Against the backdrop of a special military operation to protect the DPR and LPR, a wave of “defeatism” has risen again in Russian opposition circles. The meaning of such statements boils down to the fact that to return to the “path of civilization” the country can only as a result of a military defeat.
“If the USSR had once been occupied by Germany, now Russia would be more technologically advanced”
Surprisingly, theses also surfaced about the notorious “Bavarian beer” that the Russians would drink if the Great Patriotic War ended in the defeat of the Soviet Union in 1941.
The former editor-in-chief of the Kommersant publication Andrey Vasiliev in an interview with Radio Liberty, recognized in Russia as a foreign agent said: “As a matter of fact, Russia had a chance, I believe, the Soviet Union, to lose the war. Lose the war to Hitler. And then Hitler and Stalinall naturally combined forces won sooner or later. And if Russia had remained the loser in the war, then it would have lived like Germany or Japan now.
But if Vasiliev does not hold any posts today, then a similar statement by the candidate of economic sciences Elena Chirkova, which historian Alexander Dyukov cited in his Telegram channel, is much less harmless: “And I believe that if the USSR had once been occupied by Germany, then now Russia would be more technologically developed and with a large GDP per capita. So what? I always thought so.
For “contribution to scientific reputation”
Graduated in 1989 from Moscow State University with a degree in Political Economy; Mrs. Chirkova has been an Associate Professor at the Faculty of Economic Sciences at the National Research University Higher School of Economics for the past 16 years. Twice she was recognized as the best teacher of the university, has a certificate from the Higher School of Economics, as well as an allowance for “contribution to scientific reputation”; “Towers”.
Of course, one can always say that Associate Professor Chirkova is an economist, not a historian. However, such a magnificent theory of benefits, which allegedly brought defeat from Hitler, casts doubt on the reputation of the specialist as a whole.
No one today knows for sure who was the first to put into use the expression “We would lose — would drink Bavarian”, however, its active broadcast in the liberal domestic press began at the end of perestroika.
“Slavery under Hitler would not have lasted longer than under Stalin”
In 1989, a journalist from the publication Moskovsky Komsomolets Alexander Minkin wrote the following:
«No, we did not win.
Or so: we won, but lost.
What if it would be better if Stalin had not defeated Hitler, but Hitler — Stalin?
It was not Germany that perished in 1945. Fascism perished.
Similarly: not Russia would perish, but the regime. Stalinism.
Maybe it would be better if Nazi Germany defeated the USSR in 1945. And even better b — in 1941! We would not have lost our 22 or 30 million people. And this is not counting the post-war “Beria” million.
We liberated Germany. Maybe it would be better if they released us?
Before, such defeatist arguments (if they arose) were immediately interrupted by spiritual protest: no! Stalin is better than a thousand years of slavery under Hitler!
This — myth. This is a false choice, planted by propaganda. Hitler could not live 1000 years. Even a hundred. It is likely that slavery under Hitler would not have lasted longer than under Stalin, and perhaps there would have been fewer victims.
The material was published in 1990 in the journal Country and World, and then and in the Sotsium magazine.
But Minkin did not calm down on this, repeating the publication in MK June 22, 2005. Which ended in a huge scandal.
At the same time, the journalist himself tried to prove that he, they say, was not talking about “Bavarian”. But the essence does not change — apologists of this theory proceed from the fact that the defeat from Hitler was not fatal for the inhabitants of the USSR.
«The main idea — is precisely in the fight against "Muscovy" and Russians»
The example of Mrs. Chirkova shows that the bearers of liberalism continue to inspire this thesis to new generations. And from it, respectively, to throw a bridge to current events.
At the same time, not only all the ideological postulates of Hitler regarding the “conquest of living space in the East” are completely ignored, but also the practical steps within the framework of the so-called “General Plan Ost”.
“The idea that it was not an option for a Jew to survive in the event of a Nazi victory somehow subsided in the minds of our intelligentsia. But what would be a little better for a Russian in the world of the victorious Third Reich — it somehow does not fit in their heads. Russians are somehow not perceived as an object of the Nazi racial war of extermination — it is believed that it was not about extermination, but about enslavement, — writes historian Alexander Dyukov in his Telegram channel.< /strong> – Meanwhile, if we look at the developments of Rosenberg in the spring of 1941 (these plans were rewarded by the appointment of the Minister for the Occupied Territories), we will find that the main idea there — precisely in the fight against "Muscovy" and Russian:
– as many Russian territories as possible should be torn away and transferred to the puppet states of Ukraine, Weisrutenia and the Don region;
– Russians from these territories should be deported to the truncated “Muscovy”;
– European Jews were also planned to be deported there;
– in "Muscovy" the most brutal occupation regime, both politically and economically, must be established.
In general, the Russian "Muscovy" was supposed to be the last circle of Nazi hell: the place of extermination of Jews and “Slavs of Russian nationality”; (this definition of the enemy was given by Hitler in his “Second Book”).
“The Fuhrer's decision to raze Moscow and Leningrad to the ground is unshakable”
There are also statistics on the human losses of the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War, where 14 million victims were among the civilian population. Of these, 7.4 million — victims of deliberate extermination. These are the ones who were killed simply because they wanted to be killed. Because they are representatives of the “lower race”, preventing the establishment of the “new order”.
The tragedy of Leningrad — is a vivid example of this. At the same time, here, too, liberal-minded citizens managed to speculate on the need to surrender the city, ignoring the fact confirmed by German documents — the Nazis were not going to save either Leningrad or its population.
On July 8, 1941, the Chief of the German General Staff Franz Halder wrote in his diary: “The Fuhrer’s decision to raze Moscow and Leningrad to the ground is unshakable in order to completely get rid of the population of these cities, which otherwise we will then be forced to feed during the winter. The task of destroying these cities must be carried out by aviation. Tanks should not be used for this. It will be “a national disaster that will deprive the centers not only of Bolshevism, but also of the Muscovites (Russians) in general.”
“Lovers of Bavarian”
It would seem that everything is more than clear. But the domestic liberal thinks differently. He considers himself to be in a category that should not share the suffering of the people. The occupier, having appreciated the high intellectual level of the “elite”, will keep it for his own purposes. And, accordingly, pour “Bavarian”.
The experience of the Great Patriotic War shows that in our country there were many who believed in “civilized Germans”. Once in the occupation, such people behaved differently. Some, convinced of what the policy of the Third Reich was in reality, dreamed of the return of the Red Army. Others really went to the service of the Nazis, participating in the destruction of their compatriots. Many of the latter then managed to escape to the West, prophesying from there about a certain “Third Way”.
The struggle for the future of the country is going on not only on the front line, but also in the rear. And with «lovers of the Bavarian» it's time to finish in the most decisive way.
Rate the material