The confrontation between the head of the Begovaya district administration and the owners of the legendary Anti-Soviet kebab shop lasted for three days. Its result was the dismantling of the sign, which was what the head of the council, Vladimir Shtukaturov, demanded, citing a complaint from Moscow veterans, among whom is the former Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Vladimir Dolgikh.
“We have not received any official confirmation that the sign is illegal,” says the general director of the Anti-Soviet kebab shop. Alexander Vanin. – Today we received a letter from the Association of Administrative and Technical Inspections stating that the sign will be forcibly dismantled if we do not remove it by tomorrow. This is legally illegal: forced dismantling of a sign is at the discretion of the court, and it takes at least three months. The conflict lasts three days. The only reason for dismantling the sign is a letter from veterans, or more precisely, a veteran. According to the head of the council, the letter was sent by veteran Dolgikh, who does not contact us.
Letter Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh, in 1972-88, Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, and now Chairman of the Moscow City Council of Veterans, Prefect of the Northern Administrative District Oleg Mitvol was published only today on the prefecture’s website. In it, Vladimir Dolgikh also refers to complaints - from Muscovites who share with veterans their indignation about the “Anti-Soviet” sign. In the letter, Vladimir Dolgikh asks “to recommend to the management of the kebab shop that they change the name of their establishment so as not to irritate that part of the citizens who respect the Soviet period in our history.”
Alexander Vanin noted that in April of this year, three months before the opening of the kebab shop, large banners “Anti-Soviet kebab shop: opening soon” hung on the windows, and they did not cause discontent even on Victory Day.
“On Victory Day, the banners did not offend the feelings of the veterans, the head of the council, the prefect, but on the eve of the elections to the Moscow City Duma, the sign seemed offensive to them,” reflects Alexander Vanin.
“Otherwise, Mr. Mitvol promised to treat this facility with passion, said that he would come here personally and do everything possible to close this enterprise,” says Alexander Vanin. – We decided not to start an information war and chose the path of minimal losses. We are dismantling the sign - instead of dismantling the enterprise. We are socially responsible to the 60 people who work here and whom we will not abandon in the crisis and era of unemployment. It’s just that now “Anti-Soviet” will again become a popular name. Although we did not open an information bureau or a newspaper - this is just a kebab shop, and there is no political background in the name.
Oleg Mitvol in an interview with Radio Liberty neither confirmed nor denied the threat to close the establishment:
“This sign irritated the veterans, and I told the director that if they don’t dismantle the sign, we will dismantle it, and this procedure is prescribed by law. If they have specific claims, he (director Alexander Vanin - RS) should voice them and file them in court,” said Oleg Mitvol.
The new official name “Anti-Soviet” has not yet been invented.
“There is nothing anti-Soviet here,” says Igor Makarov about the interior of the kebab shop. – Everything here is decorated in memory of Brodsky, Okudzhava, Vysotsky, here they remember that time and respect these people. In Soviet times, such interiors were in sanatoriums and restaurants for members of the Central Committee. The sign has a slight shocking element - like any restaurant name. And linguists can find fault with the name of each restaurant. But no one has canceled the parody genre.
Today at two o'clock in the afternoon they were waiting for the head of the administration at the kebab shop, who yesterday, according to the owners of Anti-Soviet, promised to personally supervise the dismantling of the sign. However, only the editor-in-chief of the prefecture’s website came from representatives of the city authorities: to cover the event as a journalist. Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Vladimir Dolgikh, who filed a complaint against the sign, was also not visible. The side of the “Anti-Soviet” critics was represented by another member of the council of veterans of the “Begovaya” district, who said that he was also Vladimir Ivanovich, but Elesin, and also had a negative attitude towards the sign.
“There were a lot of positive things under Soviet rule, although there were negative aspects,” explains Vladimir Elesin. “And we, as veterans, believe that it would be nice to introduce many things now.” There was free education and science was developing, but now it is in an abandoned state. Therefore, “Anti-Soviet” is not a good name.
Prefect Oleg Mitvol is unhappy that the dismantling of the sign caused so much noise.
“They are trying to inflate a serious political story out of this,” says Oleg Mitvol. - Everything is very simple there. Next to the kebab shop there is a Moscow city organization of war veterans, and veterans approached us regarding the sign, which some veterans evoke negative emotions. You know that many soldiers in the Great Patriotic War went to their deaths under the slogan “For the Soviet Motherland.” They asked to look into the moment of installation of this sign, and we found out that the sign did not have the documents required by Moscow law. Dozens of signs are being dismantled because of this, but for some reason everyone paid attention to this one.
Anti-Sovietskaya does not agree with Oleg Mitvol’s claim and says that the management of the kebab shop has all the documents for approving the sign.
Oleg Mitvol clarified that he himself has an ambivalent attitude towards Soviet power, was never a communist, and that his wife’s grandparents met in the camps. At the same time, he noted that “ordinary soldiers of that war were unpleasant and painful” from the sign. He said veterans have already thanked him.
Oleg Mitvol was dissatisfied with the fact that the sign was not completely dismantled and now it looks like this: “Asovetskaya”.
The conversation with Oleg Mitvol, which began with a discussion of the fate of Anti-Soviet, ended with another topic that obviously worries him more. The prefect of the Northern District suddenly remembered the gay club “Soul and Body”.
– In Russia, the gay club operated under the guise of the All-Russian Society of the Blind. Do you think this is normal? – Oleg Mitvol asked RS correspondent. – There’s such an establishment ten meters from the children’s library! We will seek eviction.
The unconventional turn introduced some confusion into the discussion of the topic of the Soviet and anti-Soviet past of Russia, and it remained not entirely clear who complained to the council of veterans, who complained to Oleg Mitvol, who did not complain to anyone, took up the matter decisively, since it distracted him from more important tasks.
Since 1997, Vladimir Dolgikh has been Chairman of the Board of the Moscow regional public organization "Krasnoyarsk Community"; since 2002 - Chairman of the Moscow City Council of Veterans; since 2008 - Chairman of the Moscow Public Council.
Vladimir Dolgikh is a full member of the International Academy of Information Processes and Technologies, a full member of the International Academy of Sciences of Ecology, Human Security and Nature, and an honorary professor of the Moscow Academy of Finance and Law.
Hero of Socialist Labor (1965, 1984).
The declared income of Vladimir Dolgikh for 2012 was about 4.5 million rubles. Owned in Russia are a plot of land for individual housing construction with an area of 2 thousand square meters, a residential building with an area of 295.2 square meters, an apartment with an area of 102.7 square meters, and a parking space with an area of 17 square meters.
The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources
On December 5, the candidate member of the Politburo and Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee turned 80Vladimir Dolgikh.The chairman of the Moscow City Council of Veterans spoke to a Vlast observer about his long life in big politics.Evgeny Zhirnov."Khrushchev is sitting, spinning in his chair, with his eyes closed"
— Vladimir Ivanovich, how did you become secretaries of the CPSU Central Committee?
— The leaders of the party and government knew me well. I worked as the director of the Norilsk plant, and I often came into contact with Alexei Nikolaevich Kosygin. He came to Norilsk, we had a lot of meetings with him in Moscow. The development of the production of non-ferrous and precious metals was a matter of national scale. Investments made it possible to provide the country with nickel, copper and platinum metals, so the plant was taken very seriously. In February 1964, I had a meeting with Khrushchev on this issue.
— Did he come to Norilsk?
- No. During a trip to Tselinograd, he announced that he would fly to Norilsk. We prepared for six months, built an airfield, hung posters “to dear Nikita Sergeevich.” And here in Crimea, while on vacation, the leader of the Italian Communist Party, Palmiro Togliatti, died, and Khrushchev flew there. And we got into a helicopter and went fishing.
He was generally a somewhat chaotic person. We met in 1964. Before this, he had been told a lot about the development of the Norilsk plant. He promised to accept me several times. Then Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR Pyotr Fedorovich Lomako called me and said: “Come, we seem to have agreed. Khrushchev will receive you.” I come to Moscow, I come to Lomako. He calls Khrushchev, and I hear an unpleasant conversation: “Comrade Lomako, I am also a man, I have my own plans. Well, I can’t accept you from Dolgikh!” There’s nothing to do, I’m going to the metallurgy committee on business. And there they are already running towards me: “Urgently return to Lomako!” And he says that Khrushchev has changed his mind and we are going to him.
He greeted us warmly. He sits, spins around in his chair, his eyes closed. I started telling him, he didn’t react. Then he started getting involved, asking questions, and we talked for about an hour. And at three o'clock the Presidium of the Central Committee was supposed to meet. He says: “Well, write a note to the Presidium.” And I have a note ready. “From the young,” he says, “and the early.” I read the note. The issue was immediately included on the agenda of the Presidium. That’s how energetically he took on any task, but he tried to cover everything at once alone, and sometimes it turned out wrong. One day I was invited to the Central Committee and shown a note dictated by him. It says that he had Lomako and the director of the Norilsk plant and asked such and such a question. But the question is from the field of ferrous metallurgy, and we could not raise it. Why he attributed this to us, I don’t know.
— You said that Kosygin flew to Norilsk. Is it just as chaotic?
- No, he was a thorough person. But I flew to Norilsk only for a day. “I don’t have any more time,” he says. I explain to him: “What day? To get a quick acquaintance with the plant, you need 15 days. Stay at least three or four days.” He refused. But when we looked at some objects, he agreed to stay. And after looking at it, I decided to lay a gas pipeline to the plant.
“Brezhnev poured a glass of cognac, drank it and went back.”
- But Kosygin did not nominate secretaries of the Central Committee.
— Personnel issues of the party were completely in the hands of the General Secretary of the Central Committee, who became Brezhnev. To be honest, I didn’t want to leave for Moscow. I was elected secretary of the Krasnoyarsk regional committee. There is a lot of work, the work is interesting. We put forward the idea of comprehensive development of the productive forces of the region, which possessed colossal energy resources. Brezhnev supported. This issue was discussed at the Politburo with my report.
So I had no intention of leaving anywhere. I knew that the Secretary of the Central Committee for Heavy Industry, Mikhail Sergeevich Solomentsev, had been appointed Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR, but I did not even suspect that the question arose about me as his successor. Brezhnev was very scrupulous about personnel. He included me in his delegation to the congress of the Polish United Workers' Party and took a closer look. Then he himself flew to Krasnoyarsk and looked around the region. He was in a good mood, joked, told a lot of anecdotes. Do you know what really surprised me then? He had a small notebook with him, where he made some notes. So, after a trip around the region, he wrote down some numbers from it on a piece of paper and with this sheet of paper in his hands, he spoke very efficiently and intelligently for an hour and a half at our site. After this meeting, the issue of my transfer to Moscow was decided.
— How did you feel in the new place?
— It was quite difficult. It was necessary to understand what was possible, what was impossible and impractical. In Moscow, the table of ranks was important. Where and how to stand, where and how to sit - there was a precise order in everything. Which country should the party delegation be headed by a member of the Politburo, which should be headed by a candidate member, and where could the Secretary of the Central Committee go at the head of the delegation.
— Brezhnev didn’t help you get comfortable?
- Helped. Once he invited me to go with him to Zavidovo. I arrive, and he wonders why I don’t have anything hunting. It turns out he invited me to go hunting. They equipped me. And he himself took me to the tower. I see he has some kind of special gun. We sat on the tower, and he began to explain to me how to hunt here. Suddenly there was a grunt somewhere. A small boar came out. Brezhnev kissed him, once - and that was it. “Now,” he says, “we need to take a sip like a huntsman.” I poured a small glass of cognac and drank. And we went back. So I went hunting.
— Did you hunt often?
- Occasionally. There were no mass departures. Two or three people called each other. I spoke with the secretaries of the Central Committee Katushev and Kapitonov: “Well, shall we go hunting on Sunday?” If there was no emergency, we packed up and went. Zavidovo - it was for the general secretary. And we went to Badgers. I'm more of a fisherman than a hunter. But I managed to get out to fish only in the summer, when I was on vacation in Sochi. We went to Shevardnadze’s place in Georgia to go fishing in the ponds. But for the most part there was no time for fishing or hunting. Judge for yourself. In the Central Committee I had to deal with a large number of industries: ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, geology, oil, gas industry, coal industry, Gosgortekhnadzor, construction, all energy, railway, water transport, etc. Everywhere the role of the Central Committee was very large.
— How were the decisions of the Central Committee made?
— The issue was discussed and prepared in the relevant department. Then they discussed it with me. Then I spoke with that of the secretaries of the Central Committee who would conduct the meetings of the Secretariat - with Suslov or Kirilenko. Suslov was the chief of staff of the Central Committee. He shaped the agenda of the Secretariat and the Politburo. His opinion was always significant. And I don’t know a question that he doesn’t understand. The most experienced in that party leadership. A modest person in his own right. He and I were part of the delegation at the party congress in the GDR. So, as soon as we were escorted out and the plane took off for Moscow, he immediately took the remaining currency out of his pocket and handed it over to his assistant.
I did not have a warm relationship with Andrei Pavlovich Kirilenko, but with Suslov it was much better. Kirilenko oversaw the general economy - Gosplan, Gossnab. But his responsibility included transport and energy, so our spheres overlapped. We prepared some questions together. We agreed that we would raise this issue with, say, the Secretariat. But there was no warmth. Maybe because Kirilenko saw his successor in me. He developed sclerosis, it was difficult for him to speak, he forgot many words.
— That is, in order for a decision to be made, it was necessary to come to an agreement with Suslov or Kirilenko. And the other secretaries, for whom the question was not core, did not object?
— If we were talking about purely special issues, then, as a rule, no. If the question concerned the population of some territories, other secretaries of the Central Committee participated in the discussion. But the opinion of the profile secretary was considered dominant.
— Didn’t they take the government into account?
— I prepared questions in close contact with ministries and the government. I had a very good relationship with the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Nikolai Aleksandrovich Tikhonov. We were in contact, he asked me to come and take part in the consideration of issues. I could argue with him, but we always understood and supported each other.
"Ustinov and the company did not let us near these materials"
— But were erroneous decisions made?
— There were shortcomings - the quality of the products was lame, and our tendency towards gigantomania in the construction of enterprises did not bring any benefit.
— There was another overlap - towards the defense industry.
— Brezhnev said that he had two main directions - the rise of agriculture and defense capability. And he kept these two directions. I oversaw industries that supported the defense industry. For example, we had to get a nosebleed, but provide them with special alloys. They dominated.
— Brezhnev didn’t understand that this was being done to the detriment of the country?
“We have always had a tradition of admiration for the leader, and no one dared to condemn what the leader does. And then, until 1976, Brezhnev was very active and efficient. And after the stroke, when he changed a lot, everyone expected that he would get better. And then everyone somehow got used to it. He wasn’t evil, he didn’t make repressive personnel decisions, and that suited everyone.
— And in the end we had stagnation.
— The stagnation was in personnel, not in industry. No industry operates by gaining momentum all the time. It develops in waves. Capital leaves areas where there is overproduction, and in the defense industry we had overproduction. When Andropov became general secretary, he raised the question of the need to pump funds and resources into civilian sectors. Gorbachev, Ryzhkov and I were instructed to take up this matter. We were considered young growth in the Central Committee, and Andropov trusted us. But we were essentially not allowed near these materials.
— Marshal Ustinov?
- And company. The defense industries had enormous scientific developments. But after testing, many interesting developments for the civilian sphere were considered unsuitable for the army, were written off and were not transferred anywhere. We have seen a colossal overproduction of military equipment.
- How come they didn’t let you in?
— Not us, they did not allow the transfer of advanced technologies to the national economy. They said that there were many secrets tied to this. For example, there is the issue of airfields. Why couldn't military airfields be used for civilian purposes? Many countries have this kind of sharing, and this results in significant savings. But the military was against it. Then a strong caste of large military men emerged. These were honored people, but they were accustomed to their special position in the country and believed that it should be so. Perhaps this could have been changed. But Andropov very soon became very ill.
“Tikhonov and I did not let Yeltsin through”
- But the fight against stagnation in personnel began quite soon - with Gorbachev coming to power.
— In general, everyone understood that the need for change was ripe. The party seriously closed in on itself and did not enter into dialogue with the population. Many people joined the party for careerist reasons. The party needed serious cleaning, and its personnel needed updating.
— In those years, Yeltsin appeared in Moscow. He headed the construction department of the Central Committee, which was under your jurisdiction.
- For a while, yes. He was nominated to Moscow twice, and both times I was against it. We knew his harsh character, and I also heard rumors that he was drinking. He was recommended as a minister, but Tikhonov and I fought to the death and did not let him through. And when the post of head of the construction department became vacant, Yeltsin’s candidacy arose again. I slowed him down again. But Tikhonov was already retired, and my opinion was not taken into account. The majority was in favor of his nomination. And I was instructed to talk with him.
— Did you have differences with Gorbachev on other issues?
“The point of our differences was that destruction began without creating anything in this place. It was proposed to liquidate this or that ministry. What instead of him, no one speaks or knows. They say: "Let's introduce the election of directors of enterprises." But we understood that this is not always appropriate or justified. For example, the head of the railway. He has about 300 thousand people at his disposal. Who should elect him and how? Unclear. Or a nuclear power plant. Can she be entrusted to some loudmouths who were eager to become leaders? Moreover, I, Ryzhkov, and Slyunkov were against it. The argument against us was this: “Look who is against it - former directors of enterprises. Dolgikh is the director of the Norilsk plant, Ryzhkov is the director of Uralmash, Slyunkov is a large plant in Belarus. They are defending their own.”
My good working relationship with Tikhonov irritated Gorbachev. Some people close to Gorbachev at that time later wrote that he said: they say, these old people are pulling Dolgikh to themselves, they want to make him a leader.
— Many believed that after Tikhonov was sent into retirement, you would be the chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers. And Gorbachev appointed Nikolai Ryzhkov.
- I learned about these sentiments later - that I seemed to be listed as prime minister. This question is very subjective. Whoever is easier, more convenient, easier for the General Secretary, the head of state, to work with is the one he chooses. And Gorbachev and I had quite a lot of arguments.
— The argument ended with him starting to squeeze you out.
- Yes. In general, yes.
- And how did he “leave” you?
— Before the Politburo meeting, he invited me to his place. He says: “Now Demichev and Solomentsev are leaving for a well-deserved rest. It’s probably time for you too.” I answer: “Sixty-three years old is probably not an old age. But if the Politburo thinks so, what can I do?”
— Do you remain a convinced opponent of perestroika?
- There are no personal grudges here. The current government is also starting to think about it. She follows approximately the same path as we walked. What is "United Russia"? The ruling party. The Presidential Administration is the same Central Committee of the CPSU. They disavowed the nomenklatura, but now they are returning to it.
With the assistance of the publisherVAGRIUS "POWER"presents a series of historical materials
Reveals the secret mechanisms of the Kremlin puppeteers
First Secretary of the Regional Committee of the CPSU Vladimir Dolgikh meets General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Leonid Brezhnev at Krasnoyarsk airport (September 1972)
Probably many remember the historical battle between party veteran Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh and the Anti-Soviet kebab shop. Let me remind you that the Forces of Evil were then put to shame, the sign was removed, and Vladimir Ivanovich emerged victorious. I wrote about this incident. He also wrote about some details of the biography of the main Defender of Good and Justice.
Let me remind you that Vladimir Ivanovich graduated from Soviet times with the rank of candidate member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, i.e. was among the TOP 25 most influential communist functionaries of the USSR. After the collapse of the USSR, Vladimir Ivanovich did not retire; he was a member of the board of directors of Wimm-Bill-Dann, a member of the board of directors of Norilsk Nickel, a laureate of the Moscow Legend of the Century award, and chairman of the Council of Veterans. And so on.
I had already forgotten about this nice man. Maybe, I thought, he’s no longer alive. And that’s because the person was born in 1924, 87 years ago. Is it a joke? And if he’s still alive, what can he do other than sit in a rocking chair, drool and shit on himself. However, I forgot the good old phrase “I should make nails out of these people.” Candidates for membership in the Politburo are such human material that does not leave the stage so quickly. And so, the latest news again attracted my attention to the personality of the “legend of the century”, who was not afraid to destroy the Anti-Soviet kebab shop. So, what is Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh doing now?
And this is what he does.
Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh became a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation of the sixth convocation. Member of the Industry Committee. Source of information – Official website of the State Duma of the Russian Federation.
From which party, you ask? Yes, from the most wonderful party - from United Russia. From what other party could the “legend of the century” get into the State Duma? The party is legendary, and the deputies from this party are a legend upon a legend.
Actually, what else can be said about this? Yes, absolutely nothing to what I said earlier, namely, that “United Russia” is exactly the same heir to the CPSU as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. “United Russia” and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation are two sisters who are fighting each other for their mother’s inheritance. United Russia turned out to be more agile. But, in principle, while they are always arguing with each other, they do not forget that they came out of the same womb.
This circumstance is so obvious that I do not consider it necessary to expand on it further. It is not even so important that the more successful sister - “United Russia” - has already given birth to a daughter, “Fair Russia”, who, thanks to her mother’s efforts, also lives well. That is, for those who like figurative comparisons and simplified diagrams, I give this visual family picture of modern Russian politics:
The CPSU is the ancestor.
United Russia and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation are her daughters. Moreover, “United Russia” was able to seize the mother’s inheritance, pushing aside the dumber Communist Party of the Russian Federation, from time to time allocating pieces of the mother’s inheritance so as not to be too angry.
“A Just Russia” is a daughter of “United Russia” and a granddaughter of the CPSU. Moreover, “A Just Russia” treats both its mother (United Russia) and its aunt (KPRF) equally warmly. Well, it’s clear that the whole family has a very warm attitude towards their ancestor - the CPSU.
What? LDPR? Well, how can I explain it to you? Well, we need to create some kind of settling tank for all kinds of idle talkers whose tongues are boneless. This is the LDPR. The LDPR was created to implement the good old saying: “Shallow, Emelya, your week.” It is not needed for anything else. And of course the LDPR has nothing to do with the legacy of the Progenitor - the CPSU. I don’t know, the LDPR deputies themselves realize that they are playing and will play only one role – “the sixth creeping up,” but Vladimir Volfovich understands everything perfectly. That’s why his eyes are sometimes so sad. Because, whatever you say, it’s hard to play the role of a hanger-on in the house of rich sisters all your life. It seems that the food is being fed properly (the post of Deputy Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation can be thrown off the master’s table, although not the first one), but still sometimes you need to dance Kamarinsky. And in general, you understand perfectly well that all the squabbling over your mother’s inheritance does not concern you. No matter what they decide between themselves, you still won’t get anything but a corner in the closet.
Here, in fact, I hope that the political alignment of party life in modern Russia is clear. If not in detail, then in general terms it should be clear.
But I began my reasoning with the personality of the “legend of the century”, i.e. with V.I. Dolgikh, who, on the threshold of turning 90, suddenly became a deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation. And here I will allow myself to indulge in some reasoning that I usually condemn. Namely, I will take upon myself the sin of conspiracy.
To begin with, let me ask myself this question: who even came up with the idea of putting an 87-year-old man in the State Duma as a deputy, who, it is possible, will twist his fins today or tomorrow. No, really? No matter how strong a fighter against anti-Soviet kebab shops may be, 87 years is an age. Imagine such a heartbreaking picture: a plenary session is in progress, Mr. Naryshkin (for those who don’t know, this is the new chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation) gives the floor to another deputy, and suddenly there is noise and commotion in the hall. What's happened? Well, they say Vladimir Ivanovich died. How did you die? Why did he die? I gave no such instructions! - Mr. Naryshkin is surprised. And the answer was: yes, he died of old age, it’s time. Just imagine how they will drag dead Vladimir Ivanovich out of the conference room. Embarrassed. And at his age, such an assumption is not so unrealistic.
Well, in such situations, how can such an ancient old man be seated as a deputy in the State Duma? Does United Russia have few candidates for a deputy sinecure? No, I think not a little. However, they found a place for Vladimir Ivanovich. That means they respect. And how respected they are.
Now watch my hands carefully to understand what real conspiracy theory is.
So, a former candidate member of the Politburo at the age of 87, contrary to all logic, becomes a deputy of the State Duma. What kind of title was this in the Soviet hierarchy - candidate member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee?
The USSR, let me remind you, was a country in which the communists usurped power. Despite the fact that formally the USSR, in terms of government structure, was exactly the same country as, say, France or the USA - it had a council of ministers, a parliament, a supposedly independent judicial system, etc. etc., but in fact all power was concentrated in the hands of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee. The Politburo consisted of a dozen (approximately) communists who, over many years of intrigue and internal party struggle, were able to rise to the very top of power in the CPSU, and, therefore, in the USSR. The CPSU was blinded by Comrade Stalin, who, if anyone remembers, studied at a theological seminary as a child and should have known the internal structure of the Church quite well, at least. Therefore, it is not surprising that the structure of the CPSU under Comrade Stalin turned out to be exactly similar to the structure of the Church. At the top is the most important bishop, the Patriarch (General Secretary), next to him is a circle of especially trusted and authoritative bishops - the Holy Synod (Politburo). Moreover, the Holy Synod consists of permanent and temporary members. In the same way, the Politburo consisted of members and candidates for members of the Politburo. Well, then, further down, there were all sorts of exarchates, dioceses, parishes, monasteries, etc. (territorial committees, regional committees, district committees, primary cells of the CPSU).
Let's imagine what would happen if power in the USSR was concentrated not in the hands of a political party, but in the hands of the Russian Orthodox Church? Then, as is obvious, the Patriarch would rule all life in the country. And members of the Synod would help him. And the word of a member of the Synod, his authority would not be much lower than the word of the Patriarch. In this case, there would not be a particularly fundamental difference whether it was a permanent or temporary member of the Synod. All the same, for all lower levels this would be an unquestioned authority and his word would be law.
Now let’s assume that for some reason – for example, for the convenience of managing the flock in the context of global civilizational changes – the united Russian Orthodox Church decided to split into several formally independent local Churches. What would happen then? And then, as you might guess, the Holy Synod would have to come up with some kind of scheme, according to which the general religious leadership would still remain in the hands of the Synod. The word of the representative of this secret Synod is the law for all other Churches and all its “children”. More precisely, the “children” should not know that there is a single supreme Synod, but can believe that local Churches are now independent of each other and themselves determine the strategy of their development (sorry for using such terminology). And the Synod, of course, is headed by the most trusted Elder.
And who should this Most Authoritative Elder be? Yes, in principle, it doesn’t matter who. After all, the internal structure of the Holy Synod, which has gone into the shadows, remains the same. The Holy Synod and its power are not spelled out in any way in any legislative acts, in the Constitution of the state, etc., but every initiate understands that the system has remained the same - all power is in the hands of the Holy Synod, and everything else is pure decoration.
Well, now let's return to reality. So, there was a time when the CPSU had full power in the country. Then the CPSU, for some reason, decided to stage a puppet show for the little fools: the “multi-party system.” According to the hypothetical diagram drawn above, in this system, members of the former Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee would still have to control the entire political map. Let's get a look.
Who became the President of the Russian Federation? That's right - a candidate member of the Politburo (Yeltsin). I will note in parentheses that for those below him, the difference between a member and a candidate member of the Politburo was minimal, because everyone understood that a candidate is a candidate only until one of the members dies, and then he is automatically “introduced” into the Politburo. Therefore, from the point of view of the management system, which I schematically showed, a member of the Politburo and a candidate member of the Politburo were almost equal figures.
Since the processes were ambiguous, in fact, this is precisely why the Synod/Politburo went through such transformations. Therefore, not everything worked out right away. For example, Ukraine, Belarus and a number of other republics initially received leaders who were formally independent from the Politburo. But, for example, Kazakhstan received a “whole” member of the Politburo - Nazarbayev (who, as recent events have shown, is still very firmly seated). Georgia floundered a little, played at democracy and received an old, proven member of the Politburo - Shevardnadze. By the way, what is the reason for the fierce hatred of the modern political authorities in Georgia on the part of official Russia? I am far from saying anything kind about Saakashvili. But one thing is obvious - he has nothing to do with the Politburo and, in fact, overthrew the power of a member of the Politburo. Which, of course, could not be regarded by the remaining members of the Politburo as anything other than a terrible sin, the perpetrator of which must be destroyed.
Well, what about Russia? Let me remind you that on December 31, 1999, the current President of the Russian Federation and “former” candidate member of the Politburo B.N. Yeltsin appointed V.V. Putin as the new president. Something similar was done a little earlier - in 1989 - by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, who resigned from all official posts. But who ruled China? Yes, basically, the same Dan. In the same way, Russia, which was formally headed by V.V. Putin, actually remained under the control of B.N. Yeltsin, a “former” candidate member of the Politburo. And Puti was busy with minor matters. For example, at the beginning of 2000, in a strange way, the aluminum industry turned out to be redistributed according to new rules (Abramovich, Deripaska, etc. surfaced), and the old aluminum kings lost all their property. How so? Putin was asked a question about this. Putin got away with inarticulate muttering. He understood his role perfectly well in 2000 - pure decoration.
By the way, presidential elections were held in 1996. Many were sure that the leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation G. Zyuganov won. But he was allegedly afraid to challenge the election results and recognized Yeltsin’s victory. Those who think that Zyuganov was scared understand nothing about the internal structure of the CPSU. And in the CPSU, the right to this or that action was completely determined by the level of the hierarchy at which this or that functionary was located. So, what was the “struggle” between Yeltsin and Zyuganov in 1996 from the point of view of the CPSU hierarchy?
Yeltsin was a candidate member of the Politburo, i.e., in fact, a celestial being. And Zyuganov? Deputy head of the department in the CPSU Central Committee, i.e. hardware bipod. From the point of view of the party hierarchy, the “struggle” between Yeltsin and Zyuganov was similar to if some abbot of the monastery on Solovki began to fight with the Patriarch. Incomparable quantities. So Zyuganov was not afraid, but simply acted clearly within the framework of the ethics and discipline of the CPSU. Every communist cricket knows its nest. And your own ceiling of ambition.
Well, what about Putin? Who was Putin in the USSR from the point of view of this entire rigid communist hierarchy? Yes, basically, no one. Just dust.
What was the KGB? From the point of view of an ordinary person or journalists in Western countries, the KGB is a terrible security agency, capable of anything. And from the point of view of the functionaries of the CPSU?
Officially, this structure was called the State Security Committee under the Council of Ministers of the USSR. That is, in fact, it was one of the Committees included in the government and subordinate to the Prime Minister (Chairman of the Council of Ministers). But this is formal. But in reality the KGB was “a sharp punishing sword in the hands of the party,” i.e. completely subordinated to the leadership of the CPSU. Yu.V. Andropov, for example, was himself a member of the Politburo, and all employees were either members of the Komsomol or the CPSU. There could not be non-partisans in the ranks of the KGB of the USSR by default.
So what was a minor KGB officer like for a candidate member of the Politburo in the light of party discipline and hierarchy? Yes, no one. Yeltsin, of course, due to some of his internal ideas about Good and Evil, constantly brought people closer to him who had no relation to the nomenklatura of the CPSU. From the point of view of the idiot party officials, who concentrated mainly in the Communist Party of the Russian Federation in the 90s, this was a great sin. And although the old apparatus of the CPSU Central Committee, almost in full force, continued its work under a new guise - the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation - there were constant mutual quarrels between the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and Yeltsin over the fact that Yeltsin was making appointments “out of rank.” But in any case, the very fact that Yeltsin was a candidate member of the Politburo (that is, a member of the Holy Synod) reconciled the party officials with reality.
Did V.V. Putin gain real power in 2000? No I did not receive it. Yeltsin continued to control everything. The highest officials of the state, appointed by Yeltsin, made reports to Putin as president, and in the evening they went to Yeltsin’s dacha and repeated these same reports and, in fact, it was there that everything was decided. Of course, Yeltsin gradually provided more and more freedom to Putin as president. Or maybe Yeltsin was simply tired of this whole carousel - Boris Nikolayevich was generally a rather unusual person for the Politburo. Be that as it may, Putin began to gradually get rid of the people whom Yeltsin installed. But if the people appointed by Yeltsin were legitimate in the eyes of the old CPSU party bureaucracy (and the Komsomol, by the way, too). The people appointed directly by Putin did not have such legitimacy in the eyes of this layer. Putin relied not on the nomenklatura as such, but on his friends and people from the KGB. And the KGB, from the point of view of the party nomenklatura, was a servant all the way, having no right to lay claim to power in the party (and therefore in the country). I hope that I have convincingly shown that the main active force in modern Russian politics remains the party bureaucracy from the CPSU and Komsomol, and not people from the KGB. But I will chew on this idea a little more below.
And here we come to the most interesting part. This is where conspiracy theory, as such, begins.
In the previous post, I asked myself: how, exactly, does the period from 2008 to 2011 differ from the period from 2004 to 2008? There doesn't seem to be much difference. But a sensitive barometer in the form of a “famous blogger” suddenly changed “his point of view.” In 2007, Putin suited him so much that he was ready to give him at least six terms in a row (let’s leave aside the question that nothing at all depends on the will of famous bloggers), but today, in 2011, he is not satisfied with him. What happened?
What happened was that in April 2007, Yeltsin died, that is, the one who legitimized Putin in the eyes of the party nomenklatura. And Putin has already begun to play entirely by his own rules. He tried to make exactly the same somersault that Yeltsin once did with him - that is, he appointed a formal president, continuing to hold in his hands all the threads of government. However, even here he apparently understood that he would not be able to completely repeat this. It was Yeltsin or Deng Xiaoping who could refuse all positions altogether, but not lose power. But Putin decided to play it safe by reserving the post of prime minister. But Putin and Yeltsin, in the eyes of the party elite, are not comparable values. As they say, what is allowed to Jupiter... Yeltsin could have walked onto the podium of the State Duma while drunk and urinated directly into the hall. And then everyone would have wiped themselves off. For Yeltsin was a Candidate for Member of the Politburo, that is, a member of the Holy Synod. Who is Putin? Nobody, and there’s no way to call him. Moreover, he brought a bunch of security officers to the very top. And the party elite always despised the security officers. She was afraid (she very much remembered Stalin’s purges), but she also despised her at the same time. For example, the late Brezhnev no longer trusted the KGB and in all places where guards were supposed to be located, both a representative of the KGB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs stood/sat. For reliability
So what process started in the end? And here it is: the Holy Synod came to the conclusion that they “played around and woke up.” The process of demonizing Putin has begun. And it’s not that Putin doesn’t have sins worth kicking him for. But the fact is that he had all these sins before, but “it didn’t catch my eye.” And then suddenly everyone began to notice everything at once.
In general, it should be noted that the party elite always deals with people from the special services easily and gracefully. At one time, Yagoda and Yezhov were sent to the next world without any effort. Some may say that only the evil genius of Stalin could so easily cope with the all-powerful People's Commissars of Internal Affairs. Nothing happened. After the death of Stalin, the formidable Beria was brought down and shot without any effort. Shelepin also lost the struggle for power to Brezhnev (although at first he was almost predicted to become the new General Secretary). Part of the CPSU Central Committee stood behind Andropov, but as soon as he began to carry out such a shake-up that strings were pulled to Grishina (Secretary of the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU) and other responsible people, he, the once formidable Chairman of the KGB of the USSR, unexpectedly died from numerous illnesses. Moreover, such things in the party-bureaucratic system are characteristic not only of the USSR. One can, for example, recall how Himmler lost the struggle for power (albeit a very ephemeral one) to Bormann.
Well, here is some Putin. Moreover, Putin himself highlighted all his people, placing them in key positions. That is, he made them objects of criticism and put them under attack. Although an apparatchik like Yeltsin would have acted differently, for example, he would have appointed officials “to be eaten,” i.e. he would stage it for the duration of an unpopular reform, and then, for the amusement of the crowd, he would film it and still shout at him and stamp his feet.
Okay, I'll wrap it up. What's happening now? Nomenklatura revenge. Moreover, it is given all the more easily to the Holy Synod because Putin himself prepared everything for this and dug his own grave. And what’s most remarkable is that the circumstances are so successful for the Holy Synod that the US State Department can easily and without any stretch be blamed for all the unrest. Moreover, the United States, with its constant statements, only makes this task easier. This is a classic hardware game - to remove a piece from the board with someone else's hands. And then these “alien hands” can be cut off easily and effortlessly.
And in this sense, the appearance in the State Duma of an 87-year-old “former” member of the Holy Synod is at least symbolic. Of course, you can give free rein to your imagination and assume that Dolgikh is the main overseer of the Holy Synod (he behaves like a greyhound). But this is where readers can draw their own conclusions. Moreover, the activation of the already forgotten M.S. Gorbachev (the “former” General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee!) also requires comprehension.
Actually, I spoke.
Yes, I almost forgot. Who am I for? In this fight - the Holy Synod vs. Putin, but rather on Putin’s side and wish him victory. No matter how disgusting Putin’s “capitalism of friends” may be, the nomenklatura revenge of the communist bastard is even more disgusting to me. Look at Comrade Dolgikh’s snout very carefully. This collective party snout wants to once again nestle on the neck of the people. In fact, it has almost taken root and is acting more and more brazenly.
Only a loafer who understands nothing about politics could come up with the nickname “Party of Crooks and Thieves” for United Russia. If everything were that simple, then there would be nothing special to worry about. It is very easy to knock off a party of swindlers and thieves. But the horror is that “United Russia” is the flesh and blood of the CPSU. “United Russia” is the party of Dolgikh and his offspring. Figuratively speaking, of course. But anyway.
And the funny thing is, at the anti-Putin rally, which is scheduled to take place on December 24, there will be a lot of shouting about Putin, about the party of swindlers and thieves, about the strangulation of freedom of speech (I am silent about the fact that Ostankino has always been an obedient servant of the Politburo) and about much more other. But no one - I guarantee - no one will say what is truly important.
Namely, that Russia, in order to get a second wind and begin normal development, must completely decommunize. The CPSU must be recognized as a criminal organization. All former party functionaries must undergo special procedures, and their every step must be examined. All those who held managerial positions in district committees and above in the hierarchy of the CPSU and Komsomol should be barred from participation in government. And the highest party bosses, such as Dolgikh, should sit not in the Duma chair, but in the dock. I will not say a priori that Dolgikh is a criminal. Maybe he is personally an honest person. But for the sake of the future of the country, a public court must prove this.
But, I repeat, none of this will be said at the rally. This will be an ordinary empty talk shop - another link in the chain of behind-the-scenes hardware games. And all this will be watched with an arrogant smile by the “legend of the century”, Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh “and other officials.” For which I congratulate us all.
There is an ongoing debate about the admissibilityplacing stands on the streets of Moscow about the role of Stalin in the Great Patriotic War. The Public Chamber yesterday called this decision by the Moscow leadership rash and provoking confrontation. Disputes about Stalinism and anti-Sovietism have recently been associated with the name of Vladimir Dolgikh, former secretary of the CPSU Central Committee and candidate member of the Politburo. The loudest of them flared up after the sign was removed from the kebab shop "Anti-Soviet" , and now - after the decision of the Moscow Advertising Committee on “Stalinist” posters.
Vladimir Dolgikh does not give comments or interviews, and refuses to participate in television programs. Its audience is narrowed to two councils: the Moscow Veterans Council and the Public Council (the latter was created two years ago by order of Mayor Luzhkov for “constructive dialogue between public organizations and government bodies”).
However, the dialogue with Radio Liberty Vladimir DolgiX agreed.
Vladimir Dolgikh is one of those people who consider Joseph Stalin a “controversial historical figure.”
“We must look at Stalin from the position of historical truth,” says Vladimir Dolgikh. – The question of his role, starting from the 20th Party Congress, divided society into supporters of Stalin and his opponents. The figure of Stalin is controversial. Of course, no one has ever welcomed such things as repression among the people. The first gulags or camps were organized in the country by Trotsky, Stalin is the successor. It must be borne in mind that the country was always in a state of class struggle. There were crimes and shortcomings, including during the war. At the same time, one cannot help but see what actually happened. Take the pre-war period. In nine years, the country industrialized to the extent that it allowed for the creation of a defense industry and was prepared for war. During the war, more than one hundred thousand tanks and aircraft were produced. A brilliant job was done to relocate the entire defense industry from the Western occupied territories. It is not so easy to organize all this in the shortest possible time in wartime. Finally, look at the results of the war: all military leaders who are Marshals of Victory, such as Marshal Zhukov, recognized Stalin's role as a worthy supreme commander.
We know about the assessment of Stalin by his sworn enemy Churchill: Stalin took the country with a plow, and left it with a full gold reserve and atomic weapons. Ultimately, Stalin was the greatest theoretician. All this cannot be discarded or ignored under any circumstances.
Video: Vladimir Dolgikh about Stalin
Veterans believe that it is impossible to show footage from the Yalta, Tehran or Potsdam conference and cut out Stalin or Molotov: this is a historical untruth; they were the main promoters of the interests of the Soviet Union at these conferences. It is also a historical untruth that portraits of the Marshals of Victory are hung in the city and portraits of Stalin are excluded. All this does not mean that we should ignore mistakes and crimes. The Chinese also encountered this phenomenon during the Cultural Revolution led by Mao Zedong. No fewer people died there. Nevertheless, in China they behaved with dignity: they did not curse their country, did not lower the level of patriotism, said Vladimir Dolgikh.
According to the Memorial Society , in 1937-1938 alone, more than 1 million 700 thousand people were arrested for political reasons. More than 725 thousand of them were shot.
There were also repressed people in the family of Vladimir Dolgikh.
“My sister’s husband, Ivan Romanovich Maslov, was repressed,” says Vladimir Dolgikh. – I had to work in Norilsk with a huge number of people who were repressed. There was no malice on their part after Stalin’s death, during the period of excitement with the cult of Stalin’s personality after Khrushchev’s speech. These people behaved better than many party members.
Vladimir Dolgikh does not like it when Stalin is called an “effective manager,” but not because he considers him ineffective.
– Stalin is a historical figure of a much larger scale to be called an effective manager. This person is, if not higher, then, in any case, not lower than such people as Roosevelt and Churchill, explains Vladimir Dolgikh.
How did the Dolgikhs form such an opinion about Stalin and historical truth? To answer this question, it is worth looking into his past.
Vladimir Ivanovich Dolgikh was born in 1924 in the city of Ilansky, Krasnoyarsk Territory. There are two opposing legends about his family: according to the first, popular one, Vladimir Dolgikh’s father was a high-ranking security official who headed the Gulag in the 1950s. According to the second, Vladimir Dolgikh was born into a family of hereditary railway workers, and his father was repressed in 1937. The first legend is incorrect: the Gulag was headed by Dolgikh’s namesake. The second is partially true: Vladimir Dolgikh’s father was indeed a railway worker. As a child, Vladimir Dolgikh led a pioneer and Komsomol organization, read Maupassant, and together with his brothers and sisters dreamed of becoming a railway depot employee.
“We were primarily raised by school, because our parents did not have higher education at that time,” says Vladimir Dolgikh. “The fact that my brother was in charge of the railway library helped me. I became addicted to reading: I read a lot, although without appropriate selection. As a schoolboy, I re-read all of Maupassant, although, probably, judging by the school curriculum, this could have been avoided. We had a railway family - my older brothers, sisters and I knew well what it meant to be a dispatcher, conductor, driver, and head of the road department. This is what we aspired to become. Fate decreed differently.
When Vladimir Dolgikh turned 17 on December 5, 1941, he went to the front, adding a year to his life.
“There were hundreds of thousands of people like me back then: having learned about the start of the war, they went to the military registration and enlistment offices with a request to join the Red Army and defend the country. Most of my classmates were a year older than me - born in 1923. And I, the leader of the Komsomol organization, considered it beneath my dignity not to support my comrades in joining the army. Moreover, we were invited to the district Komsomol committee and asked the question: guys, are you afraid to join the army? Naturally, everyone said that they didn’t even think about being afraid. I was pushed to go to the front by a sense of camaraderie and, to a certain extent, leadership,” said Vladimir Dolgikh.
The TASS statement on June 14, 1941 about the unfoundedness of rumors about an imminent war with Germany was included in the history books. Vladimir Dolgikh, however, claims that the news of the start of the war did not come as a surprise to any of the ordinary people in his home village of Ilansky:
“We had little idea how a war could affect every family, what kind of war it would be - everyone oohed and aahed. But society was prepared for the very news of the beginning of the war: in 1941, even in such a village as the city of Ilansky, lecturers appeared who spoke about the international situation. We clearly knew, for example, about the German occupation of Norway and France...
17-year-old Vladimir Dolgikh and his peers were prepared for war in Krasnoyarsk for about a month, then they were sent to Moscow as part of the marching company of the 6th Guards Rifle Division. Vladimir Dolgikh became the company's political instructor. He believes that this partly saved him: in February 1943, in a town in the Oryol region, he was wounded during a mortar shelling, and they were looking for him as a political instructor– with special diligence.
– I must say frankly: this is not such a modern weapon - the ability to throw bottles with a combustible mixture. For several weeks in Krasnoyarsk we learned exactly this, although throwing grenades too... It is wrong to think that everyone who fought was not afraid of anything and everything was okay. War is the hardest thing. I was wounded on February 9 after the capture of the city of Livny, Oryol region - our company came under mortar fire. I didn’t feel any fear, because I woke up already wrapped in a blanket envelope on the stove in a small broken house without windows or doors. I was the political instructor of the company; apparently, my comrades reported to the medical battalion that I was wounded. They might not have found me: time was ticking by the clock, and it was February.
As you know, Stalin stated that 7 million people died in the Great Patriotic War. Khrushchev - 20 million. Gorbachev - 27 million people. Of the 27 million, more than 15 were civilians. Disputes about these figures continue to this day.
“After being wounded, I ended up in Irkutsk to live with my older brother,” continues Vladimir Dolgikh. – I had to think about education, I was forced to go to preparatory courses, and there were such ones at the Mining and Metallurgical Institute. I graduated from the institute with honors in fine metallurgical technology - refining of platinum metals. There were practically no such specialists, but there was a need for them: in 1935, the Norilsk Mining and Metallurgical Combine appeared, where ores that contained platinum metals were processed...
Video: Vladimir Dolgikh on modernization
From the post of director of the Norilsk plant, I was elected to the post of first secretary of the Krasnoyarsk regional committee of the CPSU. Over three years of party work, it was possible to create and implement a program for the comprehensive development of the productive forces of the Krasnoyarsk Territory: metal, wood or coal are mined, then processed for different purposes at different factories - in the end, all enterprises are involved. This was the first experience in a country where there were large raw materials and energy resources, but unorganized, chaotic use of enterprises was planned.
This comprehensive system was supported by the Party's Central Committee. When I was elected Secretary of the Central Committee, I continued to be involved in industrial production: I oversaw geology, ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, the oil and gas industry, Rostekhnadzor, construction, all energy and transport. There was a lot of work, but I believe that during that period from the early 1970s to 1985 we managed to create a fuel and energy complex that still supplies Russia.
Video: Vladimir Dolgikh about perestroika