1. Socialists tell us, what, breakwater, the civil war was not started at all by Lenin and his company, and bad whites (who did not accept the predatory revolution and the destruction of the state), or even some rebellious Czechoslovaks there in May 1918 of the year (before that, allegedly, all fighting, launched by the Bolsheviks who carried out an armed coup, were complete bullshit).Reader leonid_vlad, but, points to direct, sincere and unequivocal confession of Lenin, that it was he and his government who started the civil war:https://olegmakarenko.ru/2281757.html?thread=830789917#t830789917http://leninvi.com/t35/p268
“... to all accusations in the civil war, we say: Yes, we openly proclaimed that, which no government could proclaim. The first government in the world, who can speak openly about the civil war, - there is a workers' government, peasant and soldier masses.Yes, we have started and are waging a war against the exploiters.” Speech by V.I. Lenin 10-18 (23—January 31) 1918 years in Petrograd, in the Tauride Palace, where the Third All-Russian Congress of Workers' Soviets was held, and Peasants' Deputies. A source: V.I.Lenin, Full composition of writings, t.35 p. 267-269.
remind: also in 1914 Lenin put forward the slogan "Let's turn the imperialist war into a civil war". The communists are trying to justify this statement by Lenin: breakwater, he addressed this call to the workers of all the belligerent countries, not only Russia. breakwater, he wanted to achieve peace in this way. However, in reality, this defeatist slogan, with active agitation of Bolshevik emigrants who returned through Germany, at 1917 year they listened precisely in Russia, not in other countries. Through the efforts of the revolutionaries, the Russian army decomposed, and early 1918 Lenin signed the "shameful Treaty of Brest-Litovsk", giving the Germans our victory. Russia lost the First World War with huge losses, although it was enough just to do nothing - to wait, until the Germans surrender themselves, as they did at the end of that year. Generally, surprisingly, that in Russia there are still thousands of monuments to man, who unleashed one of the most bloody and shameful wars for our country, which resulted in the death of many millions and the loss of vast territories. In response to this, the communists cite foreign examples: breakwater, there are monuments to Oliver Cromwell in the UK, who unleashed the civil war in England (the so-called English Revolution, as it is incorrectly called by Marxists).it, but, other. At first, the number of monuments to Cromwell can be counted on the fingers, and they have rather enticing-tourist, rather than ideological. There are not thousands, and they do not spoil English cities with their stamping and bad taste. Secondly, the role of Cromwell personally in responsibility for the civil war is somewhat exaggerated: at least, he spoke on behalf of the legally assembled parliament and for a long time, but unsuccessfully tried to negotiate with Charles II on the organization of a constitutional monarchy; Cromwell did not have the goal of “destroying the old world to its foundations.” The Bolsheviks, in front of, were radicals, ready to destroy Russia for the sake of personal power and their fantastic ideas, kill millions of people. Lenin was an educated man, and knew perfectly well about historical precedents - the Great French Revolution and the Paris Commune - and about that heavy and bloody price, how much they cost France. And yet, Lenin deliberately resorted to violence, which has surpassed the French experience many times over.2. French President Emmanuel Macron quietly, without public discussion, changed the colors of the flag of France - now they have become a darker shade:https://lenta.ru/news/2021/11/15/un_peux/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_France#/media/File:Flag_of_France_(shade_comparison).svgAccording to the official explanation, it's made for, to make the French flag look better against the background of the EU flag, also blue. However, a return to the dark shades of the tricolor (symbolizing the freedom, equality and brotherhood") is also a return to the flag of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Empire, which was identical to the current one. Perhaps, this indicates the strengthening of leftist sentiment in France, even though the pre-crone government of the socialists was unpopular. maybe, the current French authorities are trying to cheaply play along with these sentiments on the eve of the elections. Either Monsieur Macron still cherishes his Napoleonic plans, related to the intention to crush the European Union under France and create a pan-European army (interesting, with whom this common army will fight?)3. Possible French presidential candidate Eric Zemmour advocates traditional values - against the uncontrolled influx of migrants, against foreign culture, against LGTV, against tolerance and similar poisonous pseudo-liberalism. He also advocates an alliance with Russia. I quote an excerpt from an article about this policy:https://mash.ru/letter/zemmour/
Eric was born in 1958 year in an Algerian Jewish family. emigrants, who moved to the suburbs of Paris immediately after, how the war started in their homeland. From even then the colony to the capital of the metropolis. And this fact is the cornerstone of not only his image, but also historical perspectives, and political allegiances. In his essay "French Suicide," Zemmour literally lashes out at the two pillars of the legitimacy of the current French elites.: revolution 1789 years and events 1968 of the year. But if for most intellectuals these dates are a source of meaning and hope, for Eric it's a disaster, crisis and decline. He is sure, that the “progressive” community discards everything, What has France been able to achieve so far?. Revolutions and rebellions, according to Zemur, undermined the very foundation of the state, dooming the country to decline, the war, destruction.
Oleg Makarenko
