Posted 1 сентября 2021,, 17:02

Published 1 сентября 2021,, 17:02

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:38

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:38

Stalin is no longer relevant. Most voters are indifferent to the attempts to justify the villain

Stalin is no longer relevant. Most voters are indifferent to the attempts to justify the villain

1 сентября 2021, 17:02
Even the Communist Party of the Russian Federation in its election campaign uses the name of the "father of all peoples" to a minimum

As you know, two days ago Lavrov publicly stood up for Stalin, saying the following:

“I absolutely agree that history cannot be touched. By the way, the attacks on Stalin as the main villain, the lumping together of everything that he did in the pre-war period, during and after the war - this is also part of the same attack on our past, on the results of World War II".

These words caused a storm of emotions in opposition circles, so strong that Lavrov was forced to publicly explain himself the very next day:

“In fact, I said the following:“ Those who demand to perceive Stalin as an absolute evil, without any nuances, who demand to consider him and Hitler as the only culprits of the Second World War, thereby want to put our country and those who who set the goal to conquer Europe, and we saved this Europe - from conquest, from destruction, and saved many peoples".

And I said that this line is being used by those who want to restrain our country and who want to weaken us, see us always weak... some figures in our opposition, opposition media then began to say that "Lavrov justifies the crimes of Stalinism". This is despicable. And never this kind of people will achieve a result..."

Nevertheless, everyone understands perfectly well that the head of the diplomatic department could not make a reservation, people in such positions do not make a reservation. This is what made the experts look for the true reasons for this behavior of the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

And they turned out to be quite simple and clear. They were named by political scientist Alexey Makarkin:

“Sergei Lavrov's statement about Stalin, of course, fits into the pre-election context, which is paradoxical in modern Russia. Three parties - United Russia, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and A Just Russia - are dealing with the Stalinist theme, which is irrelevant for the absolute majority of voters. Stalin is traditionally the corporate hero of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - just for its ideological electoral core, this topic is important and vital, which is reflected in the numerous monuments to the “leader of the peoples” erected by party members on private territories. Then the "Social Revolutionaries" with Zakhar Prilepin moved to the field of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation in order to prevent the expansion of the electorate of the communists and, at the same time, to overlap as little as possible with the electorate of "United Russia". True, they did not succeed very effectively, since voters, for whom Stalin and Dzerzhinsky are relevant and important, are accustomed to voting for Zyuganovites, considering them to be the authentic successors of the CPSU cause.

But for United Russia, whose second number on the list is Lavrov, the Stalinist theme is counterproductive not only because of its irrelevance, but also due to the fact that for a huge part of the party's supporters the theme of returning to the Soviet past is in principle undesirable. Time passes, nostalgia becomes less, people live in the present and future, in which Stalin has no place. At first glance, this is at odds with the data of surveys that record a positive attitude towards the "leader of the peoples", including in youth groups..."

Sociologist Grigory Yudin is sure that for the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Stalin has long lost its relevance, so Lavrov tried in vain:

“The reasoning of Minister Lavrov about Stalin is not connected with the coming repressions, but with one very simple fact. In March, the gap between United Russia and the Communist Party was 18%, and as of last week it narrowed to 9%. The EP rating has set another anti-record, they are collecting them this summer. Lavrov, if anyone has forgotten, tops the list of this poor party in the elections.

The Kremlin considers the Stalinists to be the beast that devoured 9% and halved the advantage of United Russia. Once the Communist Party is growing, the people want Stalin. The desire not to give the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Stalin's grandfather leads to the fact that Lavrov makes quite unexpected statements for himself.

I suspect that Putin's political managers misunderstand the reason for the fall of their party. It is not the Stalinists who disperse the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. In this campaign, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation generally uses Stalin to a minimum. Which, by the way, speaks of the growing autonomy of this party - it still dug Stalin out every time in order to drown itself on the recommendation of the Kremlin. The Communist Party, firstly, is the first choice for those who are looking for at least some kind of alternative. And secondly, during this campaign, the party is working with a completely vital agenda - retirement age, violation of human rights during a pandemic, repression, dictatorship, arbitrariness of officials. Its rating is growing not due to the awakened Stalinists (they usually vote, and their number is decreasing, including thanks to Putin's management of the epidemic). Its rating is raised by completely different groups..."

And political scientist Mikhail Vinogradov examined this story from a different angle:

“One thing confuses amateurs about Stalin, Grozny, Malyuta Skuratov, and so on. They are absolutely sincere in the belief that in the past there are indeed answers to the questions of the present and the future.

I will not argue that understanding the context of the past is not at all superfluous for the outlook, picture of the world, understanding of the current and even forecasting. But the reinterpretation of the past itself does not carry any butterfly effect.

Understanding whether Belgium scored offside for the Soviet team at the 1986 World Cup will not give answers about the rise of Russian football from its knees. And even the disclosure of all the circumstances of who was the first to start World War II or what happened to the State Emergency Committee will not clarify much in our knowledge about the current one.

However, why am I writing this? Nobody will believe it anyway. Amateurs are sincere in the belief that history is not just a branch of knowledge (albeit a fascinating and interesting one), but a special universe that overwhelms all other sciences..."

The publicist Leonid Lyalin, as usual, reacted to the collision with verses:

Why is there still no law

That Nero cannot be denigrated?

Our capital has long been the Third Rome

We won't let anyone slander the first one!

Many were executed - such is the era.

I ruled until my last breath.

Diligent in sports, stubborn in art,

He took, and burned the first Rome to hell.

We remember that we were looking longingly at Sochi,

His running at the Olympics!

Although he was a bit sadistic,

The greatest artist died in it!

Among the executed inhabitants,

There were many traitors.

Cut, whispering that he was, they say, wrong -

Rome was among the great powers!

Alas, I did not see all the betrayals,

But the prices of slaves were reduced.

All attempts will be thwarted

Affect the outcome of the Gallic War!