Lenin are Ukrainian nationalists. Lenin creates Soviet Ukraine

Brilliant ideas about the oppression of "Ukrainians" and "Ukraine" illuminated Ilyich on the occasion of the preparation of the fraternal German and Austro-Hungarian empires for war with Russia.

Until 1913 Lenin " Ukrainian issue”Was not at all interested, which is easy to check by his canonical MSS.

Lenin's first mention of the oppressed "Ukraine" in manuscripts dates back to the end of 1912. It was not published then.

LENIN(V. I. Lenin's theses "On the question of some speeches of workers' deputies" formed the basis of the declaration of the Social Democratic faction of the IV State Duma,PSS, v.22, p.199 , p.203; written in November, later on 11 (24), 1912)

"Against government nationalism, indicating oppressed peoples:

Finland, Poland, Ukraine, Jews and etc. Slogan political self-determination of all nationalities it is extremely important to point out exactly as opposed to any reticence (like one "equality") ".

“All chauvinism and nationalism will meet a merciless enemy in the Social-Democrats. faction, will it be rude, brutal government nationalism, crushing and choking Finland, Poland, Ukraine, Jews and all nationalities, not belonging to the Great Russian- will it be a hypocritically veiled, refined nationalism of liberals and cadets, ready to talk about the great-power tasks of Russia and about her agreement with other powers for the sake of plundering foreign lands?

How a certain " government nationalism"Brutally strangles" Ukraine "for the sake of cyclocross, Lenin never explained anywhere. If you can even guess about the Jews (Pale of Settlement), about Poland and Finland, you can guess something, then who are " Ukrainians"Who is oppressing them nationally and how ?! Although Lenin was demoniac, he did not have the audacity to assert that it was the Great Russians who were oppressing the “Ukrainians”. According to Lenin, the government is somehow especially strangling "Ukraine" for the sake of cyclo-crossings. Madhouse!

The first Leninist publication mentioning Ukrainian nationalism dates back to May 1913.

LENIN ("THE WORKING CLASS AND THE NATIONAL QUESTION", Collected Works, v.23, p.149 , Published on May 10, 1913 in the newspaper Pravda, No. 106):

« Russia- a motley country in terms of nationality. Government policy, the policy of landlords supported by the bourgeoisie, imbued all through and through with Black Hundred nationalism.

This policy is directed with its edge against most of the peoples of Russia making up the majority of its population. And next to this he raises his head bourgeois nationalism of other nations(Polish, Jewish, Ukrainian, Georgian, etc.), trying to distract the working class with a national struggle or a struggle for national culture from its great world tasks. "

As you can see Ukrainian nationalism first mentioned by Lenin as a bad bourgeois phenomenon.

“The class-conscious workers stand for the complete unity of the workers of all nations in all and sundry educational, professional, political, etc. workers' organizations. Let be gentlemen cadets dishonor themselves by denying or belittling the equality of Ukrainians... Let the bourgeoisie of all nations amuse themselves false phrases about national culture, about national tasks, etc., etc.

The workers will not allow themselves to be divided by any sweet speeches about the national culture or "national-cultural autonomy". The workers of all nations stand amicably, together, in common organizations, for complete freedom and complete equality - the guarantee of true culture.

The workers create their own international culture throughout the world, which has long been prepared by the preachers of freedom and the enemies of oppression. The workers oppose the old world, the world of national oppression, national squabbling or national isolation, a new world of unity of working people of all nations, in which there is no place for a single privilege, not for the slightest oppression of man by man. "

We, Soviet people, taught the Leninist concept in schools and universities two national cultures- bourgeois and folk culture, working people. So, the Soviet people were deceived. Lenin by two cultures meant something different, as you can see from his writings. He argued that every national culture - bourgeois(serving to deceive and oppress the working masses), and the workers have their own global international culture. These Leninist fabrications were so absurd that the Soviet government swept them under the rug and taught the people of the revised Ilyich. De, it is necessary to develop the national cultures of the working people. And in the USSR they diligently developed.

Who are they " Ukrainians"And where are their" Ukraine", Comrade Lenin had vague ideas. So in the note: "INTERESTING CONGRESS" ( PSS, v.23, p.288 , published on June 13, 1913 in the newspaper "Pravda" No. 134) « one of the Ukrainian centers"He points out ... Kharkov!

In 1913, Lenin did not yet demand the secession of "Ukraine", did not approve of Ukrainian nationalism, and only following the Poles, he grieved about the oppression of the mythical "Ukrainians" by the tsarism. Initially, Lenin supported Ukrainian separatism only indirectly.

LENIN ("CADETS ABOUT THE UKRAINIAN QUESTION", Collected Works, v.23, p.337 , "Rabochaya Pravda" No. 3, July 16, 1913):

“This article is real chauvinistic persecution of Ukrainians for "separatism"... "Reckless adventurism", "political delirium", "political adventure" - these are the expressions that are replete with the article of the purest Novoye Vremya citizen, Mr. Mikh. Mogilyansky, hiding behind the cloak of "democracy" !! And the constitutional "democratic" party shamelessly covers up this article, publishes it sympathetically and silently approves of such naked chauvinism. "

Business as it was. In Lviv, which belongs to Austria-Hungary, on June 19-22 (July 2-5), 1913, the Second all-ukrainian congress of students. Representatives from Russia attended. At the suggestion of the Ukrainian Social Democrat D. Dontsov, the congress adopted a resolution on “ independent Ukraine". That is, about the separation of "Ukraine" from Russia.

Supported by the Austrians Ukrainian Social Democratic Labor Party(USDRP) was a microscopic and little influential organization. But Petliura and other leaders of the Ukrainians came out of it. The aforementioned Ukrainian Social Democrat Dontsov, since the beginning of the war in 1914, worked in the “ Union for the Liberation of Ukraine ", Which set as its goal the separation of Ukraine from Russia and the formation of an independent monarchical state under the protectorate of Austria-Hungary and Germany.

In 1913, Lenin was still embarrassed to directly support Ukrainian separatism. In his usual boorish manner, he denounces the Cadets for "chauvinism" and points out that " there is no question of all Social Democrats agreeing with Dontsov... But the Social Democrats argued with Dontsov, putting forward their arguments, argued on the same platform, convincing the same audience».

“Woe to the democrats — our cadets! And would-be democrats are those who tolerate such antics of the Cadets without the most ardent protest. Marxists will never allow themselves to be dizzy with a national slogan- all the same, Great Russian, Polish, Jewish, Ukrainian or other... But Marxists also do not forget the elementary duty of every democrat to fight against any persecution of any nation for "separatism", to fight for the recognition of the complete and unconditional equality of nations and their right to self-determination. "

Lenin's position on the Ukrainian question is evasive: we cannot support Ukrainian nationalism, but we will not allow criticism either!

Lenin's boorish manner of polemicizing, Lenin's demonstrative demoniacal possession among the public left the impression of extreme Leninist rr-revolutionary spirit, fanatical ideology and absolute uncompromisingness. However, in his real (political) activities, Lenin was a notorious opportunist. Of modern political figures, in terms of the manner of doing business, Lenin is most similar in Russia - Zhirinovsky, in Ukraine - Lyashko.

It was extremely inconvenient for Lenin to agitate in favor of Ukrainian nationalism and separatism, since such agitation fundamentally contradicts both Marxism and the principled statements declared by Lenin that any bourgeois nationalism... However, Lenin agreed to serve Austrian interests for a small price list. Initially, Lenin maintains some decency and does not approve of Ukrainian separatism. He fiercely yells about the mythical national oppression of "Ukrainians" in Russia, is outraged by Russian criticism of the propaganda of Ukrainian nationalism, talks about the benefits of Ukrainian autonomy. Then, apparently, as the Austrian fees grew, Lenin switched to glorifying national freedoms in the Austro-Hungarian Empire and began to demand the secession of Ukraine. With the outbreak of the war, Lenin directly asserts that tsarism is waging a criminal war with the aim of oppressing Ukraine (as well as Poland and Finland). Next, I will cite Lenin's journalism on the Ukrainian topic.

The beginning of the First World War found Lenin in Krakow, then belonging to Austria-Hungary. The Austrian special services kept a lot of revolutionary subversive centers there, working against Russia.

As a social democrat Lenin studied with the Germans, adhered to a pro-German orientation and intended to turn Russia into a colony of the progressive German " proletariat". Having abandoned the pro-German orientation, however, the Leninist policy of Ukrainization continued Stalin .

+ + +

There is no doubt that the Soviet comrades borrowed the idea of ​​Ukrainians from the Austrians and Poles. However, no "Ukraine" except the Soviet one has ever existed.

And this is how they look in reality good Soviet Ukrainian according to Kornev.

MOSCOW, November 28, 2017 - RIA Novosti ... The deputy of the Verkhovna Rada Yevgeny Rybchinsky compared the inhabitants of Donbass with cockroaches and proposed to destroy them with the help of dichlorvos. About itreports "Observer" .

"I AM I'm not interested in the life of cockroaches... Even if a million of them are born in my kitchen, it will not mean that the kitchen will belong to them. No statuses and special modes for cockroaches, only dichlorvos and a lot of dichlorvos... Well, and a couple of thousand Javelins (American anti-tank missile systems - ed.), Of course, "- the publication quotes the parliamentarian's Facebook entry."

“Rybchinsky is known for his scandalous Russophobic statements. So, in January, he compared use of the Russian language with fornication and last year the deputy called the corruption and economic devastation in the country the result of 400 years of "Russian sabotage" against Ukraine. "

“This statement was made to the" Observer "by the People's Deputy of Ukraine (" Will of the People "group) Yevhen Rybchinsky .

"The only real problem for Ukraine will remain pro-Russian, Ukrainophobic population of the region, which will hinder the movement of Ukraine into European institutions and significantly influence the political situation in the country, "he is convinced.

"What to do with it? It's a matter of strategy and tactics. It is strategically very important Ukrainize this region, giving support in it to patriots, who used to be there a lot and who are now quite active both in the capital and in the territories controlled by Kiev. No elections for at least 10 years, no Russian television and newspapers, visa regime with the Russian Federation and active advocacy in the region... This is how it should look true integration", Rybchinsky emphasized.

According to him, "with separatist cockroaches"must figure it out" courts and tribunals"." In my opinion, they deserve life imprisonment and forced labor for the benefit of Ukraine... No amnesties and indulgences. Get out of our kitchen to the Russian trash heap! "- said the people's deputy.

Rybchinsky also recalled that his position on this issue has remained unchanged since 2014. In support of his words, he cited his post published on Facebook on August 26, 2014. "

Convinced punisher Pan E.Yu. Rybchinsky is a typical product of Soviet Ukrainization. And according to Ukrainian concepts, he said everything correctly. They do so whenever possible. In the opinion of Soviet agitators such as comrade. Kornev and Comrade marss2 are good Ukrainians, because they are better than bad Ukrainians.

And which Ukrainians are worse than the Soviet ones? Usually they are frightened by Westerners, authentic Bandera. However, the Russophobia of Galicians is the result of Soviet treatment. And realizing that this war was serious and for a long time, the Westerners en masse changed their moods in favor of reconciliation with Russia and the Russians. In contrast to the Soviet Ukrainians proper, from whom most of the stubborn guards and punishers are recruited.

It is possible to come to an agreement with sinkholes on reasonable terms, but not with Soviet Ukrainians. The widespread Soviet Ukrainians are a cannibalistic mass with a ruling elite of Jews and Caucasians. Lenin's precepts are true!

It became necessary to mention the importance of Lenin in the history of Ukraine. The main idea was ready, but how to formulate it? It did not come to mind, fatigue affected. Although, what a trifle, but at that moment nothing came to mind. And I decided to turn to inspiration, and what inspires a person the best? Of course the internet! And literally after 4 minutes of searching, I found it. This was the article " Lenin and Ukraine", and what is most interesting is that Ukrainian site... Knowing with what fury the modern Ukrainian authorities are destroying the memory and monuments inherited from history, I decided to repost this text. I don’t know how reliable this information is about Lenin and his role in the formation of today's Ukraine within the borders that exist today. But I am 100% sure of one thing without Lenin there would be no present Ukraine. ( Given the current situation, we can say: Would it be better if Lenin did nothing?)
The article is dated July 8, 2012 (one of the best days in Ukraine). I think in the near future the article will go under the knife. Therefore, it is our sacred duty to keep it!
In the good Soviet times, there was a song with the following words: “... but you, January, are not welcome. You took your friend away from us. " This refers to the death of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin) on January 22, 1924. During the years of Gorbachev's "perestroika", or rather "catastrophe", ideals were debunked. This continues in independent Ukraine. This machine of de-ideologization also touched the name of Lenin. Overthrowing authority is the surest way to appear smart without bothering to learn anything, even what you subvert. Nowadays, few people would call Lenin a great man, especially among young people.
So who was he?
A friend of all workers or an evil genius?
You just need to see what Lenin did for all of humanity - without exaggeration for everything. View objectively. Well, if you look a little narrower and see, what did he do for Ukraine? I will try to answer briefly.
Immediately after the February revolution, some states that were part of the Russian Empire turned to the Provisional Government with a request to secede from Russia, in particular Poland, Finland, Ukraine... Provisional government everyone refused.
The Bolshevik Party, led by Lenin, was the only political force in Russia that, after the February Revolution, supported the Ukrainian national movement. Without Lenin, it could have died out in the summer of 1917. Without Lenin and his party, there would have been no Ukrainian statehood, which was fully realized in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It was in the Soviet Union that Ukraine united all Ukrainian lands.
The government of the Ukrainian People's Republic, headed by Petliura, handed over Western Ukraine to Poland and Romania during the civil war. It was not for nothing that Petliura was declared an enemy of the population of Western Ukraine. A the leadership of the Soviet Union, fulfilling the behests of Lenin, returned these lands to Ukraine in 1939. Crimea was also transferred to Ukraine during the Soviet era The decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on the transfer was signed by our fellow countryman, Bolshevik Kliment Voroshilov. Donbass, Kharkov and Dnepropetrovsk regions in 1918, having created the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Republic, announced their secession from Ukraine and entry into the Russian Federation. Lenin was categorically against this, saying that without Donbass, Ukraine could not become an independent state. Thus, the current cathedral Ukraine within its existing borders is a Leninist legacy.
Lenin attached great importance to the development of modern large-scale industry: mechanical engineering, energy, chemical industry and other industries. It was in Ukraine that the firstborn of the Soviet five-year plans appeared - Dneproges. The entire industry of Soviet Ukraine corresponded to a developed independent state - industry, transport, agriculture and ensuring the state's defense capability. For 20 years of independence in Ukraine did not appear not a single large industrial enterprise... Agriculture also lags far behind the Soviet period.
Even the Western region of Ukraine received stable and promising development from the Soviet regime. After the annexation of Western Ukraine to the Soviet, the first thing they began to develop there was education, medicine and science. And in our time, millions of Western Ukrainian workers left their homes. Western Ukraine lives almost as before 1939, when the only industrial enterprise there was the Lviv Brewery.
Without Lenin and the Bolshevik Party he created, there would have been no Ukrainian state. It was at Lenin's proposal that the party's program laid down the right of nations to self-determination, which appeared after the events of 1991, the main independence of our country.
Lenin was the initiator of the industrialization of Soviet Ukraine. Powerful industry is also a Leninist legacy. Thanks to Lenin's policy, a highly developed agriculture was created in Ukraine. Lenin also stood at the origins of the Ukrainian cultural and national revival of the 1920s, thanks to which our compatriots learned to read and write in their native language. That is why Soviet Ukraine was ranked among the five most developed countries in the world by most indicators.
The fact that Ukraine was one of the states that founded the United Nations, says a lot... First of all, that, despite the fact that Ukraine was part of the USSR, she had the opportunity to pursue her domestic and foreign policy. Much more than today.
After Lenin's ideas of building a state were rejected, Ukraine found itself on the outskirts of civilization. Despite these irrefutable facts, monuments to Lenin are being destroyed in Western Ukraine, monuments to the Benders and Petluras are being erected.
There are also monuments to Lenin in Lugansk. The central district of the city - Leninsky, Lenin streets in the center of the old part of the city and in the village of Yubileiny, in the Kamennobrodsky district - Lenin square, the diesel locomotive plant erected the Palace of Culture, which bears the name of Lenin, was named after him. We also had a plant named after Lenin, by the way, a plant, from the foundation of which the history of our city began.
But did Lenin know about such a small town as our town was before the 1917 revolution? It turns out that he knew, and not only knew, but also took part in his fate. Lenin's direct appeal to the people of Luhansk was almost immediately after the victory of the October Revolution. The first world war was going on. The Lugansk Cartridge Plant is always in the field of vision of the country's military leaders. Telegrams arrive at the plant. From the Main Artillery Directorate of the tsarist government in 1916: "Urgently increase the production of cartridges." The February Revolution is taking place. The Provisional Government, continuing the world massacre, sends a telegram to Lugansk: "It is necessary to increase the production of cartridges for the front." The October Revolution took place, the young state also needs to defend itself. Lenin sends a telegram to the commissioner of the Luhansk plant: "Please inform us urgently what help is needed to increase the output of cartridges." Comparison of the text of telegrams speaks for itself.
In October, before the revolution, the Lugansk Defense Commission demanded from the head of the cartridge factory, General Zurabov, to send a representative to Petrograd for a batch of trucks. Ya.S. was sent. Belousov. In Petrograd, he took part in the storming of the Winter Palace in the Austen armored car. He happened to be Lenin's personal driver. During his trips, Lenin asked him about the situation in Lugansk, about K. Voroshilov.
In January 1918, a decree of the People's Secretariat was issued on the nationalization of the steam locomotive plant of the joint-stock company "Hartman". The plant was in an extremely poor condition. New plant managers A. Kamensky and I. Shmyrov were sent to the Council of People's Commissars (SNK) in Petrograd. Luhansk residents met with Lenin, who brought the issue of helping the Luhansk people to a meeting of the Council of People's Commissars. A decree was adopted to provide the plant with financial and other assistance. This saved the plant from final collapse and helped, accordingly, the city.
In 1919, the workers of Lugansk became famous for their unparalleled feats during the defense of the city. Armed by Britain and France, Denikin's troops were rushing to Moscow. But the people of Luhansk got in the way. Lenin decides to send troops to Lugansk to help the workers of the city. The arrived Moscow divisions provided significant assistance to the Luhansk people in the defense of the city. The delay of the White Guard troops near Lugansk made it possible to organize the defense of the center of Russia, as a result, the White Guards were defeated.
Considering Lenin's services to the workers of Lugansk, the presence of monuments to him in our city can be considered justified. But few people know that one of them is missing. One of the Luhansk monuments to the leader of the world proletariat stands in Italy - in the city of Kavriago on Lenin Square. The inhabitants of this city in the distant 1920 elected Vladimir Ilyich "honorary mayor of the city." During the occupation of Luhansk in 1942, Italian troops were stationed in the city. Among them were residents of the city of Kavriago. They took out a bust of Lenin and sent it as a gift to Mussolini. The monument was placed in the Roman National Gallery of Modern Art. In 1970, in honor of the centenary of the leader, it was installed on Lenin Square in the city of Kavriago.
Nobody managed to rise to the level of Lenin. The real Lenin is a portrait of his revolutionary era. The revolution is his virtue, a blessing for hundreds of millions who for the first time rose from bestial vegetation to a truly human life, no matter how difficult it may be, and an undoubted evil for those who are accustomed to living at the expense of others and from whom the revolution took away the possibility of parasitism.
When a revolution is victorious, it has no shortage of supporters. When she has already won a victory, many swear loyalty to her (and the louder they swear, the more likely they are not entirely sincere in their oaths). It is more difficult to remain (or become) a revolutionary when the revolution is difficult, when it is defeated.
There are people who die like humans much earlier than doctors fix their physical death. There are people who live as long as their business lives. Lenin is one of these people. And he will not be killed either by slander against him, or by the fierce struggle waged against him by custom-made "scientists".
In the struggle, Lenin's name and his teachings only grow stronger.

If you want to understand the civil war, pick up a volume of Lenin or Denikin. Everything that we now see in Ukraine has already happened once in our history.

Draw your own conclusions. But it seems that Ukrainian nationalists are in vain demolishing the monuments to Ilyich ...

April 1917. An all-Russian conference of the Bolsheviks is taking place in Petrograd. Lenin delivers a speech on the national question.

Before you read a fragment of it, I want to give a little explanation.

Lenin at the beginning of 1917 was a populist striving for power. This is the destroyer of the state. Lenin at the end of 1917 and beyond was the creator of the state. Everything that he denied at the beginning of 1917, he will then create.

In his speeches immediately upon arrival in a "sealed carriage" Vladimir Ilyich defends the need to eliminate the police and ... the army. Instead - the police and ... the general arming of the people.

At the same time, by the word "militia", Lenin understands not the militia that was in our country until recently (and now it has become the police again), but something like a militia of the militia. When industrial capitalists pay for the days when their workers keep order in the police. As for the "general arming of the people" - this is a point of the RSDLP (b) program. And the Bolsheviks will embody it. During World War II, they would disband the army and navy, leaving Russia defenseless. And immediately they will begin to create a new army - their own, the Red. And only by creating it, they will be able to create the USSR.

No state can exist without law enforcement and without an army. Not a single patriot will ever call for their destruction. Because the destruction of "organs" and the army will always weaken the country and strengthen its competitors on the world chessboard.

So in whose interests did Lenin put forward the idea of ​​disbanding the army? For whom did he constantly talk about the "general arming of the people", whom he did not allow for a minute immediately after he came to power?

And immediately - to stop speculation. Lenin was never a German spy. Never!

Now, understanding what ideas in the interests of the geopolitical opponents of his homeland he put forward in the field of defense, it will be easy for you to understand what he stood for in the field of national politics ...

"Speech on the national question on April 29 (May 12)" / Seventh (April) All-Russian Conference of the RSDLP (b)

“Since there are remnants of unresolved issues by the bourgeois revolution, we stand for their solution. We are indifferent to the separatist movement, neutral. If Finland, if Poland, Ukraine secede from Russia, there is nothing wrong with that. What's wrong with that? Whoever says this is a chauvinist. You have to go crazy to continue the policy of Tsar Nicholas. After all, Norway moved away from Sweden ... Once, Alexander I and Napoleon exchanged peoples, once the kings changed Poland. And will we continue this tactic of the kings? This is a rejection of the tactics of internationalism, this is chauvinism of the worst brand. If Finland separates, what's wrong with that? Both peoples, the proletariat of Norway and Sweden, strengthened their trust in each other after secession. The Swedish landowners wanted to go to war, but the Swedish workers opposed this and said: we will not go to this war. The Finnish people want now only autonomy. We are for complete freedom to Finland, then the confidence in Russian democracy will increase, it is then that they will not secede when this is put into practice. When Mr. Rodichev comes to them and haggles over autonomy, Finnish comrades come to us and say: we need autonomy. And against them they open fire from all guns, saying: "wait for the Constituent Assembly." We say: "The Russian socialist who denies the freedom of Finland is a chauvinist."

We say that borders are determined by the will of the population. Russia, don't you dare to fight over Courland! Germany, down with the troops from Courland! This is how we resolve the issue of separation. The proletariat cannot resort to violence, for it should not interfere with the freedom of peoples. Then the slogan "get out of the border" will be true, when the socialist revolution becomes a reality, not a method, and we will say then: comrades, come to us ...
The question of the war is quite another matter. If necessary, we will not give up the revolutionary war. We are not pacifists ... When Milyukov sits with us and sends Rodichev to Finland, who there shamelessly bargains with the Finnish people, we say: no, don’t you dare, the Russian people, to rape Finland: the people who themselves oppress other peoples cannot be free. ... In the resolution on Borgbjerg, we say: withdraw the troops and leave the nation to decide the issue on its own. Now, if tomorrow the Soviet takes power into its own hands, it will not be a "method of socialist revolution", we will say then: Germany, down with the troops from Poland, Russia, down with the troops from Armenia, otherwise it will be a deception.
About his oppressed Poland comrade. Dzerzhinsky tells us that there are all chauvinists. But why did none of the Poles say a word, what to do with Finland, what to do with Ukraine? We have been arguing so much on this score since 1903 that it becomes difficult to talk about it. Wherever you want, go there and go ... Whoever does not adhere to this point of view is an annexationist, a chauvinist. We want a fraternal union of all peoples. If there is a Ukrainian Republic and a Russian Republic, there will be more connection, more trust between them. If the Ukrainians see that we have a republic of Soviets, they will not secede, but if we have a republic of Milyukov, they will secede. When Comrade. Pyatakov, in complete contradiction with his views, said: we are against forcible confinement within borders — this is the recognition of the nation's right to self-determination. We absolutely do not want the Khiva man to live under the Khiva Khan. By developing our revolution, we will influence the oppressed masses. Agitation within the oppressed masses should be presented only in this way.

But any Russian socialist who does not recognize the freedom of Finland and Ukraine will slide into chauvinism. And they will never justify themselves with any sophisms and references to their "method". "

The whole truth about Ukraine [Who benefits from the split of the country?] Prokopenko Igor Stanislavovich

Lenin creates Soviet Ukraine

Until the fall of the autocracy in 1917, there was no such country - Ukraine. This is the colloquial name for two provinces on the outskirts of the Russian Empire.

Vladimir Lavrov, Chief Researcher of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Historical Sciences, recalls how the map of modern Ukraine looked before: “If we talk about provinces in tsarist times, there were two provinces, only two. One is centered in Kiev, the other is centered in Chernigov, and that's it. That is, it was rather a speculative, theoretical concept - Ukraine, or Little Russia. And then, in Soviet times, construction began, and New Russia, which had never been Ukraine, was annexed to Ukraine. "

In this regard, today's pogroms cause great bewilderment - the destruction of statues of Lenin and other monuments of the Soviet era. Apparently, few people remember that it is the Bolsheviks, and not the nationalists, that Ukraine owes a significant part of its territories.

A senior researcher at the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Andrey Marchukov, cannot find an explanation for this either: “When Ukrainians are now demolishing monuments to Lenin, this is some kind of suicidal motive, since it is Lenin who is the father of Ukrainian statehood. It was Lenin who created Ukraine, then Stalin helped, but the main thing is Lenin, and now they are destroying his monuments. This is weird".

Let's remember how it happened. When the tsarist regime fell in 1917, each city perceived the new government in its own way. In some regions, Bolsheviks and anarchists ruled, in others, supporters of autocracy. The choice was especially difficult for the territories on the left bank of the Dnieper - Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea ...

Andrey Marchukov: “The people of the South-East and South of the Little Russian provinces, which are now the South and South-East of Ukraine, began to organize themselves. These were politically active groups. And in order to prevent Ukrainian nationalists from coming to these lands, the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Republic, the Odessa Republic and the Republic of Tavrida were formed there at the end of 1917. These were Soviet republics, but they declared themselves to be part of Soviet Russia solely in order to prevent Ukrainian nationalists from entering these lands. "

How did it happen that this region was annexed to the territory of Soviet Ukraine? With the collapse of the empire, nationalist sentiments intensified. After the February Revolution, the Central Rada, headed by Mikhail Hrushevsky, became the main legislative body of the region, which fought for the independence of Ukraine. But the Bolshevik government did not lose hope of returning its territory to its sphere of influence.

I talked to Head of the Center for the History of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, Doctor of Historical Sciences Alexander Shubin about the relations of the Central Rada with the Bolsheviks, and this is what he said: "The Central Rada says:" We want to live within the great Russia, to have wide autonomy. " The Bolsheviks say: "Yes, all the peoples of Russia have the right to broad autonomy, and if they want, even to independence, although this is not very expedient." The Bolsheviks always emphasize this. When they say that they were deliberately destroying Russia, this is not entirely fair. They didn't want to. But any Council could receive broad autonomy if it wanted it. Then another question arises: who represents the Ukrainian people? "

Despite the presence of Marxists in the Central Rada, the Bolsheviks did not consider it ideologically loyal. They rightly feared that the self-appointed parliament could show some unexpected initiative at any moment. Or do without them altogether.

Alexander Shubin: “The Central Rada represents the bourgeoisie,” said the Bolsheviks, “and not the entire Ukrainian people, not the working people. The workers are represented by the Ukrainian Congress of Soviets. " The Central Rada says: "Okay, we will arrange a Congress of Soviets for you." The Congress of Soviets is announced in December 1917, everyone is going to this Congress of Soviets, everyone is mobilizing their forces. The elections are very vague - the elections at the Congress of Soviets have always been not very clear: whoever arrived has a mandate. "

So, on December 4, 1917, the All-Ukrainian Congress of Soviets was held in Kiev. Most of the delegates supported the Central Rada. It was a failure for the Bolsheviks ... And then they took an original and unprecedented step.

To make the whole of Ukraine Soviet, they decided to add to it those regions where they had more allies. This is how Ukraine appeared within the borders in which it still exists.

A case study recalls historian Andrey Marchukov: “Kliment Efremovich Voroshilov, who for some reason began to be considered some kind of narrow-minded subject in Soviet times, was in fact an outstanding politician. He, being the head of the Lugansk Bolsheviks, managed to win the majority in the Lugansk Soviet through a political struggle, peacefully, when the popularity of the Bolsheviks there was extremely insignificant, the leading role was played by the Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries and others. He managed to make the Soviets Bolshevik. "

Kharkov, Lugansk, Donetsk - that is what the Bolsheviks could hope for. And that means that we need to rely on these cities and territories, and not on Kiev controlled by the Central Rada - after all, in Kiev, the Congress of Soviets is not in favor of the Bolsheviks. And then they leave this "wrong" congress of Soviets, leave for Kharkov and there they gather their big congress of the eastern regions. Bolshevik supporters here proclaim the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic within very broad boundaries.

The basis of the Soviet Ukrainian Republic was primarily the southeastern regions. They were never Ukrainian, but this did not bother the Bolsheviks at all, because the population supported their ideas and views. After all, they were all building one huge communist power.

This is how this historical paradox sees Alexander Shubin: “They understand: if Ukraine is left only where the Ukrainian idea definitely predominates, then the Bolsheviks will have no influence there. And if Ukraine expands, which the Central Rada also wants, then the Bolsheviks will have influence, because all these regions will be for them. The Central Rada wants influence and a large territory, but due to the large territory, its influence is eroded. The Bolsheviks want to fight nationalism, due to this they make a large Ukraine in order to have influence and defeat the Central Rada. "

The borders of this large Ukraine expanded back in the days of the USSR. In 1939, as a result of the new partition of Poland, the territories of Galicia and Bukovina were ceded to the Soviet Ukraine. In 1940 - part of Bessarabia and Bukovina, formerly part of Romania. After the war, it was a part of Czechoslovakia, which bears the historical name Subcarpathian Rus. And finally, in 1954 Nikita Khrushchev hands over the Republic of Crimea to Ukraine ...