The president of the country has issued a directive to create a standardized history textbook for schools as soon as possible. That is, to teach the history of the country not as anyone wishes, but solely based on historical documents and facts. The President’s decision is correct and somewhat overdue. Creating such a textbook, where the country’s past is viewed from a single perspective, is not a simple task. Our so-called patriots and unfortunate scholars have already managed to sufficiently defile and desecrate the country’s history and its historical figures over the last 20 years. Some of them have even suggested that the period from 1917 to 1991 should be completely discarded from Russian history. Honestly, I cannot imagine how they intend to do this. I lived under Soviet rule for 61 years, so I know about it not by hearsay. In this brief work, I do not aim to praise or denigrate the Soviet period of my life. I can only say that this is the history of my Motherland, and if there was something good, it pleases me, and I am proud of this good. And the bad, which also existed, I perceive with pain in my heart and worry about it. I am a historian by education, and my education, my long life, gives me the basis to say that in the history of humanity there has not yet been a socio-political system that satisfied all layers of society, and it seems to me that it is generally impossible to create such a system. And the Soviet management system had many negative qualities. Much has already been said about this. Of course, there was “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” and there was the mass enthusiasm of the builders of socialism. There were also mass repressions and the creation of the country’s industrial base, without which victory in the Great Patriotic War would have been impossible. There was the cult of personality and the victory in the Great Patriotic War. There was a breakthrough into space. A nuclear shield was created that reliably protected and still protects from possible aggression, from a potential enemy. And the fact that such plans were hatched and are still being hatched now, I know this as a military man who served throughout the so-called “Cold War” in the Soviet Army, in the country’s air defense forces, and as a participant in the “Caribbean Crisis.” I repeat that I do not intend to blacken or exalt the Soviet socio-political system. But, as a historian, I ask questions for which I have not yet received a sensible answer from modern scientists, political scientists, a historically substantiated answer. For example, after the overthrow of tsarism in Russia, was there another political force that could have preserved Russia within the borders of the Russian Empire, other than the Bolsheviks? And if there was, what prevented them from doing so?

If we had not created a powerful industrial base at the cost of extreme human and material resources, how would we have defended the freedom and independence of our Motherland? And all this was built only relying on internal resources. The Soviet country could not count on any investments from other countries. At that time, the country did not spend hundreds of billions of dollars on completely unnecessary pompous events for the people as it does today.

And yet another question. If, during the Great Patriotic War, the country had been led by Bukharin, Zinoviev, Trotsky, Kamenev, Yeltsin, Khrushchev, Gorbachev, Brezhnev, could we have won the war?

I would like Stalin’s activities to be evaluated based on the answers to these questions. By the way, until the beginning of the 1930s, Stalin did not possess very great power. Against the party’s course on industrialization, collectivization of agriculture, on the course of building socialism in one separate country, Stalin encountered fierce resistance from oppositionists who had serious influence in the party. So, until the beginning of the 1930s, there was no hint of a cult of personality. Then yes. My generation remembers well how they glorified and what praises they sang to Stalin. And it was. It was also that for any carelessly spoken word, one could end up in places not so remote. But does this mean that all those who were repressed in those years were innocent lambs? Not at all. The country was surrounded by deadly enemies. By the way, some neighbors are not very friendly towards us even now. Inside the country, there were indeed quite powerful forces inflicting real tangible harm to the political and economic strengthening of our state. One just needs to read history more carefully. Now there are very many historians, political scientists, who call Stalin with all sorts of expressions. But, this same Stalin was enthusiastically praised by their grandfathers, great-grandfathers, grandmothers, great-grandmothers. Should they also be scolded? After all, they created the cult of personality! They created films, literary, political, artistic, musical works praising Stalin. Well, it wasn’t Stalin alone who praised himself. And one more thing, when today “very brave” people call him a criminal, equating him with Hitler, I want to ask them, what about those people who proudly wear images of this “criminal” on their chests? I mean the millions, tens of millions of Soviet people who proudly wear medals received in battles for the Motherland, for the people? What about them? Perhaps these too “brave” people, who so “bravely” kick a dead lion, should also think about this. Probably few people know that it was Stalin who returned the Kuril Islands, Port Arthur \in China, Porkkala-Udd to Russia. Stalin cut off East Prussia, the Kaliningrad region from Germany, and for some reason, our historians are silent about this question. And finally, let’s look at what Stalin left to his children and what Yeltsin left to his heirs? As they say, a big difference. Stalin didn’t even have his own apartment. And we see how the modern rulers of Russia live. In general, it is not worth giving blanket assessments of the activities of any historical figure. For example, I largely agree with the assessment of Stalin by the historian Roy Medvedev. His assessments of Stalin’s activities are based on serious and deep research into his activities.

In the planned history textbook, it will be quite difficult to cover Stalin’s activities. This includes the year 1937 and relations with Germany, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and so on. I remember very well how much criticism and noise there was about the “Molotov-Ribbentrop” pact. I would ask these critics one question. What would have happened to us if we had not pushed the border westward by an average of 150 km, and Germany had started its sudden offensive closer to Moscow by 150 km? It will also be no less difficult to cover interethnic relations. In other words, compiling a history textbook of Russia, a textbook that would satisfy all layers of our society, is quite difficult. Perhaps our historians, political scientists, journalists in the mass media should express their thoughts, their vision of the history textbook, and try to find the most acceptable version of the textbook. In any case, one should not paint everything only in black. We are talking about the history of our people. About our distant and close ancestors. And they deserve that we respect them and are proud of their deeds. And we must live and work so that our children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren respect and are proud of us. In this regard, I would like to dwell on one more event. Since 2009, at the request of Solzhenitsyn’s widow, the Brief Course “The Gulag Archipelago” has been introduced in schools as a history textbook of Russia. Well, what can I say, everything that was written there is correct, and people should know about it. But, is this book worthy of the title History of Russia? As a historian, I think not. This book presents history in a one-sided way.

Prisons and camps do not define the history of a people. History, in my understanding, is primarily the activity of the entire nation, the struggle of the people to improve life, the struggle for a better fate for descendants. History should also tell about the bright side of the people’s life. If our entire history is presented only in such a gloomy, black tone and does not show how the people moved forward, then no descendants will respect us and be proud of the history of the Motherland. And finally, I would like to say that maybe it’s enough to dig into the era of socialism and pay attention to the present day. Socialism will never return to our country, but correcting what was done to us in the wild nineties is perhaps a more relevant task. Unfortunately, capitalism has not yet brought the desired results for the people, for the country. We have not yet investigated and eliminated the causes of the widespread impoverishment of a huge part of our population. The main causes of the fratricidal war in Chechnya have not been investigated, and those who dropped aviation bombs, artillery shells on the heads of completely innocent people have not been punished. Why is this part of our history not disclosed, why? While the real conditions for the repetition of such a tragedy are preserved. And Stalin, it seems to me, it’s time to leave him alone. It’s time to solve the tasks that really stand before us. The most important quality of a history textbook, in my opinion, is the utmost possible objectivity, the absence of which our textbooks suffer. I wanted to end this small work here but was forced to stop on one more question. Recently, in socio-political literature, there has been a course on the glorification of the Romanov dynasty. How white and fluffy they are. I do not dispute that they were indeed literate, educated people. They could even speak French. And German was their native language. But this is not what a statesman, especially an autocrat, is valued for. I will not make a deep analysis of their activities. I will only say that where people live well, there is no revolution. There is no mass destruction of each other. And as for the moral image of the Romanov dynasty, it is enough to remember the fate of Emperor Ivan VI, his mother, and his sisters. One can recall how wives strangled and killed husbands and sons killed fathers, also emperors. So whose cow would moo… And there is no need to show tsarism to posterity in such bright tones. And the fact that today Russia is lagging behind Europe is also the merit of their “wonderful” rule.

Sh. A. Chigoev, Historian