Communist party leaders in chronological order. How many general secretaries of the Central Committee of the CPSU were there in the USSR

The general secretaries (general secretaries) of the USSR... Once their faces were known to almost every inhabitant of our vast country. Today they are only part of the story. Each of these political figures committed actions and deeds that were later evaluated, and not always positively. It should be noted that general secretaries chose not the people, and the ruling elite. In this article, we present a list of the General Secretaries of the USSR (with photo) in chronological order.

I. V. Stalin (Dzhugashvili)

This politician was born in the Georgian city of Gori on December 18, 1879 in the family of a shoemaker. In 1922, during the lifetime of V.I. Lenin (Ulyanov), he was appointed the first general secretary. It is he who heads the list of general secretaries of the USSR in chronological order. However, it should be noted that while Lenin was alive, Joseph Vissarionovich played a secondary role in government. After the death of the “leader of the proletariat”, a serious struggle broke out for the highest state post. Numerous competitors of I. V. Dzhugashvili had every chance to take this post. But thanks to uncompromising, and sometimes even tough actions, political intrigues, Stalin emerged victorious from the game, he managed to establish a regime of personal power. Note that most of the applicants were simply physically destroyed, and the rest was forced to leave the country. For a rather short period of time, Stalin managed to take the country into "hedgehogs". In the early thirties, Joseph Vissarionovich became the sole leader of the people.

The policy of this Secretary General of the USSR went down in history:

• mass repression;
• collectivization;
• total dispossession.

In 37-38 years of the last century, mass terror was carried out, in which the number of victims reached 1,500,000 people. In addition, historians blame Iosif Vissarionovich for his policy of forced collectivization, mass repressions that took place in all sectors of society, and the forced industrialization of the country. Some traits of the leader's character affected the domestic policy of the country:

• sharpness;
• thirst for unlimited power;
• high conceit;
• intolerance for other people's opinions.

Cult of personality

You will find a photo of the Secretary General of the USSR, as well as other leaders who have ever held this post, in the presented article. It can be said with confidence that Stalin's personality cult had a very tragic effect on the fate of millions of the most different people: scientific and creative intelligentsia, government and party leaders, military.

For all this, during the thaw, Joseph Stalin was branded by his followers. But not all actions of the leader are reprehensible. According to historians, there are moments for which Stalin is worthy of praise. Of course, the most important thing is the victory over fascism. In addition, there was a fairly rapid transformation of the destroyed country into an industrial and even military giant. There is an opinion that if it were not for the personality cult of Stalin, now condemned by all, many accomplishments would be impossible. The death of Joseph Vissarionovich happened on March 5, 1953. Let's look at all the general secretaries of the USSR in order.

N. S. Khrushchev

Nikita Sergeevich was born in the Kursk province on April 15, 1894, in an ordinary working-class family. He took part in the civil war on the side of the Bolsheviks. He was a member of the CPSU since 1918. In the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine in the late thirties he was appointed secretary. Nikita Sergeevich headed the Soviet Union some time after Stalin's death. It should be said that he had to fight for this post with G. Malenkov, who chaired the Council of Ministers and at that time was actually the leader of the country. But still the leading role went to Nikita Sergeevich.

During the reign of Khrushchev N.S. as General Secretary of the USSR in the country:

1. There was a launch of the first man into space, all kinds of development of this sphere.
2. A huge part of the fields were planted with corn, thanks to which Khrushchev was nicknamed "corn".
3. During his reign, the active construction of five-story buildings began, which later became known as "Khrushchev".

Khrushchev became one of the initiators of the "thaw" in foreign and domestic policy, the rehabilitation of victims of repression. This politician made an unsuccessful attempt to modernize the party-state system. He also announced a significant improvement (along with capitalist countries) in living conditions for the Soviet people. At the XX and XXII Congresses of the CPSU, in 1956 and 1961. accordingly, he spoke harshly about the activities of Joseph Stalin and his cult of personality. However, the construction of a nomenklatura regime in the country, the violent dispersal of demonstrations (in 1956 - in Tbilisi, in 1962 - in Novocherkassk), the Berlin (1961) and Caribbean (1962) crises, the aggravation of relations with China, the building of communism by 1980 and the well-known political call to “catch up and overtake America!” - all this made Khrushchev's policy inconsistent. And on October 14, 1964, Nikita Sergeevich was relieved of his post. Khrushchev died on September 11, 1971, after a long illness.

L. I. Brezhnev

The third in order in the list of General Secretaries of the USSR is L. I. Brezhnev. Born in the village of Kamenskoye in the Dnepropetrovsk region on December 19, 1906. In the CPSU since 1931. He took the post of general secretary as a result of a conspiracy. Leonid Ilyich was the leader of the group of members of the Central Committee (Central Committee) that ousted Nikita Khrushchev. The era of Brezhnev's rule in the history of our country is characterized as stagnation. This happened for the following reasons:

• in addition to the military-industrial sphere, the development of the country was stopped;
• The Soviet Union began to lag significantly behind Western countries;
• repression and persecution began again, people again felt the grip of the state.

Note that during the reign of this politician there were both negative and favorable sides. At the very beginning of his reign, Leonid Ilyich played a positive role in the life of the state. He curtailed all the unreasonable undertakings created by Khrushchev in the economic sphere. In the first years of Brezhnev's rule, enterprises were given more independence, material incentives, and the number of planned indicators was reduced. Brezhnev tried to establish a good relationship with the United States, but he never succeeded. And after the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan, this became impossible.

period of stagnation

By the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s, Brezhnev's entourage cared more about their clan interests and often ignored the interests of the state as a whole. The politician's inner circle catered to the sick leader in everything, awarded him orders and medals. The reign of Leonid Ilyich lasted for 18 years, he was in power the longest, with the exception of Stalin. The eighties in the Soviet Union are characterized as a "period of stagnation". Although after the devastation of the 1990s, it is increasingly presented as a period of peace, state power, prosperity and stability. Most likely, these opinions have the right to be, because the entire Brezhnev period of government is heterogeneous in nature. L. I. Brezhnev was in his position until November 10, 1982, until his death.

Yu. V. Andropov

This politician spent less than 2 years at the post of General Secretary of the USSR. Yuri Vladimirovich was born in the family of a railway worker on June 15, 1914. His homeland is the Stavropol Territory, the city of Nagutskoye. Party member since 1939. Due to the fact that the politician was active, he quickly climbed the career ladder. At the time of Brezhnev's death, Yuri Vladimirovich led the State Security Committee.

He was nominated for the post of general secretary by his associates. Andropov set himself the task of reforming the Soviet state, trying to prevent the impending socio-economic crisis. But, unfortunately, I didn't have time. During the reign of Yuri Vladimirovich Special attention focused on labor discipline in the workplace. While serving as Secretary General of the USSR, Andropov opposed the numerous privileges that were granted to employees of the state and party apparatus. Andropov showed this by personal example, refusing most of them. After his death on February 9, 1984 (due to a long illness), this politician was the least criticized and most of all aroused the support of society.

K. U. Chernenko

On September 24, 1911, Konstantin Chernenko was born into a peasant family in the Yeysk province. He has been in the ranks of the CPSU since 1931. He was appointed to the post of General Secretary on February 13, 1984, immediately after Yu.V. Andropov. When governing the state, he continued the policy of his predecessor. He served as general secretary for about a year. The death of a politician occurred on March 10, 1985, the cause was a serious illness.

M.S. Gorbachev

The date of birth of the politician is March 2, 1931, his parents were simple peasants. Gorbachev's homeland is the village of Privolnoye in the North Caucasus. He joined the Communist Party in 1952. He acted as an active public figure, therefore he quickly moved along the party line. Mikhail Sergeevich completes the list of general secretaries of the USSR. He was appointed to this position on March 11, 1985. Later he became the only and last president of the USSR. The era of his reign went down in history with the policy of "perestroika". It provided for the development of democracy, the introduction of publicity, and the provision of economic freedom to the people. These reforms of Mikhail Sergeyevich led to mass unemployment, a total shortage of goods and the liquidation of a huge number of state-owned enterprises.

The collapse of the Union

During the reign of this politician, the USSR collapsed. All fraternal republics Soviet Union declared their independence. It should be noted that in the West, MS Gorbachev is considered perhaps the most respected Russian politician. Mikhail Sergeevich has the Nobel Peace Prize. Gorbachev remained in the post of general secretary until August 24, 1991. He headed the Soviet Union until December 25 of the same year. In 2018, Mikhail Sergeevich turned 87 years old.

General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU

Dictionaries define the word "apogee" not only as the highest point in the orbit of a spacecraft, but also as the highest degree, the flowering of something.

The new position of Andropov, of course, became the culminating point of his fate. For the history of the country - the last 15 months of Yuri Vladimirovich's life, the period of his tenure as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee - is a period of hopes, searches and unfulfilled, through no fault of Andropov, expectations.

At the Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU on November 12, 1982, Yu. V. Andropov was elected General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

He turned out to be the most informed leader of the USSR both on the internal situation in the country and in the field of interstate relations.

Another aspect of the Andropov phenomenon is the fact that he was in fact the first head of the secret service in world history to become head of state - on June 16, 1983, he was also elected Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.

As one of the participants of that Plenum A. S. Chernyaev recalled, when Yu. V. Andropov was the first to appear on the stage of the Sverdlovsk Hall of the Kremlin Palace, the whole hall stood up in unison.

When KU Chernenko read out the proposal of the Politburo on the recommendation to elect Yury Vladimirovich Andropov as General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, a burst of applause followed.

In his first speech in his new capacity at the Plenum of the Central Committee on November 12, 1982, Andropov emphasized:

– Soviet people unlimited confidence in his Communist Party. She trusts because for her there were and are no other interests than the vital interests of the Soviet people. To justify this trust means to move forward along the path of communist construction, to strive for the further flourishing of our socialist homeland.

Alas! one cannot but admit that just a few years later these words will be forgotten, and in society the mood of “doublethink” and “double-mindedness” will begin to grow rapidly and develop as a response to the hypocritical, coldly bureaucratic, formal “declarations” of party bosses, not confirmed by any specific deeds.

Three days later, at a mourning rally on Red Square at the funeral of L. I. Brezhnev, the new Soviet leader outlined the main directions for the future policy of the state:

- to do everything necessary to further raise the living standards of the people, develop the democratic foundations of Soviet society, strengthen the economic and defense might of the country, strengthen the friendship of the fraternal peoples of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics;

- the party and the state will unwaveringly defend the vital interests of our Motherland, maintain high vigilance, readiness to give a crushing rebuff to any attempt at aggression .... We are always ready for honest, equal and mutually beneficial cooperation with any state that so desires.

Of course, the Vice President of the United States, the Federal President of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Prime Minister of Japan, the Foreign Ministers of Great Britain and China, who were present at this event, drew conclusions from this political declaration of the new Secretary General.

As we have already noted, Andropov was well known abroad long before that day, including by foreign secret services, who immediately familiarized their governments with the “Andropov dossier” they had.

Nevertheless, the election of a new Soviet leader set the US president the task of conducting "reconnaissance in force" of the positions of the USSR on a number of issues.

So, on November 13, the day after Andropov was elected General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Ronald Reagan lifted the sanctions against the USSR, imposed on December 30, 1981 as a “punishment” for the introduction by the government of Wojciech Jaruzelsky of martial law in the Polish People’s Republic and the internment of activists of the anti-government Solidarity ".

But the period of easing US pressure on the USSR was short-lived.

“On the one hand, the enemy of the Soviet Union,” L. M. Mlechin wrote about R. Reagan, “on the other hand, in correspondence looks like a reasonable person who is not averse to improving relations ... Andropov could not even admit that Reagan was sincerely trying take some positive steps.

Or, unlike the author of the cited maxim, Yu. V. Andropov simply knew that on March 8, 1983, in his famous speech about the notorious “Evil Empire”, Reagan stated: “I believe that communism is another sad and strange division history of mankind, the last page of which is now being written. And, since Andropov knew that Reagan's words were backed up by very concrete deeds, which Peter Schweitzer later told the world about, he understood that special foresight, firmness and flexibility should be shown in relations with the United States.

Accusing Andropov of aggravating relations with the United States, L. M. Mlechin simply does not know or forgot about the escalation of military operations against OKSVA by Reagan, not only under the half-capable K. U. Chernenko, but also under the very digestible soft-bodied M. S. Gorbachev. About which there is a lot of evidence.

Let us recall only one of them: 1986, we were almost not involved in the war”, - former CIA officer Mark Sageman admitted to a Russian journalist.

And it would seem that in such a favorable environment, why did the United States need to use the "whip" method instead of a "carrot" of sweet promises???

In 1983 R. Reagan only decides on the deployment of American Pershing missiles in Europe and the start of work on the creation of a strategic missile defense system (the Strategic Defense Initiative program, SDI, called Star Wars by journalists). What broke the existing system of military-strategic parity, forced the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Treaty Organization to take retaliatory measures.

And the very first of them - Declaration of the Political Advisory Committee of the WTS about plans to expand the American military presence in Europe dated January 5, 1983 remained unanswered by the United States.

However, we will tell about the international activities of Yu. V. Andropov later.

On November 15, 1982, the long-planned Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU took place, which approved the plan for the socio-economic development of the country and the budget for next year. The new Secretary General spoke after two keynote speakers on these issues.

Foreign analysts noted that Andropov emphasized:

- I would like to draw your attention with all my might to the fact that for a number of important indicators, the planned targets for the first two years of the five-year plan were not fulfilled .... In general, comrades, there are many urgent tasks in the national economy. I, of course, do not have ready-made recipes for solving them ....

At that time, noted L. M. Mlechin, such a phrase made an impression: they were used to the fact that from a high rostrum they could only teach. But everyone liked it when Andropov said that it was necessary to strengthen discipline, stimulate good work with the ruble ....

Some authors who wrote about Andropov's desire to "capture the political Olympus" seem to have underestimated the significance of the key phrase of the new Secretary General about his lack of "ready-made recipes", which is confirmed by all his activities in this post. Besides in numerous speeches Andropov of that period of time, the goals and objectives of the actions taken were clearly formulated, unambiguously reflecting the interests and aspirations of the majority of citizens of our country, members of the CPSU.

So such assumptions-versions about the "seizure" of power are not confirmed by specific facts.

E. K. Ligachev, head of the department of organizational and party work of the Central Committee of the CPSU, recalled that the general secretary received tens of thousands of telegrams from people demanding to restore order in society, to increase the responsibility of leaders. It was a cry from the soul of the people, tired of the heartlessness and irresponsibility of the "servants of the people", other vicious phenomena that would later be called "stagnation".

In addition to the specialized automated information system “P” mentioned by us, Yuri Vladimirovich demanded that a weekly systematized summary of all complaints and appeals of citizens personally addressed to him be prepared for him, and then, through assistants, he gave appropriate instructions for each fact ...

Real " Feedback» the general secretary with the people was established.

Some wrote that Andropov "got rid of V. V. Fedorchuk, who was objectionable to him as chairman of the KGB of the USSR," transferring him to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

It seems that with such very superficial judgments, a number of very serious circumstances are overlooked.

Former member of the Politburo of the Central Committee A.N. Yakovlev was perplexed about the fact that a criminal case had been initiated against the former minister N.A. Shchelokov:

- All power was corrupt, why did he choose for himself only one object worthy of a fight? Why did not dare to touch others?

Without asking a completely appropriate question, what about Alexander Nikolayevich personally and his other colleagues in the Politburo done to fight the plague of corruption, leaving also on his conscience statement that “all power was corrupt”, we only emphasize that, unlike zealous journalists, law enforcement agencies are required to present evidence to the court criminal acts. And they are collected as a result of investigative actions or operational checks or developments that precede them. For what it is required, firstly, time.

Secondly, the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs was also called upon to fight official crimes, including "corruption" crimes, which at that time had mostly rather banal forms of giving or receiving a bribe.

Thirdly, which is well known, N. A. Shchelokov was not the only corrupt official in Russia and union republics ah the USSR, which was taken up by law enforcement agencies on the direct instructions of the new Secretary General.

"Resonant" criminal cases on corruption crimes, and not only in Moscow - at the suggestion of the KGB chairman - were initiated already in 1979 - such is the case of corruption in the Ministry of Fisheries and the Okean trading company, in the fall of 1982 the famous "case" of the director of the "Eliseevsky" grocery store Yu. K. Sokolov.

Let us recall the beginning in the fall of 1983 of the "Uzbek case", which revealed the monstrous facts of corruption in this republic, led by "Brezhnev's favorite" Sh. R. Rashidov!

So he dared, very much even dared Yuri Vladimirovich to "touch" yesterday's "untouchables"!

But the "stories" of N. A. Shchelokov and former secretary The Krasnodar Territory Committee of the CPSU S. F. Medunov was completed after the death of Andropov, apparently, the inertia of the movement that was still active had an effect: the new General Secretary Chernenko did not consider it possible to “pardon” the stolen party members ...

And yet, let us emphasize once again why it was the Ministry of Internal Affairs, headed by the former minister Shchelokov, who became the first object of a comprehensive check by the Main Military Prosecutor's Office?

Yes, because Andropov understood that only a civil service that is not corrupt, does not have dubious and openly criminal ties, can intensify the fight against crime!

In addition, the new General Secretary received about thirty thousand(half of the complaints received by the Central Committee of the CPSU in 1954 against the bodies of the NKVD - the MGB!), letters from citizens asking for protection from the arbitrariness of employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Upon learning of the election of Andropov as General Secretary, N. A. Shchelokov, not without reason, threw in his heart: “This is the end!”

On December 17, 1982, Andropov's former first deputy V. M. Chebrikov was appointed chairman of the KGB of the USSR.

On the same day, N. A. Shchelokov was dismissed, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs was headed by the recent chairman of the KGB, Vitaly Vasilyevich Fedorchuk.

Very soon, when conducting an audit of activities Economic management Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR, and then the initiation of a criminal case on identified crimes, Shchelokov became a suspect in complicity in them.

The searches carried out at the apartment and dacha of the former minister gave the investigation such convincing evidence that on June 15, 1983 he was removed from the Central Committee of the CPSU, and on November 6, 1984, that is, after the death of Yu. V. Andropov, he was deprived of the rank of army general and Hero of Socialist Labor.

In the conclusion of the Chief Military Prosecutor's Office in relation to N. A. Shchelokov, in addition to abuse of official position, it was noted:

“In total, Shchelokov’s criminal actions caused damage to the state in the amount of more than 560 thousand rubles. As compensation for the damage, he and his family members returned, and also seized by the investigating authorities, property in the amount of 296 thousand rubles, contributed in money - 126 thousand rubles ... ".

And this - with a ministerial salary of 1,500 rubles a month! Yes, here we are definitely talking about “especially large amounts” that have a special scale of assessment in the articles of the Criminal Code!

In the conclusion of the Main Military Prosecutor's Office, it was noted that a criminal case could not be initiated against Shchelokov N.A., in view of his suicide on December 13, 1984.

And as you know, what is the pop - such is the parish. Which generally characterizes the situation in the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the late 70s - early 80s of the last century.

In a suicide note addressed to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU K. U. Chernenko, Shchelokov wrote:

“I ask you not to allow the rampant philistine slander about me. This will involuntarily vilify the authority of leaders of all ranks, everyone experienced this before the arrival of the unforgettable Leonid Ilyich. Thank you for all the goodness and please excuse me.

With respect and love

N. Shchelokov.

Here, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU V. V. Fedorchuk was sent to rake up such “Augean stables”, which clearly indicates great confidence in him from Andropov.

N. M. Golushko, a veteran of the KGB of the USSR, who knew Vitaly Vasilyevich well, wrote: “Fedorchuk had a tough, paramilitary style in his work, which led to rigor, cane discipline, a lot of formalities and reports. In the Ministry of Internal Affairs, he increased professionalism, responsibility and discipline with perseverance and conviction, did a lot to get rid of corrupt employees, those who violated the law, had unofficial connections with the criminal world, and fought against concealing crimes. Not afraid to do business, which were high officials- party nomenklatura. During his service in the ministry (1983-1986), about 80,000 employees were dismissed from the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Those who worked with him note his industriousness, exorbitant exactingness, reaching the humiliation of people, but also honesty and disinterestedness.

Vitaly Vasilyevich himself recalled:

- When I began to deal with the situation in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, I got the impression that Shchelokov had not really been involved in business lately. I made a collapse. Crime grew, but this growth was hidden. A lot of bribe-takers have developed in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, especially in the traffic police service. We started to rake all this up, and then a bunch of statements about abuses rained down. I reported to the Central Committee in the prescribed manner about the signals connected with Shchelokov's abuses. Then this issue was submitted to the Politburo for consideration.

Andropov chaired the meeting. When the question arose whether to open a criminal case against Shchelokov, Tikhonov and Ustinov objected, Gromyko hesitated, and others were also in favor of putting everything on the brakes. But Andropov insisted that the case be initiated and the investigation entrusted to the Chief Military Prosecutor's Office.

Andropov, who was well aware of the unfavorable situation that had developed in the organs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in connection with Shchelokov’s many years of leadership and the principle of “stability and irremovability of personnel” being implemented, sent a large group of experienced KGB officers to the police authorities: on December 20, 1982, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU agreed with the proposal of the KGB on the selection and assignment to the state security agencies until April 1, 1983 to senior positions of experienced party workers under the age of 40, mainly with engineering and economic education.

And on December 27, 1982, the Politburo additionally decided to send more than 2,000 employees from the KGB to strengthen the apparatus of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - meaning the ministries of internal affairs of the Union republics, the departments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the territories and regions, including 100 officers from "the number of experienced operational and investigators."

Although, of course, not everyone, including those in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, were happy with such changes.

But these decisions and the activities of V. V. Fedorchuk and the Chekists seconded to the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs unequivocally contributed both to getting rid of compromised employees and strengthening law and order in the country, real protection of the rights of citizens from crimes and arbitrariness of officials.

We only note that under Fedorchuk, more than 30 thousand policemen were prosecuted, more than 60 thousand of them were dismissed from the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ....

These measures were an important step both towards cleansing the country's law enforcement system as a whole, restoring the trust of citizens to it, and towards intensifying the fight against crime and corruption, strengthening law and order, and increasing the effectiveness of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of Soviet people.

And it was the results of the work done that confirmed the expediency of establishing a special department of the KGB of the USSR for the operational service of the internal affairs bodies - Department "B" of the 3rd Main Directorate of the KGB and its corresponding units in the territorial departments of state security, which was carried out on August 13, 1983.

And this decision unequivocally contributed both to the deliverance of the Ministry of Internal Affairs from compromised employees, and to the strengthening of law and order in the country, the real protection of the rights of citizens from crimes and arbitrariness of officials.

Let me remark about "Andropov's tightening the screws" and "round-ups in work time for walkers." In Moscow, such a practice did indeed take place, but it was carried out, of course, not by "KGB officers" and by no means at the "initiative of the Secretary General." It is likely that this "Italian strike" was carried out precisely as a form of passive protest against the new Minister of the Interior, as a form of "imitation of vigorous activity" by negligent officials.

In a speech at the Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU November 22, 1982. Yu. V. Andropov, general secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, emphasized that the main thing “is the course towards improving the well-being of the working people ... taking care of the Soviet person, about the conditions of his work and life, about his spiritual development ...”.

In it, Andropov outlined those key points of development, which later became known as the “perestroika plan”:

- It is necessary to create such conditions - economic and organizational - that would stimulate high-quality, productive work, initiative and entrepreneurship. And vice versa, bad work, inactivity and irresponsibility should most directly and inevitably affect material remuneration, and official position, and the moral authority of workers.

It is necessary to strengthen the responsibility for the observance of national, national interests, to resolutely eradicate departmentalism and localism ...

A more resolute struggle must be waged against any violations of party, state and labor discipline. I am sure that in this we will meet with the full support of the Party and Soviet organizations, the support of all Soviet people.

And in the latter, the new General Secretary was not mistaken: his words were perceived with enthusiasm and faith in the coming changes, which created a special aura of confidence in favorable changes in society. That is why the authority of Andropov rapidly rose in society.

And foreign analysts, who closely followed the development of the situation in the Soviet Union, emphasized that Andropov paid attention precisely to “the struggle against any violations of party, state and labor discipline”, for he was well directly aware of how things really were in our society.

Feeling the serious threat emanating from the control of the working people and their public organizations, the partocrats, reluctantly, were forced to verbally declare “perestroika”, trying to drown the essence of the party demands of the moment in habitual verbiage and doxology.

In this inertia and psychological unpreparedness and the inability to really and resolutely take up concrete participation in the processes of development and stimulation of innovations and creative activity of the masses of working people, and lies, in our opinion, the objective need to replace the leading cadres who have lost both the trust of the collectives and have forgotten how to proactively solve non-trivial life tasks.

During the 15 months of Andropov's tenure as general secretary, 18 union ministers were removed, 37 only the first secretaries of the regional committees, regional committees and the Central Committee of the communist parties of the union republics, criminal cases were opened against a number of high party and government officials - another thing is that not all of them were brought to logical end due to his death.

Under Andropov, for the first time, the facts of stagnation in the economy, underfulfillment of plans, slowdown in scientific and technological progress were first made public and criticized, which would later be called the “revolutionary breakthrough” of perestroika ...

The partocrats who survived such a “shake-up” instantly felt a fertile opportunity to “relax” after the election of KU Chernenko as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. It was these cadres that were “inherited” to the last Secretary General M. S. Gorbachev.

“We have large reserves in the national economy,” Andropov continued, which will be discussed later. - These reserves should be sought in the acceleration of scientific and technological progress, in the wide and rapid introduction of the achievements of science, technology and advanced experience into production.

In his opinion, the combination of science and production should have been “promoted by planning methods and a system of material incentives. It is necessary that those who boldly go for the introduction of new technology do not find themselves in a disadvantageous position.

In an impartial analysis of the causes of the catastrophe of the Soviet Union, which occurred 9 years after the events described, it can be seen that it was preceded by the refusal - or inability, which, however, does not change the essence of the matter, of the Gorbachev leadership from using macro-planning methods and stimulating innovation. That is precisely the “know-how” (management technologies), which were already successfully used then in the most developed countries of the world and are now borrowed by us from the West as supposedly its “civilizational achievements”.

The real reason for the collapse of the USSR was the notorious "human factor" - the incompetence of the then leadership of the country - which turned into a fatal "error of the crew" and "ship captain".

As S. M. Rogov, director of the Institute for the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted on this occasion, “the unprecedented decline of the 90s was not the result of the intrigues of the CIA and the Pentagon, but of the incompetent and irresponsible policies of the then Russian leaders.”

And the American strategy of "crushing the geopolitical rival" acted only as a background, an external factor that created real challenges and threats for the USSR, which Gorbachev's leadership was powerless to resist.

However, few people seriously spoke about the real reasons for the collapse of the Soviet state. But even twenty-odd years after the “beginning of a new history of Russia” and other CIS states, which means the end of the existence of the USSR, there will undoubtedly be a serious discussion about this, as well as about the “social price”, the results and the “achieved results”. .

As well as the fact that many unexpected discoveries and confessions await us here. But, I repeat, this is a matter for the not so distant future.

But, returning to November 22, 1982, we note that with regard to the tasks facing the country and society, Andropov admitted with the utmost frankness:

- I, of course, do not have ready-made recipes for solving them. But it is for all of us - the Central Committee of the Party - to find these answers. Find, summarizing domestic and world experience, accumulating the knowledge of the best practitioners and scientists. In general, slogans alone will not move things forward. Much organizational work is needed by party organizations, economic managers, engineering and technical workers ....

Faithful to the principles of collegial leadership, faith in the "living creativity of the masses", Yu. V. Andropov intended to rely precisely on the specific knowledge of specialists and managers, not declaring "party-state decisions", as was often the case in previous years, but developing them on the basis of a deep analysis and an objective forecast of the country's available resources ....

Hence the specific tasks and instructions to the State Planning Commission, the creation in March 1983 of the Commission for the preparation economic reform under the leadership of the secretaries of the Central Committee of the CPSU N. I. Ryzhkov and M. S. Gorbachev ... (We note right away that after the death of Yu. V. Andropov, this work ceased.)

And at the end of his speech, the new General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU again emphasized:

- It is necessary to further develop socialist democracy in its broadest sense, that is, an ever more active participation of the working masses in the management of state and public affairs. And, of course, there is no need to prove here how important it is to take care of the needs of workers, of their working and living conditions.

The last words of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, addressed to the party leaders, testify both to the fact that he knew well the state of affairs in social sphere on the ground, and about what will be the main criterion for evaluating the performance of managers.

Unfortunately, these plans of Andropov were not destined to come true….

It is easy to see that in four years the new General Secretary MS Gorbachev will begin his political career by repeating these words of Yu. V. Andropov. But, unlike Yuri Vladimirovich, for him political rhetoric was needed only for the populist win of sympathy, and not for the implementation of specific socio-economic programs. This is the difference in the approaches and positions of these last two general secretaries of the CPSU.

And here the time has come to tell about the last secret of Yu. V. Andropov.

Not his personal secret, but the carefully guarded and guarded secret of my beloved, long-suffering, slandered and slandered Motherland.

After Yu. V. Andropov was elected General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union The Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress requested a report from the CIA on the state of the Soviet economy, where "both its potentialities and vulnerabilities would be presented."

In presenting this report to Congress, Senator William Proxmyer, Vice Chairman of the Subcommittee on International Trade, Finance, and Economic Interest, felt it necessary to emphasize the following key findings from the CIA analysis(cited translation from English):

“In the USSR, there is a steady decline in the rate of economic growth, however, this growth will remain positive for the foreseeable future.

The economy is performing poorly, and there is often a departure from economic efficiency requirements. However, this does not mean that the Soviet economy is losing viability or dynamism..

Despite the fact that there are discrepancies between economic plans and their implementation in the USSR, the economic collapse of this country is not even a remote possibility” (!!!).

And how much work and effort had to be made to make the “impossible possible”!!!

But these are already questions for other historical figures and characters.

For in the knowledge of history, as is well known, the vulgar-rectilinear principle does not “work”: post hoc, ad hoc - after that, therefore - therefore!

Let us continue, however, quoting the extremely important document of American intelligence that we have named.

“Usually, Western specialists dealing with the Soviet economy focus on its problems,” the senator continued, “however, the danger of such a one-sided approach lies in the fact that, ignoring positive factors, we get an incomplete picture and draw incorrect conclusions based on it.

The Soviet Union is our main potential adversary, and this gives even more reason to have an accurate and objective assessment of the state of its economy. The worst thing we can do is to underestimate the economic power of our main adversary.

You need to be aware that Soviet Union, although it is weakened by the inefficient functioning of the agricultural sector and burdened with high defense spending, in economic terms It ranks second in the world in terms of gross national product, has numerous and well-prepared productive forces, and is highly developed industrially.

The USSR also has vast mineral reserves, including oil, gas, and relatively scarce minerals and precious metals. We should seriously look at things and think about what might happen if the development trends of the Soviet economy turn from negative into positive.”

Concluding the presentation of the CIA report, William Proxmyer noted that he “should, in all persuasiveness, explain to members of the US Congress and the American public the real state of the Soviet economy, about which they still had a very vague idea. It also follows from the report that there is at least as much uncertainty in forecasting the economic development of the Soviet Union as in the prospects for our own economy.

We note, however, that certain conclusions and provisions of this report formed the basis of the strategy economic war against the USSR, unleashed by the administration of R. Reagan and especially intensified in 1986–1990.

Let us immediately cite some statistical data for the first quarter of 1983 characterizing the development of the Soviet economy.

The growth of industrial production in January-March amounted to 4.7% compared to the same period in 1982, while labor productivity increased by 3.9%.

These figures gave hope that the country's economic situation could be "raised", set the pace of sustainable development.

The next landmark political speech by Yu. V. Andropov was a report at a solemn meeting dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics December 21, 1982.

In it, the Secretary General stated that against the background of the close intertwining of the interests of the republics, “mutual assistance and interrelations are becoming more and more fruitful, directing the creative efforts of the nations and peoples of the Soviet Union into a single channel. The all-round development of each of the socialist nations in our country naturally leads to their ever greater rapprochement ... And this, comrades, is not just addition, this is a multiple multiplication of our creative forces.

But "success in solving national question does not mean that all problems have disappeared”, which is why the development of socialism “must also include a well-thought-out, scientifically substantiated national policy”.

Life shows, the Secretary General stated, “that the economic and cultural progress all nations and nationalities inevitably accompanied by the growth of their national identity. This is a natural, objective process. It is important, however, that natural pride in the successes achieved should not turn into national arrogance or arrogance, should not give rise to a tendency towards isolation, a disrespectful attitude towards other nations and nationalities. And such negative phenomena still occur. And it would be wrong to explain it only by relics of the past. They are sometimes fed by our own miscalculations in the work. Here, comrades, there are no trifles. Everything is important here - both the attitude to the language, and to the monuments of the past, and the interpretation historical events and how we are transforming villages and cities, affecting the working and living conditions of people.”

It is absolutely justified that subsequent events in our country showed that Andropov called the task of educating people in the spirit of mutual respect and friendship of all nations and nationalities, love for the Motherland, internationalism, solidarity with the working people of other countries as an enduring task. “We need to persistently seek,” he emphasized, “new methods and forms of work that meet today’s requirements, making it possible to make the mutual enrichment of cultures even more fruitful, to open to all people even wider access to all the best that the culture of each of our peoples gives .... A convincing, concrete demonstration of our achievements, a serious analysis of new problems constantly being born by life, freshness of thought and word - this is the way to improve all our propaganda, which must always be truthful and realistic, as well as interesting, intelligible, and therefore more effective. .

Despite the presence of many serious difficulties in social development, for the first time in in full published by the new general secretary, Andropov optimistically stated:

– We boldly talk about existing problems and unresolved tasks because we know for sure that these problems, these tasks are within our reach, we can and must solve them. A mood for deeds, and not for big words - that's what is needed today in order to make the great and mighty Union of Soviet Socialist Republics even stronger.

Today it is somehow not customary to remember that many initiatives of the Soviet Union, based on the principles of the peaceful existence of states with different socio-political systems, received wide international recognition, were included in dozens of international documents that guaranteed peace and consistent stable development on different continents .

And it is precisely the rejection of these principles and obligations by subsequent Soviet leadership led by M. S. Gorbachev caused the effect of the collapse of the supporting structures of the world order, the consequences of which are still felt on the planet, including far beyond the borders of the former Soviet republics of the USSR.

It is an indisputable fact that Andropov, like no other leader of the country of that time, enjoyed great prestige, trust, popularity and even love of a significant part of the population of the Soviet Union.

The German researcher D. Kreichmar noted on this occasion that "a significant part of the intelligentsia associated great hopes with the election of Andropov to the post of general secretary."

Even L. M. Mlechin, who does not feel much sympathy for the KGB chairman, is forced to admit: “The appearance of Andropov at the head of the party and the state promised changes. I liked his taciturnity and severity. They gave the impression of promises to restore order and put an end to corruption.”

In January 1983, the volume of industrial production in the USSR grew by 6.3%, and products Agriculture- by 4% compared to the previous year.

“The recent chief of the KGB,” wrote R. A. Medvedev, “managed not only to quickly consolidate power, but also to win the undoubted respect of a significant part of the population,” while “different and conflicting hopes were associated with his activities in the new field. Some expected a quick restoration of order in the form of, above all, tough measures against rampant crime and the mafia, the eradication of corruption and the strengthening of shattered labor discipline.

Andropov's phrase, which has become almost a textbook, is well known that "we still have not studied the society in which we live and work in due measure, we have not fully revealed its inherent patterns, especially economic ones."

No matter how paradoxical it may seem, it seems that the former chairman of the KGB of the USSR turned out to be right in this statement as well.

And in mid-April 1983, a completely bewildered BBC radio commentator told a Soviet audience that these facts "testify to the colossal potentialities that socialism conceals in itself, and which its leaders themselves did not seem to suspect."

In February 1983, at the request of R. I. Kosolapov, editor-in-chief of the main theoretical body of the Central Committee of the CPSU "Communist", Andropov shared with readers his vision of the complex problems of modern social development in the article "The Teachings of Karl Marx and Some Issues of Socialist Construction in the USSR".

In it he noted:

“For thousands of years, people have been looking for a way to a just reorganization of society, to get rid of exploitation, violence, material and spiritual poverty. Outstanding minds gave themselves to this search. Generation after generation sacrificed their lives in the name of this goal, fighters for the happiness of the people. But it was in the titanic activity of Marx that the work of the great scientist first merged with the practice of the selfless struggle of the leader and organizer of the revolutionary movement of the masses.

The philosophical system that Marx created marked a revolution in the history of social thought: “Marx’s teaching, presented in the organic integrity of dialectical and historical materialism, political economy, the theory of scientific communism, was a genuine revolution in worldview and at the same time lit the way for the deepest social revolutions. ... Behind the visible, seeming, behind the phenomenon, he discerned the essence. He tore the veil from the secrets of capitalist production, the exploitation of labor by capital - he showed how surplus value is created and by whom it is appropriated.

Some of today's readers may be surprised by such "panegyrics" to the allegedly "refuted" by historical experience scientific and theoretical doctrine. Let us grieve him by indicating only two facts.

On March 8, 1983, in a famous speech about the notorious "evil empire," Reagan declared, "I believe that communism is another sad and strange section of human history, the last page of which is being written now."

But at the economic faculties of the leading universities of the world and in the 21st century, economic theory K. Marx, which, as you know, is only part of his ideological and theoretical heritage.

They study, among other things, to show the methodology and creative laboratory of one of the greatest thinkers of the 19th century, recognized by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

In the 90s. journalists, analysts and economists, in order to explain many socio-economic processes, collisions and collapses that took place in Russia and other CIS countries, turned to the theory of "accumulation of initial capital" by K. Marx, which indicates that it has passed a rigorous test for vitality, real reflection objective processes, social practice for more than a hundred years.

Yu. V. Andropov emphasized that Marx “carefully peered into the life of individual peoples, he constantly looked for its interrelationships with the life of the whole world,” which indicates that the new General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU fully understood the significance of globalization, which was beginning to gain momentum.

And after the socialist revolution in October 1917 in Russia, "scientific socialism, created by Marx, merged with the living practice of millions of working people who are building a new society."

Still quite “modern” are the following words of Andropov that “the ideologists of the bourgeoisie and revisionism to this day are building entire systems of arguments, trying to prove that the new society created in the USSR, in other fraternal countries, turned out to be inconsistent with that image socialism that Marx saw. They say that reality, they say, has diverged from the ideal. But, consciously or unknowingly, they lose sight of the fact that Marx himself, in developing his doctrine, was least of all guided by the demands of some abstract ideal of a clean, smooth "socialism". He derived his ideas about the future system from an analysis of the objective contradictions of large-scale capitalist production. Just like that, the only one scientific approach allowed him to correctly identify the main features of a society that was yet to be born in cleansing thunderstorms social revolutions XX century".

Speaking about the real problems of the formation of new public relations, Andropov frankly admitted: “Historical experience shows that the transformation of “mine”, private property, into “ours”, common is not an easy task. The revolution in property relations is by no means reduced to a one-time act, as a result of which the main means of production become public property. Getting the right to be a master and becoming a master - real, wise, diligent - are far from the same thing.. The people who have accomplished the socialist revolution will have to master their new position as the supreme and undivided owner of all social wealth for a long time - to master it both economically and politically, and, if you like, psychologically, developing a collectivist consciousness and behavior. After all, only a person who is not indifferent to his own labor successes, well-being, authority, but also the affairs of his comrades at work, the labor collective, the interests of the whole country, the working people of the whole world, is socialist-educated.

Speaking about the transformation of "mine" into "ours", we must not forget that this is a long multifaceted process that should not be simplified. Even when socialist production relations are finally established, some people still retain, and even reproduce individualistic habits, the desire to profit at the expense of others, at the expense of society.

Continuing a frank conversation about the problems and contradictions of contemporary society, Andropov noted that “a significant proportion of the shortcomings that sometimes disrupt normal work in certain areas of our national economy are caused by deviations from the norms and requirements of economic life, the basis of which is socialist ownership of means of production".

Asking why the country's economy is facing serious difficulties, Andropov declared uncharacteristically frankly: “First of all, it is impossible not to see that our work aimed at improving and restructuring the economic mechanism, forms and methods of management has lagged behind the requirements imposed by the achieved level of material and technical , social, spiritual development of Soviet society. And this is the main point. At the same time, of course, the impact of such factors as, for example, the shortfall in obtaining a significant amount of agricultural products over the past four years, the need to allocate ever-increasing financial and material resources for the extraction of fuel, energy and raw materials in the northern and eastern regions of the country is also having an effect.

Therefore, “the main task today is to think over and consistently implement measures that can give more scope for the colossal creative forces inherent in our economy. These measures must be carefully prepared and realistic, which means that in their development it is necessary to proceed unswervingly from the laws of development of the economic system of socialism. The objective nature of these laws requires getting rid of all sorts of attempts to manage the economy by methods alien to its nature. It is not out of place here to recall Lenin's warning about the danger that lies in the naive belief of some workers that they can solve all their tasks by "communist decreeing."

The interests of society as a whole, emphasized the new Soviet leader, are the most important guideline for the development of the economy... But it does not follow from this, of course, that in the name of the common good of socialism, the interests of personal, local, specific needs of various social groups are allegedly suppressed or ignored. Not at all. " Idea, - as Marx and Engels emphasized - invariably put herself to shame as soon as she separated from " interest”(Marx K., Engels F. Soch., vol. 2, p. 89). One of the most important tasks of improving the national economic mechanism is precisely to ensure that these interests are accurately taken into account, to achieve their optimal combination with public interests, and thus to use them as a driving force for the growth of the Soviet economy, raising its efficiency, labor productivity, and strengthening the economic and the defense might of the Soviet state... In other words, not at the expense of the working people, but precisely in the interests of the working people, we are solving the problems of increasing economic efficiency. This does not simplify our work, but it allows us to conduct it, relying on the inexhaustible strength, knowledge, and creative energy of the entire Soviet people.

“In the aggregate, all this means - which was very quickly forgotten or simply - not even understood by Andropov's "heirs" - a fundamentally new quality of life for workers, which is by no means reduced to material comfort, but absorbs the entire spectrum of full-blooded human existence.

Andropov warned: "In general, the so-called elementary truths of Marxism should be handled very carefully, because life itself severely punishes for misunderstanding or forgetting them."

We all had to be convinced of the validity of these words, realizing the social losses that fell on the peoples of our country as a result of the ill-conceived and destructive political and social reforms of 1989–1994.

It was unusual for the time of post-Brezhnev "developed socialism" to read the words of the head of the party and the state about deficit goods and services "with all its ugly consequences, causing the just indignation of the working people."

But Andropov frankly warned: “Our indispensable duty has been and will be work in a twofold direction: firstly, the steady growth social production and the rise on this basis of the material and cultural standard of living of the people; secondly, every possible assistance in raising the material and spiritual needs of the Soviet people.

From the book Thus Spoke Kaganovich author Chuev Felix Ivanovich

SECRETARY GENERAL February 24, 1991. ( Phone conversation).– I literally wanted to ask on the go. Krestinsky was written by the General Secretary? - What, what? - The term "General Secretary" was used from Stalin or earlier? - From Stalin. Yes. Only from him ... - To me

From the book Yuri Andropov: Reformer or Destroyer? author Shevyakin Alexander Petrovich

Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU On November 23, 1962, Yu. V. Andropov, head of the Department of the Central Committee of the CPSU, was elected Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Recommending his candidacy to the Plenum of the Central Committee, N. S. Khrushchev noted: - As for Comrade Andropov, he, in essence, has long been performing the functions of secretary of the Central Committee. So,

From the book The Struggle and Victories of Joseph Stalin author Romanenko Konstantin Konstantinovich

CHAPTER 13 THE GENERAL SECRETARY Whatever may be said about Stalin, he is the most resourceful and most realistic politician of our time. From an article in the English magazine "Contemporary Review" A war that lasted more than six years, in which everyone participated peoples of Russia,

From the book The Andropov Paradox. "There was order!" author Khlobustov Oleg Maksimovich

Part I. Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU ... Memory is the basis of the mind. Alexei Tolstoy Someday, probably, an exhaustive history of our era will be written. One can be sure that the undoubted fact will be inscribed in golden letters in this history that without a firm peace-loving policy

author Vostryshev Mikhail Ivanovich

GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE CPSU Central Committee IOSIF VISSARIONOVICH STALIN (1879-1953) The son of the peasants Vissarion Ivanovich and Ekaterina Georgievna Dzhugashvili. Born (officially) on December 9/21, 1879 in the small ancient town of Gori, Tiflis province, in the family of an artisan. According to entries in

From the book All Rulers of Russia author Vostryshev Mikhail Ivanovich

GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE CC CPSU LEONID ILYICH BREZHNEV (1906–1982) Born on December 19, 1906 (January 1, 1907 according to the new style) in the village of Kamenskoye (later the city of Dneprodzerzhinsk) of the Yekaterinoslav province in a working-class family. Russian. In 1923-1927 he studied in Kursk

From the book All Rulers of Russia author Vostryshev Mikhail Ivanovich

YURI VLADIMIROVICH ANDROPOV, GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE CPSU Central Committee (1914–1984) Born on June 2/15, 1914 in the village of Nagutskaya, Stavropol Territory, in the family of an employee. By nationality - a Jew. Father, Vladimir Lieberman, changed his surname to "Andropov" after 1917, worked as a telegraph operator and

From the book All Rulers of Russia author Vostryshev Mikhail Ivanovich

GENERAL SECRETARY OF THE CC CPSU KONSTANTIN USTINOVICH CHERNENKO (1911-1985) The son of a peasant, later a buoy maker on the Yenisei River, Ustin Demidovich Chernenko and Kharitina Fedorovna Terskaya. Born on September 11/24, 1911 in the village of Bolshaya Tes, Minusinsk district, Yenisei province.

author Medvedev Roy Alexandrovich

Chapter 3 Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU

From the book Political Portraits. Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov author Medvedev Roy Alexandrovich

Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Andropov's role in solving the problems of international politics increased after the 22nd Congress of the CPSU, at which he was elected a member of the Central Committee. Yu. V. Andropov and his department took an active part in the preparation of the main documents of this congress. At the beginning of 1962 Andropov

From the book Political Portraits. Leonid Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov author Medvedev Roy Alexandrovich

Yu. V. Andropov - Second Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU In April and early May 1982, Yu. Andropov, while remaining Chairman of the KGB, had a considerable influence on the work of the ideological departments of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Brezhnev was still in the hospital, K. Chernenko and A. Kirilenko were also ill. Cabinet

From the book of the USSR: from devastation to world power. Soviet breakthrough author Boff Giuseppe

General Secretary Stalin The 13th Congress of the RCP(b) (May 1924) very carefully introduced Lenin's famous "testament" and his demand to deprive Stalin of the post of general secretary. The document was not read out at the plenary meeting: it was communicated to individual delegations

From the book Life and Reforms author Gorbachev Mikhail Sergeevich

Chapter 8. Andropov: the new General Secretary is in action These were extremely busy days. Andropov called up and met with people. First of all, it was necessary to decide what to do with the report prepared for Brezhnev. Of course, it should only be used for

From the book Life and Reforms author Gorbachev Mikhail Sergeevich

Chapter 9 General Secretary "Manuscripts Don't Burn" Throughout my life I have never kept a diary, but I have constantly used notebooks, of which I have accumulated over the years. This was my personal working lab. After leaving the presidency in December 1991,

Due to the stampede that occurred during his coronation, many people died. So the name "Bloody" was attached to the kindest philanthropist Nikolai. In 1898, caring for world peace, he issued a manifesto in which he called on all countries of the world to completely disarm. After that, a special commission met in The Hague to develop a number of measures that could further prevent bloody clashes between countries and peoples. But the peace-loving emperor had to fight. First, in the First World War, then the Bolshevik coup broke out, as a result of which the monarch was overthrown, and then shot with his family in Yekaterinburg.

The Orthodox Church canonized Nicholas Romanov and his entire family as saints.

Lvov Georgy Evgenievich (1917)

After the February Revolution, he became Chairman of the Provisional Government, which he headed from March 2, 1917 to July 8, 1917. Subsequently, he emigrated to France after the October Revolution.

Alexander Fedorovich (1917)

He was the chairman of the Provisional Government after Lvov.

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (Ulyanov) (1917 - 1922)

After the revolution in October 1917, in a short 5 years a new state was formed - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922). One of the main ideologists and leader of the Bolshevik coup. It was V. I. who proclaimed two decrees in 1917: the first on the cessation of the war, and the second on the abolition of private land ownership and the transfer of all territories that previously belonged to the landowners for the use of workers. He died before reaching the age of 54 in Gorki. His body rests in Moscow, in the Mausoleum on Red Square.

Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin (Dzhugashvili) (1922 - 1953)

General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party. When the country was established a totalitarian regime and a bloody dictatorship. Forcibly carried out collectivization in the country, driving peasants into collective farms and depriving them of their property and passports, in fact resuming serfdom. At the cost of hunger, he arranged industrialization. During his reign, arrests and executions of all dissidents, as well as "enemies of the people," were massively carried out in the country. Most of the country's entire intelligentsia perished in Stalin's Gulags. Won Second world war, defeating Nazi Germany with the allies. Died of a stroke.

Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev (1953 - 1964)

After Stalin's death, having entered into an alliance with Malenkov, he removed Beria from power, and took the place of the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He debunked Stalin's personality cult. In 1960, at a meeting of the UN Assembly, he called on countries to disarm and asked for China to be included in the Security Council. But the foreign policy of the USSR since 1961 has been getting tougher. The agreement on a three-year moratorium on nuclear weapons testing was violated by the USSR. The Cold War began with Western countries and, first of all, with the United States.

Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev (1964 - 1982)

He led a conspiracy against N. S., as a result of which he removed him to the post of general secretary. The time of his reign is called "stagnation". Total shortage of absolutely all consumer goods. The whole country stands in kilometer queues. Corruption flourishes. Many public figures persecuted for dissent leave the country. This wave of emigration was later called the "brain drain". The last public appearance of L. I. took place in 1982. He took the Parade on Red Square. In the same year he died.

Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov (1983 - 1984)

Former head of the KGB. Having become the general secretary, he treated his position accordingly. During working hours, he banned the appearance of adults on the streets without a good reason. Died of kidney failure.

Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko (1984 - 1985)

No one in the country took seriously the appointment of the seriously ill 72-year-old Chernenok to the post of general secretary. He was considered a kind of "intermediate" figure. He spent most of his reign of the USSR in the Central Clinical Hospital. He became the last ruler of the country, who was buried at the Kremlin wall.

Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev (1985 - 1991)

The first and only president of the USSR. He began a series of democratic reforms in the country, called "Perestroika". He freed the country from the "Iron Curtain", stopped the persecution of dissidents. There is freedom of speech in the country. Opened the market for trade with Western countries. Ended the Cold War. Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin (1991 - 1999)

Twice elected to the post of President of the Russian Federation. Economic crisis in the country, caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union exacerbated the contradictions in the political system of the country. Yeltsin's opponent was vice-president Rutskoi, who, by storming the Ostankino television center and the Moscow mayor's office, launched a coup d'état, which was suppressed. I was seriously ill. During the illness, the country was temporarily ruled by V. S. Chernomyrdin. B. I. Yeltsin announced his resignation in his New Year's address to the Russians. Passed away in 2007.

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin (1999 - 2008)

Yeltsin appointed acting. president, after the election became the full president of the country.

Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev (2008 - 2012)

Protege V.V. Putin. He acted as president for four years, after which V.V. became president again. Putin.

Plan
Introduction
1 Joseph Stalin (April 1922 - March 1953)
1.1 Post of General Secretary and Stalin's victory in the struggle for power (1922-1934)
1.2 Stalin - the sovereign ruler of the USSR (1934-1951)
1.3 The last years of Stalin's rule (1951-1953)
1.4 Death of Stalin (5 March 1953)
1.5 March 5, 1953 - Stalin's associates dismiss the leader an hour before his death

2 Struggle for power after Stalin's death (March 1953 - September 1953)
3 Nikita Khrushchev (September 1953 - October 1964)
3.1 Post of First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU
3.2 First attempt to remove Khrushchev from power (June 1957)
3.3 Removal of Khrushev from power (October 1964)

4 Leonid Brezhnev (1964-1982)
5 Yuri Andropov (1982-1984)
6 Konstantin Chernenko (1984-1985)
7 Mikhail Gorbachev (1985-1991)
7.1 Gorbachev - general secretary
7.2 Election of Gorbachev as Chairman of the USSR Supreme Council
7.3 Position of Deputy Secretary General
7.4 Ban on the CPSU and the abolition of the post of general secretary

8 List of General (First) Secretaries of the Central Committee of the Party - officially holding such a position
Bibliography

Introduction

Party history
October Revolution
war communism
New economic policy
Stalinism
Khrushchev thaw
The era of stagnation
perestroika

The General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU (in informal use and everyday speech is often abbreviated to General Secretary) is the most significant and the only non-collegiate position in the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The position was introduced as part of the Secretariat on April 3, 1922, at the Plenum of the Central Committee of the RCP(b), elected by the XI Congress of the RCP(b), when I. V. Stalin was approved in this capacity.

From 1934 to 1953, this position was not mentioned at the plenums of the Central Committee during the elections of the Secretariat of the Central Committee. From 1953 to 1966, the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee was elected, and in 1966 the post of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee was again established.

Post of General Secretary and Stalin's victory in the struggle for power (1922-1934)

The proposal to establish this post and appoint Stalin to it was made, on the idea of ​​Zinoviev, by a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee, Lev Kamenev, in agreement with Lenin, Lenin was not afraid of any competition from the uncultured and politically insignificant Stalin. But for the same reason, Zinoviev and Kamenev made him general secretary: they considered Stalin a politically insignificant person, they saw him as a convenient assistant, but by no means a rival.

Initially, this position meant only the leadership of the party apparatus, while Lenin, the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, formally remained the leader of the party and government. In addition, leadership in the party was considered inextricably linked with the merits of the theorist; therefore, following Lenin, Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev and Bukharin were considered the most prominent "leaders", while Stalin was not seen to have either theoretical merits or special merits in the revolution.

Lenin highly valued Stalin's organizational skills, but Stalin's despotic demeanor and his rudeness towards N. Krupskaya made Lenin repent of his appointment, and in the "Letter to the Congress" Lenin declared that Stalin was too rude and should be removed from the post of general secretary. But due to illness, Lenin retired from political activity.

Stalin, Zinoviev and Kamenev organized a triumvirate based on opposition to Trotsky.

Before the beginning of the XIII Congress (held in May 1924), Lenin's widow Nadezhda Krupskaya handed over the Letter to the Congress. It was announced at a meeting of the Council of Elders. Stalin announced his resignation at this meeting for the first time. Kamenev proposed to resolve the issue by voting. The majority voted in favor of keeping Stalin in the post of general secretary, only Trotsky's supporters voted against.

After the death of Lenin, Leon Trotsky claimed the role of the first person in the party and the state. But he lost to Stalin, who masterfully played the combination, winning Kamenev and Zinoviev over to his side. And Stalin's real career begins only from the moment when Zinoviev and Kamenev, desiring to seize Lenin's inheritance and organize the struggle against Trotsky, chose Stalin as an ally who must be had in the party apparatus.

On December 27, 1926, Stalin submitted his resignation from the post of General Secretary: “I ask you to release me from the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee. I declare that I can no longer work in this post, unable to work in this post anymore. The resignation was not accepted.

It is interesting that Stalin in official documents never signed the full name of the position. He signed as "Secretary of the Central Committee" and was addressed as Secretary of the Central Committee. When the Encyclopedic reference book "Figures of the USSR and revolutionary movements Russia" (prepared in 1925 - 1926), then there, in the article "Stalin", Stalin was presented as follows: "since 1922, Stalin has been one of the secretaries of the Central Committee of the party, in which position he remains now.", That is, not a word about the post of general secretary.Since the author of the article was Stalin's personal secretary, Ivan Tovstukha, it means that such was Stalin's desire.

By the end of the 1920s, Stalin had concentrated such significant personal power in his hands that the position became associated with the highest post in the party leadership, although the Charter of the CPSU (b) did not provide for its existence.

When Molotov was appointed Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR in 1930, he asked to be relieved of his duties as Secretary of the Central Committee. Stalin agreed. And the duties of the second secretary of the Central Committee began to be performed by Lazar Kaganovich. He replaced Stalin in the Central Committee..

Stalin - the sovereign ruler of the USSR (1934-1951)

According to R. Medvedev, in January 1934, at the 17th Congress, an illegal bloc was formed mainly from the secretaries of the regional committees and the Central Committee of the National Communist Parties, who, more than anyone else, felt and understood the fallacy of Stalin's policy. Proposals were made to move Stalin to the post of chairman of the Soviet people's commissars or the Central Executive Committee, and to elect S.M. Kirov. A group of congress delegates discussed this with Kirov, but he resolutely refused, and without his consent the whole plan became unrealistic.

Molotov, Vyacheslav Mikhailovich 1977: “ Kirov is a weak organizer. He is a good crowd. And we treated him well. Stalin loved him. I say that he was Stalin's favorite. The fact that Khrushchev cast a shadow on Stalin, as if he had killed Kirov, is vile ».

Despite the importance of Leningrad and Leningrad region their leader Kirov was never the second man in the USSR. The position of the second most important person in the country was occupied by the chairman of the Council of People's Commissars, Molotov. At the plenum after the congress, Kirov, like Stalin, was elected secretary of the Central Committee. 10 months later, Kirov died in the Smolny building from a shot by a former party worker.

Since 1934, the mention of the post of General Secretary has disappeared from the documents altogether. At the Plenums of the Central Committee held after the 17th, 18th and 19th Party Congresses, Stalin was elected Secretary of the Central Committee, in fact performing the functions of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Party. After the XVII Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, held in 1934, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks elected the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, consisting of Zhdanov, Kaganovich, Kirov and Stalin. Stalin, as chairman of the meetings of the Politburo and the Secretariat, retained the general leadership, that is, the right to approve this or that agenda and determine the degree of readiness of the draft decisions submitted for consideration.

Stalin continued in official documents to sign as "Secretary of the Central Committee" and continued to be addressed as Secretary of the Central Committee.

Subsequent updates of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks in 1939 and 1946 were also held with the election of formally equal secretaries of the Central Committee. The Charter of the CPSU, adopted at the 19th Congress of the CPSU, did not contain any mention of the existence of the post of "general secretary".

In May 1941, in connection with the appointment of Stalin as Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, the Politburo adopted a resolution in which Andrei Zhdanov was officially named Stalin's deputy for the party: “In view of the fact that Comrade. Stalin, remaining, at the insistence of the Politburo of the Central Committee, the first Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, will not be able to devote sufficient time to work on the Secretariat of the Central Committee, appoint comrade. Zhdanova A.A. Deputy Comrade. Stalin on the Secretariat of the Central Committee.

Vyacheslav Molotov and Lazar Kaganovich, who previously actually performed this role, were not awarded the official status of deputy leader for the party.

The struggle among the leaders of the country escalated as Stalin increasingly raised the question that in the event of his death he needed to select successors in the leadership of the party and government. Molotov recalled: “After the war, Stalin was about to retire and said at the table: “Let Vyacheslav work now. He's younger."

For a long time Molotov was seen as a possible successor to Stalin, but later Stalin, who considered the post of head of government to be the first post in the USSR, in private conversations suggested that he sees Nikolai Voznesensky as his successor in the state line

Continuing to see in Voznesensky his successor in leadership of the country's government, Stalin began to look for another candidate for the post of party leader. Mikoyan recalled: “I think it was 1948. Once, Stalin pointed to 43-year-old Alexei Kuznetsov and said that future leaders should be young, and in general, such a person could someday become his successor in leadership of the party and the Central Committee.

By this time, two dynamic rival groups had formed in the country's leadership. Further, events turned tragically. In August 1948, the leader of the "Leningrad group" A.A. died suddenly. Zhdanov. Almost a year later, in 1949, Voznesensky and Kuznetsov became key figures in the "Leningrad Affair". They were sentenced to death and executed by firing squad on October 1, 1950.

On April 3, 1922, a seemingly ordinary event took place. They elected the Secretary General of the Central Committee of the RCP (b). But this event changed the course of history. Soviet Russia. On this day, he was appointed to this post. Lenin by that time was already seriously ill, and Joseph Stalin, by hook or by crook, tried to gain a foothold in his post. There was no consensus in the party about what to do next. The revolution won, power was strengthened. And then what? Someone said that it was necessary to stimulate the world revolution in every possible way, others said that socialism could win in one single country and therefore it was not at all necessary to fan the world fire. The new General Secretary took advantage of the disagreement in the party and, having received practically unlimited power in his hands, began to gradually clear his way to dominance over a huge power. He ruthlessly removed political opponents, and soon there was no one who could object to him.

The reign of Joseph Stalin is a huge layer of our history. He was at the helm for long years. And what years? What has not been in our history over the years? And the restoration of the economy after the anarchy of the civil war. And construction giants. And the threat of enslavement in the Second World War, and new buildings of the post-war years. And it all fit into these thirty years of Stalin's rule. A whole generation of people grew up under him. These years are all researching and researching. One can relate differently to the personality of Stalin, to his cruelty, to the tragedy of the country. But this is our story. And our great-grandparents in old photographs, for the most part, still do not seem unhappy.

WAS THERE AN ALTERNATIVE?

Stalin's election as general secretary took place after the 11th Congress (March-April 1922), in which Lenin, for health reasons, took only fragmentary part (he attended four of the twelve sessions of the congress). “When at the 11th Congress ... Zinoviev and his closest friends promoted Stalin’s candidacy for general secretary, with the ulterior motive of using his hostile attitude towards me,” Trotsky recalled, “Lenin, in a close circle objecting to the appointment of Stalin as general secretary, uttered his famous phrase: “I don’t advise, this cook will cook only spicy dishes” ... However, the Petrograd delegation led by Zinoviev won at the congress. The victory was all the easier for her because Lenin did not accept the battle. He did not carry the resistance to Stalin's candidacy to the end only because the post of secretary had, under the conditions of that time, a completely subordinate significance. He (Lenin) himself did not want to attach exaggerated significance to his warning: as long as the old Politburo remained in power, the general secretary could only be a subordinate figure.

Having come to the post of general secretary, Stalin immediately began to widely use the methods of selection and appointment of personnel through the Secretariat of the Central Committee and the Accounting and Distribution Department of the Central Committee subordinate to him. Already in the first year of Stalin's activity as General Secretary, the Uchraspred made about 4,750 appointments to responsible posts.

At the same time, Stalin, together with Zinoviev and Kamenev, began to rapidly expand the material privileges of the leadership of the party. At the XII Party Conference, which took place during Lenin's illness (August 1922), for the first time in the history of the party, a document was adopted that legitimized these privileges. We are talking about the resolution of the conference "On the material situation of active party workers", which clearly defined the number of "active party workers" (15,325 people) and introduced a strict hierarchization of their distribution into six categories. Members of the Central Committee and the Central Control Commission, heads of departments of the Central Committee, members of the regional bureaus of the Central Committee and secretaries of regional and provincial committees were to be paid according to the highest level. At the same time, the possibility of a personal increase in their salaries was stipulated. In addition to high wages, all these workers were to be “provided with housing (through local executive committees), medical care (through the People’s Commissariat of Health), and the upbringing and education of children (through the People’s Commissariat of Education)”, and the corresponding additional benefits in kind should were paid from the party fund.

Trotsky emphasized that already during Lenin's illness, Stalin increasingly acted "as an organizer and educator of the bureaucracy, most importantly: as a distributor of earthly goods." This period coincided with the end of the bivouac situation during the civil war. “The more sedentary and balanced life of the bureaucracy creates a need for comfort. Stalin, who himself continues to live relatively modestly, at least from the outside, masters this movement towards comfort, he distributes the most profitable posts, he selects the top people, rewards them, he helps them increase their privileged position.

These actions of Stalin responded to the desire of the bureaucracy to throw off the harsh control in the field of morality and personal life, the need for which was mentioned by numerous party decisions of the Leninist period. The bureaucracy, which increasingly assimilated the prospect of personal well-being and comfort, “respected Lenin, but felt too much his puritanical hand on itself. She was looking for a leader in her own image and likeness, the first among equals. They talked about Stalin... “We are not afraid of Stalin. If he starts to become arrogant, we will remove him. The turning point in the living conditions of the bureaucracy came from the time last illness Lenin and launched a campaign against "Trotskyism". In any political struggle of a large scale, one can finally open the question of a steak.

Stalin's most defiant actions to create illegal and secret privileges for the bureaucracy at that time were still met with resistance from his allies. So, after the adoption in July 1923 of the decision of the Politburo on facilitating the conditions for children of responsible workers to enter universities, Zinoviev and Bukharin, who were on vacation in Kislovodsk, condemned this decision, stating that “such a privilege will block the way for more talented people and introduce elements of caste. Doesn't fit."

Amenability to privileges, readiness to take them for granted meant the first round in the everyday and moral degeneration of the partocracy, which was inevitably followed by a political rebirth: the willingness to sacrifice ideas and principles for the sake of preserving one's posts and privileges. “The ties of revolutionary solidarity that embraced the party as a whole were replaced to a large extent by ties of bureaucratic and material dependence. Previously, it was possible to win supporters only with ideas. Now many have begun to learn how to win supporters with positions and material privileges.

These processes contributed to the rapid growth of bureaucracy and intrigues in the party and state apparatus, which Lenin, who returned to work in October 1922, was literally shocked. In addition, as Trotsky recalled, “Lenin sensed that, in connection with his illness, behind him and behind my back, still almost imperceptible threads of a conspiracy were weaving. The epigones have not yet burned bridges or blown them up. But in some places they were already sawing the beams, in some places they were imperceptibly laying pyroxylin checkers ... Coming into work and with increasing anxiety noting the changes that had taken place over the ten months, Lenin for the time being did not name them out loud, so as not to aggravate relations. But he was preparing to give the Troika a rebuff and began to rebuff it on individual issues.

One of these questions was the question of the monopoly of foreign trade. In November 1922, in the absence of Lenin and Trotsky, the Central Committee unanimously adopted a decision aimed at weakening this monopoly. Upon learning that Trotsky was not present at the plenum and that he did not agree with decision, Lenin entered into correspondence with him (five letters from Lenin to Trotsky on this issue were first published in the USSR only in 1965). As a result of the concerted actions of Lenin and Trotsky, a few weeks later the Central Committee reversed its decision with the same unanimity as it had previously adopted. On this occasion, Lenin, who had already suffered a new blow, after which he was forbidden to correspond, nevertheless dictated a letter to Trotsky from Krupskaya, which said: “It was as if we had managed to take a position without firing a single shot with a simple maneuvering movement. I suggest not to stop and continue the offensive ... "

At the end of November 1922, a conversation took place between Lenin and Trotsky, in which the latter raised the question of the growth of apparatus bureaucracy. “Yes, our bureaucracy is monstrous,” Lenin picked up, “I was horrified after returning to work ...” Trotsky added that he had in mind not only state, but also party bureaucracy, and that the essence of all the difficulties, in his opinion, was in the combination of state and party bureaucracy and in the mutual harboring of influential groups that gather around a hierarchy of party secretaries.

After listening to this, Lenin put the question point-blank: “So you are proposing to open a struggle not only against state bureaucracy, but also against the Orgburo of the Central Committee?” The Orgburo represented the very center of the Stalinist apparatus. Trotsky replied: "Perhaps it turns out like this." “Well, then,” continued Lenin, obviously pleased that we named the essence of the issue by name, “I propose to you a bloc: against bureaucracy in general, against the Orgburo in particular.” "FROM a good man it is flattering to conclude a good bloc,” Trotsky replied. In conclusion, it was agreed to meet after some time to discuss the organizational side of this issue. Previously, Lenin proposed the creation of a commission under the Central Committee to combat bureaucracy. “In essence, this commission,” Trotsky recalled, “was supposed to become a lever for the destruction of the Stalinist faction, as the backbone of the bureaucracy ...”

Immediately after this conversation, Trotsky conveyed its content to his like-minded people - Rakovsky, I. N. Smirnov, Sosnovsky, Preobrazhensky and others. In early 1924, Trotsky told about this conversation to Averbakh (a young oppositionist who soon went over to the side of the ruling faction), who in turn conveyed the contents of this conversation to Yaroslavsky, and the latter, apparently, reported it to Stalin and other triumvirs.

IN AND. LENIN. LETTER TO THE CONGRESS

December 24, 22 By the stability of the Central Committee, which I spoke about above, I mean measures against a split, insofar as such measures can be taken at all. For, of course, the White Guard in Russkaya Mysl (I think it was S.S. Oldenburg) was right when, firstly, he bet on the split of our party in relation to their game against Soviet Russia, and when, secondly, , staked for this split on the most serious differences in the party.

Our Party rests on two classes, and therefore its instability is possible and its fall is inevitable if an agreement could not be reached between these two classes. In this case, it is useless to take certain measures, in general, to talk about the stability of our Central Committee. No measures in this case will be able to prevent a split. But I hope that this is too distant a future and too incredible an event to talk about.

I have in mind stability as a guarantee against a split in the near future, and I intend to analyze here a number of considerations of a purely personal nature.

I think that the main ones in the issue of sustainability from this point of view are such members of the Central Committee as Stalin and Trotsky. The relations between them, in my opinion, constitute more than half of the danger of that split, which could be avoided and which, in my opinion, should be avoided, among other things, by increasing the number of members of the Central Committee to 50, to 100 people.

Tov. Stalin, having become General Secretary, has concentrated immense power in his hands, and I am not sure whether he will always be able to use this power with sufficient caution. On the other hand, com. Trotsky, as his struggle against the Central Committee on the question of the NKPS has already proved, is distinguished not only by his outstanding abilities. Personally, he is perhaps the most capable person in the present Central Committee, but also overly self-confident and overly enthusiastic about the purely administrative side of things. These two qualities of the two outstanding leaders of the modern Central Committee are capable of inadvertently leading to a split, and if our Party does not take steps to prevent this, then the split may come unexpectedly. I will not further characterize the other members of the Central Committee by their personal qualities. Let me only remind you that the October episode of Zinoviev and Kamenev, of course, was not an accident, but that it can just as little be blamed on them personally as non-Bolshevism can be blamed on Trotsky. Among the young members of the Central Committee, I would like to say a few words about Bukharin and Pyatakov. These, in my opinion, are the most outstanding forces (of the youngest forces), and with regard to them one should bear in mind the following: Bukharin is not only the most valuable and prominent theoretician of the Party, he is also legitimately considered the favorite of the entire Party, but his theoretical views are very much doubt can be attributed to the completely Marxist, because there is something scholastic in him (he never studied and, I think, never fully understood dialectics).

25.XII. Then Pyatakov is a man of undoubtedly outstanding will and outstanding abilities, but he is too fond of administration and the administrative side of things to be relied upon in a serious political question. Of course, both remarks are made by me only for the present time on the assumption that both of them outstanding and devoted workers will not find an opportunity to replenish their knowledge and change their one-sidedness.

Lenin 25.XII. 22. Recorded by M.V.

Addendum to the letter of December 24, 1922 Stalin is too rude, and this shortcoming, quite tolerable in the environment and in communications between us communists, becomes intolerable in the position of general secretary. Therefore, I suggest that the comrades consider a way to move Stalin from this place and appoint another person to this place, who in all other respects differs from Comrade. Stalin with only one advantage, namely, more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more attentive to comrades, less capriciousness, etc. This circumstance may seem like an insignificant trifle. But I think that from the point of view of preventing a split and from the point of view of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky, this is not a trifle, or it is such a trifle that can become decisive.

We also recommend

• Childhood, Leo Tolstoy
• Research work "In the footsteps of Krylov the fabulist" (The artistic originality of the fables of I
• The external and internal structure of the fish
• Composition: Zaporizhzhya Sich in the story N
• Analysis of Bunin's work "Easy breathing
• Chemistry Simple substances around us