Soviet patriots love to argue that all their opponents, not just left-wing liberals, are Russophobes. “The anti-Soviet means Russophobe” —this is how this thought sounds. Let us try to make out the loyalty of this statement by the example of V. I. Lenin.
In the article “Critical notes on the national question,” Lenin writes about national culture:
“The slogan of national culture is bourgeois (and often, the Black-Hundred-clerical) deception. Our slogan is the international culture of democracy and the world labor movement. ”
Thus, if you advocate a national culture, then you are not a Marxist or a Communist. In the same article, the following is written about this: “But in every nation there is a bourgeois culture (and in the majority still a Black Hundred clerical) - moreover, not only in the form of“ elements ”, but in the form of the dominant culture. Therefore, "national culture" in general is the culture of landowners, priests, the bourgeoisie. " In contrast to the Soviet patriots, V.I. Lenin honestly wrote about the incompatibility of Russian culture and Marxism: “Take a concrete example. Can the Great Russian Marxist accept the slogan of a national, Great Russian culture? Not. Such a person must be placed among the nationalists, not the Marxists. Our business is to fight the dominant, Black-Hundred and bourgeois national culture of Great Russians, developing exclusively in the international spirit and in closest alliance with the workers of other countries, the rudiments that exist in our history of the democratic and labor movement. " Thus, according to Lenin, Russian national-Bolshevism is absurd and absurd.
In the same article, Lenin writes about Ukraine: “Take Russia and the attitude of the Great Russians towards the Ukrainians. Of course, any democrat, not to mention a Marxist, will resolutely fight against the unprecedented humiliation of Ukrainians and demand their full equality. But it would be a direct betrayal of socialism and stupid politics, even from the point of view of the bourgeois “national tasks” of the Ukrainians, to weaken the existing, within one state, connection and union of the Ukrainian and Great Russian proletariat. ” Those. on the one hand, Lenin in 1913 supported anti-Russian Ukrainian separatism, on the other hand, he supported the unity of the proletariat of the two branches of the Russian people. Finally, the allegations of national oppression of the Ukrainians themselves are false.
But that is not all. “If the Ukrainian Marxist allows himself to be carried away by a completely legitimate and natural hatred of the Great Russian oppressors to the point that he transfers at least a piece of this hatred, even alienation, to the proletarian culture and the proletarian cause of the Great Russian workers, then this Marxist will slide into the swamp bourgeois nationalism. In the same way, the Great-Russian Marxist will slide into the swamp of nationalism not only bourgeois, but also the Black-Hundred, if he forgets for a moment the demand for full equality of Ukrainians or their right to form an independent state. ” Thus, without asking the opinion of the Ukrainians themselves, Lenin wants to tear them away from the rest of the Russians and Russia. Therefore, when Soviet patriots criticize the Ukrainian 2018 regime for Russophobia, they go against their teacher, who with some changes supported the separatist anti-Russian point of view on Ukraine and its position within Russia. What is nationalism click here.
However, the most outspoken thoughts about Russians were V. I. Lenin expressed in 1922 in the note “On the Question of Nationalities or“ Autonomy ”.
“They say that the unity of the apparatus was required. But where did these assurances come from? Not from the Russian apparatus itself, which, as I indicated in one of the previous issues of my diary, we borrowed from tsarism and only a little bit smeared by the Soviet world. ”
“Under these conditions (the prevalence of pre-revolutionary hardening frames is author annotation) it is very natural that the “freedom to leave the union”, by which we justify ourselves, will turn out to be an empty piece of paper, unable to protect Russian foreigners from the invasion of a truly Russian person, a great Russian chauvinist, in essence, a scoundrel and abuser, which is a typical Russian bureaucrat. There is no doubt that an insignificant percentage of Soviet and Sovietized workers will drown in this sea of Great Russian chauvinistic trash like a fly in milk. ” What is interesting here? First, Lenin connects bureaucrats with people of Russian nationality, although bureaucratic outrage is disgusting in all countries and among all peoples. Secondly, it is clearly stated that Russian and Soviet are different nations. It reminds those who say: "I am Ukrainian, not Russian." Those. people consciously renounce Russianness in favor of Sovietism / Ukrainians. Very "worthy." Thirdly, it is clear that the Russian left-wing liberals, who defend any Russophobic national separatists from Ichkeria and ending with Ukraine, are the spiritual heirs of V. I. Lenin from retaliation. Finally, Lenin wanted to make Russians Soviet as the left-liberal academician V. A. Tishkov wishes turn the Russians into "Russians».
However, this is not the apotheosis. “Therefore, internationalism on the part of a oppressing or so-called“ great ”nation (although great only by its violence, great only in the same way as the great mord) must consist not only in observing the formal equality of nations, but also in such inequality that would compensate oppressive, a large nation, the inequality that takes shape in actual life. Whoever did not understand this, he did not understand the truly proletarian attitude to the national question, remained, in essence, on the point of view of the petty-bourgeois and therefore cannot but slide every minute to the bourgeois point of view. ” In this passage, Lenin clearly indicates the following:
- He hates all Russians, including workers and peasants.
- It was Lenin, not the left-wing liberals, who first started introducing “positive discrimination” and national-masochism.
- The leader of the Bolsheviks divides the people into oppressors and the oppressed.
In conclusion, it should be noted that V.I. Lenin was a zoological Russophobe and his veneration in Russia is a sign of national-masochism. A Russian who worships Lenin is like a Jew who worships the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. At the moment, Russian can not be discouraged. If the Russian people survived the warlike Marxism-Leninism, then it will win and tolerant-masochistic left-wing liberalism.
If you find it important that we publish such material, support the authors