i affirmatively hang up, in kiev , as i understand it, you don’t want it either, i want to stay with you, what are we going to do, just be close, but much closer, well, it’s like we were yesterday, are you against it, what are you doing,

well then as for vladimir ilyevich, for some he is...

dirty german money for the revolution, because there is also a lot of talk, myth, reality, in general, well, there are a huge number of myths about lenin, both such leafy myths of the soviet era, and negative ones myths that were created during his lifetime, which were picked up after the collapse of the soviet union, and what’s interesting is that those people who praised lenin before ’91 began to throw mud at him; after ’91, they traditionally wavered from the general line of the party. so this is the task

of clearing lenin of myths, it is also huge, but we need to do this in order to break through to objective knowledge about this by far the largest figure in the history of the 20th century. hello, this is a historical podcast russia-west on the swing of history. pyotr romanov and sergei solovyov are with you. today we will understand the biography of the leader of the russian revolution, vladimir ilivich lenin. today is 100 years since his death. from a historical point of view, well, literally yesterday, and so much happened, that is, an unimaginable number of all sorts of events, and of course, a very contradictory opinion about this figure, sometimes they compare him with peter the great, well, to a certain extent, it’s probably possible and to talk about this, well, in the end,

st. petersburg was built on bones, lenin made a revolution, and then they began to build socialism and he lit a light bulb and lit the funeral peasant fire, but nevertheless, brilliant st. petersburg still stands, and the light bulb , in general, has not completely burned out, so, probably, this parallel is generally acceptable, perhaps, especially since peter’s reforms are called a revolution from above , and lenin was the leader... of the revolution from below, but still the funeral pyre of christianism, from my point of view, this is a later period, this is the period of ancient repressions, already collectivization, may heaven forgive me, i allow myself to compare lenin with the apostle paul . there were a lot of apostles and paul alone, in fact, attraction created christianity. here , there were a lot of marxist theorists, well, the most influential and popular in russia was plekhanov, and in western europe, say, kautsky, yes, but,

as said, there were few practitioners, organizers of the uprising, well, pavel didn’t say... revised this point of view, stating that there may be more than one path to socialism, and that the methods by which one can achieve power may be different, it was lenin who owned the model that largely determined the face of social struggle in the 20th century, a model of a new type of party that lenin

wrote in the book what to do, taking it from his beloved chernyshevsky, which we will talk about today, which came out in 902, where he insisted that it should be created. a party of professional revolutionaries, not a broad mass party, as was the case in the model of german social democracy, on which western marxists were guided, but a model, accordingly, of such a somewhat paramilitary party, existing on the principle of democratic centralism, that is, while discussions are ongoing, please, they can go as long as they want, when a decision is made, party discipline obliges you to carry out these decisions, even if you do not agree with them, this model turned out to be effective in conditions of illegal existence: the social democratic movement in russia, the russian empire, and for other countries, where there was also a leftist movement, the national liberation movement was illegal, this model turned out to be very effective, including in the struggle of a number of countries for independence from the colonial isis in throughout the 20th century, during the waves

of decolonization, so it really is on a planetary scale. if you read his articles, which is interesting, he quite often repeats the main idea in the article several times from different sides, so that people have different levels of literacy, because he counted on... not only intellectuals, professional revolutionaries, members of his party, but also people who recently came to the party, the same machine workers who were also present in the party in large numbers, so that them to convey this idea, so he turns it in different ways, both in texts, and not only in texts, at rallies he returned, sometimes several times to the same main idea, he returned, of course, without fail, but well... in different ways, but in order to drive it into their heads and with the help of persuasion in this sense . differed from the style of trotsky, who was very stormy, bright, who was more interested in rhetoric rather than logic, but with the fact that lenin’s logic is very difficult to argue, even his enemies admitted it, and lenin managed convince the party to actually turn 180° several times. in particular, this was in

his famous april theses, when he announced the possibility of a socialist revolution immediately after the bourgeois-democratic, february revolution, that bourgeois reformers, a provisional government.

rose, in general, to a high rank, yes, received hereditary nobility, lenin was a nobleman, yes, he deprived himself of the nobility after october of the seventeenth year, when the estates were finally liquidated, equalized, so lenin, well then volodya

ulyanov, was the son of a man who had great hope, was generally raised to public life in the sixties, he was raised on the values ​​of the sixties, on values ​​including class. and what was possible as liberal reforms in the sixties, in the late seventies, even at the end of the reign of alexander i, and then even more so during the time of alexander ii becomes impossible. the screws are tightened, and this causes the opposite effect, but this value conflict arises, i agree with you, in this generation, i agree with you, but come on, you see, i don’t know a single period in our history when the russian people did not dream of justice, you know, he dreamed of this before the great reforms of alexander ii, he dreamed during the reforms, he dreamed after that, as it was... with the foremen you are talking about, he still dreams today, that’s right, that’s why not everyone goes to the revolution, so yes,

the very situation in the family, she set up a certain kind of thoughts, and probably the elder my brother also came to this not without the influence , so to speak, of this homely atmosphere, but nevertheless, it was vladimir ilyevich lenin who became a revolutionary, in my opinion... it was not the situation in general that made him a revolutionary in the first place, but the specific, specific death of his elder brother , who was a huge authority for him, was an authority, but still, if you look at the chronology, just when his brother was executed, he passed the exams, yes, he entered kazan university, the faculty of law, which he was going to, by the way. , people who wanted to change the system from within, yes, that’s it, and then he was expelled, as you know, for participating in a student meeting, drawn in soviet times. that he was almost a leader, imagine a freshman who studied for 3 months, of course , he was not a leader at all, he just took part and

was expelled from the list of others, then, what is also important, he graduated as an external student from the st. petersburg faculty of law, after several requests he was refused several times, his mother wrote a request, he wrote a request, and also his revolutionary activity is still imperceptible, yes, after this meeting, and he receives, accordingly, a degree, becomes.

they don’t realize that many people read it then, and there were several generations of oppositionists , lenin was not the only one who was interested in it, three generations

of russian revolutionaries were brought up by this book, it’s possible, but they read it, they don’t read just text the way they do today , they read the text there because they perceived it as a kind of encryption, well , by the way, i don’t agree that the book is boring, it didn’t even seem boring to me at school, i also studied it at school as a mandatory one, no, just how to read it, right? a utopia in fact, this book was written in a special genre, utopia, these dreams of vera palovna, famous there, yes, these are utopian dreams that paint a picture of the future society, but it’s hard to blame the author for being boring, in my opinion, it’s hard to blame, you can, but it’s difficult, who in the book is distinguished by self-irony, he mocks himself somewhat, is ironic, despite the fact that he is talking about very serious things, by the way, many people were inspired then model of relations between a man and a woman, in general, oddly enough, it was the russian revolutionary environment that was the first in the world to put forward the idea of ​​equality of women and...

ideas and so on, this book, it laid some kind of emotional, i would say, foundation in lenin’s soul, and as for the text, that is, some doctrine, then this was already marxism, but he also did not come to marxism immediately, but because, in general, he to some extent repeated the path of his teacher, plekhanov, with the only difference

that plekhanov was so convinced... a convinced, convinced marxist. this is a historical podcast russia-west on the swings of history. today we are talking about lenin. the difference with plekhanov was this : plekhanov believed that the bourgeois democratic revolution, as written by marx, opens a long period of development, after which, when the level of development of the productive forces and production relations under capitalism

comes into conflict, then there will be a reason for socialist revolutions in the most developed countries. and lenin. in the april theses he showed that he was right that the russian the bourgeoisie is so closely connected with the monarchy that it will not carry out these same reforms; it did not carry them out under the provisional government. power then lay on the road, but we will also definitely talk about the revolution in our podcast. the largest european marxists, they considered bolshevism in general to be such an illegitimate bastard of marxism, although in my opinion, well... if i suspect so, i cannot be 100% sure, but i strongly suspect that marx, well would have accepted bolshevism with greater understanding than some swedish model of social democracy, because in the end it was marx who wrote that i sowed dragon teeth,

some fleas were born, i think that in a certain sense lenin really understood - marx is better, sometimes we say, terry what well, there is, among other things, complete anti-communism, of course, it exists; when lenin is criticized, it reaches the point of complete absurdity, and makes a difference between communists, communism and fascism, although, well, it’s just the original goal setting, in the german case it assumes.. . germany above all superman, and racism, and communism presupposes something completely different, a humanistic social ideal, the free development of everyone there are conditions for the implementation of an idea - this is one thing, the idea itself is another, it is important to say here , you touched on the question, in particular about

the future dictatorship, but the bolsheviks had absolutely no intention of establishing a dictatorship; they ended up being drawn into it . as a result of a fierce civil war, they initially believed that they could do without much bloodshed, when they came to power, they imposed the death penalty canceled, which was restored by the provisional government, first canceled under the provisional government, then kornilov restored it, and so the bolsheviks in the spring of 1818, when kornilov was defeated, when atommandutov fled from orenburg, they believed that the civil war had been won, they of course greatly underestimated the resistance former ruling classes, and of course, underestimated the scale of western intervention, overestimating the possibility... he was not 30 years old, the development of capitalism in russia, which showed that russia becomes, first of all, despite the predominance of the peasant population, precisely a capitalist country, this book was directed against the populists, but he there

summarized such an array of statistical, economic material, including being in exile: yes, it turned out to be extremely difficult to argue with this. an interesting point: is he a national figure, or is he a convinced internationalist and westerner in his worldview. in the end, he was, well, what can be said, a smitten marxist, and in general, i have the impression that everything that happened around him and generally existed, whether it was, i don’t know, politics. military affairs, man, god, physical education, cinema, he looked at everything, measured it with this slide rule of marxism.

when the revolution took place in russia, he defended the interests of the russian revolution, believing that defending the russian revolution is the best means for a world

revolution to occur, not in the sense that russia should send the red army, but to europe, so there would be no contradiction to mine, perhaps you right, there is one topic that cannot be avoided, they wrote a lot, they accused the bolsheviks, lenin, this topic is the so-called dirty german money, accusations were directed regarding receiving money from germany in different directions, but including in relation to lenin, the scandal between february and october was very strong about this. lenin had to create such underground groups within the central committee, in order to simply talk about expropriations, it was the bolsheviks who were engaged in expropriations, the very well-known story with robberies of the teflist bank. they took it from everyone, they took it from artists, there is a story about

one priest who, as he said, gave his savings to gorky for the cause, that is, in fact, for the bolsheviks , they took it from a poor student, they took it from famous lawyers, they took it from factory owners, so say, at sava morozovo, therefore... in principle, in my opinion, the very idea is permissible that lenin was not for himself personally, naturally, not for selfish reasons, in the interests of the party, the world revolution, in general, his politics, he, on it could have gone, lenin was a politician, something that, i repeat, theoretically there is no evidence of this, the name parvus, known to many, could somehow finance. is this possible, perhaps, what do you think? i don’t agree, i can speak here as an archivist, since

there are no sources that would indicate that the bolsheviks took money from the germans, and those that exist are falsifications. the most famous story is with the documents of sisson, an american representative to whom the clever polish adventurer, writer, by the way, is such polish fenimore cooper, ferdinand asendovsky sold a whole stack of documents that he himself falsified, this was established at first... but there are no specific sources, in addition, the story with parvus, another story is important here, parvus, because of the first russian revolution he was a revolutionary and even co-author of trotsky in the theory of permanent revolution, but

during the first world war, he really turned into an agent of the german government, when he came to lenin, lenin did not talk to him, this is recorded, and lenin’s contacts with parvus were absent during the first world war, parvos and lenin branded him as a traitor to the interests of the proletariat, who...

i have the impression that, in principle, lenin was ready to work, yes, of course, he is a russian man, yes, of course, he wanted a revolution in russia, but in principle he was ready to work for the revolution anywhere, i have the impression that if i didn’t know, relatively speaking, there had been a revolution in haiti, he would have created ilyach’s light bulb, the red army there and fought against illiteracy . we continue the historical podcast russia and the west is on the line.

did not try to make a revolution in germany, he continued to make a revolution in russia , continued to revive the party that needed to be created, it was his will that worked in this, just literally from the ruins, and lenin managed from abroad, with the help, of course, of his comrades, with the help, by the way , krupskaya, who was the secretary of the party, and not just lenin’s wife, she played a very large organizational role, managed to recreate the party, for him, of course, the idea of ​​world revolution... was fundamental, but look at the irony of history: during the civil war, the white movement spoke out with patriotic slogans, for a single indivisible russia, yes, against the bolsheviks, but with the support of the interventionists who supported the whites, not just like that, not for utopian reasons, but to suppress the bolshevik infection , this, of course, was also so that the infection would not spread to them, but also in order to divide russia,

the former... black sea coast, the americans landed in siberia, the japanese in the far east occupied, it was on them that the white movement relied, on intervention, if not intervention, the civil war, of course, would have ended much earlier, the bolsheviks created, in fact, a national army, recreated it from the ruins, this national army, including thanks to trotsky, and defended sovereignty of the country, although they retained faith in the world revolution.

as if about the role of the individual, you mentioned lenin, you mentioned trotsky, because indeed, strictly speaking, their role is really very great, on the other hand, it’s already post... in fact, after the victory, the majority of marxists in europe explained the revolution by such a happy confluence of a number of circumstances, historical, political, economic and so on, but i repeat, all this is so, naturally, this is indisputable, but of course the role of especially these two figures

, lenin and trotsky. it is of course huge, by the way, the role of trotsky was simply recognized , uh, other times have not yet come, and uh , even stalin recognized it at one time, stalin even wrote it in his article. this is the very idea of ​​internationalism and communism, that's how many foreigners took part in the revolution during the civil war, yes , pole, pole, dzerzhinsky, please, belokun, hungarian, please, latvian riflemen. true, they left a rather scary mark , frankly speaking, but nevertheless, oleg odundich, a croatian, a dashing cavalryman, that ’s why i sometimes say that i mentioned that

they had such a leaven of character, or something, that ’s why lenin, i say, if it had happened that he ended up somewhere in gaita, he would have fought illiteracy there and created the red army. probably, maybe, but first of all, in my opinion, since we are talking about haiti, we decided to fantasize , we can afford it, he would still passionately strive to return to russia, there are his letters when the february revolution took place, he missed one revolution, the first russian revolution, emigration, he was waiting for a legal reason to return, and in fact missed it, he really didn’t want to miss the next one, and he literally bombarded enessa armand, alexandrulantai, and his other comrades with letters in the days of february.

existed and also not only in russia, because then a world revolution was expected not only in russia, the first world war, it would seem, had moved the world towards a world revolution, there were revolutionary sentiments in france, there were in germany, everything was in full swing, and even the enemies of the revolution believed that it was quite possible that everything would break out -it’s interesting that after the revolution, at the end of his political activity, he paid a lot of attention to the comintern, so he... called on his comrades, so to speak, foreign ones, not just to declarations of solidarity, as if with the soviet regime , and so to speak, selfless support for the bolshevik course and soviet russia, and it is interesting that if

he taught the russian proletarian using western european examples, yeah, then he taught the europeans, well, this is natural, with the completely fresh experience of the russian revolution. i believed, i talked a lot about the upcoming battles, so to speak, revolutionary ones , i believed that this post-war crisis must be used, that it was like a leaven for the revolution, and rejected all objections about this, up to a certain point i believed in it, yes finally believed that we need to hold out during this period of weakening, a question that remains open, but here

... literally, i believe that the most important thing for all of us, both for russians and for foreign comrades, is that after 5 years of the russian revolution we must learn, we have just now received the opportunity to study, i don’t know how long this opportunity will last, i don’t know how long the capitalist powers will provide us with the opportunity to study calmly, but we must use every moment that comes from military activity, from war, for study and moreover, from the beginning, in general, this is the literary motif of lenin’s later texts, and to learn, to learn to learn, summing up, we can say this: that the brainchild of lenin, the october revolution , of course, left a mark in world history no less than the great french revolution, because this in this world mosaic,

when this puzzle of the russian empire fell and broke, it turned out that it was simply impossible to insert the country of the soviets with a different configuration... strictly everything else. today we talked about vladimir ilyech lenin. this was a historical podcast russia-west on the swing of history. i was with you. you can watch the historical podcast russia west on the swing of history on the website of the first channel 1tv.ru. this is a podcast of mount fire and me and its host with a story about

chicago or the brazilian generals of sand quarries, in the capital of tatarstan, had been happening for 10 years in a row by that time, but it was in 88 that the first publications in the central press attracted the attention of the whole country to them , besides, it was precisely during these years that the trips of all kinds of sweatshirts became the most relevant to central cities to exchange old clothes for new and fashionable ones. kazan. became an all-union phenomenon, in the film, which reached the milestone

age of 14 years, the pioneer andryusha , played by leon kemstach, gets hit with a pumpkin for the first time, thinks about life and decides to take the crooked path of crime and joins the nearest supermarket group, his friend marrat acts as his guarantor. performed by ruzili minikaev, who was the first to purchase. andrei, then bought it a second time during registration, and then became the best a friend and guide to the warm hell of the gangs, and along the way both fall in love, one with the violinist aigul, played by anna peresilt, the other with the juvenile affairs inspector ira, played by anastasia krasovskaya. both girls melt beyond belief. meanwhile , the brother of marat and that same guarantor returns from military service in afghanistan. champion. in middleweight boxing vova adidas,

and ivan yankovsky, and makes his own coup in the group, crushing it under himself and taking away the supremacy from the former leader of kashchei, nikita, clearly soiled by agreements kolagrivy. the group goes on the warpath, it loses one of its fighters, yarolash, in some street battle, and organizes powerful battles, fights and the like . first by dispersing the uninvolved group of patrols, and then by reaching out to the real culprits, the haditakt group. the names of the groups are taken from the documentary novel by robert gorayev, the words of the boy, therefore , in general, they fully correspond to the disposition that prevailed in kazan at that time, let’s say, in fact, this is a novel of success, the film begins from the moment when the pianist... andryusha in the absence of an instrument, he is forced, in the absence of an instrument, to play

on a cardboard with marked keys; in the finale, he finally receives his coveted piano in a juvenile colony, where he accompanies a choir of bunny boys singing the song “hello, gray night, gentle may cereals.” everything came true for the person. the main character of the picture, without a doubt , is a jaw-dropping blow from the right, if all the punches are in a melon... in a pumpkin, in a butt, in a tambourine, collected into one large cut, you will get a rather long, almost a ten-minute video comparable to a collection of mike tyson knockouts, they hit the garlic , in general, there is some concern for the performers, because serious right blows slightly shake the brain, and the kemstach alone takes out almost 12 times per series , yes to a middleweight boxer. in avana, during the series

, an immeasurable amount of everything flies in, all this makes an indelible impression on civilized girls, the passion of young ladies of 14-15 years for young zhigans has always been somewhat puzzling, but you always need to lay it down unlimited attention to criminal freedom, at one time just such active mass interests. made a box office for the film bastards, and 30 years before that, the film from 1976 was underage, now hardly anyone will remember what it was about, but in 1976 they collected 44 million viewers in the first year of release, also, in general, such street gangs , the groups have tense relationships, although adjusted for the seventy-sixth year, not for the relationships themselves on the street, but for the extent to which it could be shown on the screen, very adequate and vivid productions, bam-bang way-bang, impeccable

work of the performers, very well-chosen uniforms of the thieves...

i'm dumbfounded that the most expensive movie ticket in soviet times cost 50 kopecks. and then in moscow, most likely in kazan for two tickets, he would need 80 kopecks and only a disabled person with loss of orientation could not find a ruble in his pocket in order to take a young lady to the cinema, and at the same time a boy who

does not have 80 cop. for a movie ticket, but there is a mother who lays out 100 rubles for a finger on a wooden box with... right away. 100 rubles per eighty-eight was the usual monthly salary of the city of kazan, in that poor family in which the boy andrei, strictly speaking, grew up, most likely, they never saw a full hundred ruble, receiving a salary in tens. in addition, the boy, having barely joined the group, immediately goes to the nearest police station to play on the computer; it is unknown how long after that he would have managed to live on the street without a security guard.

republic of afghanistan any parent whose children served in afghanistan knew, there are such there are an infinite number of jambs, but at some point the question even arises about the climax, what caused all the chaos, why - the leaders of the dom byta group decided to obviously commit chaos, to bring the elders of the other group to their knees, cutting the ear of a youngster, after all, despite... despite the fact that minikaev the artist is quite mature, judging by the red tie, his hero is no more than 14 years old, and because of what everything happened, because of the unfortunate video recorder, which was wrested from some random terpily, what?