The fight for Stalin shook the depths of the mass consciousness that on the surface things are really frightening. The question is not who is right, but not perebivay if we have each other.
Less than a week the fight between prominent journalists Maxim Shevchenko and Nikolai Svanidze, which happened during a discussion by them of Stalin in a live radio “Komsomolskaya Pravda”, had become the historic event (in several senses). Was and violent reaction in social networks, there were no comments at the highest level — from the Kremlin. Press Secretary of the head of state, Dmitry Peskov, calling the participants in the brawl “mastodons” at the same time used the occasion to defend against the attacks of our Ministry of culture.
The official statement on this occasion, I had to do and the head of the Council on human rights under the President of the Russian Federation, which members are Svanidze, and Shevchenko. Not spared even the Patriarch — clearly in the footsteps of sensational fights he urged the clergy to take responsibility for public statements, which can result in physical abuse, and to cast doubt on Orthodoxy.
Such a resonance has caused a new wave of discussion about what the accumulated contradictions in society are so great that negotiation between different parties with each other already at all does not work. Here is the place for the arguments and take the blows of the fist. So, another civil war is inevitable in Russia.
However, before making such far-reaching conclusions, it is necessary to understand what actually happened. This is a time-lapse to track the episode with the brawl, since he lasted some three minutes.
Let me remind you, the topic of discussion was: “Is Stalinism disease that should be treated”. From the beginning, Maxim Shevchenko began to kill Nikolai Svanidze, in fact, not allowing him to speak. For example, the words Svanidze that Stalin before the Second world war destroyed the color command of the red Army, Shevchenko latched on to the word “all.” And not helped by the fact that Svanidze immediately corrected himself: “almost all”.
Shevchenko continued to literally attack his opponent. Again when he quite reasonably said that the Stalin’s repressions against the military in 1937-38, which, incidentally, was destroyed by at least two thirds of the high command of the red army, “brought the country to war with Hitler in a catastrophic state”, that “by the end of 1941 in German captivity were 3.8 million Soviet soldiers” that the Soviet Union lost in the war “almost 30 million people,” Shevchenko said, “but the Soviet Union, in contrast to France, on his knees was not.” Like Svanidze claimed the opposite.
The logic of the Shevchenko turned out that if Svanidze scolds Stalin for his repressions against the leadership of the red army, which led to disastrous results and unimaginable loss, so he “spits on the graves of those who died near Moscow”.
Here I can not see myself, as a historian and managing editor of the encyclopedia “History wars” that even winning (!) for yourself battles such as the battle of Moscow and battle of Kursk, the red Army’s losses three to four times higher than German losses. What can we say about the terrible defeats of the red army of 1941-42, when the German “pocket” were the Soviet groups of 200-400 thousand people…
But back to “fruitful” discussions in radstudio. After that “Nikolai Karlovich spits on the graves of those killed near Moscow”, Svanidze called Shevchenko bastard. “I may be a bastard,” agreed the other. After this recognition, apparently, that no one had any longer any doubt, Shevchenko began to keep a “dialogue” with Svanidze in openly provocative style, simply calling their much older and less physically strong opponent in a banal fight.
In the end, when Shevchenko allowed myself the words “get up, and punch me in the face, pussy, this” Svanidze really stood up and gave his opponent a slap in the face, and in response received a series of punches and ended up on the floor.
If this ends with an attempt to discuss the events of seventy years ago between two members of the HRC (remember the full name of the organization: “the presidential Council of the Russian Federation on development of civil society and human rights”), then what can we expect from those who enjoyed less status and responsibility?
Also note that the dispute in this occasion ended the fight because in certain parts of society there has been a clear request for the rehabilitation of Stalin, and most of all, his methods. Moreover, we can say that this is even a political order (although the President and stressed publicly that “this is not 1937” and “black funnel” for dissidents not to go). But it is no accident that the highest level we constantly hear about the fact that Stalin was an “effective Manager”. And it sounds it as a call to learn that his “effective methods”.
It is worth to try to understand the reasons for this state of Affairs. At the time, my good friend and comrade, the old Soviet dissident socialist Vadim Belotserkovsky spoke about the terrible moral degradation of modern Russian society. Then to me his words seemed a kind of emotional overkill. In the end, one member of the society moral, the other immoral — we should not generalize.
However, after 2014 in this respect things in Russia are really much worse. Any war (and the real, in the Donbass, and not less than a fierce, blazing in the information space) has an effect on public morality most disastrous, destroying the remnants of both. For a very simple reason. During the war, the state allows its citizens fighting for their interests, both real and on the information front, to do what in peacetime is considered criminal or at least immoral.
For the excitation of ordinary soldiers of this war are utilized Patriotic slogans, which are from time to time (yet the expense of losses went into the hundreds of thousands and millions of them) work. They need a little happily to die “for the Homeland”. That is to say, in the interests of the same ruling political class. Generals information front we have a more ambitious task. They should excite the millions of citizens, defeating the enemies of his superiors ideologically.
Here we see that the beating (preferably live) those who do not want to become in the overall system, in a literal and not just an intellectual sense, becomes almost the only way to have a discussion with those who disagree.