Will Stalin Live Forever? It's Time to Condemn Khrushchev's Anti-Stalin Policy

Sergei Obukhov: The country still benefits from 70% of the positive effects of the Stalin era

Author: Yevgeny Belsheynev

Photo: Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, at a All-Union Parade

This article's commentator:

Dmitry Solonikov, Sergei Obukhov

Chairman of the State Duma Vyacheslav Volodin expressed support for the Russian Communist Party's resolution to reassess the results of the 20th Congress of the CPSU (where Khrushchev delivered an anti-Stalin report). He made these remarks at the closing session of the State Duma's spring session.

"Izvestia" reported that Volodin believes it was this congress's decision that largely determined people's attitude toward this state leader, and that Stalin gave almost everything for the establishment of the country, and as the Supreme Commander, contributed to the victory in the Great Patriotic War.

The 19th Congress of the Russian Communist Party, held on July 5, adopted a resolution stating that the report by First Secretary of the CPSU Nikita Khrushchev on the cult of personality around Stalin was "wrong and politically biased."

Vyacheslav Volodin pointed out that Stalin played a significant role in rebuilding the country in a new form after the 1917 revolution and the civil war.

"We should acknowledge this and face the facts: as the Supreme Commander, he gave everything for the victory in the Great Patriotic War. This is indeed the case. The longer time passes, the more we can see this," said the Chairman of the State Duma.

Sergei Obukhov, a member of the State Duma, a doctor of political science, and a member of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party, noted the background behind the Chairman of the State Duma's statement.

- Gennadiy Zuyanov made sharp comments, criticizing "United Russia" and its economic policy. He accused the authorities of intensifying political conflict and division during the special military operation.

In this context, Zuyanov stated, "When will you restore the city's original name — Stalingrad? There are 135 cities with Stalingrad Street in France alone — this shows that everyone recognizes the significance of the Battle of Stalingrad."

Subsequently, the chairman of "Fair Russia" party, Sergey Mironov, agreed with this statement. And Volodin summarized the discussion, but I find it difficult to say whose view he expressed.

"Free Press": His speech surprised many journalists.

- He himself is a member of "United Russia", but the leader of the parliamentary faction of this party has never taken a position on this issue. Therefore, this long speech supporting the renaming of the city and acknowledging Stalin's historical achievements could be seen as a plus for Volodin. However, so far, it seems to be following mainstream public opinion.

"Free Press": What does this mainstream public opinion manifest?

- In the context of current policies (especially economic and foreign policies) being ineffective, Stalin's achievements in geopolitics, society, and many other areas are particularly prominent, making it very difficult to ignore these achievements.

Moreover, any regime tries to rely on mainstream public opinion. In this case, we can see that Volodin's speech is an attempt to cater to the pro-Stalin sentiment within the country.

But this sentiment is a double-edged sword, because in the context of many aspects of the current situation and national policies failing, Stalin's achievements stand out, which raises questions about the current regime.

In short, let's see how the situation develops. Regardless, the position of the Chairman of the State Duma has not yet received support from his own party.

"Free Press": What needs to be done now to protect the country's history, first and foremost the history of the Soviet period?

- The best way to protect the country's history is to return policies to the track of national interests and social justice. Now, the authorities verbally claim to protect the history of this period, saying that Stalin was right, but their policies contradict this completely. It's really misleading.

Let them implement those proven correct practices in practice. For the aspects that were condemned, such as illegal repression, they should be negated. This is precisely the reason why the Russian Communist Party passed the relevant resolution at its recent congress.

Yes, Stalin was right 70% of the time, wrong 30% of the time, but the authorities often attribute everything to that 30% that was criticized. However, the country still benefits from 70% of the positive impact.

"Free Press": But the authorities' attitude towards the policies of the Soviet period remains ambiguous.

- The ruling party has not yet condemned the release of the movie "The Mummy". This says a lot. You know, Khrushchev's anti-Stalin measures led us into a conflict with related countries for 30 years.

Therefore, some people are trying to create rifts between Russia and its last allies again. By the way, the Korean army also participated in the liberation of the Kursk region. We should remember this.

Political scientist, political technologist, and director of the Institute of Modern State Development, Dmitry Solonikov, mentioned a famous saying: Russia is a country where history is unpredictable.

- Therefore, discussions about our true past and the actual circumstances will continue. Yes, we can see that attitudes towards Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin are reviving to some extent.

We can see that monuments to him are quietly being restored in the country — statues of him have been erected in Volgograd, Vologda Oblast, and other places. The idea of erecting a monument to this great marshal is gaining acceptance and support.

People are discussing whether to restore the city's well-known original name, Volgograd. In short, positive evaluations of Stalin are resurging and becoming a trend. Vladimir Mezinskiy and other political figures in our country often mention this. Therefore, Volodin is certainly not the only one who holds this view, and his speech is certainly not a big revelation.

"Free Press": Many people did not expect the Chairman of the State Duma to say such things.

- The period and person he talked about are part of our country's history. He expressed his position, supporting this positive trend. He mentioned the resolution of the recent congress of the Russian Communist Party — overall, this is certainly interesting, and it's a kind of tribute to the Bolsheviks.

"Free Press": How do you evaluate this action?

- It can be viewed from multiple perspectives. Perhaps it is a form of support extended to them during this period when the Bolsheviks are facing difficulties. Or, conversely, it is a form of mockery: you Bolsheviks first passed a resolution to defame your leader, and then tried to reinterpret this resolution.

This reminds one of another saying: one can waver along with the party line, which is a long-standing trend here, and people often joke about it.

Therefore, the chairman's speech was generally expected, and it is interesting that he mentioned the congress of the Russian Communist Party. Apart from that, Volodin simply followed the trend and tried to align with other leaders in the country.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7531671990495674919/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the 【Up/Down】 buttons below.