the name of lenin now sounds constantly, according to the mind. it should be in one perfectly obvious context. lenin was the first to defeat all-ukrainian separatism. he was able, he managed petliura and defeated hundreds of independent gangs and dragged ukraine into russia, but no, in this context, the millennium. for some reason, it sounds rare, much more often, any comments on the topic . you will open and be sure to read a few memes or myths, if you like, regarding lenin. mam, the first lenin thrust russian territory into ukraine this time. meme second lenin created ukraine and therefore supposedly we are clearing up lenin's mistakes. this is two ma'am the third lenin planted a bomb under the russian

empire, dividing the country into a republic, and this is how a sort of demon appears, who sits and whispers under his breath. oh, now i 'll put more russian lands into ukraine . oh what i thought was funny. i'm not laughing. the problem is that people who are not critical perceive this generally ridiculous and incorrect information. but here is the most banal question. for example, people do not want to ask themselves. and why did lenin, in agony in bloody skirmishes, at first, not even having a proper army, with all his might, furiously and furiously dragged ukraine into the country he led. i would take it, yes, i would share it, yes, and i don’t give a damn, it’s also easier to lay no bombs. i would have taken it like yeltsin and let the whole country go to the wind, they fought for this ukraine two. or rather, even 4 years in a row, if he is such

an opponent of everything russian, i repeat, he is calm, the devil was doing all this. why did he drive and drive the army to take kiev and take it? moreover, let's start twice with lenin's personal attitude to this issue, a curious letter from lenin and messi armand dated january 30 , 1917 is known, the revolution is already on the eve of the date. and here is what lenin writes about the ukrainian question. we recently had two fugitives. and migrant nuclear people typicals such as one jew from bessarabia, a battered panather, but personally not interesting and either ordinary, and the other voronezh peasants above the land from the old believer family the black earth force was extremely interesting to see and

i tried to listen to a year in german captivity. at all. there he was in the darkness of horrors in the camp of 27,000 ukrainians. the germans make up camps according to nations and break them off from russia with all their might; the ukrainians sent clever lecturers from golitsya, and the results were only 2,000 for independence after a month of efforts of agitators , an exclamation point, the rest fell into a rage at the thought of separating from russia and switching to the germans or austrians that by 1917 lenin had a completely imperial great russian, and from the point of view of modern ukraine it’s quite xenophobic view of the ukrainian issue self-styled ukraine is invented by the germans with the help of glitzist agitators. this is what lenin clearly understood and really wanted russia

to be rid of ukrainian separatism. they didn’t hear about such a letter, even surprisingly they heard about a bomb, but there are no oddities about such a letter. we like to draw all sorts of analogies here, so, i’ll also draw an analogy now, and this analogy of the mythical lenin whom we recently drew makes, in fact, indistinguishable from one russian emperor, the great, by the way, the emperor so in 1809, as the current liberal would say, it was annexed to finland, which, as you know, never had its own statehood, but was then part of sweden, that is, once again finland did not have statehood, in general, nevertheless, alexander i created the grand

duchy of finland, endowed it with unheard-of preferences, freedoms , the right to speak their language by parliament and so on and so forth, as well as the swedish lands. all series and karelian on in the south, so have you ever seen, for example, our monarchist, who fights in anger, repeating damn alexander i shoved russian lands. finnom planted a bomb under the russian empire, created a country that never existed, and then we disentangled his mistakes and stalin's soldiers went to fight for the lands that this damn tsar finnom gave. no , we have never seen such a monarchist. well , it's good that you didn't see it. why yes, because alexander the first damn thing annexed finland and when he glued vyborg to it

province. he did this inside his state. he could not imagine that one day his great-great-grandfather would abdicate the throne and everything would go to hell, and the empire would go along the seam, alexander was the first, not a prophet. he was king. he simply rearranged furniture in his huge apartment. well, about the king. we seem to understand that there are no complaints about alexander the first, but there are much fewer reasons for lenin, why do i say that with less reason? i will now explain in the mind of modern man how everything is arranged. there were probably some little russian provinces. truth plainly no one knows which ones, including, because the majority is sincerely confident that this is the donbass of the donetsk and luhansk regions. they were not part of these russian provinces , they went there. lenin put it in the net, a picture is walking around, where it is drawn that the donbass is

lenin annexed to ukraine. that's where some territory is on the right. it was stalin who annexed it to ukraine, and if it is so drawn in the picture, then that is how it was. well , now let's not look at pictures from the network, but real pre-revolutionary cards and compare these real pre-revolutionary maps with pre-revolutionary dictionaries, the most authoritative dictionary of tsarist times. what is the correct encyclopedic dictionary of burgauza efron, we open the article little russia, they write little russia part of european russia, extremely indefinite in volume and then a note, see the article ukraine, that is , the pre-revolutionary most authoritative dictionary of tsarist times about gauz efron, recognizes the identity of ukraine and little russia. read on for a small title. russia arose from

the time when the tsars of moscow began to be called autocrats, great and small. russia, under the andrusov treaty , the territory of the present chernigov and poltava provinces was annexed to the moscow state, but the cherkasy or south russian people. currently, it occupies a much wider territory according to the transfer of 1897, speaking the ukrainian language was listed in the provinces and regions, and then there is a listing of the regions of the poltava province 93% speak the ukrainian language. chernihiv province almost 88% speak in ukrainian, this dictionary reports this is not me podolskaya almost 81%, speaks ukrainian, kharkiv more than 80 percent speak the ukrainian language of the kiev province, according to the dictionary of burgauz and efron,

ukrainian was spoken by 79% of the population near volyn 70% the village in yekaterinoslav 70 % of the population of kherson 53.5% of the population, as well as in the kuban writes a dictionary 47% tauride 42%, in staropol and voronezh 36% each. on the territory of the don cossacks region, 28% spoke ukrainian over a quarter we open the article ukraine in the entire dictionary , we read by the middle of the 17th century, both the right-bank and the left-bank ukraine were already sufficiently populated by colonists, mainly of the malarussian tribe. between them, however, especially on the right bank, there were also many poles, armenians and jews, and on the left bank of the belarusians in 1654. ukraine united with moscow ukraine, they write, united with moscow, they write there according to the andrusov treaty of 1667. left-bank ukraine

remained with moscow right-bank ukraine remained with poland since that time , little russia on the left bank of the dnieper became the usual name for left-bank ukraine; ukraine was officially called only sloboda ukraine, that is , the primary kharkiv province on the right side of the dnieper, the name of ukraine was preserved for all lands. end of quote. that is, as the dictionary tells us, ukraine was called the entire right bank and the kharkov province. this time, and the rest began to be called little russia. these two are here a slight confusion from which it is not at all easier for us, in fact, because in any case, the terms of ukraine and little russia. already in the dictionary they are interchangeable, they pass one into the other and these same little russians. cherkassy khokhols are ukrainians, south russians, and also people speak their own ukrainian language, and they speak ukrainian in many provinces in these provinces, not counting the kuban of his claim, the don majority. and these vast lands essentially occupied the same territory as the current ukraine, these

provinces once again according to the royal. i say so poltava governorate chernihiv podolsk kharkiv kiev-volyn kherson yekaterinoslav, and where is donetsk and lugansk they will say they are not. why aren't they? yes, because lenin then put them in there, they will tell us. well let's now map. let's see. yekaterinoslav governorate is the name of an administrative-territorial unit of the russian empire. there, 70% of the population spoke ukrainian and the enemy and the front put this province on the list of little russian ones, by the way, the province was formed on october 8, 1802 by separating the center from the novorossiysk province, the center was identified in yekaterinoslav now, the city of fornication was renamed dnieper , that is, it was again under alexander i, when she was discharged from novorossia, but let's look at the map, what was part of the yekaterinoslav

province, and there they entered this province. gypsy, bakhmut debaltseve to gorlovka lozova mariupol yuzovka yuzovka is the future, yes, donetsk, the rest of the current lugansk region was part of the kharkov province , which we remind you once again in the 19th century was called kharkov ukrainian, that is, it officially bore the name of ukraine in royal documents and only a small part future donetsk and future luhansk regions were part of the don cossacks region, one of the original autonomy of the tsarist time. and when the donetsk and luhansk regions appeared, the donetsk region was formed in 1932 by separating the ukrainian ussr from the kharkov region, and the luhansk region was created in 1938, which was already separated from the donetsk region. then, by the way, the donetsk

region was called the stalinist region, because donetsk was then called stalin, you say, well, how is it that they say everywhere that lenin shoved native russian lands into ukraine here i took it straight with scissors, cut it off and glued it. i have to tell you a terrible secret. it's all untrue, mostly these lands, we were already in the servants' donetsk mariupol, and so on. yes, indeed, a small part of the current donetsk, the current lugansk regions, was part of the don army and the don army , these areas were cut off. the reason here , however, is not at all what you thought, that’s where we’ll take their coolness from the russian people, we’ll give the reasons here just of the opposite kind , the area of ​​​​the don cossacks first even earlier ukraine filed for separation from moscow as soon as november 7, 1917. the revolution happened right there ataman kaledin announced the independence of the don cossacks from russia, the current cossacks. in this place

, they will definitely begin to tell that they wanted to live with the tsar father, but with demonic bolsheviks. they wanted to live, but that's all. excuse the nonsense, the tsar-father had already renounced the don cossack army for a long time by that time. by the way, nothing was done to put him back on the royal throne, no business to confess to the cossacks. there was no king then. now there may be, but then there was never the bolsheviks, they came to power on november 7th. they have not even managed to carry out any persecution of the cossacks or the church, and not only have they taken power from the liberal bourgeois government. mostly of the freemasons , this government, consisting of, just at the time, took away power. the king's father. the bolsheviks took power from these bourgeois freemasons. they were with the king whose cossacks allegedly loved so much, but the cossacks were so offended by the provisional governments that they immediately filed for separation from russia separation from petrograd? separation from moscow further, as you remember, there was a civil war and all these bloody

events, but we will return to the topic of donbass . the fact is that donbass was generally for the reds for moscow for russia if 80% of the cossacks were for the separation and only 20% the poorest cossacks were for the reds and for a united soviet country, then in the donbass mining areas. everything was on the contrary, there the vast majority was for moscow for petrograd for the bolsheviks for a united soviet russia , therefore the miners who lived in the territory the don troops were only attached to those miners who, since 1802, lived in the yekaterinoslav little russian province. this is what happened. the miners were connected with the miners, not the russians. they put it into the mouth of the ukrainians in the house, in general, it was the most important headache for soviet moscow , because not only did this tsarist autonomy separate from the very first, the don also became the base

for the white movement and the volunteer army. therefore, after the civil war, the don army was disbanded out of harm's way and their lands were redistributed. mainly in the benefit of the russian federation was done by russia, as the monastics demand from us now, for example. that’s how they did it, so that there are no autonomies and only russia everywhere, that’s exactly what they did for the tsar to have a kind of cossack autonomy on its bolsheviks, so that the separatists would be disrespectfully eliminated and only a small part of the cossack the don land of the cossack don autonomy went not to russia, but to soviet ukraine, which is logical, because lugansk and yuzakovka were already part of the little russian ukrainian province. so, by and large, nothing goes anywhere lenin thrust lenin in the most elementary way , he was guided by the maps of the tsarist provinces, as it was drawn approximately there, so he did, because the lenins, stalin were

conservatives and you won’t believe they were oriented in their territorial ones. the blues themselves did not invent anything for tsarist times. what provinces did the tsar's dictionaries refer to as traditional little russian and little russian speakers, mostly in the ukrainian language, that ukraine was defined by many. i know it's unpleasant to hear that they have already decided for themselves that this is lenin in everything luhansk future is not to blame, donetsk was thrust into the malorodsky ekaterinoslav province by tsar-father alexander i from him and ask for the vyborg province from the luhansk region. you don’t want to ask him strangely, and everyone who lived then in the 19th century on the territory of present-day donbass lived in places called little russian. and it was no secret to anyone at the time. so, what are you doing with this stuffed russian land into ukraine. lenina just leave alone, because it's dishonorable. lenin, i repeat, returned ukraine to big russia, so he definitely made a new one

the season of the people. show 10 is very unusual and very interesting. for a long time i have not experienced such delight from dancing from the number that i just watched, psychedelics, some kind is present here. country of talent, new season

nothing, in your opinion, they are normal, what do you need? where do you have access to yours? think i planned it all. in general, i accidentally turned out to be a false flag here, if we find those people who are really. whether this will give us the opportunity to release you and anton the premiere from monday at 22:15 on ntv let's go further about the division of the country into the republic

to listen to the current critics. lenin so creates the feeling that he was the first who, shouting eureka, came up with national autonomy, in order, of course, thereby to plant a terrible bomb under the country. you are dear opponents for fools, then the entire russian people. please don't hold. our russian tsars never built any ethnic united country, and did not even try to build such a country, but on the contrary, enili, a very colorful picture of autonomy and protectorates, is no worse the leninist soviet republics and all these autonomies , the protectorates, as soon as a crisis happened, immediately went along the seam, and the seam went even where there seemed to be provinces, and not republics . why, now let's see? why instead of the lenin bomb, which you have already hesitated to discuss here, what bombs were offered and planted by the roman of the novorossiysk empire, here i will notice darkly ironic, because i,

of course, am sure that it was not lenin, stalin, or the romanovs who did not plant any bombs. they diligently built what would destroy subsequently yeltsin, so the russian empire, of course, had their own autonomies , we repeat, which were part of the russian empire. poland had its own constitution and legislature. finland adopted seven laws for itself, finland also had its own authorities and administration, its own judicial system, its legislation was isolated from the legislation of the russian empire , no republics of the soviet union could dream of such a thing. the region, the current tuva, these protectorates, to summarize, had incomparably more than the soviet republics autonomous economic and political resources, the region of the

don cossacks, the urals and the turgai territory were independent with the rights of the province. they were not part of the general governments and , using the current terminology, it was precisely that the bombs, the territory of the don cossacks , is the oldest cossack land that the cossacks secretly always considered theirs, and not moscow or st. petersburg property, therefore the don cossacks separated already in november 1917. note that the ural cossacks did the first thing immediately after the february revolution of 1917. they renamed the ural cossack host into the yaik cossack troops. why on the night of march 29, 1918 in uralsk, the military government of the yaik cossack army in an alliance with representatives of the party? a coup was organized. and what kind of alash you ask, and it was a kazakh party, which set the main goal of creating the kazakh republic not for the united indivisible russia, they arranged no

coup, and in this way the whites took power for the federation, that is, the kazakh and kazakh republicans, in fact, and potential separatists. in general, further, the torgai region is now, it is mainly located on the territory of kazakhstan, and here the separatist bunk broke out not in 1918, and not even in 1917, but back in 1916. that is, all these three regions blazed and filed for separation from moscow from 1916 to 1918, but now they categorically do not want to remember the project, because it was still normal if it weren’t for the lenin bomb, well, yes, that’s all normal for those who have no memory. we are also often told that this is where the russian empire was divided into provinces, so everyone lived simply in russian provinces, allegedly did not know their national differences, and everyone, in fact, was, as it were, russian, not just what

arose under lenin. all this, of course , does not stand up to criticism, because in the russian empire there existed at different periods of the georgian province derben province kazan province lithuanian province with the capital of villina lefland province with the center in riga as well as shamakhi the province of yerevan, the province of istlyansk, the province of the yakut land, and so on and hardly, the side began to fever all these provinces of the land and region were separated in no way worse than the republics, and were not stupidly separated, like the provinces of the land and region, because these subjects were not simply created according to the national sign. but they were also named on a national basis. i don't understand you at all. who do you want to deceive tell me that lenin created ethnic enclaves? what did he create them from? well, the answer is no, but so i'll tell you, he created from the autonomy of the protectorates, and in some cases from the province of the russian

empire most often, according to the boundaries of the autonomy of the protectorates of the province or vicegerency of the russian empire pre-revolutionary. well, the simplest example in the russian empire was since the time of catherine the great, the caucasian territory under the jurisdiction of localities was called the caucasian region with the administrative capital tiflis, the region was divided into a number of provinces, the tiflist yerevan baku kutain regions, including the armenian region. well, not lenin all this was cut right on april 22, 1918, behind the caucasian seim within the territory of the baku and revan tiflist kutaist provinces of the batum and kars regions of the former. the russian empire transcaucasian democratic federative republic was then established at the request of the ottoman empire, the transcaucasian seven was dissolved, and this single republic broke up into three states, may 26 was

proclaimed. georgian democratic republic, may 28, azerbaijani democratic republic and de facto, republic of armenia well, who do we want to blame lenin for this? so he has nothing to do with it, these were the provinces and regions of the russian empire, which fell apart approximately along their borders at the request of the ottoman empire and turned in the republic at the request of the ottoman empire exactly the same as before lenin under the leadership of the germans. ukraine, which was created, also applied to the republic. let's do it again. let's repeat not by lenin but lenin back, then they remounted the composition of soviet russia, it was not he who created them, invented them and divided them already as republics thrust back into the country undertaking frantic furious military political and diplomatic efforts. it’s just that they don’t tell you about it now, they tell you more and more about the bomb. no, they would tell how he

managed to shove all these territories back into the country, how his polite people managed to work at such breakneck speeds. well , let's move on, finally, to the republics from the point of view of the world geopolitical oh, these republics all ears buzzed us with these republics. the point is that the population the newest russia was literally driven into the head that the division of the country into the republic ruined the soviet union and this is perhaps the most ridiculous cruel thing. lies this lie was spread by russian liberals right after in 1991 yeltsin and his accomplices in belovezhskaya pushcha committed the meanest most heinous most monstrous crimes in the entire history of russia and disbanded the country that was not assembled by them liberals. how insane. they didn’t come, yet they understood what they had done and,

after a moment’s thought, found the extreme in those times at first i did not even believe that such nonsense could work, but it worked , the liberals began to say that it was laziness. that's what he divided the country into republics. and so she fell apart. i remember how insistent. curly-haired boris nemtsov repeated this on tv. i didn’t know how to cry out of indignation or break the tv set. you yourself wanted to yell at me. you're the bitches, you did it all. how dare you blame it all on lenin who collected it all, but years have passed, and now i hear how this liberal meanness is some kind of liberal lie, justifying yeltsin and all his vile company repeat russian patriots repeat ours, for example, the monarchists in a clear eye. all this is said. lenin created ukraine, they say, they wait , lord, to whom kiev obeyed in 1922 in moscow, who was the hero of soviet ukraine shchors and kotovsky, who

fought against petliura, by the way, fought much more against petliura and the self-sustainers than against the white army. what book was cult, including in ukraine, for all its young children, how nikolai's steel was tempered russian, where the author fights the entire first half of the book with ukrainian separatists, for whom the inhabitants of soviet ukraine fought in the soviet-finnish war for russia for moscow . what culture did they learn first of all, russian culture. what was the border between, kharkov region and belgorod region, for example, there was no border there. it was one country for whom it fought , the vast majority of the inhabitants of ukraine from 1941 to the forty-fifth year, and then also in the war with japan for the russians for russia for moscow so what the hell did lenin create ukraine if it was russian ukraine since what year did ukraine not submit to moscow in 1991? since what year, instead of russian culture and russian history, have they been studying the devil knows that since 1991 it has been like this

. what does lenin have to do with it? , already separated territories were driven into a single country. as republics, because by 1920 most of them were already republics created more often just not the bolsheviks, but the local elites with the help of the germans or the ottoman empire or other partners and allies, do not believe the white armies. well, the republics were taken as republics because it turned out to be a reasonable and action, moreover, it was both reasonable and effective. why? yes, that's why, as a result of the first world war , the german empire collapsed, the austro-hungarian empire , the ottoman empire, three empires on thursday. and the russian empire, which reassembled the soviet union, managed to return most of its territories. but france britain swelled.

yes, and then it also swelled, but this is not the end of history. the italian empire collapsed. in 1941, the british and french empire collapsed after the second world war, having lost the overwhelming majority of their territories, the question of all these six largest miro empires. they were divided there in the republic lenin was in power? no, he was not there, but the soviet union survived them; all world empires burst one after another; their colonies were released, as a rule, grateful to the soviet union for its freedom, and the soviet union stood still, stood firmly, stitched together by the leninist republics, which, as we remember before lenin, were provinces and autonomies and protectorates of the russian empire and only in 1991, without any threats, three criminals disbanded the great country. however, here is what is important to say when the ussr was divided, the majority of the country voted for the preservation of the ussr, the vast

majority of the republics did not use the right to withdraw. lenin's bomb did not explode and lenin had nothing to do with it at all the country was disbanded. creatively, contrary to the leninist norms, they simply took it and tore it apart with their hands and dumped it, then everything is on lenin, they say. not us, it's him. well, these rascals from belovezhskaya pushcha. okay, they are criminals, they had to hide the traces of crimes. why are you? repeating their pathetic excuses and the last thing i wanted to say. please note that according to the dictionary of enemy efron at the beginning of the 20th century, approximately 70% of the population of present-day ukraine spoke ukrainian. this is also confirmed by the all-russian pre-revolutionary census, but 60 years later, by the beginning of the seventies of the xx century after lenin's stalinist so -called film adaptation, the percentage of ukrainian speakers falls on the territory of ukraine

at times. it is even fierce monarchists who recognize soviet ukraine was mainly russian- speaking. and you know, what is the explanation for this paradox, yes, in the level of education. that's what, by the beginning of the 20th century, ukraine was mostly rural, not educated, not reading books , and they said it was at sea, respectively, and then they arranged about you leninsky and the bolsheviks, there they planted universal enlightenment and, in addition to ukrainian culture, they planted russian culture, first of all, russian culture, planted and ukrainians switched to russian, because it was the language of russian soviet culture russian soviet cinema russian soviet television russian soviet radio. this is what the results of the work of the bolsheviks are, in this he expresses himself and in 1991, the inhabitants of ukraine extracted from the russian soviet matrix and began to boil down all the russian soviet from them and boiled it down, and now

the result and today we are enjoying all this is the result of our yeltsin's liberal stupid work. this is our tragedy, which we blame on the person who corrected this tragedy, unlike us, he coped with it. and by the way, he never blamed either alexander i or the germans. i took it and did it myself, i did not look for the extreme, because the one who works does not look for the extreme. in

this room and the bedroom of the parents and the concert for the son, we will change the state of things of the parents, send to sleep in the stalls, and the young musician, we will put arches and mirrors on the forefront as a decoration, in a word, we are waiting for the full house and the dyumins, we gave ourselves a good shake-up , we left our native siberia and moved to the capital to work in a place for a new life. chose meticulously looking for support points there, and it is wide. it is very similar to the moscow river , so we arrived, as if we miss home, there is such a photograph, we look at family ones. yes , it's very beautiful there. most of all he fishes, fedya, he generally washed down in family affairs.