Victims of mass repression. Stalin's repressions (briefly). Beauty and health in winter
The development of disputes about the period of Stalin's rule is facilitated by the fact that many NKVD documents are still classified. There are different data on the number of victims of the political regime. That is why this period remains to be studied for a long time.
How many people did Stalin kill: years of rule, historical facts, repressions during the Stalin regime
Historical figures who built a dictatorial regime have distinctive psychological characteristics. Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili is no exception to this. Stalin is not a surname, but a pseudonym that clearly reflects his personality.
Could anyone have imagined that a single mother-washer (later milliner - a fairly popular profession at that time) from a Georgian village would raise a son who would win fascist Germany, will establish an industrial industry in a huge country and make millions of people shudder just by the sound of his name?
Now that our generation has access to ready-made knowledge from any field, people know that a harsh childhood shapes unpredictably strong personalities. This happened not only with Stalin, but also with Ivan the Terrible, Genghis Khan and the same Hitler. What is most interesting is that the two most odious figures in the history of the last century had similar childhoods: a tyrant father, an unhappy mother, their early death, education in schools with a spiritual bias, and a love of art. Few people know about such facts, because basically everyone is looking for information about how many people Stalin killed.
The path to politics
The reins of government of the largest power in the hands of Dzhugashvili lasted from 1928 to 1953, until his death. Stalin announced what policy he intended to pursue in 1928 at an official speech. For the rest of the term he did not deviate from his own. Evidence of this is the facts about how many people Stalin killed.
When it comes to the number of victims of the system, some of the destructive decisions are attributed to his associates: N. Yezhov and L. Beria. But at the end of all documents there is Stalin’s signature. As a result, in 1940, N. Yezhov himself became a victim of repression and was shot.
Motives
Goals Stalin's repressions pursued several motives, and each of them achieved them in full. They are as follows:
- Reprisals followed the leader's political opponents.
- Repression was a tool to intimidate citizens in order to strengthen Soviet power.
- A necessary measure to boost the economy of the state (repressions were carried out in this direction as well).
- Exploitation of free labor.
Terror at its peak
The years 1937-1938 are considered to be the peak of repression. Regarding how many people Stalin killed, statistics during this period provide impressive figures - more than 1.5 million. NKVD order number 00447 was distinguished by the fact that it chose its victims according to national and territorial characteristics. Representatives of nations different from the ethnic composition of the USSR were especially persecuted.
How many people did Stalin kill because of Nazism? The following figures are given: more than 25,000 Germans, 85,000 Poles, about 6,000 Romanians, 11,000 Greeks, 17,000 Latvians and 9,000 Finns. Those who were not killed were expelled from their territory of residence without the right to assistance. Their relatives were fired from their jobs, military personnel were expelled from the ranks of the army.
Numbers
Anti-Stalinists do not miss the opportunity to once again exaggerate the real data. For example:
- The dissident believes that there were 40 million of them.
- Another dissident A.V. Antonov-Ovseenko did not waste time on trifles and exaggerated the data by two times - 80 million.
- There is also a version belonging to the rehabilitators of victims of repression. According to their version, the number of those killed was more than 100 million.
- The audience was most surprised by Boris Nemtsov, who in 2003 live stated 150 million victims.
In fact, only official documents can answer the question of how many people Stalin killed. One of them is a memo by N. S. Khrushchev from 1954. It provides data from 1921 to 1953. According to the document, more than 642,000 people received the death penalty, that is, a little more than half a million, and not 100 or 150 million. The total number of convicts was over 2 million 300 thousand. Of these, 765,180 were sent into exile.
Repressions during the Second World War
The Great Patriotic War forced the rate of extermination of the people of their country to slow down slightly, but the phenomenon as such was not stopped. Now the “culprits” were sent to the front lines. If you ask the question of how many people Stalin killed at the hands of the Nazis, then there is no exact data. There was no time to judge the culprits. Remained from this period catchphrase about decisions “without trial or investigation”. The legal basis now became the order of Lavrentiy Beria.
Even emigrants became victims of the system: they were returned en masse and sentenced. Almost all cases were qualified by Article 58. But this is conditional. In practice, the law was often ignored.
Characteristic features of the Stalin period
After the war, repressions acquired a new mass character. The “Doctors' Plot” testifies to how many people from among the intelligentsia died under Stalin. The culprits in this case were doctors who served at the front and many scientists. If we analyze the history of the development of science, then that period accounts for the vast majority of “mysterious” deaths of scientists. The large-scale campaign against the Jewish people is also the fruit of the politics of the time.
Degree of cruelty
Speaking about how many people died in Stalin’s repressions, it cannot be said that all the accused were shot. There were many ways to torture people, both physically and psychologically. For example, if relatives of the accused are expelled from their place of residence, they are deprived of access to medical care and food products. Thousands of people died this way from cold, hunger or heat.
Prisoners were kept for long periods in cold rooms without food, drink or the right to sleep. Some were left handcuffed for months. None of them had the right to communicate with outside world. Notifying loved ones about their fate was also not practiced. No one escaped the brutal beating with broken bones and spine. Another type of psychological torture is to be arrested and “forgotten” for years. There were people “forgotten” for 14 years.
Mass character
It is difficult to give specific figures for many reasons. Firstly, is it necessary to count the relatives of the prisoners? Should those who died even without arrest be considered “under mysterious circumstances”? Secondly, the previous population census was carried out before the start of the civil war, in 1917, and during the reign of Stalin - only after the Second World War. There is no exact information about the total population.
Politicization and anti-nationality
It was believed that repression would rid the people of spies, terrorists, saboteurs and those who did not support the ideology of the Soviet regime. However, in practice, completely different people became victims of the state machine: peasants, ordinary workers, public figures and entire nations who wished to preserve their national identity.
The first preparatory work for the creation of the Gulag began in 1929. Nowadays they are compared with German concentration camps, and quite fair. If you are interested in how many people died in them during Stalin’s time, then figures are given from 2 to 4 million.
Attack on the “cream of society”
The greatest damage was caused by an attack on the “cream of society.” According to experts, the repression of these people greatly delayed the development of science, medicine and other aspects of society. A simple example: publishing in foreign publications, collaborating with foreign colleagues, or conducting scientific experiments could easily end in arrest. Creative people published under pseudonyms.
By the middle of the Stalin period, the country was practically left without specialists. Most of those arrested and killed were graduates of monarchist educational institutions. They closed only about 10-15 years ago. There were no specialists with Soviet training. If Stalin led an active struggle against classism, then he practically achieved this: only poor peasants and an uneducated layer remained in the country.
The study of genetics was prohibited, as it was “too bourgeois in nature.” The attitude towards psychology was the same. And psychiatry was engaged in punitive activities, imprisoning thousands of bright minds in special hospitals.
Judicial system
How many people died in the camps under Stalin can be clearly imagined if we consider the judicial system. If at an early stage some investigations were carried out and cases were considered in court, then after 2-3 years of the start of repression a simplified system was introduced. This mechanism did not give the accused the right to have a defense present in court. The decision was made based on the testimony of the accusing party. The decision was not subject to appeal and was put into effect no later than the next day after it was made.
The repressions violated all the principles of human rights and freedoms, according to which other countries had already lived for several centuries at that time. Researchers note that the attitude towards those repressed was no different from how the Nazis treated captured military personnel.
Conclusion
Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili died in 1953. After his death, it became clear that the entire system was built around his personal ambitions. An example of this is the cessation of criminal cases and prosecutions in many cases. Lavrentiy Beria was also known by those around him as a hot-tempered person with inappropriate behavior. But at the same time, he significantly changed the situation, prohibiting torture against the accused and recognizing the groundlessness of many cases.
Stalin is compared to the Italian dictator Benetto Mussolini. But a total of about 40,000 people became victims of Mussolini, as opposed to Stalin’s 4.5 million plus. In addition, those arrested in Italy retained the right to communication, protection, and even to write books behind bars.
It is impossible not to note the achievements of that time. Victory in the Second World War, of course, is beyond any discussion. But thanks to the labor of Gulag residents, a huge number of buildings, roads, canals, railways and other structures were built throughout the country. Despite the hardships of the post-war years, the country was able to restore an acceptable standard of living.
The topic of political repression in the USSR under Stalin is one of the most discussed historical topics of our time. First, let’s define the term “political repression.” That's what the dictionaries say.
Repression (Latin repressio - suppression, oppression) is a punitive measure, punishment applied by government agencies, the state. Political repressions are coercive measures applied based on political motives, such as imprisonment, expulsion, exile, deprivation of citizenship, forced labor, deprivation of life, etc.
Obviously, the reason for the emergence of political repression is the political struggle in the state, causing certain “political motives” for punitive measures. And the more fiercely this struggle is waged, the greater the scope of repression. Thus, in order to explain the reasons and scale of the repressive policy pursued in the USSR, it is necessary to understand what political forces were active at this historical stage. What goals did they pursue? And what they managed to achieve. Only this approach can lead us to a deep understanding of this phenomenon.
In domestic historical journalism regarding the issue of repression of the 30s, two directions have emerged, which can conditionally be called “anti-Soviet” and “patriotic”. Anti-Soviet journalism presents this historical phenomenon in a simplified black and white picture, attributing b O Most of the cause-and-effect relationships are due to Stalin’s personal qualities. A purely philistine approach to history is used, which consists in explaining events only by the actions of individuals.
From the patriotic camp, the vision of the process of political repression also suffers from bias. This situation, in my opinion, is objective and is due to the fact that pro-Soviet historians were initially in the minority and, as it were, on the defensive. They constantly had to defend and justify, rather than put forward their version of events. Therefore, their works, as an antithesis, contain only “+” signs. But thanks to their criticism of anti-Sovietism, it was possible to somehow understand the problematic areas of Soviet history, see outright lies, and get away from myths. Now, it seems to me, the time has come to restore an objective picture of events.
Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Zhukov
Regarding the political repressions of the pre-war USSR (the so-called “Great Terror”), one of the first attempts to recreate this picture was the work “Another Stalin” by Doctor of Historical Sciences Yuri Nikolaevich Zhukov, published in 2003. I would like to talk about his conclusions in this article, and also express some of my thoughts on this issue. This is what Yuri Nikolaevich himself writes about his work.
“Myths about Stalin are far from new. The first, apologetic, began to take shape in the thirties, taking its final shape by the early fifties. The second, revealing, followed after Khrushchev’s closed report at the 20th Congress of the CPSU. It was actually a mirror image of the previous one, it simply turned from “white” to “black”, without changing its nature at all...
... Without at all pretending to be complete and therefore indisputable, I will venture only one thing: to get away from both preconceived points of view, from both myths; try to restore the old, once well-known, but now carefully forgotten, completely unnoticed, ignored by everyone.”
Well, that’s a very commendable desire for a historian (without quotes).
“I am only a student of Lenin...”- I. Stalin
To begin with, I would like to talk about Lenin and Stalin, as his successor. Both liberal and patriotic historians often contrast Stalin with Lenin. Moreover, if the former contrast the portrait of the cruel dictator Stalin with the seemingly more democratic Lenin (after all, he introduced the NEP, etc.). The latter, on the contrary, present Lenin as a radical revolutionary in contrast to the statist Stalin, who removed the unruly “Leninist guard” from the political scene.
In fact, it seems to me that such oppositions are incorrect, breaking the logic of the formation of the Soviet state into two opposing stages. It would be more correct to talk about Stalin as the continuer of what Lenin started (especially since Stalin always spoke about this, and not at all out of modesty). And try to find common features in them.
Here is what, for example, historian Yuri Emelyanov says about this:
"First of all, Stalin was constantly guided by the Leninist principle of creative development Marxist theory, rejecting "dogmatic Marxism". Constantly making adjustments to the daily implementation of policy so that it corresponded to the real situation, Stalin at the same time followed the main Leninist guidelines. Putting forward the task of building a socialist society in one particular country, Stalin consistently continued the activities of Lenin, which led to the victory of the world's first socialist revolution in Russia. Stalin's five-year plans logically followed from Lenin's GOELRO plan. Stalin's program of collectivization and modernization of the countryside met the objectives of mechanization Agriculture posed by Lenin."Yuri Zhukov also agrees with him (, p. 5): “To understand Stalin’s views, his approach to solving all problems without exception is important - “specific historical conditions.” It was they, and not anyone’s authoritative statement, that official dogmas and theories became the main ones for Stalin. They, and not anything else, explain his commitment to the politics of the same pragmatist Lenin as himself, explain his own hesitations and turning points, his readiness, under the influence of real conditions, without being embarrassed at all, to abandon previously made proposals and insist on others , sometimes diametrically opposed.”
There are good reasons to assert that Stalin's policies were a continuation of Lenin's. Perhaps, if Lenin had found himself in Stalin’s place, under the same “specific historical conditions” he would have acted in a similar way. In addition, it is worth noting the phenomenal performance of these people, and the constant desire for development and self-learning.
The fight for Lenin's legacy
While Lenin was still alive, but when he was already seriously ill, a struggle for leadership in the party unfolded between Trotsky’s group and the “leftists” (Zinoviev, Kamenev), as well as the “rights” (Bukharin, Rykov) and Stalin’s “centrist group”. We won’t go into too much detail about the vicissitudes of this struggle, but let’s note the following. In the stormy process of party discussions, it was the Stalinist group that initially occupied much worse “starting positions” that stood out and received party support. Anti-Soviet historians say that this was facilitated by Stalin’s special cunning and deceit. He, they say, skillfully maneuvered among opponents, pitted them against each other, used their ideas, and so on.
We will not deny Stalin’s ability to play the political game, but the fact remains: the Bolshevik Party supported him. And this was facilitated, firstly, by the position of Stalin, who tried, despite all the disagreements, to prevent a split in the party during this difficult time. And, secondly, the focus and ability of the Stalinist group for practical government activities, the thirst for which, apparently, was very strongly felt among the Bolsheviks who won the civil war.
Stalin and his comrades, unlike their opponents, objectively assessed the current situation in the world, understood the impossibility of a world revolution at this historical stage and, based on this, began to consolidate the successes achieved in Russia, and not to “export” them outside. From Stalin's report to the 17th Congress: “We were guided in the past and we are guided in the present by the USSR and only by the USSR.”.
It is impossible to say precisely from what date the full dominance of the Stalinist group in the country’s leadership began. Apparently, this was the period of 1928 - 1929, when we can say that this political force began to pursue an independent policy. At this stage, repressions against the party opposition were rather mild. Usually, for opposition leaders, defeat ended in removal from office. leadership positions, expulsion from Moscow or from the country, exclusion from the party.
Scale of repression
Now it's time to talk about numbers. What was the scale of political repression in the Soviet state? According to discussions with anti-Sovietists (see “The Court of History” or “Historical Process”), it is precisely this question that causes a painful reaction on their part and accusations of “justification, inhumanity,” etc. But talking about numbers actually matters, since numbers often reveal a lot about the nature of repression. At the moment, the most widely known studies are those of Dr. V. N. Zemskova.
Table 1. Comparative statistics of prisoners in 1921–1952
for political reasons (according to data from the First Special Department of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs and the USSR KGB)
Table 1 shows Zemskov’s data obtained from two sources: statistical reports of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB and data from the First Special Department of the former USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs.
V. N. Zemskov:
“At the beginning of 1989, by decision of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences, a commission of the History Department of the USSR Academy of Sciences was created, headed by corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences Yu.A. Polyakov on determining population losses. Being part of this commission, we were among the first historians to gain access to statistical reports of the OGPU-NKVD-MVD-MGB that had not previously been issued to researchers...
...The vast majority of them were convicted under the famous Article 58. There is a rather significant discrepancy in the statistical calculations of these two departments, which, in our opinion, is not explained by the incompleteness of the information of the former KGB of the USSR, but by the fact that employees of the 1st special department of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs interpreted the concept of “political criminals” more broadly and in the statistics they compiled there was a significant "criminal admixture".
It should be noted that so far there is no unity among historians in assessing the process of dispossession. Should the dispossessed be classified as politically repressed? Table 1 includes only those dispossessed in category 1, that is, those who were arrested and convicted. Those sent to a special settlement (2nd category) and simply dispossessed but not deported (3rd category) were not included in the table.
Now let's use this data to identify some special periods. This is 1921, 35 thousand of them were sentenced to capital punishment - the end of the civil war. 1929 - 1930 - carrying out collectivization. 1941 - 1942 - the beginning of the war, the increase in the number of those executed to 23 - 26 thousand is associated with the elimination of “particularly dangerous elements” in prisons that fell under occupation. And a special place is occupied by the years 1937 - 1938 (the so-called “Great Terror”), it was during this period that there was a sharp surge in political repressions, especially 682 thousand people sentenced to criminal charges (or over 82% for the entire period). What happened during this period? If everything is more or less clear with other years, then 1937 looks truly very terrifying. The work of Yuri Zhukov is dedicated to explaining this phenomenon.
This picture emerges from archival data. And there is fierce debate about these numbers. They very much do not coincide with the tens of millions of victims voiced by our liberals.
Of course, one cannot say that the scale of repression was very low, based only on the fact that the actual number of those repressed turned out to be an order of magnitude fewer numbers liberals. Repressions were significant in the designated special years, when large-scale events took place throughout the country, compared to the level of “quiet” years. But at the same time, we must understand that being repressed for political reasons does not automatically mean innocent. There were those convicted of serious crimes against the state (robbery, terrorism, espionage, etc.).
Stalin's course
Now, after talking about numbers, let's move on to the description historical processes. But at the same time I want to make one digression. The topic of the article is very painful and gloomy: political intrigue and repression inspire few people. However, we must understand that life Soviet people these years were not filled with this at all. In the 20s - 30s, truly global changes took place in Soviet Russia, in which the people took a direct part. The country developed at an incredible pace. The breakthrough was not only industrial: public education, healthcare, culture and labor rose to a qualitatively new level, and the citizens of the USSR saw this with their own eyes. " Russian miracle» Stalin's five-year plans soviet people rightly perceived as the fruit of their own efforts.
What was the policy of the new leadership of the country? First of all, the strengthening of the USSR. This was expressed in accelerated collectivization and industrialization. In raising the country's economy to a completely new level. Creation of a modern army based on a new military industry. All the country's resources were devoted to these purposes. The source was agricultural products, mineral raw materials, forests, and even cultural and church values. Stalin was the harshest proponent of such a policy here. And, as history has shown, it’s not in vain...
In international politics new course was to curtail activities to “export the world revolution,” normalize relations with capitalist countries, and search for allies before the war. First of all, this was due to increasing tension in the international arena and the expectation of a new war. The USSR, at the “proposal” of a number of countries, joins the League of Nations. At first glance, these steps contradict the tenets of Marxism-Leninism.
Lenin once spoke about the League of Nations:
“An undisguised instrument of imperialist Anglo-French desires... The League of Nations is a dangerous instrument directed with its tip against the country of the dictatorship of the proletariat”.
Whereas Stalin in one of his interviews:
“Despite the withdrawal of Germany and Japan from the League of Nations - or perhaps because of this - the League may provide some brake in order to delay or prevent the outbreak of hostilities. If this is so, if the League can turn out to be a kind of bump on the road to at least somewhat complicating the cause of war and facilitating to some extent the cause of peace, then we are not against the League. Yes, if that's the move historical events, then it is possible that we will support the League of Nations, despite its colossal shortcomings.".
Also in international politics, there is an adjustment in the activities of the Comintern, an organization designed to carry out the world proletarian revolution. Stalin, with the help of G. Dimitrov, who returned from Nazi dungeons, calls on the communist parties of European countries to join the “Popular Fronts” with the Social Democrats, which again can be interpreted as “opportunism.” From Dimitrov’s speech at the VII World Congress of the Communist International:
“Let the communists recognize democracy and come to its defense, then we are ready for a united front. We are supporters of Soviet democracy, workers' democracy, the most consistent democracy in the world. But we defend and will defend in capitalist countries every inch of bourgeois democratic freedoms that are encroached upon by fascism and bourgeois reaction, because this is dictated by the interests of the class struggle of the proletariat!
At the same time, the Stalinist group (in foreign policy this is Molotov, Litvinov) went towards the creation of the Eastern Pact consisting of the USSR, France, Czechoslovakia, England, suspiciously similar in composition to the former Entente.
Such a new course in foreign policy could not but cause protest sentiments in some party circles, but the Soviet Union objectively needed it.
There was also normalization within the country public life. We're back new year holidays with a Christmas tree and a carnival, the activities of communes were curtailed, the army introduced officer ranks(oh horror!), and much more. Here is one illustration that, it seems to me, conveys the atmosphere of that time. From the Politburo decision:
[in the Internet] .
IN THE USSR. I tried to answer nine of the most common questions about political repression.
1. What is political repression?
There have been periods in the history of different countries when government for some reason - pragmatic or ideological - it began to perceive part of its population either as direct enemies, or as superfluous, “unnecessary” people. The selection principle could be different - by ethnic origin, by religious views, by financial status, by political views, by level of education - but the result was the same: these “unnecessary” people were either physically destroyed without trial or investigation, or subjected to criminal prosecution, or became victims of administrative restrictions (expelled from the country, sent into exile within the country, deprived of civil rights, and so on). That is, people suffered not for any personal fault, but simply because they were unlucky, simply because they found themselves in a certain place at a certain time.
Political repressions occurred not only in Russia, and in Russia - not only under Soviet rule. However, remembering the victims of political repression, we first of all think about those who suffered in 1917–1953, because among total number They make up the majority of Russian repressed people.
2. Why, when talking about political repressions, are they limited to the period 1917–1953? There were no repressions after 1953?
The demonstration of 25 August 1968, also called the "demonstration of the seven", was carried out by a group of seven Soviet dissidents on Red Square to protest the introduction of Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia. Two of the participants were declared insane and subjected to compulsory treatment.
This period, 1917–1953, is singled out because it accounted for the vast majority of repressions. After 1953, repressions also occurred, but on a much smaller scale, and most importantly, they mainly concerned people who, to one degree or another, opposed the Soviet political system. We are talking about dissidents who received prison sentences or suffered from punitive psychiatry. They knew what they were getting into, they were not random victims - which, of course, in no way justifies what the authorities did to them.
3. Victims of Soviet political repression - who are they?
They were very different people, different in social origin, beliefs, worldview.
Sergei Korolev, scientist
Some of them are the so-called “ former”, that is, nobles, army or police officers, university professors, judges, merchants and industrialists, and clergy. That is, those whom the communists who came to power in 1917 considered to be interested in the restoration of the previous order and therefore suspected them of subversive activities.
Also, a huge proportion of the victims of political repression were “ dispossessed“peasants, most of them strong farmers, who did not want to join collective farms (some, however, were not saved by joining a collective farm).
Many victims of repression were classified as “ pests" This was the name given to production specialists - engineers, technicians, workers, who were credited with the intent to cause material, technical or economic damage to the country. Sometimes this happened after some real production failures, accidents (for which it was necessary to find those responsible), and sometimes it was only about hypothetical troubles that, according to prosecutors, could have happened if the enemies had not been exposed in time.
The other part is communists and members of other revolutionary parties who joined the communists after October 1917: Social Democrats, Socialist Revolutionaries, anarchists, Bundists, and so on. These people, who actively fit into the new reality and participated in the construction of Soviet power, at a certain stage turned out to be redundant due to the internal party struggle, which in the CPSU (b), and later in the CPSU, never stopped - first openly, later hidden. These are also communists who came under attack due to their personal qualities: excessive ideology, insufficient servility...
Sergeev Ivan Ivanovich. Before his arrest, he worked as a watchman at the Chernovsky collective farm “Iskra”
At the end of the 30s, many were repressed military, starting with senior command staff and ending with junior officers. They were suspected of potential participants in conspiracies against Stalin.
It is worth mentioning separately employees of the GPU-NKVD-NKGB, some of which were also repressed in the 30s during the “fight against excesses.” “Excesses on the ground” is a concept that was coined by Stalin, implying the excessive enthusiasm of punitive authorities. It is clear that these “excesses” naturally followed from the general state policy, and therefore, in the mouth of Stalin, words about excesses sound very cynical. By the way, almost the entire leadership of the NKVD, which carried out repressions in 1937–1938, was soon repressed and shot.
Naturally, there was a lot repressed for their faith(and not only Orthodox). This includes the clergy, monasticism, active laypeople in parishes, and simply people who do not hide their faith. Although the Soviet government did not formally prohibit religion and the Soviet constitution of 1936 guaranteed citizens freedom of conscience, in fact, open profession of faith could end sadly for a person.
Rozhkova Vera. Before her arrest she worked at the Institute. Bauman. Was a secret nun
Not only individual people and certain classes were subjected to repression, but also individual peoples - Crimean Tatars, Kalmyks, Chechens and Ingush, Germans. This happened during the Great Patriotic War. There were two reasons. Firstly, they were seen as potential traitors who could go over to the side of the Germans when our troops retreat. Secondly, when German troops occupied Crimea, the Caucasus and a number of other territories, part of the peoples living there actually collaborated with them. Naturally, not all representatives of these peoples collaborated with the Germans, not to mention those of them who fought in the ranks of the Red Army - however, subsequently all of them, including women, children and old people, were declared traitors and sent into exile (where, by force inhumane conditions, many died either on the way or on the spot).
Olga Berggolts, poetess, future “muse of besieged Leningrad”
And among those repressed there were many ordinary people, who seemed to have a completely safe social origin, but were arrested either because of a denunciation, or simply because of an order (there were also plans from above to identify “enemies of the people”). If some major party functionary was arrested, then quite often his subordinates were also arrested, down to the lowest positions such as a personal driver or housekeeper.
4. Who cannot be considered a victim of political repression?
General Vlasov inspects ROA soldiers
Not all those who suffered in 1917–1953 (and later, until the end of Soviet power) can be called victims of political repression.
In addition to the “political” ones, people were also imprisoned in prisons and camps on ordinary criminal charges (theft, fraud, robbery, murder, and so on).
Also, those who committed obvious treason cannot be considered victims of political repression - for example, “Vlasovites” and “policemen”, that is, those who went to serve the German occupiers during the Great Patriotic War. Even regardless of the moral side of the matter, it was their conscious choice; they entered into a fight with the state, and the state, accordingly, fought with them.
The same applies to various kinds of rebel movements - Basmachi, Bandera, “forest brothers”, Caucasian abreks and so on. You can discuss their rights and wrongs, but the victims of political repression are only those who did not take the war path with the USSR, who simply lived ordinary life and suffered regardless of his actions.
5. How were the repressions legally formalized?
Certificate of execution of the death sentence of the NKVD troika against the Russian scientist and theologian Pavel Florensky. Reproduction ITAR-TASS
There were several options. Firstly, some of the repressed were shot or imprisoned after the opening of a criminal case, investigation and trial. Basically, they were charged under Article 58 of the USSR Criminal Code (this article included many points, from treason to anti-Soviet agitation). At the same time, in the 20s and even in the early 30s, all legal formalities were often observed - an investigation was carried out, then there was a trial with debate between the defense and the prosecution - the verdict was simply a foregone conclusion. In the 1930s, especially starting from 1937, the judicial procedure turned into a fiction, since torture and other illegal methods of pressure were used during the investigation. That is why, at trial, the accused admitted their guilt en masse.
Secondly, starting from 1937, along with ordinary judicial proceedings, a simplified procedure began to operate, when there were no judicial debates at all, the presence of the accused was not required, and sentences were passed by the so-called Special Meeting, in other words, the “troika”, literally behind 10-15 minutes.
Thirdly, some of the victims were repressed administratively, without any investigation or trial at all - the same “dispossessed”, the same exiled peoples. The same often applied to family members of those convicted under Article 58. The official abbreviation CHSIR (member of the family of a traitor to the motherland) was in use. At the same time, personal accusations were not brought against specific people, and their exile was motivated by political expediency.
But in addition, sometimes repressions did not have any legal formalization at all; in fact, they were lynchings - starting from the shooting in 1917 of a demonstration in defense of the Constituent Assembly and ending with the events of 1962 in Novocherkassk, where a workers’ demonstration protesting against rising prices for food was shot. food.
6. How many people were repressed?
Photo by Vladimir Eshtokin
This is a complex question to which historians still do not have an exact answer. The numbers are very different - from 1 to 60 million. There are two problems here - firstly, the inaccessibility of many archives, and secondly, the discrepancy in calculation methods. After all, even based on open archival data, one can draw different conclusions. Archival data is not only folders with criminal cases against specific people, but also, for example, departmental reports on food supplies for camps and prisons, statistics of births and deaths, records in cemetery offices about burials, and so on and so forth. Historians try to take into account as many different sources as possible, but the data sometimes disagree with each other. The reasons are different - accounting errors, deliberate fraud, and the loss of many important documents.
It is also a very controversial question - how many people were not just repressed, but specifically physically destroyed and did not return home? How to count? Only those sentenced to death? Or, on top of that, those who died in custody? If we count the dead, then we need to understand the causes of death: they could be caused by unbearable conditions (hunger, cold, beatings, overwork), or they could also be natural (death from old age, death from chronic diseases that began long before the arrest). Death certificates (which were not even always preserved in the criminal case) most often included “acute heart failure,” but in reality it could have been anything.
In addition, although any historian should be impartial, as a scientist should be, in reality each researcher has his own ideological and political preferences, and therefore the historian may consider some data more reliable, and some less. Complete objectivity is an ideal that should be strived for, but which has not yet been achieved by any historian. Therefore, when faced with any specific estimates, you should be careful. What if the author, wittingly or unwittingly, overstates or understates the numbers?
But to understand the scale of the repressions, it is enough to give this example of discrepancies in numbers. According to church historians, in 1937-38 more than 130 thousand clergy. According to historians committed to communist ideology, in 1937-38 the number of arrested clergy was much smaller - only about 47 thousand. Let's not argue about who is more right. Let's do a thought experiment: imagine that now, in our time, 47 thousand railway workers are arrested in Russia throughout the year. What will happen to our transport system? And if 47 thousand doctors are arrested in a year, will domestic medicine even survive? What if 47 thousand priests are arrested? However, we don’t even have that many of them now. In general, even if we focus on the minimum estimates, it is easy to see that the repressions have become a social disaster.
And for their moral assessment, the specific numbers of victims are completely unimportant. Whether it’s a million or a hundred million or a hundred thousand, it’s still a tragedy, it’s still a crime.
7. What is rehabilitation?
The vast majority of victims of political repression were subsequently rehabilitated.
Rehabilitation is the official recognition of the state that a given person was convicted unfairly, that he is innocent of the charges brought against him and therefore is not considered to have been convicted and gets rid of the restrictions that people released from prison may be subject to (for example, the right to be elected as a deputy, the right to work in law enforcement organs and the like).
Many believe that the rehabilitation of victims of political repression began only in 1956, after the first secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N.S. Khrushchev exposed Stalin’s cult of personality at the 20th Party Congress. In fact, this is not so - the first wave of rehabilitation took place in 1939, after the country's leadership condemned the rampant repressions of 1937-38 (which were called “excesses on the ground”). This, by the way, important point, because thereby the existence of political repression in the country was generally recognized. It is recognized even by those who launched these repressions. Therefore, the assertion of modern Stalinists that repression is a myth looks simply ridiculous. How about a myth, if even your idol Stalin recognized them?
However, in 1939-41, few people were rehabilitated. And mass rehabilitation began in 1953 after the death of Stalin, its peak occurred in 1955–1962. Then, until the second half of the 1980s, there were few rehabilitations, but after perestroika announced in 1985, their number increased sharply. Individual acts of rehabilitation occurred already in the post-Soviet era, in the 1990s (since the Russian Federation is legally the successor to the USSR, it has the right to rehabilitate those who were unjustly convicted before 1991).
But, shot in Yekaterinburg in 1918, she was officially rehabilitated only in 2008. Previously, the Prosecutor General's Office had resisted rehabilitation on the grounds that murder royal family did not have any legal registration and became the arbitrariness of local authorities. But the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in 2008 found that even though there was no court decision, the royal family was shot by the decision of the local authorities, which have administrative powers and therefore are part of the state machine - and repression is a measure of coercion on the part of the state.
By the way, there are people who undoubtedly became victims of political repression, who did not commit what they were formally accused of - but there is no decision on their rehabilitation and, apparently, there never will be. We are talking about those who, before falling under the skating rink of repression, were themselves drivers of this skating rink. For example, the “iron people's commissar” Nikolai Yezhov. Well, what kind of innocent victim is he? Or the same Lavrenty Beria. Of course, his execution was unjust, of course, he was not any English or French spy, as was hastily attributed to him - but his rehabilitation would have become a demonstrative justification for political terror.
The rehabilitation of victims of political repression did not always occur “automatically”; sometimes these people or their relatives had to be persistent and write letters to government bodies for years.
8. What do they say now about political repression?
Photo by Vladimir Eshtokin
IN modern Russia there is no consensus on this topic. Moreover, social polarization is manifested in attitudes towards it. Various political and ideological forces use the memory of repression in their political interests, but ordinary people, not politicians, can perceive it very differently.
Some people are convinced that political repression is a shameful chapter national history that this is a monstrous crime against humanity, and therefore we must always remember about the repressed. Sometimes this position is simplistic, all victims of repression are declared equally sinless righteous, and the blame for them is placed not only on Soviet power, but also to the modern Russian one as the legal successor of the Soviet one. Any attempts to figure out how many were actually repressed are a priori declared to be a justification of Stalinism and condemned from a moral standpoint.
Others question the very fact of repression, arguing that all these “so-called victims” are really guilty of the crimes attributed to them, that they really harmed, blew up, plotted terrorist attacks, and so on. This extremely naive position is refuted by the fact that the fact of repression was recognized even under Stalin - then it was called “excesses” and in the late 30s almost the entire leadership of the NKVD was condemned for these “excesses”. The moral deficiency of such views is equally obvious: people are so eager to wishful thinking that they are ready, without any evidence, to slander millions of victims.
Still others admit that there were repressions, they agree that those who suffered from them were innocent, but they perceive all this completely calmly: they say, it could not have been otherwise. Repression, it seems to them, was necessary for the industrialization of the country and for the creation of a combat-ready army. Without repression it would not have been possible to win the Great Patriotic War Patriotic War. Such a pragmatic position, regardless of how much it corresponds historical facts, is also morally flawed: the state is declared to be the highest value, in comparison with which the life of each individual person is worth nothing, and anyone can and should be destroyed for the sake of the highest state interests. Here, by the way, one can draw a parallel with the ancient pagans, who made human sacrifices to their gods, being one hundred percent sure that this would serve the good of the tribe, people, and city. Now this seems fanatic to us, but the motivation was exactly the same as that of modern pragmatists.
One can, of course, understand where such motivation comes from. The USSR positioned itself as a society of social justice - and indeed, in many respects, especially in the late Soviet period, there was social justice. Our society is socially much less fair - plus now any injustice instantly becomes known to everyone. Therefore, in search of justice, people turn their gaze to the past - naturally, idealizing that era. This means that they psychologically strive to justify the dark things that happened then, including the repressions. Recognition and condemnation of repression (especially declared from above) among such people is coupled with approval of current injustices. One can demonstrate in every possible way the naivety of such a position, but until social justice is restored, this position will be reproduced again and again.
9. How should Christians perceive political repression?
Icon of the New Russian Martyrs
Among Orthodox Christians, unfortunately, there is also no unity on this issue. There are believers (including churchgoers, sometimes even in the priesthood) who either consider all those repressed guilty and unworthy of pity, or justify their suffering by the benefit of the state. Moreover, sometimes - thank God, not very often! - you can also hear the opinion that the repressions were a blessing for the repressed themselves. After all, what happened to them happened according to God’s Providence, and God will not do anything bad to a person. This means, say such Christians, that these people had to suffer in order to be cleansed of heavy sins and to be spiritually reborn. Indeed, there are many examples of such spiritual revival. As the poet Alexander Solodovnikov, who went through the camp, wrote, “The grille is rusty, thank you! //Thank you, bayonet blade! // Such freedom could only be given to me // by long centuries.”
In fact, this is a dangerous spiritual substitution. Yes, suffering can sometimes save the human soul, but it does not at all follow from this that suffering in itself is good. And even more so, it does not follow from this that the executioners are righteous. As we know from the Gospel, King Herod, wanting to find and destroy the baby Jesus, ordered the preventive killing of all the babies in Bethlehem and the surrounding area. These babies are canonized by the Church, but their killer Herod is not. Sin remains sin, evil remains evil, a criminal remains a criminal even if the long-term consequences of his crime are wonderful. Moreover, one thing is personal experience to talk about the benefits of suffering, and quite another thing to say this about other people. Only God knows whether this or that test will turn out for good or for bad for a particular person, and we have no right to judge this. But this is what we can and should do - if we consider ourselves Christians! - This is to keep God's commandments. Where there is not a word about the fact that for the sake of the public good you can kill innocent people.
What are the conclusions?
First and the obvious is that we must understand that repression is evil, both social and personal evil of those who carried it out. There is no justification for this evil - neither pragmatic nor theological.
Second- this is the correct attitude towards victims of repression. They should not all be considered ideal. These were very different people, both socially, culturally, and morally. But their tragedy must be perceived without regard to their individual characteristics and circumstances. All of them were not guilty of the authorities who subjected them to suffering. We do not know which of them is righteous, which is a sinner, who is now in heaven, who is in hell. But we must feel sorry for them and pray for them. But what you definitely shouldn’t do is don’t speculate on their memories while defending our own Political Views in controversy. The repressed should not become for us means.
Third- we must clearly understand why these repressions became possible in our country. The reason for them is not only the personal sins of those who were at the helm in those years. The main reason is the worldview of the Bolsheviks, based on atheism and the denial of all previous traditions - spiritual, cultural, family, and so on. The Bolsheviks wanted to build heaven on earth, and at the same time they allowed themselves any means. Only that which serves the cause of the proletariat is moral, they argued. It is not surprising that they were internally ready to kill by the millions. Yes, there were repressions in different countries(including ours) and before the Bolsheviks - but still there were some brakes that limited their scale. Now there were no brakes - and what happened happened.
Looking at various horrors of the past, we often say the phrase “this must not happen again.” But this Maybe repeat itself, if we discard moral and spiritual barriers, if we proceed solely from pragmatics and ideology. And it doesn’t matter what color this ideology will be - red, green, black, brown... It will still end in great blood.
1. Stalin's repressions- massive political repressions carried out in the USSR during the period of Stalinism (late 1920s - early 1950s).
2. Scale of repression:
From a memo addressed to Khrushchev: from 1921 to the present, 3,777,380 people were sentenced for counter-revolutionary crimes, including 642,980 people to confinement in camps and prisons for a term of 25 years or less, 2,369,220 to exile and deportation - 765,180 people. (Minister of Internal Affairs).
Number of prisoners in prisons:
3. Reasons:
· The transition to a policy of forced collectivization of agriculture, industrialization and cultural revolution, which required significant material investments or the attraction of free labor (it is indicated, for example, that grandiose plans for the development and creation of an industrial base in the northern regions of the European part of Russia, Siberia and the Far East required relocation huge masses of people.
· Preparations for war with Germany, where the Nazis who came to power declared their goal to be the destruction of communist ideology.
To solve these problems, it was necessary to mobilize the efforts of the entire population of the country and ensure absolute support for state policy, and for this, to neutralize the potential political opposition that the enemy could rely on.
· The policy of collectivization and accelerated industrialization led to a sharp drop in the standard of living of the population and to mass hunger. Stalin and his circle understood that this was increasing the number of people dissatisfied with the regime and tried to portray “saboteurs” and saboteurs—“enemies of the people”—responsible for all economic difficulties, as well as accidents in industry and transport, mismanagement, etc.
· The peculiar character of Stalin
1) begins with the seizure of power in 1917 and continues until the end of 1922. The “natural allies” of the Bolsheviks - the workers - did not escape repression. However, this period of repression fits into the context of general confrontation.
2) The second period of repression begins in 1928 with a new attack on the peasantry, which is carried out by the Stalinist group in the context of political struggle in the upper echelons of power.
· Fight against sabotage
· Repression of foreign technical specialists
· Fight against internal party opposition
· With the beginning of the collectivization of agriculture and industrialization in the late 1920s and early 1930s, as well as the strengthening of Stalin’s personal power, repressions became widespread
· Dispossession
· Repressions in connection with grain procurements
· In 1929-1931, dozens of scientists were arrested and convicted in the so-called “Academy of Sciences case”
During 1933-34, as indicated Russian researcher O. V. Khlevnyuk, there was a slight weakening of repression.
3) Political repressions of 1934-1938
· Killing of Kirov (On the day that Kirov was killed, the USSR government responded with an official message about the murder of Kirov. It spoke of the need for the “final eradication of all enemies of the working class.”)
· 1937-1938 was one of the peaks of Stalin’s repressions. Over these two years, 1,575,259 people were arrested on NKVD matters, of which 681,692 people were sentenced to death[
· On July 30, 1937, NKVD Order No. 00447 “On the operation to repress former kulaks, criminals and other anti-Soviet elements” was adopted
· Repression of foreigners and ethnic minorities
· In the 1930s, persons of a number of nationalities were evicted from the border zones of the USSR, mainly those foreign to the USSR at that time (Romanians, Koreans, Latvians, etc.).
· Repression and anti-Semitism
· Lysenkoism
4) Wartime repressions
Deportation of peoples in 1941-1944 (nothing like that there)
5) Political repressions of the post-war period
· Deportations of the 1940-1950s
· Repression and anti-Semitism
· Ideological control in Soviet science, Lysenkoism
In the 20s and ending in 1953. During this period, mass arrests took place and special camps for political prisoners were created. No historian can name the exact number of victims of Stalin’s repressions. More than a million people were convicted under Article 58.
Origin of the term
Stalin's terror affected almost all sectors of society. For more than twenty years, Soviet citizens lived in constant fear- one wrong word or even a gesture could cost your life. It is impossible to unequivocally answer the question of what Stalin’s terror was based on. But of course, the main component of this phenomenon is fear.
The word terror translated from Latin is “horror”. The method of governing a country based on instilling fear has been used by rulers since ancient times. For the Soviet leader, Ivan the Terrible served as a historical example. Stalin's terror is in some ways a more modern version of the Oprichnina.
Ideology
The midwife of history is what Karl Marx called violence. The German philosopher saw only evil in the safety and inviolability of members of society. Stalin used Marx's idea.
The ideological basis of the repressions that began in the 1920s was formulated in July 1928 in " Short course history of the All-Union Communist Party." At first, Stalin's terror was a class struggle, which was supposedly needed to resist the overthrown forces. But repressions continued even after all the so-called counter-revolutionaries ended up in camps or were shot. The peculiarity of Stalin's policy was the complete non-compliance with the Soviet Constitution.
If at the beginning of Stalin's repressions the state security agencies fought against opponents of the revolution, then by the mid-thirties arrests of old communists began - people selflessly devoted to the party. Ordinary Soviet citizens were already afraid not only of NKVD officers, but also of each other. Denunciation has become the main tool in the fight against “enemies of the people.”
Stalin's repressions were preceded by the "Red Terror", which began in the years Civil War. These two political phenomena have many similarities. However, after the end of the Civil War, almost all cases of political crimes were based on falsification of charges. During the “Red Terror,” those who disagreed with the new regime, of whom there were many during the creation of the new state, were imprisoned and shot first of all.
The case of lyceum students
Officially, the period of Stalinist repressions began in 1922. But one of the first high-profile cases dates back to 1925. It was this year that a special department of the NKVD fabricated a case accusing graduates of the Alexander Lyceum of counter-revolutionary activities.
On February 15, over 150 people were arrested. Not all of them were related to the above educational institution. Among those convicted were former students of the School of Law and officers of the Semenovsky Life Guards Regiment. Those arrested were accused of assisting the international bourgeoisie.
Many were shot already in June. 25 people were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. 29 of those arrested were sent into exile. To Vladimir Shilder - former teacher- at that time I was 70 years old. He died during the investigation. Nikolai Golitsyn, the last chairman of the Council of Ministers, was sentenced to death Russian Empire.
Shakhty case
The charges under Article 58 were ridiculous. A person who doesn't own foreign languages and had never communicated with a citizen of a Western state in his life, he could easily have been accused of colluding with American agents. During the investigation, torture was often used. Only the strongest could withstand them. Often those under investigation signed a confession only in order to complete the execution, which sometimes lasted for weeks.
In July 1928, specialists became victims of Stalin's terror coal industry. This case was called "Shakhty". The heads of Donbass enterprises were accused of sabotage, sabotage, creating an underground counter-revolutionary organization, and assisting foreign spies.
The 1920s saw several high-profile cases. Dispossession continued until the early thirties. It is impossible to calculate the number of victims of Stalin’s repressions, because no one carefully kept statistics in those days. In the nineties, the KGB archives became available, but even after that, researchers did not receive comprehensive information. However, separate execution lists were made public, which became a terrible symbol of Stalin’s repressions.
The Great Terror is a term that applies to a short period of Soviet history. It lasted only two years - from 1937 to 1938. Researchers provide more accurate data about victims during this period. 1,548,366 people were arrested. Shot - 681,692. It was a fight “against the remnants of the capitalist classes.”
Causes of the "Great Terror"
During Stalin's times, a doctrine was developed to strengthen the class struggle. This was only a formal reason for the extermination of hundreds of people. Among the victims of Stalin's terror of the 30s were writers, scientists, military men, and engineers. Why was it necessary to get rid of representatives of the intelligentsia, specialists who could benefit the Soviet state? Historians offer various answers to these questions.
Among modern researchers there are those who are convinced that Stalin had only an indirect connection to the repressions of 1937-1938. However, his signature appears on almost every execution list, and in addition, there is a lot of documentary evidence of his involvement in mass arrests.
Stalin strove for sole power. Any relaxation could lead to a real, not fictitious conspiracy. One of the foreign historians compared the Stalinist terror of the 30s with the Jacobin terror. But if the last phenomenon, which took place in France at the end of the 18th century, involved the destruction of representatives of a certain social class, then in the USSR people who were often unrelated to each other were arrested and executed.
So, the reason for the repression was the desire for sole, unconditional power. But there was a need for formulation, an official justification for the need for mass arrests.
Occasion
On December 1, 1934, Kirov was killed. This event became the formal reason for the arrest of the killer. According to the results of the investigation, which was again fabricated, Leonid Nikolaev did not act independently, but as a member of an opposition organization. Stalin subsequently used the murder of Kirov in the fight against political opponents. Zinoviev, Kamenev and all their supporters were arrested.
Trial of Red Army officers
After the murder of Kirov, trials of the military began. One of the first victims of the Great Terror was G. D. Guy. The military leader was arrested for the phrase “Stalin must be removed,” which he uttered while intoxicated. It is worth saying that in the mid-thirties, denunciation reached its apogee. People who had worked in the same organization for many years stopped trusting each other. Denunciations were written not only against enemies, but also against friends. Not only for selfish reasons, but also out of fear.
In 1937, a trial of a group of Red Army officers took place. They were accused of anti-Soviet activities and assistance to Trotsky, who by that time was already abroad. The hit list included:
- Tukhachevsky M. N.
- Yakir I. E.
- Uborevich I. P.
- Eideman R.P.
- Putna V.K.
- Primakov V. M.
- Gamarnik Ya. B.
- Feldman B. M.
The witch hunt continued. In the hands of NKVD officers there was a recording of Kamenev’s negotiations with Bukharin - there was talk of creating a “right-left” opposition. At the beginning of March 1937, with a report that spoke of the need to eliminate the Trotskyists.
According to the report of the General Commissioner of State Security Yezhov, Bukharin and Rykov were planning terror against the leader. A new term appeared in Stalinist terminology - “Trotskyist-Bukharinsky,” which means “directed against the interests of the party.”
In addition to the above-mentioned political figures, about 70 people were arrested. 52 were shot. Among them were those who took a direct part in the repressions of the 20s. So, they shot the employees state security and political figures Yakov Agronom, Alexander Gurevich, Levon Mirzoyan, Vladimir Polonsky, Nikolai Popov and others.
Lavrentiy Beria was involved in the “Tukhachevsky case”, but he managed to survive the “purge”. In 1941, he took the post of General Commissioner of State Security. Beria was already executed after the death of Stalin - in December 1953.
Repressed scientists
In 1937, revolutionaries and political figures became victims of Stalin's terror. And very soon arrests of representatives of completely different social strata began. People who had nothing to do with politics were sent to the camps. It’s easy to guess what the consequences of Stalin’s repressions were by reading the lists presented below. The “Great Terror” became a brake on the development of science, culture, and art.
Scientists who became victims of Stalinist repressions:
- Matvey Bronstein.
- Alexander Witt.
- Hans Gelman.
- Semyon Shubin.
- Evgeny Pereplekin.
- Innokenty Balanovsky.
- Dmitry Eropkin.
- Boris Numerov.
- Nikolay Vavilov.
- Sergei Korolev.
Writers and poets
In 1933, Osip Mandelstam wrote an epigram with obvious anti-Stalinist overtones, which he read to several dozen people. Boris Pasternak called the poet's act suicide. He turned out to be right. Mandelstam was arrested and sent into exile in Cherdyn. There he made an unsuccessful suicide attempt, and a little later, with the assistance of Bukharin, he was transferred to Voronezh.
Boris Pilnyak wrote “The Tale of the Unextinguished Moon” in 1926. The characters in this work are fictitious, at least that’s what the author claims in the preface. But everyone who read the story in the 20s, it became clear that it was based on the version of the murder of Mikhail Frunze.
Somehow Pilnyak’s work ended up in print. But it was soon banned. Pilnyak was arrested only in 1937, and before that he remained one of the most published prose writers. The writer's case, like all similar ones, was completely fabricated - he was accused of spying for Japan. Shot in Moscow in 1937.
Other writers and poets who were subjected to Stalinist repression:
- Victor Bagrov.
- Yuliy Berzin.
- Pavel Vasiliev.
- Sergey Klychkov.
- Vladimir Narbut.
- Petr Parfenov.
- Sergei Tretyakov.
It is worth talking about the famous theater figure, accused under Article 58 and sentenced to capital punishment.
Vsevolod Meyerhold
The director was arrested at the end of June 1939. His apartment was later searched. A few days later, Meyerhold's wife was killed. The circumstances of her death have not yet been clarified. There is a version that she was killed by NKVD officers.
Meyerhold was interrogated for three weeks and tortured. He signed everything the investigators required. On February 1, 1940, Vsevolod Meyerhold was sentenced to death. The sentence was carried out the next day.
During the war years
In 1941, the illusion of lifting repressions appeared. In Stalin's pre-war times, there were many officers in the camps who were now needed free. Together with them, about six hundred thousand people were released from prison. But this was a temporary relief. At the end of the forties, a new wave of repression began. Now the ranks of “enemies of the people” have been joined by soldiers and officers who have been in captivity.
Amnesty 1953
On March 5, Stalin died. Three weeks later, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR issued a decree according to which a third of the prisoners were to be released. About a million people were released. But the first to leave the camps were not political prisoners, but criminals, which instantly worsened the criminal situation in the country.
Loading...