To Stalin, a man and a myth

© RIA Novosti / Go to the mediabankTo Stalin, a man and a myth
To Stalin, a man and a myth - Sputnik International
Subscribe
Iosif Dzhugashvili-Stalin was born 130 years ago, died 56 years ago, but has yet to fully depart from our sinful land. He is still in the center of public debate. Every politician considers it his duty to express his attitude toward Stalin. Every publication about Stalin generates thousands of comments, whose authors clash with each other as if their life and fortune were still in the hands of Comrade Stalin

Iosif Dzhugashvili-Stalin was born 130 years ago, died 56 years ago, but has yet to fully depart from our sinful land. He is still in the center of public debate. Every politician considers it his duty to express his attitude toward Stalin. Every publication about Stalin generates thousands of comments, whose authors clash with each other as if their life and fortune were still in the hands of Comrade Stalin.

His spirit refuses to disappear

Clearly, all these arguments and political declarations have little in common with the historical figure of the CPSU General Secretary and the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars. The vast majority of the "discourse fighters" either has very little information about Stalin or simply ignores the facts vehemently.

Some fiercely argue that the country was full of foreign spies and that no one was executed or imprisoned if innocent, and that only criminals were persecuted. In support of their arguments, they like quoting Churchill's famous saying that Stalin "inherited Russia with a wooden plough, and left Russia in possession of an atomic bomb."

Others argue emphatically that Stalin executed 800,000 soldiers and officers of the Soviet Army in the very beginning of the war and that an additional 2 million defected to the German side. This leaves us puzzled as to who then fought the enemy and won the war.

For anti-Stalinists, the very statement of the fact that the victory in the Great Patriotic War was achieved under the leadership of Stalin as the Supreme Commander is perceived as his glorification. At the same time, the Stalinists do not accept the catastrophic failures and mistakes of their idol before the war.

These disputes smack of scholasticism. The ferocious Oriental despotism, hidden under the euphemism of a "personality cult," first introduced by Georgy Malenkov on March 10, 1953, has been relegated to the realm of legends. And the despot, the chief, and the "mastermind of victories" has turned into a myth. They fight this myth and worship it, they are ready to "go to battle" "for the motherland and for Stalin" like the soldiers allegedly did during the war, even though many of them deny it.

Iosif Dzhugashvili became a myth in his own lifetime. He was the first to create the legend about himself. He lived behind the tall walls of the Kremlin, was rarely seen in public and did not give frequent public speeches. As a result, he became a deity of sorts, a good one for some, and an evil one for others. A universal adoration of Stalin is yet another myth. People were split approximately in half, and the division line ran through families.

My own family was affected. My mother has always despised Stalin, but volunteered for the army in 1942, as you can be against Stalin, but never against your motherland. Her sister, my aunt, adored Stalin and cried when he died, despite the fact that her father and his three brothers were arrested and sent to labor camps for no reason. Later this became known as "repressions."

Currently, society is split along the same lines. But unlike those sad times, when polling Stalin's popularity was out of the question, nowadays it is common. Polls are conducted regularly and reveal very interesting results.

Between 37% and 54% of the respondents positively assess Stalin's policies; the older the respondents, the higher the rating. The younger respondents are largely indifferent. It is likely that they would not have known Stalin at all, if his name were not on TV all the time. As for the older respondents, they were still too young in the Stalin days, and their opinions have formed "post factum" during our times.

Last year, a large scale all-Russian internet, TV, and radio poll was conducted as part of the Imya Rossiya (Name of Russia) project. Four and a half million respondents were polled. Stalin was in the lead for a long time and "finished third" in the end. Many people still think that the organizers of the project rigged the poll to reduce the number of votes given to Stalin. In any event, Stalin confirmed his popularity.

Books about Stalin are so popular they are sold out immediately. A major publishing house keeps printing additional copies of his biography.

Finally, every public discussion about Stalin, like the one broadcast on NTV on Sunday night December 20, becomes so emotional and passionate, as if there are no other more important and urgent topics for discussion.

The three most vicious dictators of the 20th century have met a different fate. Only historians and some marginal groups take interest in Lenin and Hitler. Only Stalin has captured the imagination of current generations. Even today he can compete in popularity with active politicians and win the virtual votes of the electorate.

The "Leader of Nations" had no ideology of his own; he had no interest in reforming mankind and creating a new world, but had a simple agenda of strengthening his personal power, as dozens of tyrants and despots like him have always done. As such, he became very intimate and naturally acceptable to his countrymen and continues to be very popular. The phrase "Stalin would have dealt with you" can be heard quite frequently on various occasions even from some very decent people.

But he would no longer, of course. Today's "progressive public" should not be worried or be warning about the "revival of Stalinism." It is not the real Iosif Dzhugashvili that today's Stalin admirers support, but only his myth. The indispensable element of that myth is the statement - "Stalin ensured order."

Those who reason this way would not be able to live a day under such "order." However, the years of disorder and disarray have made their imprint and the most dreadful period in 20th century Russian history has paradoxically become the "golden age" in the minds of many Russians.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Nikolai Troitsky)

Newsfeed
0
To participate in the discussion
log in or register
loader
Chats
Заголовок открываемого материала