Voices from Russia

Sunday, 19 February 2017

February Revolution of 1917: Good Intentions, Tragic Fates?

00-russsia-nikolai-ii-160217

__________________________________

Editor:

A good friend of mine wrote of this:

It shows how some in the emigration are still justifying their and their forefathers’ treason.

I need add no more…

I urge all readers to use the Russian Wikipedia links provided… they differ from the English ones (they’re better)… run a machine translation if you must, it’ll reward you.

BMD

******

Nicholas Daniloff, 82, the founder of the School of Journalism at Northeastern University in Boston MA and former Moscow correspondent for US News & World Report, is one of a very few Americans who has a personal connection to the February Revolution in Russia. In 1917, this revolution, which combined a popular uprising with a élitist anti-monarchist plot, toppled Tsar Nikolai II Aleksandrovich and paved the way for almost a century of “troubled times” in Russia.

When Nicholas Daniloff was born in a Russian émigré home in Paris in 1934, his grandfather Yu N Danilov, a former tsarist general and head of Russian Army Headquarters during World War I, was still alive and had two more years to live. Isolated both from his now Bolshevik Russian motherland and from the majority of his fellow émigré officers, General Danilov didn’t lead a happy life in France. The reason for their isolation from the mostly monarchist Russian émigré community in Paris was Danilov’s participation in Nikolai II’s abdication on 2 March 1917. The tsar abdicated due to the insistence of the army’s top generals, including Danilov, after a series of rebellions in Petrograd and Moscow on 23 February to 1 March. The generals later said that by forcing Tsar Nikolai to resign they wanted to prevent even bigger troubles, ensuring a smooth transition of state power to the tsar’s relatives or to the Gosduma, which was then dominated by anti-monarchist liberals. However, the situation quickly slipped out of the liberals’ control, the Bolshevik faction of the Social-Democrat Party toppled the liberal Provisional Government in October 1917, and a bloody civil war followed in 1918-21, followed by 70 years of communist rule. Nicholas Daniloff remembered:

My father Serge, a general’s son, lived a life of a refugee in the USA. In early 1917, the Provisional Government sent Serge on a diplomatic mission to Europe, but after the Bolshevik coup, he didn’t want to serve this “new Russia”. The members of the mission divided its funds amongst themselves and went different ways. Therefore, thanks to the February revolution I became an American and later worked as a foreign correspondent in Moscow in the early 1960s and in 1979-86… against the will of my father, who said that even my American passport might not protect me.

Speaking Russian like a native, Daniloff retains a somewhat distanced and critical approach to his historic motherland. In a curious way, this attitude reflects the divisions that to this day plague Russians whenever one mentions the February revolution. He told me during our first meeting in 1991:

I agree with [19th-century French critic of Russian monarchy Astolphe-Louis-Léonor, Marquis] de Custine when he said back in 1840 that Russia was doomed to following the West, but never quite catching up with it. Will this new attempt by Russia to make it [Daniloff meant Gorbachyov‘s perestroika] be successful? Russia already had the Great Reform of 1861, the February revolution of 1917. These attempts were well-intentioned, but never quite successful.

In Russia, the pro-Western Yabloko faction shares Daniloff’s largely positive view of the February revolution’s intentions. Its leader G А Yavlinsky supports the return of the Crimea to the Ukraine and views the EU’s expansion to Russia’s borders as a positive phenomenon. Yavlinsky wrote in an article dedicated to the anniversary of the revolution:

The people who suddenly found themselves having power in February 1917 were educated and honest men, they didn’t deceive their country, and didn’t rob it of its riches. They just lacked the needed experience of running state affairs; the authoritarian tsarist regime denied them this experience.

V А Nikonov, Dean of the History Department at Moscow State University, gave a more negative view both of the February revolution and its leaders at a conference in Moscow dedicated to the February revolution:

The people who held power between February and October 1917 were irresponsible and unpatriotic. The first thing they did after coming to power was to liquidate the Police Department in the Interior Ministry, a step that led to a quick rise in violent crime and extremism. They dismissed or even arrested all the old tsarist governors, without giving clear guidelines to citizens as to how they should elect new governors. All of these actions paved the way for the Bolshevik party, which ultimately seized the power that was lying on the street in October 1917. There can be no feeling of pride associated with the February events and the subsequent abdication of Tsar Nikolai II. Rather, we should remember these events with a feeling of regret or even shame. The tsar was a victim of an elitist conspiracy, which he failed to prevent.

The Bolsheviks executed Nikolai and all of his family in 1918, a little more than a year after the February revolution. The “revolutionary masses” killed most of the military participants of the anti-Nikolai plot (including General N V Ruzsky, who had a direct influence on Nikolai during the latter’s abdication) in 1917-18. The politicians involved in the anti-monarchist conspiracy at least since 1915 (Gosduma leaders P N Milyukov and Prince G Ye Lvov, industrialist A I Konovalov) later lived more or less comfortable lives in emigration, as Russia was treading a bloody path from the Civil War to Stalin’s collectivisation. Some participants of the February events (like the more moderate Gosduma member V V Shulgin) outlived even the 1941-45 Great Patriotic War with Germany… a dramatic “remake” of World War I, which the February revolution is widely believed to have prevented Russia from winning. Shulgin later returned to the USSR, where he spent many years in jail and exile until 1976 (he died at the age of 98), bitterly condemning his Gosduma colleagues’ actions in February 1917.

Was the February revolution inevitable? During Soviet times, it was officially prohibited to even doubt the “historically predetermined character” of the events of 1917. Interestingly, the liberal press and academia in Russia still cling to this “fatalist” view. Amongst those who disagree is B N Mironov, history professor at St Petersburg State University and an author of several books on the Russian revolution of 1917 (the latest trend is to view both the February and the October coups as parts of the same process). He said in a phone interview:

There was no inevitability behind the events of February 1917. Russia wasn’t in military or economic crisis, the food situation in St Petersburg wasn’t good, but it wasn’t worse than in Paris, which had no revolution after all. Russia’s Achilles Heel was public opinion, carefully shaped for years by irresponsible radical intellectuals. The tsar’s main mistake was a lack of attention to public opinion inside the country, where an “anti-monarchist consensus” formed by January 1917. It came about due to rumours about “treason” on the part of [Tsaritsa Aleksandra Fyodorovna], her “spiritual father” G Ye Rasputin, and other members of the so-called “camarilla”.

Investigations by both the Provisional Government and the Soviet Cheka later never found any traces of this “treason”. Mironov noted:

I hope that modern Russian authorities would learn the lessons from 1917, to pay adequate attention to public opinion, and develop healthy pluralism in the political system, making it more flexible and better prepared to sustain all kinds of pressures.

10 February 2017

Dmitri Babich

Sputnik International

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201702101050558449-february-revolution-1917-good-intentions-tragic-fates/

Friday, 10 February 2017

10 February 2017. ENGLISH SUBTITLES Peoples Artist of Russia S V Bezrukov Recites Poetry of K M Simonov… Russia’s Spirit Incarnate

00-glory-to-the-soldier-liberator

“Glory to the Soldier-Liberator!” When (not if) Russia intervenes to put an end to the notional and evil Uniate junta in the Ukraine, this is how most “Ukrainians” will welcome them… as liberators from a feral and criminal oligarch cabal. America had best step aside…

******

____________________________________

People’s Artist of the Russian Federation S V Bezrukov recites powerful poetry by K M Simonov from the VOV. There are English subtitles… you have to hear the raw emotion that Sergei Vitalyevich gives to Konstantin Mikhailovich’s words. Bezrukov is one of the most-loved and most well-known actors in Russia today… every Russian knows who he is and what he stands for. Sergei Vitalyevich is a patriot, a true son of the Rodina, a modern successor to the great V S Lanovoi… unlike Hollywood, actors in Russia respect and honour the national patrimony. He stands for support of the patriot Peoples Republics in the Donbass… a stance that we should share.

You can stand with the American Establishment (and their running dogs amongst us like Potapov and Kishkovsky) or you can stand with Sergei Vitalyevich. I know where I stand… I confide that I’m far from being alone (although far too many in the American Orthodox diaspora have sold out to Anglo America and its pretty baubles and false non-culture). McCain, Graham, Clinton, Mattis, Mullen, and Trump had best take heed (Trump, so far, has refused to rein in the Uniate murderers… shall he?)… Russia has a record of defeating foreign aggressors…

BMD

Sunday, 5 February 2017

Tunguska Event: Russian Scientists Debunk Meteorite Theory

00-russia-tunguska-siberia-forest-050217

____________________________________

Many thought that Lake Cheko was an impact crater of a large explosion that occurred near the Tunguska Riva in Siberia, detected hundreds of miles away. However, Russian scientists found that Lake Cheko is at least 280-years-old, which means that the lake dates back hundreds of years before the Tunguska event. The so-called Tunguska event is still a mystery after 108 years. It’s the largest impact event on Earth in recorded history.

On the morning of 30 June 1908, a large fireball crossed the sky above the taiga over the Stony Tunguska River in Krasnoyarsk Krai in Siberia. A large explosion followed, which one could hear even in distant villages 1,200 kilometres (745 miles) away, and visible even in Britain. It flattened 2,000 square kilometres (770 square miles) of forest. During the following days, observed noticed strange phenomena in the skies above Europe, such as silvery glowing clouds, colourful sunsets, and a strange luminescence in the night. Soon, Russian newspapers reported that it was a meteorite impact, whilst foreign newspapers speculated on various scenarios from a volcanic eruption to a UFO accident. However, the unpredictable political situation in Russia at that time prevented further investigations.

After 13 years, the first research expedition led by Russian mineralogist Leonid Kulik visited the Tunguska site. Despite exploring the entire area, they didn’t discover a single great crater or meteoritic material. To explain this fact Kulik suggested that some natural extraterrestrial solid exploded in the Earth’s atmosphere. Over time, scientists proposed many other theories, some quite unusual, to explain the apparent lack of craters and missing extraterrestrial matter. In 2007, a research team of the University of Bologna in Italia led by Luca Gasperini proposed that a small lake in the region, Lake Cheko, might have been the impact crater. They based their assumptions on the fact that the lake is unusually deep for the region and its shape looks like a crater. Moreover, there’s no record of the lake existing before 1908. Gasperini’s evidence is controversial, as seen in one published answer to this research.

In July 2016, a team of Russian researchers from Krasnoyarsk and Novosibirsk explored Lake Cheko again to estimate its real age. Before the 20th century, there were only poor maps of the region so the lake might have existed before 1908, they presumed. One can estimate the age of a lake by assessing its bottom sediments. Last year, the scientists obtained a core sample of bottom sediments from the deepest trench of Lake Cheko for geochemical and biochemical analysis. Recently, their colleagues from the Institute of Geology and Mineralogy, Siberian Branch of The Russian Academy of Sciences (RAN) completed radioscopic analysis of the core samples.

The study showed that the deepest sample is about 280 years old, which means that the lake is probably even older because the researchers didn’t manage to get samples from the very bottom. Nevertheless, this proves that Lake Cheko is older than the Tunguska event and isn’t an impact crater of a supposed Tunguska meteorite impact. According to Denis Rogozin, a senior research worker at Krasnoyarsk Research Centre, Siberian Branch of the RAN, the results of the study will appear in a peer-reviewed scientific journal on 30 July 2017, the anniversary of the Tunguska event. The results of the Russian scientists’ research left academia without a clue; it meant that they might not find any evidence that the Tunguska event actually was a meteorite impact. It made the Tunguska event really mysterious again.

18 January 2017

Sputnik International

https://sputniknews.com/science/201701181049718416-tunguska-event-lake-cheko/

Orthodox-Sovereign Calendar… Memorable Days of Russia… 21 January/3 February

00-russia-baker-vov-leningrad-030217

____________________________________

1942 † Daniil Ivanovich Kyutinen

He was a baker during the siege of Leningrad and died of starvation in 1942 on the job at the age of 59-years-old. He died, but he didn’t eat a single gramme of unrationed bread. His grave is at the Shuvalov Cemetery.

3 February 2017

Igor Chernozatonsky

Facebook

Editor:

Show me a person’s heroes and I’ll show you their character. D I Kyutinen is a hero, worthy of respect. Godless filth such as Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, and Mike Pence are greedy punks, only intent on grasping as much as they can for themselves. There are people who respect them. What does that tell you about them? Nothing good, I’d warrant…

One of these things is NOT like the other…

BMD

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.