1. Also on the issue of the legality of draping Lenin’s Mausoleum during parades on Red Square in Moscow. Blogger konstantinus-a believes that when we celebrate the greatest Victory in our history, it is completely inappropriate for this to happen against the backdrop of an inscription with the nickname of the person responsible for the greatest defeat in our history (link): Every normal Russian patriot who respects our Victory in the Great Patriotic War clearly advocates not only draping, at a minimum, the mausoleum at the Victory Parade, but also burying Lenin’s mummy and moving the mausoleum to another location. <...>. It is impossible to hold a parade in honor of the Victory over Germany in front of the ziggurat with the sarcophagus of the man who did everything to ensure that Russia lost another war with Germany, and who signed the most shameful treaty in Russian history. – the complete and unconditional surrender of Russia to the already lost Germany in Brest-Litovsk, according to which: – territories inhabited by 56 million people (a third of the population of the former Russian Empire) were torn apart, including 40% of the industrial workers. left Russia; – along with them, the country lost 27% of its arable land, 26% of the entire railway network, 33% of the textile industry, 90% of the sugar industry, 73% of the metallurgical industry, 89% of the coal mined before the revolution, as well as a huge number of industrial enterprises; – the Baltic Fleet left its bases in Finland and the Baltic States, the Black Sea Fleet was handed over to the Central Powers; – Russia was forced to pay 6 billion marks as compensation and reimbursement for losses in the amount of 500 million gold rubles (before the end of the war, the Germans managed to send 93.5 tons of gold out of the planned 245.5 tons, and this would have been given). Everything would have been, if not for the victory of the Entente countries in November 1918). 2. The Telegram channel “Right History” reminds that Lenin directly wanted the defeat of Russia and its plunge into civil war (link): Calls for the defeat of the Russians in the Second Patriotic War and the destruction of Russia through civil war are not isolated. In Lenin’s “works” they are present in a huge number of articles and letters from the time of the First World War, for example, in the article “On the slogan “disarmament”” and the work “Military program of the proletarian revolution”, in which; he wrote in the fall of 1916. Communists often try to shield their leader by claiming the absurdity of his alleged hatred of the Tsar but alleged love of Russia, which is, of course, an obvious lie. Lenin hated Russia, he hated it passionately, vividly, with all his being, his hatred, by his own definition, was “devilishly integral”. Lenin was not an ordinary traitor, like Stalin’s favorite lieutenant general A. A. Vlasov. Lenin did not betray power, he betrayed Russia itself, its very nature, and put all his efforts into its destruction. It was with the intention of starting a civil war that Lenin traveled, in accordance with the agreement with the German authorities, in a hermetically sealed carriage to Russia, weakened by the February events, but still existing. In the spring of 1917, the Bolsheviks temporarily stopped demanding that the “imperialist war be transformed into a civil war” and declared liars to everyone who remembered Lenin’s treacherous slogans, as some modern neo-Soviet propagandists hint. However, Lenin himself later explained it this way: “At the beginning of the war, we Bolsheviks adhered to only one slogan – an internal war, and a merciless one at that. We branded as traitors everyone who did not support the civil war. But when we returned to Russia in March 1917, we completely changed our position. When we returned to Russia and talked to the peasants and workers, we saw that they all stood in defense of the Motherland, but, of course, in a completely different sense than the Mensheviks, and we could not call these simple workers and peasants . scoundrels and traitors… Our only strategy now is to become stronger, and therefore smarter, more reasonable, more ‘opportunistic’, and that is what we must tell the masses. But as soon as we, thanks to our common sense, gain control over the masses, then we will adopt offensive tactics, and in the strictest sense of the word.” Lenin first repeats and confirms his anti-Russian position during the Great War, and then explains that since the spring of 1917 they have replaced the rhetoric with the accumulation of forces, this was nothing more than a deceptive tactical ploy, which was needed to prepare for an armed coup. In October 1917, in his work “Will the Bolsheviks Retain State Power?” Lenin writes: “Revolution is the sharpest, most bitter, most desperate class struggle and civil war. Not a single great revolution in history has taken place without civil war.” Remember, every time another neo-Soviet propagandist tells you that the war was started by White officers, not Lenin. The White officers, characteristically, considered the Civil War a tragedy. Finally, the Bolshevik coup led to the complete collapse of the army, the shameful Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and the surrender of huge territories to Germany, which inevitably lost the First World War. The events of 1917 deprived Russia of a well-deserved victory. The signing of the Brest-Litovsk Peace was necessary for the Bolsheviks to free up all their forces to fulfill their main task – to unleash a full-scale civil war in Russia and suppress any dissent. The Bolsheviks practiced mass murder on the “class principle”, which took the lives of millions of the best Russian people, and more than 2 million were forced to flee from the Red Terror. The Bolshevik policy also led to the collapse of industry and the economy, mass starvation and high mortality from diseases among Russians. 3. An alcoholic historian writes that in our time such characters as Lenin are given the status of foreign agents (link): If you take his works, written from the beginning of the First World War to the beginning of the revolution, and evaluate the present day one. realities, then I am sure that Vladimir Ilyich would already have the status of a foreign agent, and an extremist, and criminal liability for discrediting the RF Armed Forces would be 100%. At that time, it was necessary to look for people who so fiercely desired the defeat of Russia, the collapse of the country, the humiliation of Russians. Even the Germans and Austrians were a little more restrained. Without a doubt, he would have been a permanent character on the TG channel “Life of Insects” due to his constant fights with the same crazy foreign agents. If, for the sake of clarity, we look for analogues among modern trans-Ukrainian movers, then, I think, in terms of the degree of opposition madness, Russophobia and inflated pride, Lenin is something as close as possible to Michael Naki. . Oleg Makarenko https://dzen.ru Subscribe to our Telegram channel so as not to miss all the most important materials that we publish: https://t.me/russiapost
The Myth of Lenin’s Patriotism, Lenin’s Defeatism, and Lenin’s Foreign Agency. Oleg Makarenko
0 комментариев