The honesty of historians is in doubt. Who benefits from distorting history?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Falsification of events in history books is one of the types of hybrid war against Russia. Events are distorted in such a way as to eradicate in our children a sense of pride in their ancestors and homeland, and to instill in them a sense of inferiority and guilt …

The honesty of historians on the example of a textbook for the ninth grade on the subject of the Second World War

Sergei Vasiliev wrote a lot here about the lies of historians - about the Mongols, Normanism and other legends of deep antiquity. But there are events that happened quite recently, which are documented in great detail - the Great Patriotic War. When these textbooks were written, many eyewitnesses to the events were alive and could tell everything that was not in the archives. Maybe these events in school textbooks are described authentically and as accurately as possible? I wanted to find a textbook for analysis, which I studied, but, unfortunately, I could not find it. For parsing, I took this one:

RUSSIAN HISTORY

Textbook for the 9th grade of educational institutions Recommended by the Main Directorate for the Development of General Secondary Education of the Ministry of General and Professional Education of the Russian Federation 3rd edition MOSCOW "ENLIGHTENING" 1997

A. A. Danilov L. G. KOSULINA

Candidate of Historical Sciences M. Yu. Brandt, Danilov A. A., Kosulina L. G. took part in the preparation of the methodological apparatus.

D18 History of Russia, XX century: Textbook. manual for 9th grade. general education. institutions. - 3rd ed. - M.: Education, 1997. - 366 p.: maps. - ISBN 5-09-008175-1

After all, this is the third edition, in which all the shortcomings have probably been corrected. After all, a whole candidate of historical sciences followed the compilation of the textbook. I would like to comment on some excerpts from the textbook that raised my questions, to put it mildly.

Excerpt # 1

I wonder if the world was agitated when such a treaty was concluded Franceand Germany? Almost 9 months before, December 6, 1938, a similar non-aggression pact with Germany was signed, for example, by France. After that, French Foreign Minister Bonnet sent out a circular letter, where he informed the French ambassadors of the results of his negotiations with Ribbentrop, informing that “German policy is now focused on the struggle against bolshevism … Germany shows its will to expand to the East ».

Warsaw: Marshal Jozef Piłsudski and Josef Gebels 1934

This is where the question arises: was the fact that Germany was preparing aggression against the USSR and openly spoke about it at the negotiations, forced the "highly moral" French to abandon the treaty with Hitler?

On the contrary, the French government, having a mutual assistance treaty with Moscow and being aware of Hitler's intentions to commit aggression against the USSR, as if nothing had happened concludes with Germanynon-aggression agreement, and thereby guarantees the fascists in the event of the start of a German-Soviet war, the inviolability of their western borders, deliberately pushing Hitler to war with the USSR. So why, if this was allowed to France, and to this day no one of her actions publicly condemns, similar steps of Stalin suddenly announced criminal?

Do not forget about Anglo-German negotiations (London talks), which were conducted at about the same time - from June to August 1939. And as the leaders of the USSR knew, the London talks were aimed at concluding a broad Anglo-German agreement on political and economic issues (Wiki).

And, of course, having this information, our candidate of historical sciences writes in the textbook only about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and with such expression, the star of the world is in shock, the people are in a stupor. On the face explicit manipulation … Historical accuracy is driven into the forest. It is much more important to pour the thought of the cannibalistic essence of the Soviet State into the fragile heads of schoolchildren than to clearly describe the situation in simple words.

Excerpt number 2

Then my eye twitched. Tukhachevsky is a great military theorist ??? Army of Tukhachevsky were broken near Warsaw and fled shamefully … At a critical moment, Tukhachevsky did not have strategic reserves, and this decided the outcome of the grandiose battle. Tukhachevsky's defeat was not accidental: six months before the start of the Soviet "liberation campaign" against Warsaw and Berlin, Tukhachevsky "theoretically substantiated" the uselessness of strategic reserves in the war.

Tukhachevsky's atrocities in Kronstadt became legendary. Monstrous extermination of peasants in Tambov province became one of the most terrible pages in the entire history of mankind. And the author of this page is Tukhachevsky.

In 1923 M. N. Tukhachevsky, already famous for the mass extermination of civilians Central Russia, North Caucasus, Urals, Siberia, Poland theoretically substantiated the purpose of the war - "to ensure the free use of violence, and for this it is necessary, first of all, to destroy the enemy's armed forces" (War and Revolution. Collection N 22, p. 188).

The Sovietization of the occupied territories by the method of "free use of violence" and the exploitation of all the resources of the "liberated" regions for new "liberation" received from Tukhachevsky the "scientific" name - "expansion of the basis of war." Tukhachevsky introduces this term even into the Great Soviet Encyclopedia of 1928.

But someone who is interested will remember that Tukhachevsky was an adherent of technical progress. And retrogrades Voroshilov and Budyonny they offered to go to the tanks with sabers, despite the wise admonitions of Tukhachevsky the thinker. But what was it really like?

Budyonny in his speech at the 16th Party Congress (1930) he says absolutely sensible things: the work of individual idiots in the country is destroying the horse population, but this cannot be done, because there are still very few tractors, and the horse perfectly complements the tractor park. Moreover, “the relief of our country is not everywhere adapted exclusively for a tractor … we have such areas in which tractor and horse processing can be combined ».

What is there that is ignorant, stupid, backward? Quite sane reasoning.

Yes, Budyonny says that "the defense of the country without a horse is unthinkable." But in the yard, do not forget, the thirtieth year! In European armies, there are tens of tanks, and nothing more. And a potential enemy - Poland and Germany - by nature itself, they are adapted for successful cavalry actions: the terrain is flat, one cannot expect a continuous positional front in those years.

And then … Listen Budyonny: "In modern warfare, in the presence of an engine in the air, and on the ground - armored forces, the cavalry, relying on this engine, acquires an unprecedented penetrating power."

Does everyone understand? Neither Budyonny nor Voroshilov ever proposed to "replace" tanks and armored cars with cavalry. On the contrary, they rely on the motor, and the cavalry, in their mind, must complete the success achieved by the motorized forces. Agree, this is somewhat different from the nonsense that was drummed into us with regards to these two military leaders. It is even quite different …

Albeit not military geniuses, but precisely in those areas that were commanded Voroshilov(North-West) and Budyonny (South-West) the Wehrmacht never once managed to arrange a single "boiler". In contrast to what was happening on other fronts. Voroshilov and Budyonny retreated, of course, snapping as best they could, but not a single division of those commanded by these two "ignoramuses" and "horsemen" did the Germans succeed in encircling. It is somehow not customary for us to remember that Voroshilov's activities that summer were highly appreciated by a person interested and knowledgeable - the chief of staff of the Wehrmacht, General Halder (which, it is easy to guess, the historical decisions of the XX Congress did not oblige to anything, but from Khrushchev with Zhukov he was even less dependent and could write the truth …)

Excerpt number 3

And here are the real radiograms of Richard Sorge, received in Moscow:

May 30, 1941: "Berlin informed Ott (the German ambassador to Japan. - AB) that the German offensive against the USSR would begin in the second half of June."

"Exact" date, you will not say anything …

June 1, 1941: “The expectation of the start of the German-Soviet war around June 15 is based solely on information that Lieutenant Colonel Scholl brought with him from Berlin, from where he left on May 3.

More precisely, right in the bull's-eye …

June 15, 1941: "The German courier told the military attaché that he was convinced that the war against the USSR was being delayed, probably until the end of June."

What would you do on the spot Stalinreceiving similar dispatches? Either rain, or snow, or it will be, or not … And if we add to this the earlier "warning" to Sorge on May 19, 1941: "The new German representatives who arrived here from Berlin declare that the war between Germany and the USSR could start at the end of May, as they received an order to return to Berlin by that time."

There are several more radio messages to Sorge with completely vague "terms": "The time of the end of sowing in the USSR" … "In case the USSR begins to develop activity against the interests of Germany." Here a wide field opens up for an unrestrained flight of imagination. And someone else chides Stalinthat he did not believe this stream of consciousness ?!

Admirers of "Ramsay", even reluctantly admitting that on the basis of such "warnings" it is really impossible to make any military decisions, they still cling to the last line of fortifications: yes, they agree, about Germany Ramsay little more … a finger to the sky … But he is strong in something else: he clearly and unequivocally warned that Japan would never fight against the USSR!

Alas, in this case too Sorge sent to Moscow an avalanche of radiograms that contradicted one another …

August 11, 1941: "I ask you to be very vigilant, because the Japanese will go to war without any announcements between the first and last week of August."

August 12, 1941: “The military attaché of the German embassy in Tokyo made a trip to Korea and Manchuria and told me that six divisions had arrived in Korea for a possible attack on Vladivostok … Preparations for the operation would end between the 20th and the end of August, but BAT personally telegraphed to Berlin that the decision on the Japanese performance has not yet been made …"

September 14, 1941: “Source Invest left for Manchuria. He said that the Japanese government decided not to oppose the USSR this year …"

And so on … A similar inconsistency in any intelligence center will cause quite understandable distrust of the sender.

The exploits of the scout ended in captivity and a voluntary confession to espionage. Moreover, according to the laws of that time in Japan of all revealed intelligence officers were sentenced to death. For some reason, Richard was lucky. The option that he worked for two owners, although not confirmed, is very likely.

Japanese prosecutor supervising the investigation Yoshikawa stated: “To obtain a confession, no violence was used against Sorge. Physical evidence was presented to him and an explanation was demanded. Thus, at the end of the first week, he confessed …"

As for the European sources, the same “stream of consciousness” reigned here - the ninth wave of reports, where the most different dates were named.

December 29, 1940 Soviet military attaché in Berlin Major General Deadlocks reported: “Hitler gave an order to prepare for war with the USSR. War will be declared in March 1941"

The head of the Intelligence Directorate reported to Stalin on March 20, 1941: The beginning of the offensive against the USSR was tentatively on May 20.

Excerpt number 4

But after such pearls, I want to hit the candidate on the head with a candelabrum for candidiasis.

On June 18, 1941, Stalin gave the order to bring the troops of the first strategic echelon into full combat readiness. The General Staff transmitted the directive to the troops, but it was actually not implemented in those border districts that were hit by the enemy's main blow.

In the text of the directive number 1, which entered the military districts on the night of June 22, it was written: "Be in full combat readiness." Let's pay attention: not "lead", but "be". This means that the order to bring the troops into combat readiness was given in advance. Meticulously collected evidence of the order to bring the troops to combat readiness Mukhin … You can read the details here:

Subsequently, at the trial, the former commander of the Western Front, General Pavlov, and his chief of staff confirmed that on June 18 there was a directive from the General Staff, but they did nothing to fulfill it. This was confirmed by the chief of communications of the district through which she went.

The fleets reported on being put on alert already on June 19. The border guards were also on full alert.

For some unknown reason, the troops were not preparing for the implementation of an active defense plan in accordance with the only document approved at the government level, but for a counter-offensive, working out the corresponding tasks. By the way, at the beginning of September 1940 in KOVO, and Zhukov was the commander there at that time, the 6th army of the district underwent exercises according to the scenario of an immediate (including preventive) oncoming head-on strike in the South-West direction and even from the bridgehead of the Lvov ledge, which in fact was an army prototype of the future scenario for entering the war, that is, the plan of May 15, 1941, completed Vasilevsky … Having received a directive dated 06/18/41 (four days before the war) on bringing the troops to combat readiness and deploying front-line command posts by 0 o'clock on June 22, the commanders of the three districts that received the main enemy blow (Army Group South, Center and "North"), they did not fulfill it. The main groupings of troops were concentrated in the Bialystok and Lvov ledges, which, according to the plan of the General Staff, were supposed to strike the flank of the attacking German armies and, developing a counter offensive, knock them out onto Polish territory, but as a result they themselves were defeated.

Those. Stalin knew both the exact date and the place of the enemy's strike. Moreover, a year before the offensive, exercises were held that were similar in terms of the conditions of the real combat operations of 1941. And the criminal negligence was shown by those same military personnel whom Stalin shot without exception in 1937. And nevertheless, they managed to take the helm in the Soviet troops.

Excerpt number 5

The fact that Stalin, according to a long-rooted and firmly rooted myth, intimidated his generals so much that they were numb, like a rabbit in front of a boa constrictor, and were afraid to give the troops an order at least to look around, does not at all correspond to the truth. In reality, it was just the opposite.

Here, say, the People's Commissar of the Navy Kuznetsov … For some reason, the formidable Stalinist orders of complete immobility did not reach him, a complete impression, and he, long before the fateful hour, just ordered his sailors to be vigilant and ready for any nasty surprises. And, as soon as at three o'clock in the morning of the longest day of the year, German planes crossed the Soviet borders, a couple of minutes later they rumbled together. all anti-aircraft artillery of the Baltic and Black Sea fleets.

Not a single Soviet warship was sunk by the Germans, because nobody failed to be taken by surprise. But the naval gunners sent to the bottom more than one plane with black crosses on the wings. By the way, the famous bombing of Berlin in the summer of 1941 was carried out not by the army, but by naval aviation …

The sad truth is different: the groundmen turned out to be so mediocre and stupid that they almost pissed off the whole thing.

General Baghramyan recalled that the troops of the same district, or rather, their operational reserves, began deploying five days before the war. For defense, defense, defense!

There are many such testimonies. First, a week before the war, the troops were ordered to turn around, take positions, withdraw equipment, and dig in. Secondly, at the same time they were focused not on a "surprise strike", but on defense!

What happened? And what happened was that some military leaders behaved either like stupid ones, or like traitors … Western Military District (formerly Belarusian) under the command of a general we already know Pavlova (the fact that in Spain he sabotaged what he was sent there for), he simply did not fulfill the directives of the General Staff on deploying troops and preparing them for defense. Pavlovwas not at all "paralyzed by fear" and demands "not to succumb to provocations." There was an unambiguous, clear order from higher authorities to deploy troops for defense. And Pavlov did not fulfill!

When, after the crushing defeat of the Western Military District, Pavlov was tied together with his immediate subordinates, the investigation revealed a lot of curious things - in addition to the material that had been on Pavlov since the time of Spain.

At first, he whined that, in full accordance with the directives of the General Staff on the fifteenth, he ordered the withdrawal of troops from Brest to their positions, but did not control the execution of his order, and the commander of the 4th Army Korobkov did not fulfill it. As a result, two rifle divisions and one tank division subordinated to Pavlov suffered such losses that "more, in fact, as the formations did not exist."

However, the mentioned Korobkov, instantly realizing that they were making an extreme out of him, in his voice refused this dubious honor. With all the fervor. He said that the order that Pavlov was talking about was not given at all! District communications chief general Grigoriev this testimony Korobkova immediately confirmed, saying that Pavlov and his chief of staff Klimovsky even after the telegram from the chief of the General Staff, no action was taken to deploy the troops. Grigoriev delicately called this act "complacency."

Excerpt number 7

Again a lie. You can lie to a candidate of historical sciences and nothing will happen to him for it. The session of exposing lies is pretty simple. Quote:

I order:

1. Commanders and political workerswho, during the battle, tear off the insignia and defect to the rear or surrender to the enemy, are considered malicious deserters, whose families are subject to arrest as the families of deserters who have violated the oath and betrayed their homeland.

To oblige all higher-ranking commanders and commissars to shoot such deserters on the spot from the command staff.»

And, suddenly, it turns out that not all, but only commanders and political workers. And not caught, but deserting or surrendering captured.

But maybe the order was carried out in such a way that the historian was right (three times ha) - everyone was imprisoned and shot?

No, the commanders recorded most of the prisoners as missing. As a result, according to official reports, during the entire Great Patriotic War in the USSR, out of more than 5 million missing persons, only about 100 thousand people were recorded as prisoners of war. In fact, there were about 4.5 million of them, that is, the overwhelming majority of the missing were taken prisoner. It is obvious that the top military-political leadership of the USSR knew about this, but preferred to close their eyes. AND Stalin, "A terrible tyrant and bloodsucker", knowing this, issued an order, according to which in the funeral notices they wrote "faithful to the oath, military duty and the socialist homeland", disappeared without a trace. This document was at the same time a certificate, according to which the family of the “missing person” was supposed to pay benefits.

Here is a story, one of thousands, which Comrade. Bushkov cited in his book about Stalin:

“So, S. P. Lisin, captain of the 3rd rank, commander of the submarine of the Baltic Fleet "S-7". During the next combat campaign, the S-7 was torpedoed by a Finnish submarine, and several crew members, along with the commander (they were standing on the bridge during the explosion and therefore survived) were captured. The Germans took them away from the Finns and took them to Germany. Then Lisin was transported back to Finland, and after she left the war, along with other prisoners, she was handed over to the Soviet Union. In captivity, as I said, Lisin spent two years …

And what, they shot? Have you planted? Nothing of the kind! Of course, a check followed. It turned out that in captivity Lisin behaved with dignity - he was silent during interrogations, tried to escape several times, and even refused to work in the mine.

Lisin (who, by the way, was not even arrested at all during the check) awarded the Star of the Hero of the Soviet Union and the Order of Lenin … He was promoted to a high rank even before captivity - and, interestingly, the submission was approved even when Lisin was in captivity (which he learned from a downed Soviet pilot who recognized Lisin from a photograph in a newspaper)! And then he was appointed commander of the submarine division of the Pacific Fleet. And for a long time he remained in the Navy in combatant and teaching positions.

This - real fate. Incidentally, it does not contain anything unique. There are many such cases …"

A short summary of what I've learned from this tutorial:

1. Tukhachevsky is not maniac and sadist, but an ingenious military thinker-strategist. And if he had not been shot, by the way, for organizing a conspiracy, then the war would have been going on in a completely different scenario and we would have celebrated the victory in 1941.

2. All losses of the initial period of hostilities were not due to the actions of the commanding staff, who ignored the orders of the General Staff, and that very Stalin who is solely to blame for everything.

3. 270 orders declared all prisoners of war traitors, and their families were to be repressed.

4. Pavlov and other "distinguished" generals were shot by the insane Stalin completely in vain.

5. The non-aggression pact between the USSR and Germany is something so terrible and unusual that the whole world was shocked.

Initially, there were twice as many excerpts for analysis, but the volume of the material turned out to be too voluminous. All the nonsense of the candidate was sorted out a hundred times by hundreds of people, so I made a selection from the articles Mukhina and books Bushkova The Frozen Throne. Instead of a balanced presentation of facts, historians have blinded collection of fantasies of a liberal and Solzhenitsyn.

The conclusion from reading the textbook is sad. If the events of very recent events are distorted beyond recognition, then believe what the senior candidates of historical "sciences" write about the events millennial there is no reason whatsoever. There are orders of magnitude less information about those times, it's easier to lie, it is more difficult to refute. Expansion for crooks and laymen. So they are jumping hundreds of thousands of Mongols in Europeand whoever disagrees is an ignoramus and an amateur.

There are still big questions about the description of the reign of Peter I. Not at all better than the descriptions of the Second World War. Everything white was called black, everything black was smeared with white, emotions were added and instead of the ghoul who introduced slavery, began to get the people drunk, mocked the country's faith, got a fashionable ruler who pulled the country out of backwardness into a bright European tomorrow.