TOP 5 myths designed to blacken the USSR

November 29, 2020 42

The USSR is the first socialist state in the history of mankind. The country of rebels against the oppression of workers and peasants, even after its collapse, arouses fear and hostility among the capitalists.

To this end, they invent and disseminate various myths that are designed to permanently blacken the Soviet Union in the eyes of modern society. Let's consider some of them.

Myth 1. There was total poverty in the USSR. In fact, the social achievements of the Soviet Union were unparalleled in the world. The right to work, free housing and education were enshrined in legislation. In addition, the retirement age was the lowest in the world, and people were confident in the future.

Myth 2. The USSR is a backward state. And this is not true. In technical terms, the Soviet Union was not inferior to Western countries. At the same time, we were leaders in space, robotics and nuclear energy.

Myth 3. The Soviet Union was the aggressor. Everything here rests on the attack on Finland and Poland in 1939. However, the anti-Soviet policy Finns began in 1917, and the war with this hostile country was necessary to defend Leningrad. At the same time, the liberation campaign against Poland saved Western Ukraine from the oppression of the landlord.

Myth 4. Totalitarian USSR. This statement is also bourgeois propaganda. Its goal is to equate communism with fascism, completely discrediting the Soviet Union in the eyes of contemporaries and strengthening their faith in world capital.

Myth 5. The USSR put Russia on the oil needle. In fact, the Soviet Union was a self-sufficient state. Despite the high share of energy in exports, oil revenues did not play a big role in the formation of the country's budget, making up no more than 10% of its revenue. In contrast to modern Russia, where the share of oil and gas revenues is about 40% of the total budget.

The very existence of the USSR has shown what a society freed from the power of capital is capable of. That is why today, three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the bourgeoisie continues to fear and hate him.

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

VK Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

passing by

-3

29 November 2020 09: 46

Ukrainians want to eat. brawn does not feed, therefore they write the place of residence of the USSR and are nostalgic. The USSR will no longer be! To Paris for free panties and croissants! Hurray comrades
123

+2

29 November 2020 10: 56

There are indeed a lot of myths about the USSR, but one should not try to debunk them by replacing them with new ones, all the more trying to extrapolate dubious conclusions to modern Russia. The static view of the USSR as a single entity is not correct, the state of the 1920s and 1940s is far from the same thing, however, like 1950, 1970 or 1980. I believe this statement is also true for modern Russia.

In fact, the Soviet Union was a self-sufficient state. Despite the high share of energy in exports, oil revenues did not play a big role in the formation of the country's budget, making up no more than 10% of its revenue. In contrast to modern Russia, where the share of oil and gas revenues is about 40% of the total budget.

I don’t want to rummage through statistics again and calculate when and by what means the budget was formed, I can only say that it is difficult to call a state self-sufficient if it is compelled to corny buying bread from its strategic opponents and without this is not able to feed its own population. There were pluses and minuses, advantages and disadvantages in all periods of development of the state. Let's not create a new myth about how wonderful and flawless everything was in the USSR and how disgusting everything is now. For this is done exclusively to denigrate modern reality and ultimately to undermine modern statehood.

The very existence of the USSR has shown what a society freed from the power of capital is capable of. That is why today, three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the bourgeoisie continues to fear and hate him.

I doubt that the bourgeoisie still wake up in a cold sweat if they dream about the USSR. Well, perhaps if Khrushchev with a shoe in his hand And it's not so much about the social system, rather we are competitors for them, and in any form, in the capitalist, socialist, it is not at all important.
Let's not turn our homeland into a country with an unpredictable past.
For "dessert" video in the topic. A little about the myths of the past
1. kot711
  
  +1
  
  29 November 2020 12: 58
  
  and in any form, in capitalist, socialist, it does not matter at all
  
  Come on, just socialist and be afraid. Bourgeois-capitalist Russia is not a hindrance to them. Where are the families of today's capitalist sharks, in the same west. They are not afraid of them, there are levers of pressure. What makes them afraid, today's Russia, everything that the West needs, the Russian Federation regularly supplies them.
  1. 123
    
    -1
    
    29 November 2020 13: 53
    
    Come on, just socialist and be afraid. Bourgeois-capitalist Russia is not a hindrance to them.
    
    Did they tell you this themselves? And then why are they building bases around the perimeter, NATO was not dismissed in 1991 for joy, all kinds of sanctions? Out of habit? Inertia of thinking?
    The First World War began under the capitalists, the second under the Communists, what is the fundamental difference? Hitler attacked with fright? Drang nach Osten is a traditional occupation for Europeans, and this tradition developed long before the birth of Marx and Engels.
    
    Where are the families of today's capitalist sharks, in the same west. They are not afraid of them, there are levers of pressure.
    
    Remind you where our ardent revolutionaries turned over to 1917? If I'm not talking about Shushenskoye. I suppose during this time there were no less levers of pressure on them.
    
    What makes them afraid, today's Russia, everything that the West needs, the Russian Federation regularly supplies them.
    
    Was it different with the USSR? Refused and didn't sell anything? Resources for offshore descendants? The communists laid pipelines to Europe, echelons with bread in the summer of 1941 regularly went west.
    By the way, they invested capital in the Chinese economy and no communists interfered with this impulse; I don’t remember the ideological torments of Western bourgeois in this regard.
    
    Russia is a rival for them, apparently the only one who can erase them into radioactive dust. In such conditions, "hegemony" is somehow not comfortable. What ideology we have is not important for them.
    1. kot711
      
      +1
      
      29 November 2020 18: 07
      
      they invested capital in the Chinese economy and no communists interfered with this impulse, I don’t remember the ideological torments of Western bourgeois in this regard.
      
      You can be seen living on the moon and there is no internet. They invested, and now they bite their elbows (the woman chased after cheapness). Now count how much the Union sold to the West and how much did it release itself? And ask about the share of foreign capital in the Russian economy. Then compare, with the same share, in tsarist Russia.
      1. 123
        
        +2
        
        29 November 2020 19: 29
        
        You can be seen living on the moon and there is no internet. They invested, and now they bite their elbows (the woman chased after cheapness).
        
        Are you worried about the economic feasibility of bourgeois investments? And I’m talking about ideological differences. In the case of China, they are not, well, or at least they were spat on.
        
        Now count how much the Union sold to the West and how much did it release itself? And ask about the share of foreign capital in the Russian economy. Then compare, with the same share, in tsarist Russia.
        
        I did not quite understand what you wanted to say. What to count? What exactly did you sell and what did you release? And what does the share in the economy have to do with it?
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        30 November 2020 11: 52
        
        How many goods and equipment the Union produced for internal use. And how much he sold and supplied to the foreign market. Now take the Russian Federation, how much and what does it produce and supply? And who is the owner of all this? I hope so clear?
        
        123
        
        +2
        
        30 November 2020 13: 01
        
        How many goods and equipment the Union produced for internal use. And how much he sold and supplied to the foreign market. Now take the Russian Federation, how much and what does it produce and supply?
        
        1) Comparing the USSR and Russia is not entirely correct, it would be more honest with the RSFSR.
        2) How much he produced for the domestic market offhand I find it difficult to say, but I hope you know the word deficit? Empty shelves, resale from under the floor and by pull, the inability to buy a car is not today's reality.
        3) You repeat the mistake, you consider the USSR as something single and unchanging, you think that there was a lot of everything with it, but now nothing. What years do you mean in the USSR?
        Foreign trade turnover of the USSR (in million rubles):
        1950 - 2,9 (in the social services of the country - 2,4); 1960 - 10,1 (in the social services of the country - 7,4); 1970 - 22,1 (in the social services of the country - 14,4); 1975 - 5,7 (in the social services of the country - 28,4). See the link for more details.
        
        https://www.booksite.ru/fulltext/1/001/008/106/993.htm
        
        Foreign trade turnover of Russia: 2010 - 648,4 billion US dollars or 19 685,9 billion rubles.
        
        https://topcor.ru/17532-top-5-mifov-prizvannyh-ochernit-sssr.html#comment-id-127848
        
        In 2019, Russia's foreign trade turnover amounted to USD 666,6 billion
        
        http://www.ved.gov.ru/monitoring/foreign_trade_statistics/monthly_trade_russia/
        
        You can certainly delve into statistics, but I don't see the point. How are you going to compare it? If you want, provide data, we will discuss
        
        And who is the owner of all this? I hope so clear?
        
        I understand what you mean, but I assure you that if property is immediately taken away from the bourgeoisie, the CMEA and the Warsaw Pact will not automatically revive and Poland and Bulgaria will not buy weapons from us. And the GDR will not have Cuban sugar cigarettes. Armenia will not stop being abroad and will not start producing machines and cars (maybe it’s for the better ), Uzbek cotton growers will not go to rest in Sochi and Riga electric trains, RAFs and sprats will not be there either. And the Vietnamese pioneers in Artek. The world has changed, you cannot enter the same water twice.
        Something like this
        
        kot711
        
        0
        
        2 December 2020 11: 14
        
        We (the country) have entered foreign water and are playing by their rules. And I want to compare, compare the data on the RSFSR in 1990 and the Russian Federation in 2020. Maybe then you will understand that the country is degrading. All this data is in the public domain and 30 years of defective managers clearly show this.
        
        123
        
        +2
        
        2 December 2020 12: 12
        
        We (the country) have entered foreign water and are playing by their rules.
        
        Exactly and so it will be until the milenok accumulates to write the rules themselves.
        
        And I want to compare, compare the data on the RSFSR in 1990 and the Russian Federation in 2020. Maybe then you will understand that the country is degrading. All this data is in the public domain and 30 years of defective managers clearly show this.
        
        Degradation - gradual deterioration, decline.
        (Ushakov. Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language)
        
        That is, it is assumed that everything is getting worse and worse. I strongly disagree with this. In some areas we are lagging behind the Russia of the Soviet period, in others we have moved forward. There is no need to talk about some kind of total degradation. if it comes to that, I can find quite a few positions in which Russia surpassed the positions of the RSFSR of the Soviet period, and in some places the entire USSR.
        2) If that in 1990 it was the RSFSR, a republic within the USSR, it would be more logical to start from 1991. Hedgehog it is clear that after the collapse everything collapsed, as it usually happens during such cataclysms. In 1913 everything was better than in 1917, as in 1940 it was better than in 1946.
        Russia in the 90s is still quite different today.
        3) If you are proposing to compare data, it would be logical to present them. And so you advise yourself to find the data confirming your point of view.
        In my opinion, you are simply overly emotional about this issue.
        
        kot711
        
        0
        
        14 December 2020 17: 43
        
        Then tell me, how many planes, ships has the Russian Federation released? What planets have Russian other planets visited? What technical projects have allowed the Russian Federation to dominate, at least in something?
        
        123
        
        +2
        
        14 December 2020 19: 41
        
        Then tell me, how many planes, ships has the Russian Federation released?
        
        What for? How will you compare it? Do you have data on the volume of aircraft and ship production in the RSFSR? Let’s provide them, and I’ll count for you in the Russian Federation?
        
        What planets have Russian other planets visited?
        
        Again twenty-five ... If that space stations of the RSFSR did not fly at all, because there were none. Do you want to compare all over the USSR? And in general, you have a rather peculiar approach, you are comparing the RSFSR of 1990 and the Russian Federation of 2020, that is, the republic is practically at its peak of development and the country after the cataclysm. Moreover, you completely ignore the dynamics, which is extremely important because degradation is precisely a process. Do you want me to compare the USSR with the Russian Empire? Take 1913 and 1950 or 25 for example. Or for the purity of the experiment, add 1913 years to 30 and count as 1943? What do you say about degradation then?
        By the way, about the planes ... I recommend reading, just on the topic.
        
        https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/11674/
        
        What technical projects have allowed the Russian Federation to dominate, at least in something?
        
        At least in something? Nuclear power and hypersound, please.
        
        kot711
        
        0
        
        8 January 2021 17: 39
        
        Understood, there is no development and that's good. So?
        
        123
        
        0
        
        8 January 2021 19: 12
        
        Understood, there is no development and that's good. So?
        
        Quite strange, you get the idea. Why is there no development? Do you want me to go through all the industries for you and make a sample where what and how?
        
        kot711
        
        0
        
        21 January 2021 13: 15
        
        Do you even know how nuclear power plants are built, ours, effective ,. managers? For the money of the Russian Federation, and the calculation only later and for a long time. And hypersound was technologically developed back in the USSR, there were simply no suitable materials. Believe, your right, I see only an increased dependence on foreign manufacturers.
        
        123
        
        0
        
        21 January 2021 15: 27
        
        Do you even know how nuclear power plants are built, ours, effective ,. managers? For the money of the Russian Federation, and the calculation only later and for a long time.
        
        This scheme is widespread and not only in our country. And it does not directly relate to our question. You asked about technology and domination.
        
        And hypersound was technologically developed back in the USSR, there were simply no suitable materials.
        
        Perhaps, although I have no idea where you got this information. The atom was also "saddled" in the USSR, just at that time there were no suitable materials, technologies, and so on. Nobody canceled the continuity with science. But they had to be invented, tested, introduced, worked out. The result is obvious.
        
        Believe, your right, I see only an increased dependence on foreign manufacturers.
        
        Sorry, but about faith, this is not for me. I prefer facts. The increasing dependence on foreign manufacturers is not so for me.
        
        kot711
        
        0
        
        22 January 2021 19: 00
        
        And you just ask about the share of foreign capital in the economy of modern Russia? Or whose machines are in operation in new factories? Well, or whose grain is sown here?
        
        123
        
        0
        
        22 January 2021 19: 41
        
        And you just ask about the share of foreign capital in the economy of modern Russia?
        
        Whom would you advise to ask? What data do you have?
        The interpenetration of capital for our times is rather the norm. The main thing is that strategic industries do not come under foreign control.
        
        Or whose machines are in operation in new factories? Well, or whose grain is sown here?
        
        Is this news? Nobody hides that the machine tool industry was ruined, as was the gene pool for agriculture. They revive both. What is the conclusion from this?
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        14 February 2021 10: 58
        
        The main thing is that strategic industries do not come under foreign control. ,,
        
        Are you sure they don't cross? Take an interest, how many foreign citizens, in leading banks, enterprises?
        
        123
        
        +1
        
        14 February 2021 13: 32
        
        The presence of foreign citizens in banks and enterprises does not place them under "foreign control". The main thing is who owns the controlling stake.
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        14 February 2021 17: 58
        
        Is it okay that our money works for Europe, for the USA, but not for Russia? The profit is taken out there.
        
        123
        
        0
        
        14 February 2021 18: 03
        
        Do you want to completely block the withdrawal of capital? What about foreigners owning enterprises in Russia? Let them buy matryoshkas for all the proceeds and put them in the garage? Let's also prohibit buying imported goods, because money is also flowing abroad.
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        14 February 2021 18: 06
        
        In general, I do not recognize capitalism. And what happened to the money that poured into the bins (or into the pockets) in the 2000s, were waiting for investors? Why then, technologies, factories, equipment were not purchased? And now the country is being sold.
        
        123
        
        0
        
        14 February 2021 18: 15
        
        In general, I do not recognize capitalism.
        
        Your right. You can go to the forest, build a hut and live separately. Well, or start building socialism.
        
        And what happened to the money that poured into the bins (or into the pockets) in the 2000s, were waiting for investors?
        
        And where did they fall before? In the 90s or 80s? probably the same place. Until now, tales about the gold of the party go
        In general, the question is not entirely correct. What kind of money do you mean, where and how much was "poured"?
        In the 2000s, money was just beginning to come in, before that Yeltsin begged for loans and declared defaults. To say that in the 2000s nothing was built at all is also not correct.
        
        And now the country is being sold.
        
        And before that it didn't go? Under the communists, it was simply distributed.
        
        These are all common words. Do you want to compare some facts, statistics, trends?
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        15 February 2021 17: 27
        
        Are you delusional? This is when the communists were giving out? And how much money the Russian Federation received, as a result of the rise in oil and gas prices, is in the public domain. If you shake these factories like that, then write how many were closed?
        
        123
        
        0
        
        15 February 2021 17: 45
        
        Are you delusional? This is when the communists were giving out?
        
        Here's an example. The amount at first glance is certainly not impressive, but that dollar and the current one are not the same. The list is far from complete, there are no Egyptian dams and African cannibals are not listed.
        
        And how much money the Russian Federation received, as a result of the rise in oil and gas prices, is in the public domain.
        
        Well, name it, is it not difficult for you? Everything is freely available.
        
        If you shake these factories like that, then write how many were closed?
        
        Do you think factories should not be closed? This is happening all over the world all the time. Some factories are being closed, others are being opened.
        
        kot711
        
        +1
        
        22 February 2021 12: 54
        
        ruxpert.ru
        This is for oil and gas. And by closing factories, you, together with the "effective" owners, deprive people of their jobs. Yes, what can you discuss with a person with a nickname 123? A multi-source or a purely Prigogine office? The USSR understood why it invested money in other countries (influence, expanding its capabilities), and under the current authorities, siphoning out the country's resources.
        
        isofat
        
        0
        
        22 February 2021 13: 14
        
        Quote: kot711
        Yes, what can you discuss with a person with a nickname 123?
        
        kot711, tell us about your "March" victories on the rooftops and on the ground. 711, is it thousand?
        
        123
        
        +2
        
        22 February 2021 15: 18
        
        This is for oil and gas.
        
        What about oil and gas? What are we talking about?
        
        And by closing factories, you, together with the "effective" owners, are depriving people of their jobs.
        
        Plants are built in order to produce products. If the old production is not efficiently modernized. Manufacturing must be cost effective and competitive. The products should be in demand, and not just fulfilled the plan, and there at least the grass will not grow. If your initial goal is to provide people with jobs, hire better officials, it is cheaper. A desk with a computer in the office costs less than a machine in the shop. This is the whole essence of the Soviet economy. The main thing is the process, everyone is busy doing something, but the result is not important. And yet, I have nothing to do with "effective owners". So is it easier to "expose"? They fastened me to them, now there is something to present for? By the way, where did they come from? Regular communication with Mars has not yet been established. They just removed the membership cards and that's it. These are the same people.
        
        Yes, what can you discuss with a person who has a nickname 123? A multi-source or a purely Prigogine office?
        
        Killed on the spot. And don't say the nickname is really so-so. Just typed in the first three digits. By the way, the most common password
        Whether your nickname is kot711. The depth of thought and ideological coloring are immediately visible. This round is yours, there is no reception against such a crowbar.
        
        The USSR understood why it invested money in other countries (influence, expanding its capabilities), and under the current authorities, siphoning out the country's resources.
        
        Naturally, why he understood, however, the country's resources were siphoned off for this expansion of opportunities. The trouble is different, he did not understand how and what to do with them. And where is that influence? What was the use of it? They took money, said that they were building socialism and voted the right way (like the current US satellites). That's all. This is what the resources were spent on. They rebuilt Warsaw when the whole country was in ruins after the war, developed industry and agriculture in the Warsaw bloc countries and the union republics, Russia itself was not particularly concerned.
        For this, everyone around respected the communists, everyone liked it. Only money can't buy friends. They stopped giving money and everyone (with rare exceptions like Cuba) went to lick other boots.
        In general, order should be established, including with "effective owners", but this should be done gradually, without bloodshed and revolution. Which, in my opinion, is being done, although not as quickly as we would like.
    2. Oleg Rambover
      
      +1
      
      30 November 2020 00: 47
      
      Quote: 123
      And why are they building bases around the perimeter, NATO was not dismissed in 1991 for joy,
      
      Well, do not compare the contingent of the Cold War era and today. I think the American generals have been lighting candles in the church for Putin in recent years.
      
      https://tass.ru/info/4137574
      
      Quote: 123
      Russia is a rival for them, apparently the only one who can erase them into radioactive dust.
      
      Think China's US missiles are kosher? Or North Korean?
      1. 123
        
        +1
        
        30 November 2020 04: 45
        
        Well, do not compare the contingent of the Cold War era and today. I think the American generals have been lighting candles in the church for Putin in recent years.
        
        What to do, financial opportunities are shrinking, and the allies categorically do not want to pay. Donnie pulls out 2% with ticks And by the way, the bases continue to move to the borders of Russia no matter what.
        
        Think China's US missiles are kosher? Or North Korean?
        
        Of course not, but like Pakistani or Indian, ideology does not greatly affect the level of radiation. China and especially Korea lag far behind in the number of warheads and delivery vehicles.
        
        Oleg Rambover
        
        -2
        
        30 November 2020 15: 46
        
        Quote: 123
        What to do, financial opportunities are shrinking, and the allies categorically do not want to pay.
        
        Blessed is he who believes.
        
        Quote: 123
        And by the way, the bases continue to move to the borders of Russia no matter what.
        
        Are these for example?
        
        Quote: 123
        China and even more so Korea lag far behind in the number of warheads and delivery vehicles.
        
        I doubt even one is acceptable for US politicians.
        
        123
        
        +1
        
        30 November 2020 17: 52
        
        Believe, do not believe, doubt, ask ...
        There are such towns in Eastern Europe - Radzikovo, Deveselu, then Yandex to help, look for yourself, educate yourself, deal with the financial state of the US army, what is acceptable for US politicians and what is not, than one nuclear bomb (which may not yet reach), different from total destruction. What did you want from me? Will you share your doubts? Or find out information?
Alexzn

0

29 November 2020 12: 15

You should not jump from one extreme to another, in all 5 points there is a certain grain of truth, but it is precisely the share.
The point about the oil needle smiled. Oil revenues, i.e. petrodollars were converted into rubles at 63 kopecks and received a ridiculous 10% of the budget.
1. boriz
  
  +5
  
  29 November 2020 12: 41
  
  You can smile as much as you like, but the USSR both bought and sold exactly at this rate. And not only oil was sold. In the world, 40% of aircraft (civil) were Soviet. 17% of the world machine tool market was held by the USSR.
beeper

-1

29 November 2020 13: 01

A huge Stalinist mistake (IMHO) was in the liberation of the Galician-Jewish population of Zapukria from the oppression of the landlord and the annexation of Polish lackeys to Soviet Ukraine!
Zapukry still (in which generation!) Behind this unfree, humiliated and slavish, "evropaceWhom "the position of the" lord cattle "they yearn and malice, they cannot forgive us, Soviet-Russian!
Alexzn

0

29 November 2020 13: 29

Quote: boriz
You can smile as much as you like, but the USSR both bought and sold exactly at this rate. And not only oil was sold. In the world, 40% of aircraft (civil) were Soviet. 17% of the world machine tool market was held by the USSR.

From whom did the USSR BUY dollars at this rate ?!
I sold - yes, ridiculous 10-30 dollars to tourists traveling abroad. The budgetary weight of purchased goods for foreign currency was 2-10 times higher than the established rate.
goncharov.62

0

29 November 2020 15: 19

When Reagan made (with the help of the Saudis, of course) oil for $ 10 each, and friends in quotes around the neck of the USSR were added minus the economy minus the national. elites minus their own elites - the USSR collapsed. The people got tired and began to burn party cards. KaPeEsS ordered to live long.
Oleg Rambover

+1

29 November 2020 16: 40

Dear here 123 right, the USSR under Stalin is not the same as the USSR under Khrushchev.

Myth 1. There was total poverty in the USSR.

There were periods, people died in millions of hunger, it is unlikely that they were rich at the same time.

Myth 2. USSR is a backward state

This could be said about the 20s, early 30s. Already under Khrushchev, the country broke into second place in the world (in some regions, first)

Myth 3. The Soviet Union was the aggressor. Everything here rests on the attack on Finland and Poland in 1939. However, the anti-Soviet policy of the Finns began in 1917, and a war with this hostile country was necessary to defend Leningrad. At the same time, the liberation campaign against Poland saved Western Ukraine from the oppression of the landlord.

And, that is, when others commit aggression, this is a horror of horror, and if the USSR, then it really needs it, so you can? And the list is somewhat larger, I think the USSR deserved the honorable second place.

Myth 4. Totalitarian USSR.

Someone doubts that the USSR was totalitarian under Stalin?

Myth 5. The USSR put Russia on the oil needle.

The pipelines were built in the USSR.
Xuli (o) Tebenado

-1

29 November 2020 19: 27

The client has died for 29 years, and here everyone is singing: "Do you know what kind of guy he was ?!"
1. beeper
  
  -1
  
  29 November 2020 19: 55
  
  Quote: Xuli (o) Tebenado
  The client has died for 29 years, and here everyone is singing: "Do you know what kind of guy he was ?!"
  
  Well, it’s hard to “beat in the rear” -for the now defenseless USSR and “breaking communication” with our past, sneaking “from the rear“ gradually- ”step by step“ destroying ”the historical justification”, it is much easier for “common people” (than stupidly "attacking head-on, from the front"!) to move on to kondovoy anti-Russianism, undermining the Russian Federation and the next (after all, at least once a century, this all-European attempt on our Russian Fatherland occurs, and, already, our chopped off Russian outskirts zapadoids devour, if not all themselves, and rather grunt, chomp! ) "Drangu nah Osten"!
Albert

+1

19 December 2020 12: 22

The bloodiest conquerors:

Alexander the Great - type of Greek,
Huns with Attila,
Charlemagne - the first European integrator,
Mongols of Genghis Khan,
Uzbek Tamerlan,
Ottoman butchers
The conquistadors who destroyed the continent
Napoleon Bonaparte - European integrator No. 2,
Eurocolonizers - the slave trade, playing off peoples, draining resources,
Japan, which killed about 30 million Chinese,
Hitler Germany,
USA - extermination of Indians, slave trade, bombing, coups, non-stop wars ...

In general, the world is just groaning from Russian aggression ...