"… for those who sin deliberately and out of simplicity,"
(Ezra 45:20)
Anti-communism and anti-Sovietism, as systems of views aimed at condemning the communist and Soviet ideology, its political goals and statements, were formed not spontaneously, but purposefully, starting from the 1920s. Our article presents anti-Soviet posters of the 1920s – 1950s in a chronological retrospective. The greatest aggravation of anti-Soviet propaganda was observed during the period of covert or open military confrontation, which is quite understandable and understandable. Mass hysteria was also whipped up by the same posters. At the same time, European propaganda acted rather rudely, using irrational and instinctive aspects, appealing to blood.
Rice. 1 "Bolshevism means to drown the world in blood." Germany, 1919
The propaganda of those years was based on the statement about the utopianism of communist ideology, the “totalitarian” nature of socialist states, the aggressive essence of world communism, the “dehumanization” of social relations, the “standardization” of thinking and spiritual values under socialism.
Rice. 2 "Do you want this to happen to your women and children?" Poland, 1921.
A striking example of the propaganda of anti-Sovietism and anti-communism is the book of the French authors' collective (S. Courtois, N. Vert, J.-L. Pannet, A. Paczkowski, K. Bartoshek, J.-L. Margolin) - The Black Book of Communism. This edition, published in 1997 in Paris, presents the author's view of the communist regimes of the 20th century. Subsequently, an English translation of the Black Book came out, and in 1999 it was published in Russia. The book is a collection of testimonies, photographic documents, maps of concentration camps, routes of deportation of the peoples of the USSR.
Rice. 3 "The Soviet puppeteer who pulls the strings." France, 1936.
In fact, this book has become the bible of anti-communism and anti-Sovietism. If we talk about the generalized features of this ideology, then we will rely on the opinion of S. G. Kara-Murza, who distinguishes the following features of anti-Sovietism:
- anti-state orientation: the USSR is proclaimed a "totalitarian state" like Nazi Germany, any actions of the Soviet state are criticized;
- the destruction of the Soviet world of symbols, their denigration and ridicule: the image of Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, the creation of a false opinion about Pavlik Morozov as a fanatical adherent of the totalitarian idea, etc.;
- the demand for freedom, which in fact means the demand for the destruction of traditional ethics, replacing it with law;
- undermining the idea of the brotherhood of peoples, namely the introduction into the consciousness of the non-Russian peoples of the USSR of the idea that they were oppressed and oppressed by the Russians, and into the consciousness of the Russian people - that the Soviet system was “non-Russian” imposed on Russian Jews and Freemasons;
- denial of the Soviet economy as a whole - propaganda of the idea that a Western-type market economy is more efficient than a Soviet-type planned economy. At the same time, Soviet industrialization is denied due to its too large, according to critics, its victims. In addition, the idea is created that any state-owned enterprise will inevitably be ineffective and doomed to collapse. That is, the technique is used to bring to the point of absurdity everything that took place in Soviet Russia. Although, it is clear that in real life nothing purely white and absolutely black has never been and never happens. In Nazi Germany, for example, beautiful autobahns were built, but this does not mean that, with this in mind, we should forget about Auschwitz and Treblinka.
Rice. 4 "Red bayonets against Europe". Germany, 1937.
In the post-Soviet space, anti-Sovietism and anti-communism were and are not just an abstract ideology, but an element of building national states. This, for example, is the view of scientists (A. Gromov, P. Bykov). This ideology became the foundation for building statehood in the former Soviet republics as well. At the same time, a number of stages are distinguished that are characteristic of almost all states that were part of the former Soviet Union.
Rice. 5 "Red storm in the village." Germany, 1941.
The first stage was the establishment, after the collapse of the USSR, in all states, to one degree or another, of nationalist regimes. At the same time, either the party-Soviet leaders of the republics, who adopted nationalist slogans, or the heads of national movements, became the leaders of the new nationalist states. At this stage, a policy of repulsion from Russia was pursued, which was perceived as a symbol of the USSR and national suppression: "an external force that prevents us from living beautifully and happily." A pro-Western vector was seen: the West actively helped the nationalist movements during the period of "late perestroika", actively influenced their formation and was now perceived as the main support of the new regimes. However, relying on economic aid from the West in most cases did not come true. Or it entailed undesirable consequences. Of course, it was the disgusting communists who built factories, theaters in these countries, introduced universal literacy "free of charge, that is, for nothing."
Rice. 6 "Socialism against Bolshevism". France, 1941.
Let us also note the influence of the diasporas, who played the role of guardians of national identity and teachers of life, and where they were, also states that were close in ethnic composition (Turkey for Azerbaijan, Romania for Moldova, Poland for Ukraine and Belarus).
The so-called "national-cultural revolutions" have become a significant element: restricting the use of the Russian language in the management system. At the same time, the countries could not boast of positive results, because the personnel and professional composition of state managers was mostly Russian-speaking.
In a situation of cultural and administrative collapse, clan ties and corruption mechanisms began to play a key role. A fierce clan struggle for access to economic resources began, which eventually resulted in a battle for power. In some states (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan), thanks to the strength of the leader or his entourage, the current government turned out to be the winner in the clan struggle. In others (Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Moldova), a change of government took place. And often as a result of very turbulent and bloody events.
Rice. 7 "A poster for the occupied Soviet territories." Germany, 1941.
At the second stage, during the de-Sovietization, the establishment of clan-corruption regimes took place. The main task of these regimes was the redistribution of national wealth within the ruling clans. During this period, there was also the rebuilding of new state structures. At the same time, it is difficult to call the policy of the new regimes pro-Russian: neither Shevardnadze, nor Kuchma, nor Nazarbayev particularly worried about the interests of Russia. We can also note the weakening of the influence of the West, especially the "patron states" due to excessive interference in internal affairs and small economic preferences. The clan authorities sought to monopolize access to the resources of certain groups. However, this stage did not last long, and the third stage was marked by the dismantling of clan-corruption regimes, since they became a brake on national development. The main mechanism for changing the regime and dismantling the system turned out to be “color revolutions”. The term “color revolution” is often understood as the intervention of external forces in the development of post-Soviet countries, but these forces in this case are only external support (in their own geopolitical interests, of course) to the processes of nation-building.
Rice. 8 "Get Away." France, 1942.
However, the dismantling of the clan-corruption system does not necessarily have to be carried out in a revolutionary way. In Kazakhstan today, the evolutionary dismantling of this system from the inside begins. Although the example of Russia is not indicative, here the function of the Orange Revolution was, in fact, performed by the transfer of power from Yeltsin to Putin.
But even in the event of a revolutionary transition of power, dismantling the clan-based corruption system is a protracted process. And not all countries turned out to be ready for it: after the color revolution, Kyrgyzstan did not go to the third stage, but rather returned to the first, Georgia also faced big problems. In the case of Belarus and Azerbaijan, it was not the clan-corruption regime that had to be dismantled, but the state distribution system. That is, it is based on modernization and liberalization, while economic.
Rice. 9 "Soviet Paradise". Germany, 1942.
The same countries that are still in the second stage are the most problematic today, the situation in them is the least predictable and explosive. Moreover, this applies equally to both democratic Armenia and authoritarian Uzbekistan. The most difficult situation was in Turkmenistan, which lost its leader in a vacuum of continuity and even the rudiments of democracy.
Another important feature of post-Soviet evolution is the overcoming of nationalism. The most successfully developing today are precisely those states that have managed to move as far as possible from nationalist ideology. The main danger of nationalism is that it replaces national-state tasks with nationalist tasks, and their solution does not improve the quality of life in the country. Well, they banned watching Russian cinema in Ukraine. So what? Did all Ukrainians get more money in their wallets from this?
Rice. 10 "Uncle Joe and His Doves of Peace." France, 1951.
The whole point of post-Soviet politics in a certain way was to use territorial, historical and other claims to parasitize on Russian resources. This is the policy pursued by the overwhelming majority of post-Soviet countries. And anti-Sovietism and anti-communism organically fit into this strategy.
Let's make a reservation right away that today there is no legislative definition under what conditions the regime in the country can be considered communist. Nevertheless, calls for his condemnation appear quite often.
Post-Soviet space: the ban on Soviet and communist symbols and the so-called "Leninopad"
Ukraine has pursued and is pursuing a rather active anti-Soviet policy. And not only through calls for the organization of an international tribunal, similar to Nuremberg, for the crimes of the Bolsheviks. Not only through the dismantling of Soviet monuments and the trial of Stalin. But also at the legislative level: for example, on November 19, 2009, Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko signed decree No. 946/2009 "On additional measures to recognize the Ukrainian liberation movement of the 20th century." By this decree, Yushchenko ordered the Cabinet of Ministers to take additional measures to recognize the Ukrainian anti-communist movement of the 20th century. The Holodomor in 2012 was first recognized as genocide by the Kiev Court of Appeal. Subsequently, the relevant law was adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. In 2015, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a package of laws that was called the “package of decommunization”. Their meaning is still the same: the condemnation of the Nazi and communist regimes, the opening of the archives of the Soviet special services, the recognition of the actions of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and other underground organizations operating in the 20th century as a struggle for independence.
Rice. 11 "By supporting communism, you are supporting terror and slavery."
In Moldova, a commission was created to study and evaluate the totalitarian communist regime, and in 2012, the "crimes of the Soviet regime" were publicly condemned. As in a number of Eastern European countries, in the same 2012 in Moldova, a ban was imposed on the use of communist symbols for political purposes and the propaganda of totalitarian ideology. However, already in 2013, the Constitutional Court overturned this prohibition, as contrary to the basic law of the state.
In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, at the state level, it is said about the Soviet occupation. In 2008, the Lithuanian Sejm banned the use of Soviet and Nazi symbols as criminal during mass actions and the performance of the anthems of Nazi Germany and the USSR, uniforms and images of the leaders of the National Socialists of Germany and the Soviet Communist Party, by adopting a number of amendments to the Law on Assemblies. The use of these symbols at public events in Latvia has been prohibited since 1991, with the exception of entertainment, festive, commemorative and sports events. In Lithuania, since 2008, the use of Soviet and Nazi symbols and hymns at public meetings has been prohibited. However, in Estonia, despite the widespread opinion, there is no similar prohibition in the legislation. But there is a dismantling of the monuments: the transfer of the monument to Soviet soldiers-liberators of Tallinn, which the Estonian authorities decided in the spring of 2007 to move from the center of the capital to a military cemetery, became resonant. During the transfer and the riots that accompanied it, a person died.
The post-Soviet countries of Central Asia do not carry out mass media campaigns and legislation to abandon Soviet symbols. Their anti-Sovietism is expressed in a different way and without unnecessary noise. Here the process, which received the name "Leninopad" in the media, was on a wide scale. Monuments to Lenin and other leaders of the communist movement are being removed consistently.
Rice. 12 "Weekends in the USSR are unforgettable." Germany, 1952.
At the same time, the same fate often befalls monuments associated with the Great Patriotic War. Another direction for the destruction of the memory of the Soviet past is the renaming of cities in the states of Central Asia and the Caucasus, named after Soviet leaders: the Tajik Leninabad again became Khujand, the Armenian Leninakan - Gyumri, the Kyrgyz Frunze - Bishkek. On the other hand, all these actions are completely within the legal framework. Because how to name or rename your cities and towns is the sovereign right of any country.
Uzbekistan, like most of the post-Soviet republics that raised anti-Sovietism and anti-communism on the shield of new state building, especially in the conditions of emerging authoritarian regimes on its own territory, also began with the dismantling of monuments. And he began with a radical version of the destruction of the monument to Soviet soldiers and the park of military glory. At the same time, with the following wording: does not reflect "the history of the armed forces of the republic and the military art of the peoples of Central Asia." Of course, it does not reflect: after all, during the Great Patriotic War, about 18 thousand Uzbeks were killed (1.36% of the total number of those killed) and 69 people became Heroes of the Soviet Union. This, apparently, is not enough in order not to demolish their monuments and keep their memory. In 2012, Tashkent suspended Uzbekistan's membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). And this Treaty of May 15, 1992 is often called the "Tashkent Treaty", since it was signed in Tashkent.
In 2009, a monument to 26 Baku commissars was dismantled in Azerbaijan, and then a parking lot was built in its place. In addition, it was reported in the press that some of the monuments of the Soviet period were later also destroyed. However, it is clear that here the Azerbaijanis are completely and completely in their own right. It's just … somehow it's somewhat un-neighborly, somehow very defiant …
In 2011, in Khujand, one of the last in Tajikistan and the highest in Central Asia monument to Lenin was dismantled, which was almost 25 meters high with a pedestal. At the same time, the authorities promised to "carefully" move it to the park of culture and recreation, while denying the political background of these actions. And yes, indeed, the monument was moved to Victory Park in another area of the city.
Like Uzbekistan, Georgia dismantled Soviet monuments, and citizens of Georgia itself were also affected. Thus, the explosion of the Memorial of Glory in Kutaisi by order of the authorities led to the death of two people - a mother and daughter Jincharadze. And during the trial in this case, three people were sentenced to prison for violation of safety precautions, that is, they are actually victims of anti-Sovietism. And already in 2011, the use of Soviet symbols was banned in Georgia, it was prohibited on an equal basis with the use of Nazi, all the names of settlements that were related to the Soviet past were changed. In the same year, the Freedom Charter was adopted, which introduced a number of restrictions for former functionaries of the Communist Party, the Komsomol, and members of the Soviet special services.
What is the situation in Europe?
Meanwhile, with the exception of the countries of Eastern Europe, practically nowhere in the West are there any bans on communist symbols and equating them with Nazi symbols. True, one can refer to the German Criminal Code, where there is a ban on the use and distribution of the symbols of the Communist Party of Germany, which was recognized by the Federal Constitutional Court as illegal and contrary to the Constitution.
Rice. 13 "All Marxist paths lead to dependence on Moscow." West Germany, 1953.
In Eastern Europe, however, it is a different matter. Public use of communist and Soviet symbols is prohibited in at least seven countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
In Hungary, from 1993 to 2013, there was a ban on communist and Nazi symbols. But it was canceled due to the unclear wording of the circumstances of the violation of the law. Three months later, these wordings were clarified and the ban came into force again.
In Poland, it is allowed to use for artistic and educational purposes, and even collect items containing communist symbols. But for their storage, distribution or sale since 2009, criminal liability is provided up to imprisonment.
In the Czech Republic, communist symbols have also been banned since 2009.
Nevertheless, since 2006, the European Community has been constantly working to condemn the "crimes of communism and Stalinism": resolutions, declarations are adopted, and such state events are held.
For example, on January 25, 2006, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a Resolution condemning the crimes of communist regimes on a par with Nazi ones (Resolution No. 1481 “The need for international condemnation of the crimes of totalitarian communist regimes”). On July 3, 2009, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe adopted the Resolution “On the reunification of a divided Europe: Promoting human rights and civil liberties in the OSCE region in the 21st century”, which officially condemned “the crimes of the Stalinist and Nazi regimes”. On April 2, 2009, the European Parliament approved the European Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Stalinism and Nazism. This proposal was developed during the conference "Conscience of Europe and Communism" in June 2008 in Prague. Her declaration noted that it was Europe that was responsible for the consequences of Nazism and communism.
The same idea can be traced in the Declaration of the International Conference "Crimes of Communist Regimes" of February 25, 2010: to condemn the communist and totalitarian regimes at the international level.
That is, we are dealing with decisions based on inaccurate formulations, excessive generalizations and primitive innuendo on the principle of “black and white”. And this is a very primitive and impractical approach.
Rice. 14 "In the networks of communism". Italy, 1970.
In the meantime, it turns out that anti-communism and anti-Sovietism are not just propaganda in the media, they also act as an integral element of real state activities aimed at suppressing the communist, workers' and national liberation movements. It is quite obvious, ancient, but has not lost its relevance method of creating an image of the enemy, which is facilitated by the absence of this enemy in reality and the impossibility of counter-propaganda.
"Positive" anti-communism, in contrast to aggressive, tries to prove the obsolescence, inappropriateness of Marxism-Leninism for solving the problems of a developed "industrial" society, focuses on a gradual internal degeneration, "erosion" of communism.
Anti-Sovietism is a special case of anti-communism. This is a system of views directed against the Soviet system and the associated social system, its impact on a wide geographical area. At the same time, some call anti-Sovietism any disagreement with the actions of the Soviet government and the subsequent condemnation of these actions, while others call hatred of Soviet society as a whole.
In Russia, according to a poll conducted by VTsIOM in 2006-2010 (on the 20th anniversary of the fall of the USSR), the word "anti-Soviet" itself has a negative connotation for 66% of Russians: 23% feel condemnation, 13% - disappointment, 11% - anger. 8% - shame, 6% - fear, 5% - skepticism. That is, in the country most "affected" by Sovietism and communism, its negative assessment is far from being unambiguous. And this is the most interesting thing. Those who seem to have suffered the most from "communism" know its pros and cons from their own experience, treat it … with understanding. But those who took advantage of its advantages to a greater extent, just attack it in the most active way. But where would the same Poland and Finland be, if not for Lenin, where in the world would the “republics” of Central Asia be, if not for help from the USSR? And so on and so forth. That is, there is a certain clearly defined primitivism and simplification in the coverage of the many extremely complex social problems that took place in the 20th century, and it is also a trend in the presentation of information about the problems of the world of our era today, although it is well known that “other simplicity is worse than theft”!
