. "Cult of Personality" and "repression" declared the same as in the Khrushchev era, "period cost", features the personal disposition of Stalin — without any attempt at a class analysis of the events of those years. And we, who lived in the Brezhnev era, believe in it, because we have been hard to imagine for yourself what people can truly, sincerely adore and respect their own leader. Favorites like our then-Politburo, did not cause any emotion except smiles, especially when we tried to "make" their "love", as most of Leonid Brezhnev (to which I am now though without love, but with enough reverence) . And it had an impact on our attitude to Stalin, and our response, for example, to come to us from the DPRK magazines with stories about Kim Il Sung. "The cult of personality" seemed to us something deeply humiliating for the modern, thinking man, because, based on their experience Brezhnev period, we felt that it was something "under duress" and not a real nation-wide love. But the older generation to understand what it would read. It really was not "brainwashed" — it just caught the control of another type and scale than brezhnevtsy and Khrushchevites. I realize this is the beginning of a truly just after my trips to North Korea, where I was lucky enough to see and feel a real love for the people's Leader in practice.
In describing the events of the construction of socialism in the 20s-30s in school textbooks Brezhnev period Stalin's name is almost never mentioned, and it created us, the younger generation, an underlying feeling that socialism was being built like this "by itself." It seems to be a confusion mentioned in the history books of Brezhnev's time "pests of the economy", carried out the same-in fact sabotage in factories and collective farms were created yet, but in the tone of "someone, somewhere, in our times," as sung in the delightful television series 60-70-ies of the Russian police "investigation leading experts." We almost did not beheld around portraits of Stalin (in the book was one of his photos, along with VI Lenin, if I remember correctly). The theoretical legacy of Stalin is in fact not been studied, was not even considered. Books with his works was impossible to find in stores, and of the libraries are issued only by special permission, as I remember. In his works, was not supposed to be invoked as a methodological framework in theses and dissertations, his name was struck from the ranks of the classics of Marxism, and his role in history has been reduced to a purely organizational and administrative. Just not too long ago, I realized that it was a conscious policy of the Communist Party control of those years, and not just a "mistake" or "underestimation of the value of work Stalin. " I think that we did not give them carefully just exactly as perfectly understood the meaning of these works!
I think that the fault is that "restructuring" on the basis of anti-Stalinist worked in the late 80's, almost everything is on the Ru
ssian leaders 70s who innuendo, half-hearted and amorphous own position with regard to Stalin contributed to the fact that people are under the impression that we need something about Stalin's times, "keep back."
This ambiguous attitude of the authorities, shamefaced to Stalin to Brezhnev era gave rise to no only feeling that we are something "not doskazyvali", and a form of protest by the people. In the middle of long distance truck drivers have been very vserasprostraneno in his own truck cab portrait of Stalin, with his exhibit at the windshield, facing outward, that is, to show the others. It began, it seems, with the Georgian drivers, but enough to spread rapidly throughout the country. Forbid them to exhibit in booth portrait managing the world's first socialist country, of course, was impossible, but at the same time it felt like something semi-legal (these portraits they took on the black market at the handicraft producing their photographers, because the store these portraits are not sold), as a kind of challenge to the authorities. It was a protest against the rise in the years of corruption, deviation from the norms of socialist, anti-separation of the party from the top of the people.
"In fact, it was a form of protest, often do not understand, against the corruption and degeneration of bourgeois party, Russian and economic apparatus of the USSR. Such an expansion of degenerative was under way, promising "perestroika", which passes into the counter-revolution and the "renaissance" of capitalism. "
The image of Stalin and attitude towards us and passed through another channel — a memoir about his time of our loved ones.
I will say at once that in my family there were those who are now called "repressed" — two of my grandmother's brother, both of them were party workers, one of them was a party member since 1917 (he was 17 years old) and even worked together with SM Kirov in Leningrad. They were arrested in 1937 and were sent into exile in the Urals, but rehabilitated during the life of Stalin and continued to live there. But negative things to Stalin in our family really was not, although the arrest brothers grandmother and her family remembered as a very nasty in their life time. From him they inherited the role of fear in politics, but less.
There was a negative relationship to Russian authorities and to Stalin personally and very "repressed." Vasyl Nikiforov later recalled with humor about his own arrest, "Why have fought for it and ran!" He was well aware that, in politics, in the struggle of different political lines, especially at a time when the country is in danger, is all. He forever remained a communist, as central to his life were not some small personal grievances, such as, for example, the intellectuals, the trees are not seeing the forest and the country and the people, the cause of building socialism.
My grandmother's sister, Tamara V. Nikiforov, was fired from her job because she was "a family member of an enemy of the people", but then she wrote a letter to Stalin, complaining of injustice, and then was reinstated and received as "compensation "as uttered would at this point, a ticket to the Black Sea resort. She is very loved to think about it and was convinced that Stalin had personally helped her and all figured out.
Accordingly, I also have not brought up to Stalin aggressive emotsiy.30-e-50s were perceived by me — as in books and the stories of family — as a time of spiritual flight, the incarnation unenforceable as a beautiful time.
The negative attitude towards Stalin was at first kept in the circles of the petty-bourgeois consciousness. His exaggerated, full of personal grievances vision of "repression" they gave to their children and grandchildren, but most of them got away from socialism as a result disproportionately more than suffered from it. Kids and grandchildren are not going to even deal were really to blame their relatives or not — they just do not want to allow such thoughts. For them the main was that the question of their parents, their grandfathers and grandmothers, and not that there are indeed caused harm to the building of socialism by their actions. Here is one small example — the ladies, which is now everywhere screaming about how bad the communists killed her grandfather party partisan struggle during the war, "rot" in his camp. And just when you start to understand the present case, it appears that this grandfather, even though he was arrested, but died the death of his own, and he was arrested for his role in "partisan" detachment made by the Nazis of our people! And yet, it was necessary on the head for this pet? When you specify on the facts of his granddaughter, she starts yelling that his grandfather "did not know which side he is fighting." Leave aside even completely reasonable remark that "ignorance of the law does not release from responsibility." How curious, you can not "know" which side you fight in the war? And now that her grandfather, Nazi henchman, exonerated by new Russian authorities, the heirs of Vlasov and his heirs receive compensation as "the descendants of victims of political repression."
But during the Brezhnev years, such an attitude to Stalin — as a "tyrant" — did not go beyond the boundaries of intellectuals (mostly capital) cuisines. Such thoughts aloud if expressed, the only "Aesopian language" in works of art. And it was not so much in censorship, but in the fact that the people he would not accept the product in which such things were spoken to in plain text.
For the first time since the Khrushchev era that my generation has not found a wide public interest in the personality of Stalin broke (to be exact, was fired up) during the second half of the 80s, when we were 20 years old with a ponytail. In the years of the so-called perestroika. I remember very well, as in the walls of our institution (I studied in Moscow in the History and Archives) was declared one such lecture. We were promised a "new word in the historical science" based on a "closed before for publishing sources." According to the institute loitered some types that are whispered that this lecture will be "truly historic." At the moment I do not even remember who read it. But whisperers have gained their own — have warmed up to her passion to such an extent that to get to the lecture was virtually impossible. People hanging from the railings of stairs, huddled in the doorway, hung on the windows … What was all the same lecture? In a hysterical and unfounded accusations Stalin of all sins and all our failures, as in the past, and the real. And indeed, we first consider that this may be a grain of truth — most on the basis of the feeling that "something from us kept silent" about which I have already mentioned. Some time We really felt that we have before us a "new word in the historical science."
The restoration of capitalism in our country was going for a long time under the slogan "return to the Leninist roots", the restoration of some fabulous "right of socialism" which in fact never existed. The aim was to convince people that socialism we have — not "per se, as it is necessary," and that this povinet Comrade Stalin personally, and no one else. For this purpose, it was important to tear Stalin from Lenin, to oppose it to Lenin (Lenin's authority because the people were like before indisputably high). Implementation of the plan helped that actually none of us was familiar with the theoretical works of Stalin, and our zaniya of it was very shallow. But after Stalin's settlement authority, as we later realized, as a result necessarily had to happen and undermining the authority of the leader of the world proletariat.
uffered severe bombardment of anti-Stalinist publications in the press, political hastily nashtampovat little pieces personally offended by Stalin, like in those years, the prestigious libel "Go on! Next! Next! "Misha Shatrova.  Many of the creators of life fed by the Leniniana, and so people do not immediately appear thought that in actual fact we are not dealing with ideological communist writer, and with the usual hangers-on "the gravy train" that finally got through to Gorbachev, the opportunity to show his true face. I have a friend that of  (who was a student and friend Shatrova), which in Russian time ate only from their own opus about Lenin, and after the counter-revolution in our country was suddenly "a magician and sorcerer", "Master", the soothsayers on the maps and supporter of the Union of Right Forces. So, here, the "fiery Leninist" also appeared in "Stalin personally offended." When you see the work of these people now, very difficult to get out of the idea that their ancestors suffered in the 30's fully deserved. If they were even a bit similar to their own offspring.
Stories about spies and saboteurs 30th ridiculed pests and spies 80 as "fantasy" and "means for execution of political opponents." As greedy means of establishing personal power. Similarly, we are told that the NATO countries — not any enemies of our country, and the most that on is our friends and "partners", the whole thing was only a "bad communists" who did not want to be friends with them. The cost of such "friendship" perestroika shrewdly silent. But now we are paying it, this cost. Now the reality assures us that the care of our grandparents as annoying though it may sound, was based not on fantasy …
Trying to make us believe that we have the "wrong socialism" (just like Winnie the Pooh were "wrong bees!"), These "superintendents of perestroika" intentionally treated the history of our country apart from the specific historical circumstances of the period through the prism of the so- referred to as "universal values", which are always in practice lead to forgiveness "crooks and thieves" of all kinds, to the fact that the victims turns out to be less rights than criminals, who in reality are not "universal", and class, bourgeois values.
The hysteria around the Stalin then have gained such an extent that for the mere mention of Stalin in a positive light (even with the war) people instantly derided as "reactionary," "Stalinist," and it just stopped to listen and take seriously.
I began to feel that something was not right when I started to read lists of rehabilitated "crowd" of their own countrymen, then published once a week in our local newspaper. It seemed obvious that in the middle of "repressed" actually was not working, it was hard enough farmers, and the vast majority were members of the same group, which consisted of the ranks of the "flagship superintendents and perestroika" — Prof. party workers and sales workers. But no one understood more justly or unjustly punished them — all of them, particularly in a crowd, justified and wept. Those who asked questions, here hysterically blamed "support authoritarianism."
My mother at work knew very large number of people in the town (in the general difficulty of not less than 2000), and of these 2,000 were repressed relatives only 3 families (one of them — our own). To believe in the extent of "repression" in which they assured us angrily perestroika, after all this, it was hard.
Yet, anti-Stalinism perestroika poisoned by a certain time to a certain extent and my mind. I am a long time, despite my usual positive attitude toward socialism, for revolution, the Soviet Union, still felt some awkwardness in the conversation with those who are most definitely a positive attitude to Comrade Stalin. This unease was expressed in my ideas of the "good man, although Stalinist. " This vdolblennoe reorganization on a subconscious level distrust of "brainwashed Stalinist propaganda" and stop me turn to the works of Stalin himself, to read them in order to judge him by them, not by the fact that "the grandmother (this is not mine!) two told. " To correct this situation I CONTRIBUTE personal contacts with the Party of Belgium and, as I mentioned, a trip to the DPRK.
Now, looking around, looking like the Russian reality, and how furiously, by all means cling to loot the people of the capitalists, I was never clearly understand that in the construction of socialism without the "repression" will not do, whether we like it or not. And it's time to stop intellectuals fear for his own skin. If it is really the people's intelligentsia, then you need to think not only about themselves, lovers. Look at what our enemies — the strong, sassy, dangerous, ready to resort to bloodshed, though what for the sake of capitalist "status quo". Neuzh you really believe that they will give up without a fight, give loot and will be a good boy and teen sex? And in future revolutions without retaliation probably will not do. If the enemy does not surrender, he must be destroyed. Golden words!
If it does not kill him, he will kill the revolution. As it happened in our country in the late 80's, when so many things were "humanely" turn a blind eye, most often, as was the stigma of a gun they themselves have virtually uncontrolled party bosses. Here's what you need to think, how to ensure continuous and effective operation of the mechanism of public control in the future of the revolution, and not practicing endlessly in kicking unable to answer Stalin and the "non-Soviet" of the USSR.
Just barely a few years back I finished smuschyatsya word "Stalinist". Realizing that Stalinism — that is our, Russian socialism in our specific criteria since. Revival of "Stalinism" there is no reason to be afraid — in the new criteria socialism in any case will be different. But to deny Stalin leads logically to a denial and Lenin, and the entire Russian heritage. Stalinism — is not just a "cult" and "repression", and all that the Soviet Union was not a decent, good and delicious unlikely would be the same as it was, without the tireless work of Comrade Stalin and his associates. And that's why, and not because of any "humanitarian" judgments specifically Stalin and is now the subject of angry attacks of the capitalists of all stripes, states and nations.
Why do people come to Stalin as well as I — just now? Since they are looking at today's outrageous inequality, to be afflicted millions of impunity and robbing them of ones and ask: "Would not it be can it be under Stalin?"
Specifically, with this idea I began my acquaintance with Stalin's works, and reading books about it. And for me, revealed that it was not easily my knowledge by Brezhnev school history textbooks, implicitly inspires the younger generation neglect to Stalin. I'm far not alone in this process. Stalin's popularity among the people now grows like a snowball. His portraits appear in public transport, in the graffiti, the creators of which is youth, he set new monuments — on the very people voluntarily collected funds (just try to force assemble such a thing now!). He dedicate new poems and even fantastic stories.
Who are the creators have ridiculed anti-Stalinist horror stories a la 80s. As they open their mouths, in response to a loud whistle. They stop listening gun — "but, once liberal windbag!" As yet, they fought for it and ran as read my ancestor-communist.
Stalin really do not need to be perfect figure, he does not need monuments and odes, and we do not need to justify it. Now it justifies
the reality itself.
Liberalstvuyuschim nitwits with one hundred percent of solidarity with them on the issue of power say, "why come to Stalin that they are of sound mind." Since began to distinguish where it was the socialist movement and creativity, and where it's capitalist corruption alive "
We open ourselves Stalin, because, seeing as his panicky fear the powers that be (like worms Worm afraid!), Recognize — once they are so afraid of it, meaning it is exactly what we need!
PS After sending my article comrades from the 1st of them came to the answer that I really liked, and bring him here as a supplement to the article.
I wish to give a hint to you the idea for your speech. It seems to me that the origins of the case for change to Stalin to be found not so much in the fact that people are looking at today's time and they say that under Stalin it would not be. The reason for turning MASS deeper — it is that most people have left a positive attitude towards the Soviet Union (although to what its period — premature, middle or late). This is demonstrated by all the opinion polls, at any age and social breakdown. What is particularly fun, young people born in the turn of perestroika and under, also expressed sympathy for the Russian Union. And further there is a fascinating thing. Russian authorities, fearing it abundantly blacken Soviet history. First Russian TV channel has become impossible to look: it often exhibit anti-Soviet TV series. Nearly completed one, for the next day the same pose another. Pressed and pressed brains. And people sympathetic to the Soviet Union, there is a desire to free themselves from the yoke of this information, to find justification for their likings. They were beating on the most unhealthy place — the repression in the Soviet Union. Most, like you, a world of repression was formed in the Khrushchev-Brezhnev period, they believe in the wealth of unfounded repression and in discussions with opponents of the Soviet Union are against the wall. They can only grip the ears and read, "So be it! Anyway Russian authorities was correct." And such people rather give the first impulse — to say that it was not repressed 10s million, and only three, while the figure is stretched to twenty years. It becomes easier. Subsequent push — tell us about the structure of repression that a huge part of them were Vlasov, gang members, such as Bandera, policemen who served the Nazis. And a man's head rises. And then one has only to add that Khrushchev himself was one of the favorites on the repression that Stalin had even upsetting him as a man breaks through, he begins himself to find information about those years — something that never would have done if it were not shameless propaganda trying to erase his positive attitude to the Soviet Union. And there happens to majestic new event — it opens itself to the creators, who have long and so far without result try this truth to the people to bring (Mukhin, etc.). A huge role in the enlightenment of people play these creators. Their work eventually falls on fertile ground and does the job. But those who before these creators did not reach quite that happens, that someone of your friends just told these proceedings and conclusions. In other words, the schematic of the anti-Stalinist revolution to the Stalinists can be drawn in the following scheme: sympathy for the Soviet Union — an attempt to protect your interest — compulsory need to do is to protect the most difficult (Stalin) period of history — first heard by true information, separating some anti-Soviet (anti-Stalinist) myth — the follow-up information, developing the first — an attempt to sort out the issue — the opening of the authors-Stalinists and reading their works. Again, I emphasize that first and foremost — sympathy for the Soviet Union — that, according to all polls, is characteristic of the majority of the population, and in fact is not based on age. If not liking this, will not take the rest of the chain.
 http://polit.ru/news/2011/04/26/stalin/ («Citizens of the Russian Federation more positive view of the role of Stalin")
("Authentic, real choice of the people, without administrative and propaganda pressure — that's it.
Stalin — Vysotsky — Lenin .. ")
 Statistical data on them can be found in the "White Book" S. Kara-Murza and in almost all other public sources, including the Web.
 See biography by M. Shatrova