After the end of the Great Patriotic War, Joseph Stalin was not just the leader of the country, but the real savior of the fatherland. They practically did not call him otherwise than the leader, and the cult of personality in the post-war period reached its climax. It seemed that it was impossible to shake the authority of such a scale, but Stalin himself had a hand in this.

A series of inconsistent reforms and repressions gave rise to the term post-war Stalinism, which is also actively used by modern historians.

Brief analysis of Stalin's reforms

Repressions of the post-war period and the tightening of the cult of Stalin

It has already been mentioned above that Stalinism in the post-war years only grew stronger, and among the people the General Secretary was considered the main hero of the Fatherland. The planting of such an image of Stalin was facilitated both by excellent ideological support and cultural innovations. All films being made and books being published glorified the current regime and praised Stalin. Gradually, the number of repressions and the volume of censorship increased, but no one seemed to notice this.

Stalinist repressions became a real problem for the country in the mid-30s, and after the end of the Great Patriotic War, they gained new strength. So, in 1948, the famous "Leningrad case" received publicity, during which many politicians holding key positions in the party were arrested and shot. So, for example, the chairman of the State Planning Commission Voznesensky was shot, as well as the secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks Kuznetsov. Stalin was losing confidence in his own close associates, and therefore those who yesterday were still considered the main friend and associate of the General Secretary were under attack.

Stalinism in the post-war years increasingly took the form of a dictatorship. Despite the fact that the people literally idolized Stalin, the monetary reform and the re-emergence of repression made people doubt the authority of the general secretary. The first to oppose the existing regime were representatives of the intelligentsia, and therefore, led by Zhdanov, purges among writers, artists and journalists began in 1946.

Stalin himself brought to the fore the development of the country's military power. The development of the plan for the first atomic bomb allowed the USSR to consolidate its status as a superpower. All over the world, the USSR was feared, believing that Stalin was capable of starting the Third World War. The Iron Curtain covered the Soviet Union more and more, and the people resignedly waited for changes.

Changes, albeit not the best, came suddenly when the leader and hero of the whole country died in 1953. Stalin's death marked the beginning of a completely new stage for the Soviet Union.

Mass repressions in the USSR were carried out in the period 1927-1953. These repressions are directly associated with the name of Joseph Stalin, who during these years led the country. Social and political persecution in the USSR began after the end of the last stage of the civil war. These phenomena began to gain momentum in the second half of the 1930s and did not slow down during the Second World War, as well as after its end. Today we will talk about what the social and political repressions of the Soviet Union were, consider what phenomena underlie those events, and also what consequences this led to.

They say: a whole people cannot be suppressed without end. Lie! Can! We see how our people have become devastated, run wild, and indifference descended on them not only to the fate of the country, not only to the fate of their neighbor, but even to their own fate and the fate of children. Indifference, the last saving reaction of the body, has become our defining feature . That is why the popularity of vodka is unprecedented even in Russia. This is a terrible indifference, when a person sees his life not punctured, not with a broken corner, but so hopelessly fragmented, so up and down filthy that only for the sake of alcoholic oblivion is it still worth living. Now, if vodka were banned, a revolution would immediately break out in our country.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Reasons for repression:

• Forcing the population to work on a non-economic basis. A lot of work had to be done in the country, but there was not enough money for everything. The ideology formed new thinking and perception, and also had to motivate people to work practically for free.
• Strengthening personal power. For the new ideology, an idol was needed, a person who was unquestioningly trusted. After the assassination of Lenin, this post was vacant. Stalin had to take this place.
• Strengthening the exhaustion of a totalitarian society.

If you try to find the beginning of repression in the union, then the starting point, of course, should be 1927. This year was marked by the fact that mass executions began in the country, with the so-called pests, as well as saboteurs. The motive of these events should be sought in the relations between the USSR and Great Britain. So, at the beginning of 1927, the Soviet Union was involved in a major international scandal, when the country was openly accused of trying to transfer the seat of the Soviet revolution to London. In response to these events, Great Britain severed all relations with the USSR, both political and economic. Inside the country, this step was presented as London's preparation for a new wave of intervention. At one of the party meetings, Stalin declared that the country "needs to destroy all remnants of imperialism and all supporters of the White Guard movement." Stalin had an excellent reason for this on June 7, 1927. On this day, the political representative of the USSR, Voikov, was killed in Poland.

As a result, terror began. For example, on the night of June 10, 20 people who contacted the empire were shot. They were representatives of ancient noble families. In total, in June 27, more than 9 thousand people were arrested, who were accused of treason, aiding imperialism and other things that sound menacing, but are very difficult to prove. Most of those arrested were sent to prison.

Pest control

After that, a number of major cases began in the USSR, which were aimed at combating sabotage and sabotage. The wave of these repressions was based on the fact that in most large companies that operated within the Soviet Union, senior positions were occupied by people from imperial Russia. Of course, most of these people did not feel sympathy for the new government. Therefore, the Soviet regime was looking for pretexts by which this intelligentsia could be removed from leadership positions and, if possible, destroyed. The problem was that it needed a weighty and legal basis. Such grounds were found in a number of lawsuits that swept through the Soviet Union in the 1920s.

Among the most striking examples of such cases are the following:

• Shakhty business. In 1928, repressions in the USSR affected miners from Donbass. A show trial was staged from this case. The entire leadership of Donbass, as well as 53 engineers, were accused of espionage with an attempt to sabotage the new state. As a result of the trial, 3 people were shot, 4 were acquitted, the rest received prison terms from 1 to 10 years. It was a precedent - society enthusiastically accepted the repressions against the enemies of the people ... In 2000, the Russian prosecutor's office rehabilitated all the participants in the Shakhty case, in view of the lack of corpus delicti.
• Pulkovo case. In June 1936, a large solar eclipse was supposed to be visible on the territory of the USSR. The Pulkovo Observatory appealed to the world community to attract personnel to study this phenomenon, as well as to obtain the necessary foreign equipment. As a result, the organization was accused of espionage. The number of victims is classified.
• The case of the industrial party. The defendants in this case were those whom the Soviet authorities called bourgeois. This process took place in 1930. The defendants were accused of trying to disrupt industrialization in the country.
• The case of the peasant party. The Socialist-Revolutionary organization is widely known, under the name of the Chayanov and Kondratiev groups. In 1930, representatives of this organization were accused of trying to disrupt industrialization and interfering in agricultural affairs.
• Union Bureau. The Union Bureau case was opened in 1931. The defendants were representatives of the Mensheviks. They were accused of undermining the creation and implementation of economic activity within the country, as well as having links with foreign intelligence.

At that moment, a massive ideological struggle was taking place in the USSR. The new regime tried with all its might to explain its position to the population, as well as to justify its actions. But Stalin understood that ideology alone could not bring order to the country and could not allow him to retain power. Therefore, along with ideology, repressions began in the USSR. Above, we have already given some examples of cases from which repressions began. These cases have always raised big questions, and today, when the documents on many of them have been declassified, it becomes absolutely clear that most of the accusations were unfounded. It is no coincidence that the Russian prosecutor's office, having examined the documents of the Shakhtinsk case, rehabilitated all participants in the process. And this despite the fact that in 1928 none of the party leadership of the country had any idea about the innocence of these people. Why did this happen? This was due to the fact that, under the guise of repression, as a rule, everyone who did not agree with the new regime was destroyed.

The events of the 1920s were only the beginning, the main events were ahead.

Socio-political meaning of mass repressions

A new massive wave of repression within the country unfolded at the beginning of 1930. At that moment, the struggle began not only with political competitors, but also with the so-called kulaks. In fact, a new blow of the Soviet power against the rich began, and this blow caught not only wealthy people, but also the middle peasants and even the poor. One of the stages of delivering this blow was dispossession. Within the framework of this material, we will not dwell on the issues of dispossession, since this issue has already been studied in detail in the corresponding article on the site.

Party composition and governing bodies in repression

A new wave of political repressions in the USSR began at the end of 1934. At that time, there was a significant change in the structure of the administrative apparatus within the country. In particular, on July 10, 1934, the special services were reorganized. On this day, the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs of the USSR was created. This department is known by the acronym NKVD. This division included the following services:

• Main Directorate of State Security. It was one of the main bodies that dealt with almost all cases.
• Main Directorate of Workers' and Peasants' Militia. This is an analogue of the modern police, with all the functions and responsibilities.
• Main Directorate of the Border Service. The department dealt with border and customs affairs.
• Headquarters of the camps. This department is now widely known under the acronym GULAG.
• Main Fire Department.

In addition, in November 1934, a special department was created, which was called the "Special Meeting". This department received broad powers to combat the enemies of the people. In fact, this department could, without the presence of the accused, the prosecutor and the lawyer, send people into exile or to the Gulag for up to 5 years. Of course, this applied only to the enemies of the people, but the problem is that no one really knew how to define this enemy. That is why the Special Meeting had unique functions, since virtually any person could be declared an enemy of the people. Any person could be sent into exile for 5 years on one simple suspicion.

Mass repressions in the USSR

The events of December 1, 1934 became the reason for mass repressions. Then Sergei Mironovich Kirov was killed in Leningrad. As a result of these events, a special procedure for judicial proceedings was approved in the country. In fact, we are talking about accelerated litigation. Under the simplified system of proceedings, all cases where people were accused of terrorism and complicity in terrorism were transferred. Again, the problem was that this category included almost all people who fell under repression. Above, we have already talked about a number of high-profile cases that characterize the repressions in the USSR, where it is clearly seen that all people, one way or another, were accused of aiding terrorism. The specificity of the simplified system of proceedings was that the sentence had to be pronounced within 10 days. The defendant received the summons the day before the trial. The trial itself took place without the participation of prosecutors and lawyers. At the conclusion of the proceedings, any request for clemency was prohibited. If in the course of the proceedings a person was sentenced to death, then this measure of punishment was executed immediately.

Political repression, purge of the party

Stalin staged active repression within the Bolshevik Party itself. One of the illustrative examples of repression that affected the Bolsheviks happened on January 14, 1936. On this day, the replacement of party documents was announced. This step has long been discussed and was not unexpected. But when replacing documents, new certificates were not awarded to all party members, but only to those who "deserved trust." Thus began the purge of the party. According to official data, when new party documents were issued, 18% of the Bolsheviks were expelled from the party. These were the people to whom the repressions were applied, first of all. And we are talking about only one of the waves of these purges. In total, the cleaning of the batch was carried out in several stages:

• In 1933. 250 people were expelled from the top leadership of the party.
• In 1934-1935, 20,000 people were expelled from the Bolshevik Party.

Stalin actively destroyed people who could claim power, who had power. To demonstrate this fact, it is only necessary to say that of all the members of the Politburo of 1917, only Stalin survived after the purge (4 members were shot, and Trotsky was expelled from the party and expelled from the country). In total, there were 6 members of the Politburo at that time. In the period between the revolution and the death of Lenin, a new Politburo of 7 people was assembled. By the end of the purge, only Molotov and Kalinin survived. In 1934, the next congress of the VKP(b) party took place. The congress was attended by 1934 people. 1108 of them were arrested. Most were shot.

The assassination of Kirov aggravated the wave of repressions, and Stalin himself addressed the party members with a statement about the need for the final extermination of all enemies of the people. As a result, the Criminal Code of the USSR was amended. These changes stipulated that all cases of political prisoners were considered in an expedited manner without attorneys for prosecutors within 10 days. The executions were carried out immediately. In 1936, a political trial took place over the opposition. In fact, Lenin's closest associates, Zinoviev and Kamenev, ended up in the dock. They were accused of killing Kirov, as well as an attempt on Stalin. A new stage of political repressions against the Leninist guards began. This time, Bukharin was subjected to repressions, as well as the head of the government, Rykov. The socio-political meaning of repression in this sense was associated with the strengthening of the personality cult.

Repression in the army

Beginning in June 1937, repressions in the USSR affected the army. In June, the first trial took place over the high command of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army (RKKA), including the commander-in-chief, Marshal Tukhachevsky. The leadership of the army was accused of attempting a coup. According to the prosecutors, the coup was to take place on May 15, 1937. The accused were found guilty and most of them were shot. Tukhachevsky was also shot.

An interesting fact is that of the 8 members of the trial who sentenced Tukhachevsky to death, later five were themselves repressed and shot. However, from that time on, repressions began in the army, which affected the entire leadership. As a result of such events, 3 marshals of the Soviet Union, 3 army commanders of the 1st rank, 10 army commanders of the 2nd rank, 50 corps commanders, 154 division commanders, 16 army commissars, 25 corps commissars, 58 divisional commissars, 401 regimental commanders were repressed. In total, 40 thousand people were subjected to repressions in the Red Army. It was 40 thousand leaders of the army. As a result, more than 90% of the command staff was destroyed.

Strengthening repression

Beginning in 1937, the wave of repressions in the USSR began to intensify. The reason was order No. 00447 of the NKVD of the USSR of July 30, 1937. This document declared the immediate repression of all anti-Soviet elements, namely:

• Former kulaks. All those whom the Soviet government called kulaks, but who escaped punishment, or were in labor camps or in exile, were subject to repression.
• All representatives of religion. Anyone who had anything to do with religion was subject to repression.
• Participants in anti-Soviet actions. Under such participants, everyone who had ever acted actively or passively against the Soviet regime was involved. In fact, this category included those who did not support the new government.
• Anti-Soviet politicians. Inside the country, all those who were not members of the Bolshevik Party were called anti-Soviet politicians.
• The White Guards.
• People with a criminal record. People who had a criminal record were automatically considered enemies of the Soviet regime.

• hostile elements. Any person who was called a hostile element was sentenced to be shot.
• inactive elements. The rest, who were not sentenced to death, were sent to camps or prisons for a term of 8 to 10 years.

All cases were now dealt with in an even more expedited manner, where most cases were dealt with en masse. According to the same order of the NKVD, repressions applied not only to convicts, but also to their families. In particular, the following punishments were applied to the families of the repressed:

• Families of those who were repressed for active anti-Soviet actions. All members of such families were sent to camps and labor camps.
• The families of the repressed, who lived in the border zone, were subject to resettlement inland. Often special settlements were formed for them.
• The family of the repressed, who lived in large cities of the USSR. Such people were also resettled inland.

In 1940, a secret department of the NKVD was created. This department was engaged in the destruction of political opponents of Soviet power abroad. The first victim of this department was Trotsky, who was killed in Mexico in August 1940. In the future, this secret department was engaged in the destruction of members of the White Guard movement, as well as representatives of the imperialist emigration of Russia.

In the future, repressions continued, although their main events had already passed. In fact, repressions in the USSR continued until 1953.

The results of repression

In total, from 1930 to 1953, 3,800,000 people were repressed on charges of counter-revolution. Of these, 749,421 people were shot ... And this is only according to official information ... And how many more people died without trial or investigation, whose names and surnames are not included in the list?

In the history of Russia in the 20th century, the repressions of the 1930s occupy a special place. Criticism of the Soviet regime is often based on the condemnation of this particular period, as evidence of the cruelty and unprincipled actions of the leaders at that time. The chronological order of events that occurred at this time, we can find in any history textbook. Many historians discussed this topic, but expressing their personal point of view on certain events, they invariably relied on the goals that were pursued by the authorities in this period, and also analyzed the results of this bloody time in the history of Russia and the USSR.

It is believed that the era of violence and repression began with the very seizure of power in 1917. However, it was in the 30s. account for the peak, at this time was put in camps and shot the largest number of people. History shows that at that time every third person was either repressed or a relative of the repressed.

The first thing that was done during this period was the holding of show trials, the purpose of which appears in the name itself, this is a demonstration of the punitive power of power, and the fact that anyone can be punished for opposition. It is noteworthy that the cases for these trials were fabricated, and for greater clarity, it was stated that all the accused themselves confessed to their crime.

On the one hand, the desire of power to gain a foothold in its dominant position is understandable and natural, on the other hand, it was chosen too immoral, from a human point of view, and cruel way.

Now we understand that the ruling power always needs some kind of counterweight, which allows you to achieve a balance in the opinions and views of statesmen who are responsible for the contagious aspects of the life of a citizen of the state. The Soviet government desperately tried to completely destroy and remove this counterweight.

Stalinist political repressions of the 30s

Stalin refers to the political repressions carried out in the Soviet Union during the period when the country's government was headed by I.V. Stalin.

Political persecution acquired a massive character with the beginning of collectivization and forced industrialization, and reached its peak in the period dating from 1937-1938. - The Great Terror.

During the Great Terror, the NKVD arrested about 1.58 million people, of which 682 thousand were sentenced to death.

Until now, historians have not come to a consensus regarding the historical background of the Stalinist political repressions of the 1930s and their institutional basis.

But for most researchers, it is an indisputable fact that it was the political figure of Stalin that played a decisive role in the punitive department of the state.

According to declassified archival materials, mass repressions on the ground were carried out in accordance with the planned tasks lowered from above to identify and punish the enemies of the people. Moreover, on many documents the demand to shoot or beat everyone was still written by the hand of the Soviet leader.

It is believed that the ideological basis for the Great Terror was the Stalinist doctrine of intensifying the class struggle. The very mechanisms of terror were borrowed from the time of the civil war, during which non-judicial executions were widely used by the Bolsheviks.

A number of researchers evaluate the Stalinist repressions as a perversion of the policy of Bolshevism, emphasizing that among the repressed there were many members of the Communist Party, leaders and the military.

For example, in the period 1936-1939. more than 1.2 million communists were repressed - half of the total number of the party. Moreover, according to existing data, only 50 thousand people were released, the rest died in the camps or were shot.

In addition, according to Russian historians, Stalin's repressive policy, based on the creation of extrajudicial bodies, was a gross violation of the laws of the Soviet Constitution that were in force at that time.

Researchers identify several main causes of the Great Terror. The main one is the Bolshevik ideology itself, which tends to divide people into friends and enemies.

It should be noted that it was beneficial for the current government to explain the difficult economic situation that prevailed in the country during the period under review as the result of the wrecking activities of the enemies of the Soviet people.

In addition, the presence of millions of prisoners made it possible to solve serious economic problems, for example, providing cheap labor for large-scale construction projects in the country.

Finally, many tend to consider Stalin's mental illness, who suffered from paranoia, to be one of the reasons for political repressions. The fear sown among the masses became a reliable foundation for complete submission to the central government. Thus, thanks to the total terror in the 30s, Stalin managed to get rid of possible political opponents and turn the remaining workers of the apparatus into thoughtless performers.

The policy of the Great Terror caused enormous damage to the economy and military power of the Soviet state.

Sources: prezentacii.com, www.skachatreferat.ru, revolution.allbest.ru, rhistory.ucoz.ru, otherreferats.allbest.ru

Egyptian goddess Amaunet

fifth sun

Goddess of Delusion Ata

Religion of ancient Greece

Archimedes - biography

A native and citizen of Syracuse. Educated in Alexandria, the greatest cultural center of the ancient world. Archimedes owns a number of important mathematical discoveries. The highest achievements of the scientist ...

The story of Demeter

Demeter is the goddess of fertility and agriculture in Greek mythology. One of the most revered deities of the Olympic pantheon. Her name means Mother Earth...

Beauty and health in winter

Winter is slowly losing its positions, and warm spring days are getting closer. But despite this, the cold is not over yet...

Why it is important to know English even for programmers

As you know, English is an international language, it is the language of negotiations, the language of most periodicals, newspapers, world-famous magazines. Not...

Prevention for eye health

Today, many people want to have good and high-quality vision, but unfortunately, this is not given to many by nature, ...

The most powerful launch vehicle

Strange as it may seem, but the Tsar missile "Voevoda" is considered the most powerful weapon in the world. Missile system R-36M2 Voyevoda with intercontinental...

The topic of political repressions in the USSR under Stalin is one of the most discussed historical topics of our time. First, let's define the term "political repression". That's what the dictionaries say.

Repression (lat. repressio - suppression, oppression) - a punitive measure, punishment used by state bodies, the state. Political repressions are coercive measures applied on the basis of political motives, such as imprisonment, expulsion, exile, deprivation of citizenship, forced labor, deprivation of life, etc.

Obviously, the reason for the emergence of political repression is the political struggle in the state, causing some "political motives" for punitive measures. And the more fierce this struggle is, the greater the scope of repression. Thus, in order to explain the causes and scope of the repressive policy pursued in the USSR, it is necessary to understand what political forces acted at this historical stage. What goals did they pursue? And what did they achieve? Only such an approach can lead us to a deep understanding of this phenomenon.

In domestic historical journalism, regarding the issue of repressions of the 1930s, two directions have developed, which can be conditionally called “anti-Soviet” and “patriotic”. Anti-Soviet journalism presents this historical phenomenon in a simplified black and white picture, attributing b O most of the causal relationships to the personal qualities of Stalin. A purely philistine approach to history is used, which consists in explaining events only by the actions of individuals.

From the patriotic camp, the vision of the process of political repression also suffers from bias. This position, in my opinion, is objective and is due to the fact that pro-Soviet historians were initially in the minority and, as it were, on the defensive. They constantly had to defend and justify, and not put forward their own version of events. Therefore, their works, as an antithesis, contain only the signs "+". But thanks to their criticism of anti-Sovietism, it was possible to somehow understand the problem areas of Soviet history, to see outright lies, to get away from myths. Now, it seems to me, the time has come to restore an objective picture of events.

Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Zhukov

Regarding the political repressions of the pre-war USSR (the so-called "great terror"), one of the first attempts to recreate this picture was the work "Another Stalin" by Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Nikolayevich Zhukov, published in 2003. I would like to talk about his conclusions in this article, as well as express some of my thoughts on this issue. Here is what Yuri Nikolayevich himself writes about his work.

“Myths about Stalin are far from new. The first, apologetic, began to take shape as early as the thirties, having taken its final shape by the beginning of the fifties. The second, revelatory, - after that, after Khrushchev's closed report at the XX Congress of the CPSU. It actually was a mirror image of the previous one, it simply turned from “white” to “black”, without changing its nature at all...
... Far from claiming completeness and therefore indisputability, I will venture only one thing: to get away from both preconceived points of view, from both myths; try to restore the old, once well known, and now carefully forgotten, decidedly unnoticed, ignored by everyone.

Well, a very commendable desire for a historian (without quotes).

"I'm just a student of Lenin..."- I. Stalin

To begin with, I would like to talk about Lenin and Stalin, as his successor. Both liberal and patriotic historians frequently oppose Stalin to Lenin. Moreover, if the former oppose the portrait of the cruel dictator Stalin, as it were, to the more democratic Lenin (after all, he introduced the NEP, etc.). The latter, on the contrary, expose Lenin as a radical revolutionary as opposed to the statesman Stalin, who removed the unbelted "Leninist guard" from the political scene.

In fact, it seems to me that such oppositions are incorrect, tearing the logic of the formation of the Soviet state into two opposing stages. It would be more correct to speak of Stalin as the successor of what Lenin started (especially since Stalin always spoke about this, and by no means out of modesty). And try to find common features in them.

Here is what, for example, the historian Yuri Emelyanov says about this:

"First of all, Stalin was constantly guided by the Leninist principle of the creative development of Marxist theory, rejecting "dogmatic marxism". Constantly making adjustments to the daily implementation of the policy so that it corresponded to the real situation, Stalin at the same time followed the main Leninist guidelines. Putting forward the task of building a socialist society in one single country, Stalin consistently continued the activities of Lenin, which led to the victory of the world's first socialist revolution in Russia. Stalin's five-year plans followed logically from Lenin's GOELRO plan. The Stalinist program of collectivization and modernization of the countryside met the tasks of mechanization of agriculture set by Lenin.

Yuri Zhukov agrees with him (, p. 5): “To understand Stalin's views, his approach to solving all problems without exception is important - “concrete historical conditions”. It was they, and not someone's authoritative statement, that official dogmas and theories became the main ones for Stalin. They, and nothing else, explain his adherence to the policy of the same pragmatist Lenin as he himself, explain his own hesitations and fractures, his readiness, under the influence of real conditions, not at all embarrassed, to abandon previously expressed proposals and insist on other sometimes diametrically opposed.

There are good reasons to assert that Stalin's policy was a continuation of Lenin's. Perhaps, if Lenin were in Stalin's place, in the same "concrete historical conditions" he acted in a similar way. In addition, it is worth noting the phenomenal performance of these people, and the constant desire for development and self-learning.

The struggle for the Leninist legacy

Even during Lenin's lifetime, but when he was already seriously ill, a struggle for leadership in the party unfolded between Trotsky's group and the "left" (Zinoviev, Kamenev), as well as the "right" (Bukharin, Rykov) and Stalin's "centrist group". We will not particularly go into the vicissitudes of this struggle, but note the following. In the turbulent process of party discussions, it was the Stalinist group that stood out and received the support of the party, which initially occupied much worse “starting positions”. Anti-Soviet historians say that Stalin's special cunning and cunning contributed to this. He, they say, skillfully maneuvered among opponents, pushed them against each other, used their ideas, and so on.

We will not deny Stalin's ability to play a political game, but the fact remains that the Bolshevik Party supported him. And this was facilitated, firstly, by the position of Stalin, who, despite all the differences, tried to prevent a split in the party at this difficult time. And, secondly, the focus and ability of the Stalinist group for practical state activity, the thirst for which, apparently, was very strongly felt among the Bolsheviks who won the civil war.

Stalin and his associates, unlike their opponents, having objectively assessed the current situation in the world, understood the impossibility of a world revolution at this historical stage and, proceeding from this, began to consolidate the successes achieved in Russia, and not “export” them outside. From Stalin's report to the 17th Congress: "We were oriented in the past and are oriented in the present to the USSR and only to the USSR".

It is impossible to say exactly from what date the full-fledged domination of the Stalinist group in the country's leadership began. Apparently, this is the period of 1928-1929, when it can be said that this political force began to pursue an independent policy. At this stage, the repressions against the party opposition were rather mild. Usually, for opposition leaders, defeat ended in removal from leadership positions, expulsion from Moscow or the country, expulsion from the party.

The scale of repression

Now it's time to talk about numbers. What were the scales of political repressions in the Soviet state? According to discussions with anti-Sovietists (see "The Court of History" or "The Historical Trial"), it is precisely this question that causes a painful reaction on their part and accusations of "justification, inhumanity", etc. But talking about numbers really matters, as the number often says a lot about the nature of the repression. At the moment, the most widely known studies have received Dr. V. N. Zemskova.

Table 1 shows Zemskov's data obtained from two sources: the statistical reporting of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB and data from the I Special Department of the former USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs.

V. N. Zemskov:

“In early 1989, by decision of the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, a commission of the Department of History of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR was established, headed by Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences Yu.A. Polyakov to determine the loss of the population. As part of this commission, we were among the first historians to have access to the statistical reporting of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB, which had not previously been issued to researchers ...

...The vast majority of them were convicted under the famous 58th article. There is a rather significant discrepancy in the statistical calculations of these two departments, which, in our opinion, is by no means explained by the incompleteness of the information of the former KGB of the USSR, but by the fact that employees of the 1st Special Department of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs interpreted the concept of "political criminals" more widely and in the statistics compiled by them there was a significant "criminal admixture".

It should be noted that so far among historians there is no unity in assessing the process of dispossession. Should the dispossessed be classified as politically repressed? Table 1 includes only those who were dispossessed of the 1st category, that is, those who were arrested and convicted. Those deported to a special settlement (category 2) and simply dispossessed but not expelled (category 3) were not included in the table.

Now let's use these data to identify some special periods. This is 1921, 35,000 were convicted, of which 6,000 were sentenced to the highest measure - the end of the civil war. 1929 - 1930 - carrying out collectivization. 1941 - 1942 - the beginning of the war, the increase in the number of those shot to 23-26 thousand is associated with the elimination of "particularly dangerous elements" in prisons that fell under occupation. And a special place is occupied by 1937-1938 (the so-called "great terror"), it is during this period that a sharp surge of political repressions occurs, especially those sentenced to VMN 682 thousand (or over 82% for the entire period). What happened during this period? If everything is more or less clear with other years, then 1937 looks truly very terrifying. The work of Yury Zhukov is devoted to the explanation of this phenomenon.

Such a picture emerges from archival data. And there is a lot of controversy about these numbers. Very much they do not coincide with the tens of millions of victims voiced by our liberals.

Of course, one cannot say that the scale of repressions was very low, based only on the fact that the actual number of those repressed turned out to be an order of magnitude smaller than the number of liberals. The repressions were significant in the indicated special years, when large-scale events were committed for the whole country, compared with the level of "calm" years. But at the same time, we must understand that being repressed for political reasons does not automatically mean innocent. There were those convicted of serious crimes against the state (robbery, terror, espionage, etc.).

Stalin's course

Now, after talking about numbers, let's move on to describing historical processes. However, I would like to make one digression. The topic of the article is very painful and gloomy: political intrigues and repression inspire few people. However, we must understand that the life of the Soviet people in these years was by no means filled with this. In the 1920s and 1930s, truly global changes took place in Soviet Russia, in which the people took a direct part. The country has developed at an incredible pace. The breakthrough was not only industrial: public education, health care, culture and labor rose to a qualitatively new level, and the citizens of the USSR saw it with their own eyes. The "Russian miracle" of the Stalinist five-year plans was rightly perceived by the Soviet people as the fruit of their own efforts.

What was the policy of the new leadership of the country? First of all, the strengthening of the USSR. This was expressed in the accelerated collectivization and industrialization. In raising the country's economy to a whole new level. Creation of a modern army based on a new military industry. For these purposes, all the resources of the country were thrown. The source was agricultural products, minerals, forests, and even cultural and church values. Stalin here was the toughest conductor of such a policy. And, as history has shown, not in vain ...

In international politics, the new course consisted in curtailing the activity of "exporting the world revolution", normalizing relations with the capitalist countries, and searching for allies before the war. First of all, this was due to the growing tension in the international arena and the expectation of a new war. The USSR, at the "proposal" of a number of countries, joins the League of Nations. These steps, at first glance, run counter to the tenets of Marxism-Leninism.

Lenin once spoke of the League of Nations:

“An undisguised instrument of the imperialist Anglo-French desires ... The League of Nations is a dangerous instrument directed with its tip against the country of the dictatorship of the proletariat”.

Whereas Stalin in an interview:

“Despite the withdrawal of Germany and Japan from the League of Nations - or perhaps precisely for this reason - the League can become a kind of brake in order to delay the outbreak of hostilities or prevent them. If this is so, if the League can turn out to be a kind of bump on the road to at least somewhat complicating the cause of war and to some extent facilitating the cause of peace, then we are not against the League. Yes, if this is the course of historical events, then it is possible that we will support the League, the nations, despite its colossal shortcomings..

Also in international politics, there is an adjustment in the activities of the Comintern, an organization called upon to carry out a world proletarian revolution. Stalin, with the help of G. Dimitrov, who returned from Nazi dungeons, calls on the Communist Parties of European countries to join the "People's Fronts" with the Social Democrats, which again can be interpreted as "opportunism." From Dimitrov's speech at the 7th World Congress of the Communist International:

“Let the communists recognize democracy, come out in defense of it, then we are ready for a united front. We are supporters of Soviet democracy, the democracy of the working people, the most consistent democracy in the world. But we defend and will continue to defend in the capitalist countries every inch of bourgeois democratic freedoms that are encroached upon by fascism and bourgeois reaction, because this is dictated by the interests of the class struggle of the proletariat!”

At the same time, the Stalinist group (in foreign policy it is Molotov, Litvinov) went to the creation of the Eastern Pact as part of the USSR, France, Czechoslovakia, England, suspiciously similar in composition to the former Entente.

Such a new course in foreign policy could not but cause protest moods in some party circles, but the Soviet Union objectively needed it.

Within the country, there was also a normalization of public life. The New Year holidays with the Christmas tree and the carnival returned, the activities of the communes were curtailed, officer ranks were introduced in the army (oh horror!), And much more. Here is one illustration that I think captures the atmosphere of that time. From the decision of the Politburo:

[in the Internet] .

Joseph Stalin died 65 years ago, but his personality and his policies are still the subject of fierce debate among historians, politicians, and ordinary people. The scale and ambiguity of this historical figure are so great that until now the attitude towards Stalin and the Stalin era for some citizens of our country is a kind of indicator that determines the political and social position.

One of the darkest and most tragic pages in the country is political repression, which peaked in the 1930s and early 1940s. It is the repressive policy of the Soviet state during the years of Stalin's rule that is one of the main arguments of the opponents of Stalinism. After all, on the other side of the coin is industrialization, the construction of new cities and enterprises, the development of transport infrastructure, the strengthening of the armed forces and the formation of a classical model of education, which still works “by inertia” and is one of the best in the world. But collectivization, the deportation of entire peoples to Kazakhstan and Central Asia, the extermination of political opponents and opponents, as well as random people attributed to them, excessive harshness towards the country's population - this is another part of the Stalin era, which also cannot be erased from people's memory.

However, recently there have been more and more publications that the scale and nature of political repression during the reign of I.V. Stalin were greatly exaggerated. It is interesting that not so long ago this position was voiced, it seemed by those who were in no way interested in “whitewashing” Joseph Vissarionovich - employees of the US CIA analytical center. By the way, it was in the United States that Alexander Solzhenitsyn once lived in exile - the main exposer of Stalinist repressions, and it was he who owns the frightening figures - 70 million repressed. The US CIA analytical center Rand Corporation calculated the number of those repressed during the years of the Soviet leader's rule and got somewhat different figures - about 700 thousand people. Perhaps the scale of the repressions was greater, but obviously not as much as Solzhenitsyn's followers say.

The international human rights organization "Memorial" claims that from 11-12 million to 38-39 million people became victims of Stalin's repressions. The spread, as you can see, is very large. Yet 38 million is 3.5 times more than 11 million. The "Memorial" refers to the victims of Stalinist repressions: 4.5-4.8 million convicted for political reasons, 6.5 million deported since 1920, about 4 million disenfranchised under the Constitution of 1918 and the decree of 1925, about 400 500 thousand were repressed on the basis of a number of decrees, 6-7 million died of starvation in 1932-1933, 17.9 thousand victims of "labor decrees".

As you can see, the concept of "victims of political repression" in this case is expanding to the maximum. But political repression is still specific actions aimed at arresting, imprisoning or physically destroying dissidents or those suspected of dissent. Is it possible to refer to the victims of political repressions those who died of starvation? Especially considering that at that difficult time, most of the world's population was starving. Millions of people died in the African and Asian colonies of European powers, and in the "prosperous" United States of America, it was not for nothing that these years were called the "Great Depression".

Go ahead. Another 4 million people were deprived of the right to vote during the Stalinist period. However, can the loss of rights be considered as a full-fledged political repression? In this case, the multi-million African-American population of the United States, which in the first half of the 20th century not only did not have voting rights, but was also segregated along racial lines, is also the victim of political repression by Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman and other American presidents. That is, approximately 10-12 million people from among those classified by "Memorial" as victims of repression are already in question. Victims of time - yes, not always a well-thought-out economic policy - yes, but not targeted political repressions.

If we approach the issue strictly, then only persons convicted under “political” articles and sentenced to death or certain terms of imprisonment can be called directly victims of political repression. And here the fun begins. Not only “politicians” were classified as repressed, but also many real criminals convicted of ordinary criminal offenses, or who, for certain reasons (not repaid card debt, for example), tried to get over from criminals by initiating a new “political” article to the political. The former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky writes about such a story, which only took place in the Brezhnev era, in his memoirs - an ordinary criminal was sitting with him, who, in order not to answer to other prisoners for gambling debt, deliberately scattered anti-Soviet leaflets in the barracks. Of course, these cases were not isolated.

In order to understand who can be classified as politically repressed, it is necessary to take a closer look at the Soviet criminal legislation of the 1920s-1950s - what it was like, who could be subjected to the most severe measures and who could and who could not become a victim " firing squad" articles of the criminal code.

Lawyer Vladimir Postanyuk notes that when the Criminal Code of the RSFSR was adopted in 1922, Article 21 of the main criminal law of the Soviet republic emphasized that in order to combat the most serious types of crimes that threaten the foundations of Soviet power and the Soviet system, as an exceptional measure to protect the state of workers firing is used.

For what crimes, according to the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, other union republics, was the death penalty imposed in the Stalin years (1923-1953)? Could they be sentenced to death under Article 58 of the Criminal Code?

V.Postanyuk: Crimes punishable by an exceptional measure of punishment - the death penalty - were included in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR. First of all, these were the so-called. "counter-revolutionary" crimes. Among the crimes for which the death penalty was due, the criminal law of the RSFSR listed the organization of armed uprisings for counter-revolutionary purposes or the invasion of Soviet territory by armed detachments or gangs, attempts to seize power (Article 58 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR); communication with foreign states or their individual representatives with the aim of inducing them to military intervention in the affairs of the Republic; participation in an organization operating for the purpose of committing the crimes referred to in Art. 58 of the Criminal Code; opposition to the normal activities of state institutions and enterprises; participation in or assistance to an organization acting in the direction of helping the international bourgeoisie; organization for counter-revolutionary purposes of terrorist acts directed against representatives of the Soviet government or figures; organizing for counter-revolutionary purposes the destruction or damage by explosion, arson or other means of railway or other means of communication, means of public communication, water pipes, public warehouses and other structures or structures, as well as participation in the performance of these crimes (Article 58 of the Criminal Code). The death penalty could also be received for active opposition to the revolutionary and working-class movement while serving in responsible or highly secret positions in tsarist Russia and with counter-revolutionary governments during the Civil War. The death penalty followed for the organization of gangs and gangs and participation in them, for counterfeiting by conspiracy of persons, for a number of malfeasances. For example, article 112 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR emphasized that execution could be ordered for abuse of power, abuse of power or inaction and negligence, followed by the collapse of the managed structure. Misappropriation and embezzlement of state values, unjust sentence by a judge, taking a bribe under aggravating circumstances - all these crimes could also be punished up to the death penalty.

Could juveniles be shot during the Stalin period, and for what crimes? Were there such examples?

V. Postanyuk: During the period of its operation, the code was repeatedly subjected to changes. In particular, they extended to issues of criminal liability of minors and were associated with the mitigation of liability measures that could be applied to juvenile offenders. The norms on punishment also changed: the use of execution for minors and pregnant women was prohibited, short-term imprisonment was introduced for a period of 1 month (Law of July 10, 1923), and later for a period of 7 days (Law of October 16, 1924) .

In 1935, the famous Decree "On measures to combat juvenile delinquency" was adopted. According to this regulation, minors over 12 years of age were allowed to be prosecuted for theft, violence and bodily harm, mutilation, murder or attempted murder. The decree stated that all criminal penalties could be applied to juvenile offenders over 12 years old. This wording, which was not very clear, gave rise to numerous allegations about the facts of the execution of children in the Soviet Union. But these claims, at least from a legal point of view, are not true. After all, the rule on the impossibility of imposing the death penalty on persons under the age of 18, contained in Art. 13 Fundamentals and in Art. 22 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, has not been canceled.

Wasn't there a single case of execution of minors in the Soviet Union?

V. Postaniuk: There was such a case. And this is the only reliably known case of the execution of a teenager in Soviet times. 15-year-old Arkady Neiland was shot on August 11, 1964. As you can see, this is far from Stalin's time. Neiland was the first and only minor officially sentenced by a Soviet court to capital punishment - execution. The guilt of this criminal was that he hacked to death with an ax a woman and her three-year-old son. The request for pardon for the teenager was rejected, and Nikita Khrushchev himself spoke out in support of capital punishment for him.

Thus, we see that Soviet criminal law did indeed provide for the death penalty under the “anti-Soviet” Article 58. However, as the lawyer noted in his interview, among the “execution” anti-Soviet acts were crimes that would be called terrorist in our time. For example, one can hardly call a “prisoner of conscience” a person who organized sabotage on a railway track. As for the use of execution as the ultimate punishment for corrupt officials, this practice still exists in a number of countries around the world, for example, in China. In the Soviet Union, the death penalty was seen as a temporary and exceptional, but effective measure to combat crime and the enemies of the Soviet state.

If we talk about the victims of political repression, then the vast majority of those convicted under the anti-Soviet article were just saboteurs, spies, organizers and members of armed and underground groups and organizations that acted against the Soviet regime. Suffice it to recall that in the 1920s and 1930s the country was in a hostile environment, and the situation was not particularly stable in a number of regions of the Soviet Union. For example, in Central Asia, individual groups of Basmachi continued to resist the Soviet regime in the 1930s.

Finally, do not miss another very interesting nuance. A significant part of the Soviet citizens repressed under Stalin were senior officials of the party and the Soviet state, including law enforcement and security agencies. If we analyze the lists of the top leaders of the NKVD of the USSR at the union and republican levels in the 1930s, then most of them were subsequently shot themselves. This indicates that tough measures were applied not only to the political opponents of the Soviet government, but, to a much greater extent, to its representatives themselves, guilty of abuse of power, corruption or any other official crimes.