Read here the Outcomes of his personal experience of the February revolution of 1917:
“…I remember the February days: the birth of our great and bloodless, – what a great mindless descended on the country. Hundreds of thousands flock absolutely free citizens are pounding the avenues of Peter’s capital. They were absolutely fascinated – these herds: the cursed bloody autocracy – over! Over the world of the rising dawn, devoid of “annexations and indemnities”, capitalism, imperialism, autocracy and even of Orthodoxy: here alive! Professional duty of a journalist, overcoming all disgust, I jostled amongst these flocks, it is circulating on the Nevsky prospect, held in the Tauride Palace, then walked to the watering hole in the broken cellar.
They were happy – these herds. If someone then began to say that in the next third of a century for the drunken days of 1917 they pay tens of millions of lives, decades of famine and terror, new wars – both civil and world, the complete devastation of half – drunk people would have taken a sober voice for the craziness. But they themselves – they considered themselves to be perfectly reasonable creatures: God have mercy: the twentieth century, culture, trams, Carla and Marla, lavatories, es-ad, es-deki, equal, secret and other voting, Cribs Marxists, socialists crib, crib constitutionalists, Cribs anarchists, and above all this endless unbridled drunken chatter endless rallies of gateley…”
By the way, studying the events of 1917 there is no denying that the driving force behind the February revolution was Pro-Western liberals. But almost no one understands what winning in the end, the Bolsheviks, too, were Westerners, and the most radical. Westernization is not synonymous with “liberalism”. Fascism also appeared in the West and was exactly the same brainchild of humanistic rhetoric of the era of the Quattrocento, as liberalism with communism. The hatred of the Communists to the socialist party – a hatred of Westerners to the theorists of some vague national way based on tradition. Lenin in any even worst nightmares could not long co-operate with people who thought that socialism may not be a Marxist (Westernizing), and some archaic peasant (populist, local).
Westerner to the core, Lenin on the one hand was based on the European doctrine of Marx, and on the other, seized power, became the most consistent and radical preferatele the ideas of the American Frederick W. Taylor. Taylor, perhaps even in a nightmare could not have dreamed how far can the practical application of his theories. And yet the fact remains that Lenin was as much a Marxist as talarians. But in any case he was a Westerner, i.e. a supporter of the victory in Russia of the ideas of Western theorists, Marx and Taylor.
What is Soviet Russia first? Only blind can not see that until 1922 it is a complete dashing from side to side and constant improvisations spanning the country deeper and deeper. The only means of rescue from the mire into which climbed the Bolsheviks, Lenin saw the NEP, i.e. the restoration (albeit in a limited way) the capitalist system. And only after the victory of Mussolini in Italy, that is only after the emergence in the West of the new model state, which was opposed by Lenin hated the liberal bourgeois state, the Russian Bolsheviks finally gained a Westernizing role model. Not the victory of fascism in Italy and Bolshevism and did not find any specific state forms and, most likely, would dissolve in a booming element of the NEP. However, no less (if not more) Westerner Stalin in the state, Mussolini saw the prototype of the state.
And although in the end Stalin shot Leninist and talarians Alexei Gastev (which, incidentally, was in correspondence with Henry Ford), the General policy of copying Western models, taken by Lenin, remained unchanged. Just in the second half of the 30s fascist Italy was no longer relevant to the project. It was Hitler’s Germany. Which was taken by Stalin for the new sample. And today, only the blockhead and the generally low educational level “having read the Preface” (in the words Shukshina), Soviet patriots (and not only them) can link the image of Stalin with the idea of anti-Westernism and rates at the national cultural codes.
If we take the quite General, in principle, all development of the revolution in Russia (with the exception of Bakunin, and the populists and their ideological descendants of the socialist-revolutionaries), was a radical Westernizing response initiated by Nicholas I and brought to the apotheosis of Alexander III radical anti-Western course.
Of course, balancing the various factions of his enemies, Stalin won because he attracted to his side the remnants of the scraps of Russian natives is by copying something from the rhetoric of Alexander III (based mainly on the work Danilevskii “Russia and Europe”; this book seems to have been a reference book of Stalin on the Tehran and Yalta conferences). However, the Russian Patriotic Fleur Stalin ended very quickly and a Westerner (that is, the hater of the Russian national way) again awoke in him, when the need for the native soil anymore. This was the main motivation of the notorious “Leningrad affair”, that is, the total destruction of almost all of the Leningrad party organization, whose leaders began to talk about the alleged sedition of the national way possible. And Stalin decided to so radically uproot all sorts of germs beginning of the “Russian Renaissance” (that is, all those romantics who took seriously his post-war “a toast to the Russian people”) that has destroyed too at the same time even such personalities as Chairman of Gosplan. A. Voznesensky and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR M. I. Rodionov. Because it was necessary once and for all give an example to all those in the Stalinist country could assume that there is some other way.
You say that Stalin is Asiatic? Sorry. Not a big Asiatic, than Hitler, Mussolini or Franco. Stalin is brought to a complete apotheosis, that is, until the end of the absurd and as such became their antithesis, the idea of Westerners. That is the kind of message that drunk (stronger than the wine from crushed wine shops) head to students and Privat-docents, the crowds that in February-March 1917, red banners, flags of Paris, i.e., Western (!) revolution raged in the streets of Petrograd.
And as a so to speak the epilogue.
The funny thing is that the Creator of the myth of the “Russian Patriotic leader Stalin” – Leningrad Sergei Semanov himself in 1982 came under attack Westerners Andropov (who pointedly friendly took in his study of the poet Yevtushenko and loved Western jazz) for so-called “Russism” (in a secret note to the Politburo Andropov and pointed to the group Semanova, as a counter-revolutionary group “teachers”). Interesting thing here is that Andropov was one of those who was a supporter of “Stalin’s methods of control” and began to introduce them as soon as he came to power.
Brezhnev’s Soviet Union on the Westernizing project was like no in what form (although there have been attempts reorientation in the form of the Helsinki accords and the different programs such as “Soyuz-Apollo”), and Andropov died very unexpectedly, so needed a new Westernizing revolution of 1991, which ended in a tank shelling of the Parliament in 1993. And the carousel began to turn. And she is spinning and spinning and spinning. And all that you can say to that is:
History only teaches that it does not teach anyone anything.
Photo: Prokudin-Gorsky, 1906