The black myth of the Holodomor is very versatile. His supporters argue that collectivization in the USSR was the main cause of famine in the country; that the Soviet leadership deliberately organized the export of grain abroad, this led to an aggravation of the food situation in the country; that Stalin deliberately organized famine in the USSR and Ukraine (the myth of the "Holodomor in Ukraine"), etc.
The creators of this myth took into account the fact that most people perceive information on an emotional level. If we talk about the numerous victims - "millions and tens of millions", the public consciousness falls under the magic of numbers and at the same time does not try to understand the phenomenon, to understand it. Everything fits into the formula: "Stalin, Beria and the GULAG." In addition, when more than one generation has changed, society already lives more in illusions, myths, which for them helpfully from year to year create a creative, free intelligentsia. And the intelligentsia in Russia, traditionally brought up on Western myths, hates any Russian state - Russia, the Russian Empire, the Red Empire and the current Russian Federation. The majority of the population of Russia (and the CIS countries) receives information about the USSR (and the History of the Fatherland) not from low-circulation scientific literature, but with the help of "cognitive" transmissions of various posners, Svanidze, milky, artistic "historical" films, which give an extremely perverse, falsified picture, and even from an extremely emotional standpoint.
In the wreckage of the USSR, the situation is aggravated by the fact that the picture is thickly smeared with nationalist tones. Moscow, the Russian people, appear in the role of "oppressors", "occupiers", "bloody dictatorship", which suppressed the best representatives of small nations, hindered the development of culture and economy, and carried out outright genocide. So one of the favorite myths of the Ukrainian nationalist "elite" and the intelligentsia is the myth of the deliberate Holodomor, which was caused with the aim of exterminating millions of Ukrainians. Naturally, such sentiments are supported in every possible way in the West; they fully fit into the plans for an information war against Russian civilization and the implementation of plans for the final solution of the “Russian question”. The West is interested in inciting nationalist passions, bestial enmity and hatred towards Russia and the Russian people. By playing the debris of the Russian world against each other, the masters of the West save significant resources, and their potential adversary, in this case the two branches of the Superethnos of the Rus - Great Russians and Little Russians, destroys each other himself. Everything is in line with the ancient strategy of "divide and conquer".
In particular, James Mace, author of the work "Communism and the Dilemmas of National Liberation: National Communism in Soviet Ukraine in 1919-1933", concluded that the leadership of the USSR by strengthening its power "destroyed the Ukrainian peasantry, the Ukrainian intelligentsia, the Ukrainian language, Ukrainian history in the understanding of the people, it destroyed Ukraine as such”. Obviously, such conclusions are very popular with Nazi elements in Ukraine. However, the real facts of history completely refute such a lie. Since the time of inclusion in the Russian state of the Left-Bank Ukraine by the Andrusiv armistice in 1667, Ukraine has only increased in territorial terms - including the inclusion of Crimea in the Ukrainian SSR under Khrushchev, and the population has been growing."The destruction of Ukraine as such" led to an unprecedented cultural, scientific, economic and demographic prosperity in Ukraine. And we have been observing the results of the activities of the governments of "independent" Ukraine in recent years: a decrease in the population by several million people, a split of the country along the West-East line, the emergence of prerequisites for a civil war; degradation of spiritual culture and national economy; a sharp increase in political, financial and economic dependence on the West; rampant Nazi elements, etc.
Spiteful anti-Soviet and anti-Russian ideas were not born in Ukraine. "Holodomor" was invented in the department of Goebbels during the Third Reich. The experience of the information war of the German Nazis was borrowed from among the Ukrainian nationalists - the emigration of the second wave, who fought on the side of Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Then they were supported by the British and American intelligence services. The use of the rich heritage of the Nazis by representatives of Western "democracy" was quite natural for them. They are also building a New World Order. Thus, the work of “exposing” the “atrocities of the Soviet regime” was carried out by the famous British intelligence officer Robert Conquest. He worked in the MI-6 Information and Research Department (Disinformation Department) from 1947 to 1956, and then left to become a professional "historian" specializing in anti-Sovietism. His literary activity was supported by the CIA. He published such works as "Power and Politics in the USSR", "Soviet Deportations of Peoples", "Soviet National Policy in Practice" and others. The work "The Great Terror: Stalin's Purges of the 30s", published in 1968, received the greatest fame. In his opinion, the terror and famine organized by Stalin's regime led to the death of 20 million people. In 1986, R. Conquest published the book "The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and Terror by Hunger", it was dedicated to the famine of 1932-1933, which was associated with the collectivization of agriculture.
When describing the terror and the "Holodomor" Conquest, Mace and other anti-Sovietists are related to hatred of the USSR and the Russian people, and the "scientific method" - the use as a source of various rumors, works of art of famous enemies of the USSR, Russophobes like A. Solzhenitsyn, V. Grossman, Ukrainian accomplices of the Nazis H. Kostyuk, D. Nightingale and others. This is how Mace organized the work of the American Commission of the Congress to investigate the famine in Ukraine. However, the matter ended with the fact that the real researchers discovered the fact of falsification of almost all cases. The overwhelming majority of cases were based on rumors, anonymous testimonies. In particular, the falsity of Conquest's data was shown by Canadian researcher Douglas Tottle in his work "Fakes, Famine and Fascism: The Myth of the Ukrainian Genocide from Hitler to Harvard."
From 5 to 25 million people are called victims of the "Holodomor" (depending on the impudence and imagination of the "accuser"). While archival data report the death of 668 thousand people in 1932 in Ukraine and 1 million 309 thousand people in 1933. Thus, we have almost 2 million deaths, not 5 or 20 million. In addition, it is necessary to exclude deaths from natural causes from this figure; as a result, hunger caused the death of 640-650 thousand people. It is also necessary to take into account the fact that in 1932-1933 Ukraine and the North Caucasus were struck by an epidemic of typhus, which greatly complicates the absolutely precise determination of the number of deaths due to hunger. In the USSR as a whole, hunger and disease claimed the lives of about 4 million people.
What caused the hunger?
Speaking about the causes of hunger, mythmakers like to talk about the negative factor of grain procurement. However, the numbers say otherwise. In 1930, the gross grain harvest amounted to 1431, 3 million poods, delivered to the state - 487, 5 (percentage - 34%); respectively in 1931: collection - 1100, commissioned - 431, 3 (39, 2%); in 1932: collection - 918, 8, commissioned - 255 (27, 7%); in 1933: collection - 1412, 5, commissioned - 317 (22, 4%). Considering that the population in Ukraine at that time was about 30 million people, then for each in 1932-1933. accounted for about 320-400 kg of grain. Then why is there a famine?
Many researchers talk about the natural and climatic factor, drought. So, in the Russian Empire, crop failures and famine also took place, and usually the tsars are not accused of deliberate genocide of the population. Crop failures were repeated at intervals of one - one and a half decades. In 1891, up to 2 million people died of hunger, in 1900-1903. - 3 million, in 1911 - about 2 million more. Crop failure and famine were commonplace, since Russia, even with the modern level of development of agricultural technologies, is in the zone of risky farming. The harvest of a particular year can be very different from the forecasts. The drought of 1932 played a dramatic role in Ukraine. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, there were still no forest belts and ponds, and with low agricultural technology, drought ruined the harvest. The state was able to implement a large-scale plan to protect agriculture only after the war.
In addition, a large role in the famine of 1932-1933. played by the so-called. "human factor". However, Stalin and the Soviet leadership, who made titanic efforts to develop the country, were not personally to blame, but sabotage at the level of local authorities (there were many "Trotskyists" among the party secretaries in the countryside, opponents of the course towards industrialization and collectivization), and the resistance of the kulaks. The “kulaks”, who from the time of perestroika to the present time, have been presented by the media as the best part of the peasantry (although there were real “world eaters” among the kulaks, usurers), in 1930 they accounted for only 5-7% of the peasantry. In the country as a whole, they controlled about 50-55% of sales of agricultural products. Their economic power in the village was immense. The local authorities carrying out collectivization, among whom were the Trotskyists-saboteurs, got down to business so zealously that they created a situation of "civil war" in a number of areas. For example, this is how the first secretary of the Sredne-Volzhsky regional committee of the party, Mendel Khatayevich, acted (he later became an "innocent victim" of repression). At the beginning of 1930, he provoked the local law enforcement agencies into total violence against the kulaks, in fact, he led the region to a situation of social war. When Moscow received information about this, Stalin reprimanded Khatayevich personally and sent a telegram to all party secretaries demanding to focus their efforts on the development of the collective farm movement, and not on naked dispossession. Stalin demanded economic dispossession: the economic ones, stronger than an individual kulak or a group of them in the countryside, forced the kulaks to cease their activities due to their inability to compete in economic activity. Instead of economic dispossession, local authorities continued to bend the line of administrative dispossession with the use of force. In some regions, the percentage of dispossessed people rose to 15%, which meant 2-3 times higher than the actual number of kulaks. They deprived the middle peasants. In addition, local secretaries also went by way of depriving peasants of voting rights.
These were deliberate actions to destabilize the situation in the country. The Trotskyists wanted to cause a social explosion in the country, artificially turning a significant percentage of the peasantry into enemies of Soviet power. Considering the fact that a plan for the intervention in the USSR was being prepared abroad at that time - it was supposed to coincide with the mass unrest in the country and a number of specially organized uprisings, the situation was very dangerous.
It is quite natural that the kulaks and some of the middle peasants who joined them answered. Strong propaganda against joining collective farms began in the village. It even came to the point of "kulak" terror (in Ukraine in 1928 - 500 cases, 1929 - 600, 1930 - 720). Antikolkhoz propaganda coincided with the slaughtering campaign. It took on a large-scale character. So, according to the American researcher F. Schumann in 1928-1933.in the USSR, the number of horses fell from 30 million to 15 million heads, cattle - from 70 million to 38 million, sheep and goats from 147 million to 50 million, pigs - from 20 million to 12 million. Here it is necessary to take into account the fact that if in Central and Northern Russia they plowed exclusively on horses (poor lands are easier), then in Southern Russia (Ukraine, Don, Kuban), tillage was carried out on oxen. The kulaks and opposition members of the CPSU (B) explained to the peasants that collectivization would fail, and the rule of collective farms would plunder their cattle. Selfish interest also played a role - I did not want to give my cattle to a collective farm. Here the cattle were slaughtered before being handed over to collective farms. Collective farms were created, but oxen and horses were in short supply. The authorities have tried to combat this phenomenon, but with little success. It was difficult to determine where the predatory slaughter was, and where was the usual preparation of meat.
Slaughtering is one of the causes of hunger. The immediate cause of the famine was the fact that the peasants who joined the collective farms, and the peasants who did not join, collected little grain. Why did they collect little? Little has been sown, along with drought. Why have they sown little? They plowed a little, the oxen were slaughtered for meat (there were still few equipment on the collective farms). As a result, hunger began.
It was a well-calculated anti-Soviet program aimed at disrupting Moscow's programs. The "fifth column" within the communist party, acting together with the kulaks, prepared the ground for a revolt. The mass famine was supposed to lead to a social explosion, during which it was supposed to remove Stalin from power and transfer control of the USSR to the "Trotskyists". The opposition, which had connections abroad, was not satisfied with Stalin's course of building socialism in a single country. Moreover, the kulaks and the opposition did not confine themselves to the above measures, they also sabotaged the process of cultivating the land. According to the data of the modern Russian researcher Yuri Mukhin, from 21 to 31 hectares were not sown in the South of Russia, that is, at best, about 40% of the fields were sown. And then, provoked by the anti-Soviet opposition, the peasantry generally began to refuse to harvest. The authorities were forced to take very tough measures. The Central Committee of the CPSU (b) and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR on November 6, 1932, adopted a resolution ordering an end to sabotage organized by counter-revolutionary and kulak elements. In those areas where sabotage was noted, state and cooperative outlets were closed, goods were seized, their supply was suspended; the sale of basic food products is prohibited; the issuance of loans has been suspended, previously issued have been canceled; the study of personal affairs in leading and economic organizations has begun to identify hostile elements. A similar resolution was adopted by the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the Council of People's Commissars of Ukraine.
As a result, a number of factors caused the famine of 1932-1933. And it was not Stalin who was to blame for it, who "personally organized the Holodomor." The natural and climatic factor - drought and the "human factor" played its negative role. Some of the local authorities "went too far" in the process of collectivization and dispossession - the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine did its best. The secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine, Stanislav Kosior, who actually declared the peasantry an enemy and called for a "decisive offensive", stood out. His program also included the criminal export of all grain to grain receiving points, which provoked hunger. Another part of the local authorities, together with the kulaks, openly provoked the village to revolt. We must not forget the fact that many peasants set themselves up, destroying livestock, reducing the cultivated area and refusing to harvest.
The result was sad - hundreds of thousands of deaths. However, it was a better alternative than a new peasant war, civil confrontation and external intervention. The course of building socialism in one country was continued.
