Non-Easter story: why the cross in memory of people who died from repressions was removed in Nagatino
What actually happened in Nagatino on Easter, understood "NI".
Irina Mishina
“On October 26, 1932, barges moored to the berths of Kolomenskoye. There were people on them - prisoners of Dmitlag, the largest camp in the Gulag. They were supposed to take part in the construction of the Moscow Canal. According to the total number of people, for the period 1932-1933, I counted from nine to ten thousand. The official statistics of the OGPU-NKVD tell us that for the period of 1933, the most difficult and most terrible year, 16% of the workers died, ”writes local historian Andrey Dvornikov in his article “Stolen History”.
He also organized the collection of signatures for the installation of a monument to those who died during the construction of the canal, and on April 23 he erected a Cross in their memory. “It was installed next to the former camp of priests, where hundreds of martyrs of Dmitlag lie without rest,” the activist wrote on his Telegram channel. As we were informed in the Nagatinsky Zaton police department, a protocol was drawn up against Mr. Dvornikov for petty hooliganism. Social networks were quick to present this story as an attack on Orthodoxy.
Why was this cross dismantled? After all, on the website of the Administration of the Nagatinsky backwater there is even a message about a meeting regarding the installation of this monument. We quote: “ Inhabitants of the Nagatinsky backwater, a representative of the district council, as well as Father Alexy from the church of St. Alexy, the Man of God, gathered in Sadovniki on October 18, 2018 to discuss the fate of the monument to the repressed builders in the Nagatino Culture House. The meeting was attended by about 50 people who decided that it was necessary to perpetuate the memory of the dead builders of the region, the prisoners of the Dmitrovsky forced labor camp. After all, many houses in the area were built by their hands”.
In fairness, it must be said that opinions were divided then, and the Nagatinites put forward many different proposals for the installation of a monument. The installation of a monument is generally not a quick matter, requiring approvals and funding. But the ice, one might say, has broken.
“The history of the Moscow Channel is full of both heroic and tragic pages. During meetings in the Council and round tables in the Council of Municipal Deputies, the opinion was expressed that putting only an end to this place means not fully reflecting the history of the construction of the canal. In addition, in addition to the Orthodox, representatives of other faiths participated in the construction of the canal. Opinions were also expressed about the inappropriateness of the cross due to the fact that there is a beach, playgrounds, and a walking area nearby. In order to commemorate those who died during construction, there are several churches nearby within walking distance. Discussions began, several projects were proposed. The council of municipal deputies approved them and sent them in accordance with the current law to the commission on monumental art at the Moscow City Duma. However, our project was sent for revision. The proposed projects were put up for public access, residents could evaluate them and express their opinion. But Mr. Dvornikov did not agree to anything but his project. He called everyone who was against it Stalinists. His cross, installed on the eve of Easter, was not destroyed by anyone, it was taken to Nagatino-Sadovniki, where it is now. We regard his act as a provocation”, - Yelena Kokurina, head of the apparatus of the Council of Municipal Deputies of the Nagatinsk backwater, told NI.
Here, it would seem, you can put an end to it, but one question arises. As activist Andrey Dvornikov, who erected the later dismantled cross, told us, he does not rule out his participation in the forthcoming elections of municipal deputies of the district. If he knew nothing about the procedure for erecting monuments in Moscow, the question arises about the competence of a potential mundep. Self-promotion on a religious theme and on Stalinist repressions, especially on Easter, is a win-win move. But from the point of view of knowledge of city legislation, such a candidate for municipal deputies raises doubts.
The history of the construction of the Moscow Canal is indeed full of tragic pages that not everyone knows about. It is necessary to talk about it. And here a question arises to the local authorities, first of all to the Administration of the Nagatinsky Zaton district, and in particular to its head Irina Petrovna Dzhioyeva. Ms. Dzhioeva did not condescend to communicate with us, passing through an assistant that she “knows nothing” about the installation of the monument. How the head of the council may not know about the resonant detention and the illegal installation of a monument in his area is a big question. But the fact that the Administration does not consider it necessary to work with local activists is obvious. After all, if Mr. Dvornikov had been explained the procedure for erecting monuments in the city, most likely the incident would not have happened. But for some reason, the citizen is the first to learn about this procedure and its intricacies from Novye Izvestia.