“He was called upon to fulfill one of the most difficult tasks...: to renew to the very foundations the huge state entrusted to his management, to abolish the state order established for centuries, based on slavery, and replace it with citizenship and freedom,... to establish freedom of the press..., everywhere to bring to life new forces..., to bring a suppressed and humiliated society to its feet and give it the opportunity to move in the open. History hardly presents another example of such a revolution."

B.N. Chicherin about Alexander II

M.S. Gorbachev, the first and last President of the USSR, turned 85 years old. One cannot idealize, but one cannot underestimate the achievements of that time. Gorbachev, like AlexanderII, faced a similar task: abolishing 70 years of slavery. Our memory is short. We deeply love our oppressors, but we do not honor those who helped us. Now there are attempts to distort history in order to distract society and search in the past for those responsible for the current decline of the country. Understanding the past is useful if it aims to change the present by considering the true essence of phenomena.

The main part of the current problems has its origins in the policies of Boris Yeltsin. M.S. Gorbachev never destroyed the USSR while being its President. He organized a referendum on its retention on March 17, 1991, and the vast majority of the people voted in his support, including Ukraine (70.2% of voters), Russia (71.3%), Belarus and Kazakhstan. He did not want to go through shock therapy, like Boris Yeltsin, but evolutionarily, according to the Chinese way, the path of the NEP, but made a number of mistakes. But what he gave to the country far exceeds all his mistakes combined.

How did Perestroika begin? Everyone is tired of well-fed poverty, gray monotony, the tenets of the CPSU, lack of freedom, and queues in stores. All consumer goods - televisions, washing machines, refrigerators, radio equipment - were in short supply. There was a lag in information and household technologies. New way- the development of market relations, democratic freedoms, the elimination of communist dogmas, the dismantling of atheism - was historically necessary.

The West at this time was in another crisis of overproduction; it had to find new markets and dismantle the USSR as its main rival. And they decided to go not by continuing the Cold War (to which they have now returned) - but through friendship and internal recruitment of Russian elites.

At that time, the course towards democratization and openness was incompatible with the course towards empire, so the fall away of the most freedom-seeking parts of the USSR and the socialist camp and the unification of Germany was objectively predetermined. Gorbachev cannot be blamed for dismantling the socialist bloc. In Eastern Europe and the GDR they wanted freedom from the USSR and the same rich market. Now there is the same thing as here. By recognizing the superiority of the West, we set an example for everyone else and voluntarily ceded our leadership. To build or maintain an empire, you had to have an advantage - and at that moment we lost it. But under Gorbachev, the USSR and Russia were still an industrial and scientific power. It was a sovereign state that was still taken into account. Dismantling the legacy of the USSR is largely the work of B.N. Yeltsin.

To implement its plans, the West found an ally in the form of the most “agile” part of the elite, which created capital by cashing out budget funds and selling raw materials and limited resources. To promote reforms, one of the most brilliant PR campaigns in the history of political technology was carried out to denigrate the past of the USSR and propaganda beautiful life market. Ogonyok magazine and others constantly provided relevant materials. But Gorbachev saw an element of freedom in this. The elite did not see the point in confronting the West. Although the USSR had influence over half the world, they did not need it. They wanted to live like foreign rich people and achieved their goal. If we had followed a gradual path, it would have been better, but the Russian elites and our Western sponsors had completely different views on this process.

When B.N. Yeltsin appeared in Moscow as secretary of the Moscow party organization, rumors immediately spread about him that he was active and ready for change. At the same time, the people were no longer happy with M. Gorbachev’s conservative position; everyone wanted quick changes and the market as manna from heaven. It happened as the people wanted. After B. Yeltsin criticized M. Gobachev’s course at the Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee in 1987, a conflict arose between them. B. Yeltsin saw a solution in the sovereignty of Russia, in which he hoped to take the role of leader. This same scenario suited the West as the first step towards the collapse of the USSR. When Russia left the USSR, Gorbachev became President without a portfolio. In May 1990, Yeltsin became Chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, and on June 12, 1990, the Congress adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the RSFSR, providing for the supremacy of Russian laws over union ones, and we elected our first President - Boris Yeltsin. In fact, this day became the first main event of the parade of “sovereignties”, which meant the collapse of the USSR: And we still celebrate it. Belovezhskaya agreements signed by the heads of Russian Federation(RSFSR), the Republic of Belarus and Ukraine on December 8, 1991, they only formally consolidated it. It was not Gorbachev who destroyed the USSR, but we ourselves, following Boris Yeltsin, his charisma and promises. Gorbachev should have more actively introduced elements of the market, but he hesitated. He wanted socialism, only with a “human face.”

The second step towards the collapse of the USSR was the putsch of August 1991. B. Yeltsin, as an ardent “fighter” against the CPSU, scared away the national elites who were party members - and the parade of sovereignties went on. This suited the West, which was just waiting for this. Having signed the Belovezhskaya agreements, neither Russia, nor Ukraine, nor their peoples, infected with nationalism, thought about the consequences. Ukraine did not want to feed the “Muscovites” and wanted to become a second France, but we wanted to be on our own and live like in the West. In reality, both are just myths. V. Putin described the death of the USSR as a disaster.

Perestroika is a time of enormous opportunities and manifestation of talents. Those who did not live under the USSR do not understand what the country received. Instead of “dullness” and “stagnation”, she accepted complete freedom from M. Gorbachev - discuss, choose, hold rallies - please.

Gorbachev sincerely believed in the people and in fact, he voluntarily (!) transferred the total power of the CPSU into the hands of society. Where has this been seen? Why - he did not think about selfish interests and was an idealist. But he was later outplayed by more grasping and selfish people, who now rule us, who usurped this power and are not going to share it to this day. This situation gave rise to a gigantic wave of creativity, the likes of which have never been seen in our country and most likely never will be. Analogue - only the initial stage of Alexander's reforms II.

Gorbachev was ready for reforms, launched entrepreneurship, a new NEP. The cooperative movement began. The economic situation was much more favorable - there was no administrative pressure and extortion, inspections, racketeering, or exorbitant taxes - VAT. People were given economic freedom, which simply does not exist today. Now business is being milked and put under pressure by everyone who has power. Entrepreneurship is almost impossible; you will be crushed by expensive loans, fees and huge taxes.

How many talented politicians and businessmen emerged from oblivion and made careers. But starting from the Yeltsin era, especially after October 1993, when a new technical nomenclature of manners of the CPSU was formed, many of them remained out of work. So now, if you are not in the party in power or not in sync with it, no one needs you. Democracy is not a child of Yeltsin - this is entirely the merit of Gorbachev - rallies, freedom of the press, open elections. Television received a huge boost - new programs appeared on it, replacing boring news shows about grain harvest reports, new music and films appeared. Showing full sessions of Parliament online on television has become a spectacular show. Do you see now what is happening there? The society had an amazing sense of the real processes of government and influence on it.

Positive steps were taken in relation to the Church, dialogue was started, persecution was stopped. In 1988, the 1000th anniversary of the baptism of Rus' was celebrated. For the first time since the post-war period, the number of parishes began to grow. In 1986, Russian Orthodox Church had 6794 parishes; and by 1989 about 10,000.

Boris Yeltsin harmed the country most of all, but he was also a forced figure in the hands of the real bigwigs. But his invaluable merit is the complete granting of freedom to the Church and assistance in its development, building a market infrastructure to a minimum extent. You should not condemn your leaders, all power is from God, everyone has their own mission and lesson.

How did shock therapy begin? On the eve of the 90s, the Russian economy had problems with external debts and was close to bankruptcy. During perestroika, the USSR made enormous external loans, spending them on the purchase of imports and partly on internal modernization. We needed new loans - and we received them in exchange for reforms according to IMF patterns.

After the putsch of August 1991, the most grasping part of the Soviet nomenklatura came to power, deciding to “privatize” Russia, getting rid of social obligations and responsibility to the people, making a deal with the West: the loss of sovereignty and the collapse of the USSR in exchange for personal enrichment. Having stood with one foot in the lair of the West, we have chained ourselves - and we can’t break it. To understand what was happening, you need to look at today’s Ukraine - it’s almost like Russia in the early 90s, only not so dirty and not so obvious; brainwashing and advisers from the USA - we had the same thing. The West wanted new markets and a source of raw materials, and this is exactly what Russia Yeltsin's shock therapy gave it. At the same time, the country lost its sovereignty - economic, political and international.

At the end of 1991, there were rumors about price increases - stores were suddenly filled with goods, including imports: everything was bought up. In 1992, the Government sharply released prices, which jumped several times, which spurred inflation and destroyed the money supply, which was not expanding at such a pace. This was also facilitated by cutting budget injections - now everything had to be earned by oneself. The first thing that disappeared from people was money. Overnight, everyone became poor (except for the dollar holders). The whole country, all of Moscow, came out to the squares in front of the shops and stood trading with boxes of shoes and rags. It was called the market! The VAT introduced in 1992 at a prohibitive level of 28% (reduced a year later to 20%) put the economy in a state of shock and led to the widest spread of shadow transactions.

The Yeltsin-Gaidar government destroyed people's savings and began to prepare the economy for bankruptcy in order to clear the markets for TNCs and ensure the purchase of assets by our oligarchs and Western "investors". It was even difficult to imagine more absurdity and sabotage. Now the so-called inflation targeting of the Bank of Russia (in fact, a controlled crisis) has the same effect.

To build an Empire, the state and the sovereign people must have a moral and economic advantage. Tsarist Russia in its best time had it. It had, although not a rich, centralized economy, a sovereign ruble, and the country was Orthodox. This was enough to build the world's largest state. The USSR was formally godless, but it had a moral code and, paradoxically, surpassed its predecessor in its morality. English history A. Toynbee believed that the USSR was still Holy Rus'. There was almost no profit in the economy, but it had its own printing press, all resources were not siphoned off, as they are now, into private pockets and abroad, but were owned by the people and the state. There were no crises in the USSR, there was full employment, there was no delirious instability of the dancing exchange rates of the dollar and oil, which now fills the information void, which differs from the time of the Brezhnev stagnation only in “glamour”. This allowed the USSR to have the world's second-largest economy and allies around the world. Socialist ideas were very popular around the world.

We can't build an empire now. Although we are an Orthodox country, the elites are in a moral crisis, trading outside - they are subject to the rules set by the United States and depend on them. Western cultural values ​​are being imposed on us, we do not have our own printing press, our financial authorities are part of the Fed and the IMF, we are a raw materials mine, our economy is in decline. In such conditions, we will not be able to accept our former territories: the refusal to annex Donbass (with its support) is symbolic.

Crimea is an exception, but this is the beginning of a new path, which gives us a conflict with the West. The second stage is the operation in Syria. Russia is beginning to try on the armor of the USSR: the imperial past cannot be changed. When we tear away the Western and oligarchic yoke, launch our printing press, restore the destroyed Temples and build new ones, then the Russian economic miracle and the prosperity of the country await us. Then some of our ancestral parts, gone like prodigal children in search rich life, like we once did, we will definitely return to the Russian World and the World of Orthodoxy.

Mistakes of M. Gorbachev - cutting down vineyards, attempts to hide the consequences of the Chernobyl accident, its liquidation at excessive costs (for which the relevant departments were most likely responsible); lack of legal agreements with NATO on its non-proliferation. Free gift of freedom to Germany, although Germany did not object, we refused compensation for the loss of our property, the squandering of military property. It would be possible to agree with Germany at least on the provision of scientific and technical assistance. Purely in Russian - generously. Economically it is not clear - but such was the atmosphere of that time. Political romanticism. Gorbachev did not take into account the risks of inflation and did not put a barrier on the transfer of funds from the budgets of state-owned enterprises into cash, which was carried out by creativity centers under the Komsomol. Took it large loans in the West and went to expand imports. But even this was rather naive - in those days it was difficult to understand. He had N.I. Ryzhkov, this was his miscalculation. Could not organize the production of consumer goods, worsening supply conditions; but this apparently was part of the plans of the elites to incite discontent through empty shelves. It was enough to build several modern factories and the problem of shortage household appliances would have been resolved, but that was not the goal. The story of the captivity at Foros is still not fully understood.

The era of high oil prices in the 70s and early 80s during L.I. Brezhnev led to the fact that we already then relied on the growth of exports of raw materials and sat on the needle of “imports,” including grain. As soon as the USSR moved to expand import purchases, the path economic development and the improvement of new technologies was closed, despite the fact that there were certain attempts to develop lagging industries. The current course of “oil in exchange for imports” is a continuation of the initiatives of the stagnant time, with the only difference that our elites decided to “forget” about the internal development of the country. Everything that has happened since then - Perestroika, the reforms of the 90s - is just a smooth and natural evolution of this system, the ineffective elites and value systems it nurtured.

The cheap consumer goods that are available now and which were in short supply during the Soviet era are not our merit, but the merit of China and South Korea. For those who live on 3P, about 10-15 thousand rubles. Despite the outward abundance, the store shelves are really empty, just like in the worst times of the USSR. But then there was no hunger or poverty. A queue for sausage or a lack of fashionable clothes is not something when you simply cannot buy it. And free education, full employment, high pensions and free housing will now be a legend for future generations. That is why the legitimacy of the current system is falling and everyone remembers the USSR. Society has a fundamental request for a “New Course”, a new Perestroika.

We are the only ones to blame for our troubles - being afraid to vote against the liberal dictatorship every time and maintaining “eternal silence” or not going to the polls. When in 1996 they told us “vote or lose,” when in 2011 the Orthodox were agitated in its support . As a result, the entire period since 2008 has been a “lost decade.” When we, naive, give our votes to decoys who conduct brilliant PR campaigns, which then melt away like mirages. If we had voted against it, changes would definitely have taken place. The system is not interested in the people, it only needs their endless patience, self-enrichment and correct voting.

V.V. Putin does not clear up Gorbachev’s mistakes. In principle, he cannot rework the “legacy” of Boris Yeltsin. Why? V. Putin is Yeltsin’s successor, both come from the same liberal system, which has the same values ​​and the same real masters. The current elites and politics are not systemically different from that time.

One cannot be ungrateful: the President ensured the safety of the country, its strengthening and growth in the 2000s. Progress was achieved due to rising oil prices, payment of oil revenues to the budget, and the construction of a vertical power structure. But the foundation for further development was not laid - and enormous opportunities for development were missed: this is a consequence of the raw materials model and the elites formed in it. Now V. Putin is taking steps towards returning Russia's sovereignty. But there is no economic and political basis for these processes yet: having never recovered after 2008, since 2011 the economy has been sliding into a systemic crisis. Now that prices have fallen, we could easily go back to the late 90s.

M.S.Gorbachev as a leader was noble and extremely honest. He gave an example of how to leave correctly. And what honors and forgives a lot, B.N. Yeltsin did the same, who did not hesitate to apologize to the people.

Speaking about N. Mikhalkov’s calls to judge the activities of B. Yeltsin and M. Gorbachev, one thing can be said - there is absolutely nothing to judge Gorbachev for. The indestructible liberal system must be judged, but who can tear the country out of its strong networks? But it’s worth thanking M.S. Gorbachev. But history will put everything in its place.

Liberalism replaced the freedom and democracy given to us in Perestroika with controlled democracy, political manipulation in order to retain power, which since 1996 (20 years!) has not allowed the people to choose a future other than that offered to them by the dictatorship of big capital, officials and international financial mafia. In the time of M.S. Gorbachev, this would have been impossible. All this could end, as in 1917, with a large-scale social explosion and civil war.

We have a lot to learn from M. Gorbachev - if we hold fair elections, createmulti-party Government of national unity and abandon the slavery of liberal ideology, the country will emerge from the crisis.

In the late 80s, we wanted the market and the benefits of the West - clothes, cinema and music. We got it. At the end of the 90s, we wanted a market, and quickly - and we got quick “shock therapy”, and instead of a market - a semi-feudal distributing and “cutting” economy. At the beginning of the 20th century, we wanted justice, equality and brotherhood, and the peasants wanted land; but without God - we got it. Justice cost a lot of blood in the fratricidal war, the land was then taken away, and brotherhood was replaced by dictatorship. For more than 100 years we have simply been deceived. And now little has changed. Politics and economics, completely saturated with lies, are meaningless. Important people who were educated from the dead books of the liberal economic sect will not help the country.

Do we deserve better? Think for yourself. Saturday and Sunday, it's raining, summer residents are stuck in traffic jams. How many people go to Orthodox churches, how many men and young people are there? How are public hearings on the construction of new Temples held? How long ago did we take communion, do we fast - and did it even happen? Do we admit our mistakes? Only morality and service to each other will strengthen the country. Let's start with ourselves: if we strive for education, success at work, in spite of everything, give birth to many children, preserve our families and faith, then everything will change for the better. "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you; for everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.” [Matt. 7:7-8]. Russia will survive only by God's grace, preserving and increasing the Orthodox faith.

Firstly, the “barred from entry” Zinoviev then amazingly accurately predicted what would happen to the country next. And secondly, the slogans with which Yeltsin then literally marched straight to power are too similar to those adopted by the current opposition in Russia: the fight against privileges (today - against corruption), against the party in power (then with the CPSU, now with “United Russia”), threats to bring people to the square... The rhetoric of the then Yeltsin is so similar to the techniques of one of the most prominent oppositionists today - Alexei Navalny (as well as the figures of these politicians themselves), that you are spellbound to discover a little over 20 years later: History has taken its turn and may repeat itself.

“IN POLITICS YOU SHOULD NOT HIT THE BALL, BUT THE OPPONENT”

Presenter: - Alexander Zinoviev, I would like to know your opinion about Yeltsin.

Zinoviev: - This is the first time I have met a Soviet politician of this caliber. I had meetings with Suslov, Voroshilov, Andropov, but anecdotal. For example, I ran into Andropov at Lubyanka. When I passed by, the guards let me through, and Andropov got scared and hid in the car. And they interrogated me all night...

Personally, I sympathize with Yeltsin to the highest degree. But when I take pen in hand, I give no mercy to anyone. And in my book “Catastroika” Boris Nikolaevich appears.

Host: - Boris Yeltsin, you were an athlete, a volleyball champion. Maybe politics is like volleyball? Need to jump higher and hit the ball first?

Yeltsin: - Not at the ball, but at the opponent. By the opponent. That's the difference.

“I DICTATED TO BREZHNEV”

Host: - Mr. Yeltsin, do you owe your career to Brezhnev? Maybe he singled you out?

Yeltsin: - No. At that time, he was no longer able to single out, select, or distinguish between good and bad.

Host: - Even so?

Yeltsin: Even so. He was completely incapable of leading the state. At the time when I was elected first secretary of the regional committee. I came to him with some paper to resolve the issue for the region, I dictated a resolution to him. And so every word that I dictated, he wrote down. Then I tell him: now sign - he signed. Now put a number - he put a number. Now call the secretary - he is calling.

Host: - Then what happens? Soviet Union was led by such an old man?

Yeltsin: - But in our country, leaders die all the time. And if you don’t say anything bad about the dead, then with us, on the contrary, they don’t say anything good about them, as you noticed.

“PRIVILEGES WILL HAVE TO BE EXPROPRIATED”

Host: - Why don’t you want to join Gorbachev’s nomenklatura, why do you give up privileges?

Yeltsin: - When I became a member of the Politburo, I became convinced of how immoral it was. Especially towards his own people, when 48 million people live below the poverty line. And this royal luxury of the members of the Politburo of the Central Committee is simply amazing.

Presenter: - In the Soviet Union there are few figures who refuse privileges. And you sternly describe Gorbachev as a man who loves privileges, collects dachas...

Yeltsin: - Well, I gave up my last privilege just before leaving here - the Volga official personal car. Unfortunately, no one followed my example. And it’s hard for the family, because habit is habit... Probably, these privileges will probably have to be expropriated by the people.

Host: - The more you give up privileges, the more people love you, and your colleagues hate you.

Yeltsin: Yes, naturally. Especially the apparatus - the party, the state - which I oppose. I am amazed that at this moment the salary of the staff was increased by one and a half to two times - this is absolutely monstrous.

Host: - But this is your chance. If everyone gave up their privileges, would you be less popular today?

Yeltsin: - This is not about popularity. This is my moral principle, I cannot do otherwise.

“IS IT NECESSARY TO HAVE FOUR Cottages?”

Host: - So, is Boris Yeltsin right in renouncing his privileges?

Zinoviev: - From a sociological point of view, this is a meaningless step. A society without privilege will fall apart. It's like an army where the generals eat like soldiers. The presence of hierarchy and privileges is normal... Refusal of them produces strong impression to the masses - and everyone will shout hurray. But when a politician takes such a step, it indicates a lack of understanding of the laws.

Here Boris Nikolaevich is indignant that the salaries of the staff have been increased. Yes, because inflation. So I was a professor, I received 500 rubles, and now professors receive 500 rubles a month, and people in cooperatives now earn 500 - 700 rubles a day. The renunciation of privileges evokes the delight of the masses. But if Boris Nikolayevich becomes the head of the state, this will be his greatest misfortune - we’ll see what he does then. You can revoke privileges, but they will be restored in other ways! People will still get what they can grab according to their position.

Zinoviev: - I know.

Yeltsin: - No, he doesn’t know. He doesn’t know that Thatcher has two security men, and if Gorbachev travels, then 200 security men. Is this a necessity? The need to have four dachas? And to build them in four years of perestroika? The person who leads the state must be clean! But his excesses, luxury, are immoral. Therefore, if my fate really turns out this way, one of the first laws of Russia will be the elimination of these privileges.

“ALLOW A THOUSAND PARTIES AND THEY WILL TURN INTO A MAFIA”

Presenter: - Your enemies today are privileges and bureaucracy? But it turns out that you are attacking the party?

Yeltsin: - Yes. And the party too. Because the party has not been renewed anywhere in the five years of perestroika. Nothing has changed in it. The party was trailing behind at the beginning of perestroika, and is trailing behind today.

Presenter: - Which path should you take?

Yeltsin: - If there is a renewal in the party - a rejection of the vertical structure and a transition to a horizontal one, direct elections of delegates to the congress are introduced, the creation of parties, individual factions and platforms is allowed - then the party will for some time stop the catastrophic decline in its authority among the masses.

Presenter: - Alexander Zinoviev, your novel “Catastroika” is a toothy satire on perestroika. But if not for perestroika, Yeltsin would not have had the opportunity to speak with a writer who is considered a renegade...

Zinoviev: - What do you want to say? Should I be happy that I can see Yeltsin? Well, it's not serious. Perestroika is not progress, it is a disease of society, it is a crisis! And the only way out can be counter-perestroika. The way out of an illness cannot be to continue the illness. Why is there no restructuring in the party? But there is no party! Is not Political Party. Nothing there can be rebuilt. You can allow a thousand parties into the Soviet Union - and they will all degenerate into political mafias! Create them and see what happens.

Host: - When Yeltsin says that we need to speed up perestroika, do you think he wants to speed up the disease?

Zinoviev: - Yes, he wants to bring the country closer to death.

Host: - Boris Yeltsin, you need to defend yourself - your perestroika, which you want to accelerate...

Yeltsin: - Who should I defend myself from? From a person who fell behind? No, I'm going to attack. We must act decisively and radically, not like Gorbachev - only half measures, compromises and indecision. A radical update is needed. Without him, we will continue to sink into the swamp...

“GORBACHEV IS JUST AFRAID OF ME”

Host: - But I’m surprised that you don’t have a program, for example, on national question. Do you think that Lithuania can become independent tomorrow? You are not offering solutions, you are only providing a general perspective.

Yeltsin: - Well, ignorance of my program does not mean that it does not exist. Maybe our media doesn't.

Host: - It seems that Gorbachev needs to have Yeltsin on his left, who says: “Let’s go faster, faster,” and on his right, Ligachev, who says: “No, let’s slow down...” You serve Gorbachev’s interests...

Yeltsin: Yes, at first it was like that. In order for Gorbachev to seem like a democrat, he had to listen to some kind of criticism. This is a democrat then. But now it’s not that he needs me, now he’s just afraid of me... He doesn’t know how to get rid of me. He did everything to prevent me from getting elected to parliament. The entire powerful apparatus was working, how much dirt and libels were pouring out.

“PEOPLE ARE LOSSING PATIENCE, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO THE STREETS”

Presenter: - How do you see the future of the USSR?

Yeltsin: - This haste of Gorbachev - to immediately convene a congress and elect a president at the congress, instead of being elected by the people - this, of course, causes protest, and our group will block the elections. A number of republics, I think, will also block. They understand that increasing power can lead to the suppression of their sovereignty...

But Mr. Zinoviev does not know the processes that are going on among the people - in factories, in factories. People are losing patience, people will take to the streets. The critical mass of discontent is now reaching its limit.

Presenter: - It turns out that the people can overthrow Gorbachev. And to raise you, because you are very popular.

Yeltsin: - No, I’m not saying this about myself. I say that the people will take power and install those who are needed today - younger, more energetic people who can save the country without a super-strong government. Super strong government is dangerous for our country. Moreover, in the same hands.

“A NEW STALIN WILL COME OUT”

Presenter: - Alexander Zinoviev, you blame the Western countries that made a star out of Gorbachev.

Zinoviev: - I want to make a short remark about what Yeltsin said. The people already once took power in the Soviet Union into their own hands. And what happened? Stalin left. And if the people take power into their own hands, no matter who gets to the top - even Yeltsin - he will still be the new Stalin. He will fulfill the same role.

Now why does the West applaud Gorbachev and Yeltsin? What do you think, the West wants Soviet people to live luxuriously and be well-fed? Nothing like this! The West needs the Soviet Union to collapse. Gorbachev and Yeltsin are being patted on the shoulder because they think they are ruining the country. They say: act, Misha, - and they are happy to try. Many parties, parliament! This is all a game for the West. As soon as the West sees that Gorbachev is not destroying Soviet society, but is emerging from the crisis, Gorbachev’s glory will end here and streams of dirt will be poured on him. Mark my words!

“THE BREZHNEV TIME WILL BE REMEMBERED AS THE “GOLDEN AGE”

Zinoviev: - I am not a politician, I am a researcher. I'll tell you exactly what will happen. In five or six years, something like what existed under Brezhnev will be restored. Even, maybe worse, closer to the Stalinist version. And the Brezhnev era will be remembered as the “golden age.” This is what will happen... But if Gorbachev succeeds in destroying Soviet society, he will be called the Man of the Century. Neither Lenin nor Stalin are truly personalities of epochal proportions, but the insignificant apparatchik Gorbachev.

Yeltsin: - I don’t want to polemicize with such extremes as Zinoviev, but I believe that the people can still have their say, - and it is not necessary that this should lead to the emergence of a new dictator, Stalin.

Host: - Do you want to replace Gorbachev and become number one in the USSR?

Yeltsin: - No.

Presenter: - Why?

Yeltsin: - Because the future belongs to Russia.

P.S. More will pass a little over a year, and on August 19, 1991, on the very first day of the State Emergency Committee, Alexander Zinoviev will send a telegram from Munich to the Kremlin: “IMMEDIATELY ISOLATE YELTSIN.” They won't isolate him, the putsch will fail. And four months later, Boris Yeltsin will sign the Belovezhskaya Agreement on behalf of Russia, which buried the USSR. The well-being of the population will fall by half. The privileges of members of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee will seem ridiculous in comparison with the wealth of the new elite - the oligarchs and bureaucracy. And in the fall of 1993, the Russian parliament will be shot from tanks. The president will receive more power than Stalin had. And in social surveys better times Russians will call Brezhnev's...

At the current stage of development of the Russian Federation and neighboring states, which are successors of the former USSR, there are many political, economic and cultural problems. Their solution is impossible without a thorough analysis of the events associated with the process of collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. This article contains clear and structured information about the collapse of the USSR, as well as an analysis of events and personalities directly related to this process.

Brief background

The years of the USSR are a story of victories and defeats, economic rise and fall. It is known that the Soviet Union as a state was formed in 1922. After this, as a result of many political and military events, its territory increased. The peoples and republics that were part of the USSR had the right to voluntarily secede from it. Repeatedly, the country's ideology emphasized the fact that the Soviet state is a family of friendly peoples.

Regarding the leadership of such a huge country, it is not difficult to predict that it was centralized. The main body of government was the CPSU party. And the leaders of republican governments were appointed by the central Moscow leadership. The main legislative act regulating the legal situation in the country was the Constitution of the USSR.

Reasons for the collapse of the USSR

Many powerful countries are going through difficult times in their development. Speaking about the collapse of the USSR, it should be noted that 1991 was a very difficult and contradictory year in the history of our state. What contributed to this? There are a huge number of reasons that led to the collapse of the USSR. Let's try to dwell on the main ones:

• authoritarianism of government and society in the state, persecution of dissidents;
• nationalist tendencies in the union republics, the presence of interethnic conflicts in the country;
• one state ideology, censorship, ban on any political alternative;
• economic crisis of the Soviet production system (extensive method);
• international fall in oil prices;
• a number of unsuccessful attempts to reform the Soviet system;
• colossal centralization of government bodies;
• military failure in Afghanistan (1989).

These, of course, are not all the reasons for the collapse of the USSR, but they can rightfully be considered fundamental.

The collapse of the USSR: the general course of events

With the appointment of Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev to the post of General Secretary of the CPSU in 1985, the policy of perestroika began, which was associated with sharp criticism of the previous government system, the disclosure of KGB archival documents and the liberalization of public life. But the situation in the country not only did not change, but also worsened. The people became more active politically, and the formation of many organizations and movements, sometimes nationalistic and radical, began. M. S. Gorbachev, President of the USSR, repeatedly came into conflict with the future leader of the country, B. Yeltsin, over the withdrawal of the RSFSR from the Union.

National crisis

The collapse of the USSR occurred gradually in all sectors of society. The crisis has come, both economically and foreign policy, and even demographically. This was officially announced in 1989.

In the year of the collapse of the USSR, the eternal problem of Soviet society - a commodity shortage - became apparent. Even essential products are disappearing from store shelves.

Softness in the country's foreign policy results in the fall of regimes loyal to the USSR in Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Romania. New national states are being formed there.

It was also quite turbulent within the country itself. Mass demonstrations begin in the union republics (demonstration in Almaty, the Karabakh conflict, unrest in the Fergana Valley).

There are also rallies in Moscow and Leningrad. The crisis in the country plays into the hands of the radical democrats, led by Boris Yeltsin. They are gaining popularity among the dissatisfied masses.

Parade of sovereignties

At the beginning of February 1990 Central Committee The party announced the annulment of its dominance in power. Democratic elections were held in the RSFSR and the Union republics, in which radical political forces in the form of liberals and nationalists won.

In 1990 and early 1991, a wave of protests swept across the Soviet Union, which historians later called the “parade of sovereignties.” During this period, many of the union republics adopted Declarations of Sovereignty, which meant the supremacy of republican law over the all-Union law.

The first territory that dared to leave the USSR was the Nakhichevan Republic. This happened back in January 1990. It was followed by: Latvia, Estonia, Moldova, Lithuania and Armenia. Over time everything allied states They will issue a Declaration of their independence (after the GKChP putsch), and the USSR will finally collapse.

The last president of the USSR

Played a central role in the collapse of the Soviet Union last president of this state - M. S. Gorbachev. The collapse of the USSR took place against the backdrop of Mikhail Sergeevich’s desperate efforts to reform Soviet society and the system.

M. S. Gorbachev was from Stavropol Territory(Vol. Privolnoe). Was born statesman in 1931 in the simplest family. After graduation high school continued his studies at the Faculty of Law of Moscow State University, where he headed the Komsomol organization. There he met his future wife, Raisa Titarenko.

IN student years Gorbachev was active political activity, joined the ranks of the CPSU and already in 1955 took the position of secretary of the Stavropol Komsomol. Gorbachev moved up the career ladder of a civil servant quickly and confidently.

Rise to power

Mikhail Sergeevich came to power in 1985, after the so-called “era of deaths of general secretaries” (three leaders of the USSR died in three years). It should be noted that the title “President of the USSR” (introduced in 1990) was only borne by Gorbachev; all previous leaders were called General Secretaries. The reign of Mikhail Sergeevich was characterized by thorough political reforms, which were often not particularly thought out and radical.

Attempts at reform

Such socio-political transformations include: prohibition, the introduction of self-financing, money exchange, the policy of openness, acceleration.

For the most part, society did not appreciate the reforms and had a negative attitude towards them. And there was little benefit to the state from such radical actions.

In his foreign policy, M. S. Gorbachev adhered to the so-called “policy of new thinking,” which contributed to detente international relations and ending the arms race. For this position Gorbachev received Nobel Prize peace. But the USSR at that time was in a terrible situation.

August putsch

Of course, attempts to reform Soviet society, and ultimately completely destroy the USSR, were not supported by many. Some supporters of the Soviet government united and decided to speak out against the destructive processes that were taking place in the Union.

The GKChP putsch was a political uprising that took place in August 1991. His goal is the restoration of the USSR. The 1991 coup was regarded by the official authorities as an attempted coup.

The events took place in Moscow from August 19 to 21, 1991. Among the many street clashes, the main a bright event, which ultimately led to the collapse of the USSR, was the decision to create State Committee By State of Emergency(GKChP). This was a new body formed by state officials, headed by USSR Vice President Gennady Yanaev.

Main reasons for the coup

The main reason for the August putsch can be considered dissatisfaction with Gorbachev's policies. Perestroika did not bring the expected results, the crisis deepened, unemployment and crime grew.

The last straw for future putschists and conservatives was the President’s desire to transform the USSR into a Union Sovereign States. After M. S. Gorbachev left Moscow, the dissatisfied did not miss the opportunity for an armed uprising. But the conspirators failed to retain power; the putsch was suppressed.

The significance of the GKChP putsch

The 1991 coup launched an irreversible process towards the collapse of the USSR, which was already in a state of continuous economic and political instability. Despite the desire of the putschists to preserve the state, they themselves contributed to its collapse. After this event, Gorbachev resigned, the structure of the CPSU collapsed, and the republics of the USSR began to gradually proclaim their independence. The Soviet Union was replaced by a new state - the Russian Federation. And 1991 is understood by many as the year of the collapse of the USSR.

Bialowieza Accords

The 1991 Bialowieza Accords were signed on December 8th. Officials of three states - Russia, Ukraine and Belarus - put their signatures on them. The agreements were a document that legislated the collapse of the USSR and the formation new organization mutual assistance and cooperation - Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

As mentioned earlier, the GKChP putsch only weakened the central authorities and thereby accompanied the collapse of the USSR. In some republics, separatist tendencies began to brew, which were actively promoted in the regional media. As an example, we can consider Ukraine. In the country, in a national referendum on December 1, 1991, almost 90% of citizens voted for the independence of Ukraine, and L. Kravchuk was elected president of the country.

In early December, the leader made a statement that Ukraine was abandoning the 1922 treaty on the creation of the USSR. The year 1991, therefore, became the starting point for Ukrainians on the path to their own statehood.

The Ukrainian referendum served as a signal for President Boris Yeltsin, who began to more persistently strengthen his power in Russia.

Creation of the CIS and the final destruction of the USSR

In turn, a new chairman of the Supreme Council, S. Shushkevich, was elected in Belarus. It was he who invited the leaders of neighboring states Kravchuk and Yeltsin to Belovezhskaya Pushcha to discuss the current situation and coordinate subsequent actions. After minor discussions between the delegates, the fate of the USSR was finally decided. The Treaty establishing the Soviet Union of December 31, 1922 was denounced, and in its place a plan for the Commonwealth of Independent States was prepared. After this process, many disputes arose, since the agreement on the creation of the USSR was supported by the Constitution of 1924.

However, it should be noted that the Belovezhskaya Agreements of 1991 were adopted not by the will of three politicians, but by the wishes of the peoples of the former Soviet republics. Just two days after the signing of the agreement, the Supreme Councils of Belarus and Ukraine adopted an act of denunciation of the union treaty and ratified the agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States. In Russia, on December 12, 1991, the same procedure took place. Not only radical liberals and democrats, but also communists voted for the ratification of the Belovezhskaya Accords.

Already on December 25, USSR President M. S. Gorbachev resigned. So, relatively simply, they destroyed the government system, which had existed for years. Although the USSR was an authoritarian state, there were certainly positive sides to its history. Among them are social security for citizens, the presence of clear government plans for the economy and superior military power. Many people to this day remember life in the Soviet Union with nostalgia.

In 1917, the Great Russian (Russian) Revolution took place, which had a colossal influence on the entire course of world development. The two main characters were, as everyone now understands, Alexander Fedorovich Kerensky and Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. There is a current version that Kerensky and Lenin almost agreed on the collapse of Simbirsk Russian Empire to please the Jews, Freemasons and other enemies of the country. That is why Kerensky “played giveaway” and brought Lenin to power.

In 1987–1991 National history repeated “in the form of a farce.” Now Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev was playing “giveaway” and “slowing down” in all positions, and Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin was his playing partner.

At the end of 2011, in the electronic media, almost completely controlled by the administration of the President of the Russian Federation and absolutely dependent on the government of our country, the prevailing opinion was that the collapse of the USSR was inevitable and it was impossible to prevent it. There are serious arguments for this position. The fact is that the command-administrative system created by Stalin during the 1930s turned out to be quite effective during the Great Patriotic War, but after its completion during the unfolding scientific and technological revolution it became ineffective. There was a clear contradiction between productive forces, which the country had, and existing industrial (social) relations. The goals and objectives that faced the country could not be achieved while maintaining unchanged such realities as the “command-administrative system”, “totalitarian regime”, “party-state”, etc. All these “realities” have long been rotten, lost any connection with the real state of affairs in the country.

Gorbachev, in the witty expression of one either journalist or political scientist, managed to do nothing until it was no longer useful to do anything. Yeltsin, for the time being, also tried not to make sudden movements. Thus, back in the summer of 1990, as chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, he criticized the chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR N.I. Ryzhkov for indecisiveness. He argued that decisive reforms could be carried out quickly and without reducing the living standards of the population. If this level decreases, Yeltsin promised to “lie down on the rails.” But in the fall of 1990, the “500 days” radical transformation program was frozen. During the Second Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR in December 1990, Yeltsin did not insist on the adoption of a new constitution. He himself spoke about granting sovereignty to everyone in the amount of “whoever can swallow as much.” He himself and his inner circle have repeatedly said that the USSR is too large a state and it could well be divided into 50–70 independent parts. But after the All-Union referendum on March 17, 1991, at which the absolute majority of citizens of the RSFSR spoke in favor of preserving the renewed Union, Yeltsin began to participate in the preparation of a new Union Treaty.

Participation in the “Novo-Ogarevo process” within the framework of the “9 + 1” scheme (nine republics and Gorbachev) was clearly tactical and feigned in nature. After the election of B. N. Yeltsin as president of the RSFSR, the main efforts were aimed at provoking political conflict, create a crisis situation. The decree of the President of the RSFSR of July 20, 1991 provided for the liquidation of any party organizations in any government agencies and organizations of the republic. And only the CPSU and the Communist Party of the RSFSR had party organizations. The communist party elite faced a difficult alternative. Either capitulate to Yeltsin, submit to a man who, to put it mildly, few people liked. Or do something. Major party leaders showed great courage and determination, making plans to curb Yeltsin... in their comfortable offices on Old Square. But “they were terribly far from the people” (like the Decembrists once), whom they did not understand and with whom they did not know how to talk. About a month before the notorious “red-brown putsch” (July 12, 1991), the author of these lines, at that time a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the RSFSR, had a conversation for several hours with the then third secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the RSFSR G. A. Zyuganov. The author tried to explain to his interlocutor that any attempt to remove Gorbachev, or even more so Yeltsin, in the image and likeness of the “Kremlin coup” in relation to N.S. Khrushchev will end in absolute defeat. Back in 1988, the author, after a lecture in a private conversation with security officers over tea, heard a completely categorical statement: “We won’t shoot at the people!”

Yeltsin and those who stood behind him had a better understanding of the situation in the country than those who were on the other side. It seems that all the participants in the more than strange events of August 18–22, 1991 regularly played their roles as puppets in “dexterous and tired hands” (there is such a song by A. Makarevich - “Puppets”). The chronology and event outline looks very simple. A group of leading comrades, having learned from the planted information about their upcoming “falling out of the cart” after the signing of the Union Treaty, at the stage of deep alcoholic intoxication (with the exception of the Chairman of the KGB of the USSR V.A. Kryuchkov) decides to create the State Emergency Committee. This decision in a matter of minutes becomes known to Yeltsin’s entourage, who was in the same state in Kazakhstan, where he went on a visit. The incompetent actions of the pathetic conspirators allowed the “king’s retinue” to turn Yeltsin into the “banner of the fight against the coup.” Gorbachev played a double game, expecting to win in any case. The army, police, special forces, and the KGB did not shoot at the people. They, in fact, did not intend to, and the order did not come from the very funny conspirators. The rest is known. The colossus with feet of clay called the USSR finally collapsed.

You can, of course, blame everything on the conspiracy of the American presidents, Arab sheikhs, the CIA, other Western special services, etc. And who would refuse to take advantage of the situation, the weakening of the main enemy in order to get rid of him? But neither under Stalin, nor under Khrushchev, nor under Brezhnev, any attempts from the outside to even shake the colossus were successful. Internal decomposition and erosion of the Soviet political and socialist socio-economic system took place, but the leadership layer, the nomenklatura, still continued to “turn the wheels” of an already outdated bicycle. Gorbachev tried to change some details on the fly. Yeltsin simply abandoned his broken bicycle.

Or maybe Gorbachev and Yeltsin have nothing to do with it. The collapse of the USSR reminds me of one joke. A man comes to the venereologist and shows his “farm”. “Well, we need to amputate. “Your farm is no longer good for anything,” says the doctor. “Doctor, let’s do something, think about it, I’m ready to pay well,” the patient whines. “Okay,” the doctor replies. - Stand on a chair. Now jump to the floor. You see, everything fell off on its own.”

Among historians, journalists, and publicist writers, there is a fairly well-founded opinion that tsarist, pre-revolutionary Russia, its state-feudal autocratic system, which developed in the 16th - early 18th centuries, was not amenable to reform. It was impossible to reform that Russia. It could only be broken. This is what was done in 1917.

Another part of historians, journalists, publicist writers believe that the USSR, if you do not get distracted by the details, was the second edition of the previously destroyed state-serfdom, autocratic imperial system, which also could not be reformed, but could only be broken. This is what was done in 1991–1993. For supporters of this approach, conversations about Soviet power and socialism seem like a debate between medieval scholastics about how many angels can fit on the tip of a needle.

We may recall that in the midst of Gorbachev’s perestroika, during the meetings of the memorable First Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR (May-June 1989) popular writer And a wise man Chingiz Aitmatov spoke with bitterness that socialism had won throughout Europe, except for the USSR itself. Real socialism, very similar to communism, as Soviet propagandists portrayed it under late Khrushchev and early Brezhnev, has actually existed for a long time in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Austria, France, Germany and some other countries. Products are consumed in accordance with scientifically based standards. Citizens are provided with living space on the principle of “a room for each family member plus a common room for the whole family.” There is free healthcare, free secondary education, and in Sweden and Finland both higher education. Average age life in developed semi-capitalist, semi-socialist countries has reached eighty years. People with disabilities and single mothers live best in these countries...

Russian Prime Minister V.V. Putin during the election campaign as a merit Russian authorities noted an increase in pensions even during the crisis of 2008–2010. IN Western countries pensions were not increased - Vladimir Vladimirovich focused on the diligence and skill of the Russian leadership. For some reason, it was never said that pensions in developed countries, the level and quality of life of pensioners is much higher than in Russia. In Europe, a pensioner who receives a pension in the amount of 70–100% of his last salary has the opportunity to vacation on a free trip to Canary Islands(though not in season). In Russia, for a pension, which is 23–25% of the last salary, pensioners, at best, reach their beloved six hundred square meters.

Many in the USSR believed first in Gorbachev and then in Yeltsin. They helped the union fall apart. The concert at the request of the workers has ended. New Vasyukovs (remember Ostap Bender) never arose in our Palestines.

1.The collapse of the USSR: the story of the betrayal of Gorbachev and Yeltsin

This year marks two interrelated events: the 20th anniversary of the collapse of the USSR and the 80th anniversary of its first and last president, Mikhail Gorbachev. How to evaluate these dates? For some, the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. IN modern Russia 56% of people are nostalgic for the USSR, in Ukraine - from 46% to 54%, according to various opinion polls. Others, who unexpectedly gained independence in 1991, claim the triumph of democracy and national self-determination of nations, pompously celebrating the days of their independence.

“The Soviet Union did not collapse due to internal failure,” says the famous philosopher and writer Alexander Zinoviev. - This is nonsense, the Soviet system was viable, it could exist forever. This was a grand sabotage operation by the West. I have stated this and I insist on this. I studied this sabotage operation for 20 years, I know the technique - how it was all done. And the final operation of this sabotage was to promote Gorbachev to the post of Secretary General. It was sabotage. He was not just chosen, but carried out, and all the activities of Gorbachev, and then Yeltsin, were the activities of traitors. They destroyed the party apparatus, destroyed the party, destroyed the state apparatus."

There is information that Gorbachev and his wife were recruited by the CIA back in 1966. during their trip to France. The notorious Z. Brzezinski, who occupies one of the leading posts in the United States, hinted at this. At the very least, Gorbachev’s anti-Soviet activities began immediately after coming to power, which indicates his preliminary “preparation.”

Now take the elections of the Secretary General themselves. The fact that they were clearly part of the operation of the relevant US services was well understood even in the West by many. Everything was deliberately set up so that only 8 people were chosen. Under some pretext, the flight from the United States of Politburo member Shcherbitsky, who would have voted against Gorbachev, was delayed. Another Politburo member who was on vacation was not informed about the elections. It was Romanov, who would also probably have voted against Gorbachev. If at least these two had voted, Gorbachev would not have become General Secretary - he passed with a margin of one vote!

At the end of the 1980s, the term “incubator” appeared among specialists in European social democracy in relation to the process of pro-American leadership coming to power. This system of creating leaders who can be controlled received special development in the 90s...

In the “incubator” system there is a continuous process of selecting relatively young people who do not occupy high positions. They must satisfy two main requirements. Firstly, have ambition, be able to present yourself and please the public. Secondly, to be controllable, for example, to have incriminating evidence in the past or hidden vices, so that, if necessary, it is possible to control their actions.

Within the framework of the “incubator” system, the CIA, through well-established channels, establishes contact with promising individuals and subsequently coordinates actions to promote the intended candidate to the top, and also eliminates rivals. The whole operation can be carried out unnoticed, in halftones, but the right person wins. There is always a choice. There remains no direct evidence of the process of forming a pro-American leadership. This is how the creation of quislings occurs, who serve the United States and are ready to surrender their peoples for personal gain... At the origins of the “incubator” system was a high-class professional - Allen Dulles. It was tested in the USSR...
The promotion of Gorbachev to the post of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee was actually the first operation to implement the Soviet counter-revolution. Gorbachev was simply bought: in addition to the $80 billion in loans collected and stolen by his administration, I remember an anecdotal incident when Chancellor Kohl offered the USSR 160 billion marks for the withdrawal Soviet troops from Germany. Gorbachev agreed to 16 billion... It’s hard to believe that the rest of the money was not paid to him.

In addition to all this, they created an incredibly positive image for him in Western media. There is also information that during the Malta meeting, Gorbachev was “gifted” 300 million dollars, Shevardnadze - 75 million. Countless universities and foundations gave Gorbachev awards, prizes, diplomas, and honorary degrees. The more Gorbachev sold out the country, the more he was praised. He even received the Nobel Prize. For peace".

To give Gorbachev the Prize “For Peace” at a time when he was waging war in Afghanistan, killing our children and destroying the Afghan people - for this normal people are not capable.

A remarkable touch. The famous meeting in Malta, December 1989. General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev and US President George H. W. Bush said at the end of the meeting that their countries were no longer adversaries. And on the eve of the historic visit, a terrible storm broke out at sea. It seemed as if nature itself was preventing something, trying to prevent some terrible tragedy. But what? Knowledgeable people tell how, during negotiations, a frantic American journalist appeared on the deck of a Soviet ship and said to his colleagues in the purest Russian: "Guys, your country is over...

If we recall what exactly Gorbachev did, then without much effort it will become obvious that all of his activities were a systematic and deliberate destruction of the party apparatus of the CPSU. After this, the process of destruction of the entire system of Soviet statehood began with amazing speed. And the whole society collapsed with lightning speed: primary groups, economy, ideology, culture, etc. There was no way this could have happened in some natural way. This became possible only insofar as the destruction of Soviet statehood was carried out by its leaders themselves under the dictation of Western manipulators.

It is also reliably known that Gorbachev knew about the existence of special institutions for training agents of influence, and he also knew the lists of their “graduates.” But, having received information from the leadership of the KGB of the USSR about the identified agents of influence, Gorbachev prohibits counterintelligence from taking any measures to suppress criminal attacks. Gorbachev and Yeltsin, although officially political opponents, both received money from the same source - the American Hugo Humphrey Foundation."

As soon as Rajiv Gandhi met with Gorbachev and outlined a plan for the USSR's strategic turn to the East and strengthening the USSR-India connection, Gorbachev reported to his masters about this dangerous initiative. His masters decided to completely destroy the Gandhi family.

In December 1989, Gorbachev personally authorized the establishment of branches of the Masonic lodge "B'nai B'rith" (Sons of the Covenant) in Moscow, Vilnius, Riga, St. Petersburg, Kyiv, Odessa, and N-Novgorod.
Everyone, including Gorbachev, knew what kind of box it was. Here, for example, are the statements of some of the leaders of this lodge. Henry Kissinger: “I prefer chaos in Russia and civil war tendencies of reunification into a single, strong, centralized state." Z. Brzezinski: "Russia will be fragmented and under trusteeship." A. Dulles (from the report) “Such a concept as the “Russian people” must disappear altogether.” But it disappears! There is no such concept in the Russian Constitution, and the denationalized media persistently drum the word “Russians” into the heads of ordinary people.

B. Didenko is absolutely right when he wrote in his book “The Civilization of Cannibals”: ​​“Perestroika is a very cunning and far-sighted move of the predatory government. The Soviet Union was deliberately prevented from moving in the right direction, at least following the example of China."

And here is the confession of B. Clinton: “Using the mistakes of Soviet diplomacy, the extreme arrogance of Gorbachev and his entourage, including those who openly took a pro-American position, we achieved what President Truman was going to do with the Soviet Union through the atomic bomb.”

Before perestroika, the USSR had virtually no debt. The loans taken during perestroika were given the name “party money”, although in fact they were used by the top “democrats”, who came from the ranks of the degenerated leadership of the CPSU, headed by M.S. Gorbachev, A.N. Yakovlev, E.A. Shevardnadze...

The paradox is that borrowed funds were used to destroy the country, plunder its wealth, and appropriate national property by those who came to power in Russia and their foreign masters. The money was also used to organize the extinction of the Russian population and create a smoke screen with the help of the media. The biggest robbery in human history took place. The total damage from the destruction of the country's potential, the robbery of its wealth, and the transfer of funds abroad, according to various sources, amounts to a trillion dollars or more.

At the end of July 1991, Georges Bush Sr. visited Moscow for a short visit. During which he had a “no tie” meeting with Gorbachev, who reported to his master about events in the country. This was three weeks before August 19, 1991. Gorbachev's international masters organized a putsch. The behind-the-scenes goal was to establish a state of emergency and dictatorship. The role of the “poor victim” of this Gorbachev putsch is very suspicious. He himself, when asked by the press, once stated that he would not tell the full truth to anyone. This was the main scenario for the development of the process planned by the world mafia. But this option did not work. But the world behind the scenes never puts “all its eggs in one basket.”

In May 1993, Gorbachev was on a private visit to France and answered questions about possible “external assistance” in eliminating the USSR. He initially argued that external influences took place, but as an objective factor. But the fundamental trends were still within the country. However, he finally let something slip, and this allowed the Le Figaro newspaper to title the interview with Gorbachev in a very strange way: "You have to give Ronald Reagan credit."

In this interview, according to Le Figaro correspondents, Gorbachev admits for the first time that at a meeting with Reagan in Reykjavik, he actually surrendered the USSR to the mercy of the United States. Here are his words: “Reykjavik was actually a drama, a big drama. You will soon find out why. I believe that without such a strong personality as Ronald Reagan, the process would not have proceeded... At that summit meeting, we, you know, We went so far that it was impossible to turn back...""

The West does not abandon its heroes. Gorbachev, responsible for the death and impoverishment of millions of people, lives happily on the money of all kinds of Western organizations, especially American and German. He is constantly “fed” with fees for speaking anywhere and for any reason.”

On December 25, 1991, Gorbachev resigned as president of the USSR. In the form of compensation, he put forward a list that almost entirely consisted of material demands. A pension in the amount of the presidential salary with subsequent indexation, a presidential apartment, a dacha, a car for his wife and for himself, but most importantly - the Foundation... the former Academy of Social Sciences.

By this time, for Soviet democrats and their Western masters, Gorbachev had become waste material. For the further collapse of the USSR, a new figure was selected - Yeltsin. A demagogue who was unable to say even three sentences coherently, a builder by education and a destroyer by nature, a democrat who strived for a personal dictatorship, who suffered from alcoholism and many other illnesses, Yeltsin was an ideal puppet. He could change his surroundings many times and make the most ridiculous statements, but he carried out the orders of the Politburo (only now located in Washington) unquestioningly. The democratic press, which was so fond of criticizing Stalin's personality cult, actually created a personality cult of Yeltsin.

To increase Yeltsin's popularity, the democrats did not hesitate to resort to outright fraud. Thus, a false text of the speech that Yeltsin allegedly delivered at the October (1987) plenum of the CPSU Central Committee was widely distributed among the population. The result of the propaganda was remarkable: Yeltsin became truly unsinkable. The reputation of any politician in the West would have remained at the bottom of the river into which Yeltsin was once thrown.

Yeltsin's failure to appear at televised debates with other presidential contenders in any other country would have been considered disrespectful to voters. In the conditions of Russia in mid-1991, the stupefied electorate did not pay any attention to these debates. At the same time, Yeltsin had no program other than demagogic discussions about his fight against the privileges of the party nomenklatura and deliberately vague slogans about Russian sovereignty.

However, the union referendum on March 17, 1991 showed that the majority of USSR citizens still wanted to live in single state. Moreover, by the spring of 1991 it became clear that having appeared only a few years ago, despite all the difficulties caused by information pressure liberal media While remaining organizationally fragmented, the patriots clearly won over the masses.

This was clearly demonstrated by the presidential elections of the RSFSR on June 12, 1991. The Russian election campaign lasted only 15 days! This was a real record of brevity.

But it would be wrong to assume that everything went off without a hitch for Yeltsin. In these virtually uncontested elections, Yeltsin received 45,552,041 votes out of 106,484,518 voters. The main sensation presidential elections It was not Yeltsin’s victory, which everyone expected anyway, but the appearance of Zhirinovsky. The main thing that attracted 7.8% of the electorate to Zhirinovsky was his one phrase: “I will protect the Russians.” As we see, despite Yeltsin’s victory, despite all the disorientation through the media, the Russian people were ready to fight for the preservation of historical Russia.

In such conditions, Western prompters and their Russian puppets needed to organize a large-scale provocation, known as the “August putsch.”

In conclusion, let us ask ourselves why Boris Yeltsin signed the infamous “Declaration of State Sovereignty of Russia” on June 12, 1990? Why, a year later, was the predetermined election of Yeltsin for the President of Russia scheduled for exactly this day, and why exactly this day (and, for example, not the day of the arrest of the State Emergency Committee) was appointed national holiday all Russians?

The answer is simple and almost indisputable. June 12 is the birthday of George W. Bush - US President, Vice President under Ronald Reagan and ex-head of the CIA, who had much more to do with the destruction of the USSR than even Yeltsin or Gorbachev.

Thus, the American curators, who in June 1991 confidently and almost without hindrance promoted Yeltsin to seize power, twice, with an interval of a year, immortalized the role of their boss in the victory of the “Crusade against the USSR.” And at the same time, they put an indelible owner’s brand (stamp on cattle) on the entire puppet Russian statehood.

2. Yeltsin and Gorbachev may be recognized as state traitors

Member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Georgy Fedorov sent a request to Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika (the document is available to the Republic of Belarus) with a request to check the content of negotiations between senior officials of the USSR and the President of the United States for compliance with such articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as “Treason” and “Disclosure of State Secrets” ", and, if necessary, take prosecutorial response measures. It's about about declassified transcripts of telephone conversations in which the country's top political leadership - Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin - essentially report to George Bush Sr. about the destruction of the USSR.

The media (in particular, the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper) published transcripts of telephone conversations that took place on December 8 and 25, 1991. According to KP, immediately after the signing of the Belovezhskaya Agreement (on the creation of the CIS), which took place on December 8, 1991, Boris Yeltsin first called US President Bush and had a conversation with him lasting more than 28 minutes. Two weeks later, on December 25, the first (and last) President of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, called George Bush, and the conversation lasted 22 minutes.

Georgy Fedorov believes that the content of these conversations directly indicates that Yeltsin and Gorbachev consciously worked for the United States and for the destruction of the USSR. These people are traitors and traitors. In this regard, he turned to the Prosecutor General's Office with a request to conduct an investigation and initiate criminal cases under articles of “Treason” and “Disclosure of State Secrets.”