Кто владеет информацией,
владеет миром

Victory of the Kremlin dreamer was triumphal

Natalya Morosova 16.04.2006

Who was defeated? Who lost? Just imagine: it was a victory also above the dreamers. But – above the “white dreamers". However, the “red dream” won, it was a victory of Bolsheviks. But why? Let's think it over.

Dreams differ. If the dream is turned into the future, it is progressive for it induces a society to the development. If the dream is turned into the past, it is reactionary. Here the basic difference of “red dream” from the “white dream”. That is also the main reason of Bolshevik’s victory above the White Guards. Bolsheviks called people not to the past but to the future!

As it was already marked in the beginning of 90th years a counterrevolution happened in our country. Development of the country - economic, social, cultural and political - has been interrupted, the country was rejected far in the past. In that past when the society has been clearly divided into rich men and poor ones when nobility ponced due to work of peasants and bourgeoisie - of workers.

 The majority of population in the Soviet Union were sloggers. They lived not very fine but with prosperity and with the whole set of social guarantees. But there were also those who loved to live at the expense of other people work and receive easy earned money. Let us say that they worked for example in some scientific research institute where he they went to spend time telling funny stories including ones on a theme of a little salary paid to them for their idleness. Do you remember a sketch played by Arcady Rajkin? One of his characters said there: “Why should I go to work? The salary can be brought to home”.

 Here you are the material which formed later a group of liberals-reformers – gaydars, chubayses, khakamadas… They would like to work less but to have more money, tasty meal, magnificent things. I knew Gaydar personally. I remember him sitting in pravdin’s cabinet doing nothing. May be he was thinking over the plan of future price liberalization. Khakamada in one of the interviews told that the reason that pushed her to become a democrat was her work in scientific research institute where she earned too little to buy personal car. Well… may be she didn’t work hard enough… Those ones that worked hard got at last possibilities to buy a car and a flat in cooperative society.   

Well, that time - in 90th years those who loved “easy” money seized authority and - the violent robbery of the country began. In fact “easy” money corrupt people. Here Yeltsin was of a great help to thieves: they gave him support on elections, he gave them oil fields, factories and mills. That was the beginning of the process after which appeared people possessing unprecedented riches. They are often called oligarchs but it is not exact, they have other nicknames: the nouveau riches, new Russians, swindlers, robbers, millionaires…and even – businessmen. Words are different but idea is one and the same: these are people that became rich in unjust way.

Of course, the history of the appearance of super richmen which I told you is a little reductive but it was done for the sake of brevity. Further conversation will be about other category of people. About that category of people which is the source for replenishing of the rows of “friends of the White Guards”.

What people are they? They are numerous servants of richmen who are well fed by them – banks employees, office workers, programmers, managers, security guards in banks, supermarkets and casinos… Did you see these security guards? Typical bullyboys! They will go all out to defend their owners.

Once I passed by a casino when the rain suddenly rushed. Having no umbrella I ran under a canopy of casino exit where I met a security guard with Herculean constitution and glass eyes who uttered that it is not possible to stand there as it is private institution! He followed his words with putting his hand on a holster. On a lapel of a jacket I saw a tablet - "security guard" as if meaning I am not a simple bullyboy or ass-kicker, I am a Security Guard!    

Clearly enough that the most valuable property of these people is their bicepse. They also have in their heads special device with some phrases written: “It is not possible to stay here… this is private institution… go out… don’t you want to get into the trouble”. Such set of phrases is enough for them.

But there are also others security guards – intellectual ones. They protect not a concrete private institution, they protect ideology of richmen. Having learned something during the epoch of the Soviet Union they work for richmen occupying "clever" posts. They are satisfied with their life, they receive decent compensation and naturally see the personal enemy in everyone who doesn’t accept present state of things.

This type of people comprises those who act on the forum pages with ardent speeches in protection of White Guards. Mostly not because they – as they persuade us - really respect Kolchak, Denikin and other hangmen, the matter is different, namely: appraising of White generals and White movement in general is a component of their guarding ideology. This ideology keeps on three foundations.

Whale1. In pre-revolutionary Russia the life was gorgeous but than a gang of Bolsheviks seized power and  destroyed the prospering Russia.

Whale 2. Noble White generals and officers tried to protect Russia from malicious and blood-thirsty Bolsheviks but suffered a defeat.

Whale 3. All Soviet epoch is a continuous horror, totalitarianism. All people were slaves and went knee-deep in the blood flowing directly on streets of the cities. Conclusion: It was necessary to destroy "Empire of evil" that was done by freedom-loving democrats. Welcome freedom, liberal values and market! Welcome richmen who let us be well fed!

People on the forum pages adhering to this, if one may say so, ideology, behave defiantly, they try to teach, they humiliate and offend. The main thing is that they do not listen to any arguments and like wood-grouses are repeating one and the same church chanting and spells. Such behaviour gives the ground to consider them as people insincere. They search not for a truth but only occasions for complication of each problem discussed.

All this also suggests that they carry out someone's task. Wandering from one site to another site, from one article to another article – where do they find time for it? It’s likely that is their basic work. To argue with them is useless as I have already told they do not listen to any reasons. But disregard some of their ideas is impossible. 

Young people coming to Forum learned history under new, false reduction of textbooks. One should also count extreme propaganda inspiring in the young soles hatred to their own country, to the past, to great figures of the past. If they read false fabrications on forum pages nobody will deny that it is possible to imagine what jumble will be formed in their heads.

For such young men one should necessarily open false essence of liberal propagation myths and its conductors. About one of such myths we shall talk today. It is a myth that White Guards had a certain dream, certain noble, patriotic, the so-called "white idea".

Distributors of this myth I have ironically called "friends to White Guards" (see article "What is it to be a friend of the White Guards" and how do they fight against History? "). In present article I shall try to prove, that White Guards has no "white idea". The only they had was a dream but this dream was mean and egoistic.

However before speaking about essence of the White Guard dream we shall return for a short while to the heading of the article, to the “Kremlin dreamer”. As you, certainly, know these are words of Herbert Wells who gave such name Lenin. In the autumn of 1920 the writer came to Moscow and on October, 6th was accepted by Lenin in the Kremlin. Later Wells wrote a book "Russia in a haze".

So, Wells was afraid that it would be tiresome conversation with marxist dogmatist but interesting and clever interlocutor appeared before him. ”Lenin spoke, - Wells recollects, - fast, excitedly, absolutely frankly and directly, without any pose as the present scientists talk”. However Wells could not get off an idea that Lenin’s plans on restoration of the destroyed country are impracticable. I quote:

The matter is that Lenin who like original marxist rejects all "utopians", eventually has run into a Utopia himself, in Utopia of electrification … Is it possible to imagine more daring project in this huge, flat country covered with woods occupied by illiterate peasants, deprived of water energy sources which has no technically competent people, in which trade and industry have almost died away?

As we see Wells also considered Lenin as the utopian but not in the sense in which he is shown now by his today’s opponents. They attribute to Lenin the promises ostensibly stated by him to build at once paradise on the earth. By the way, similar accusations were addressed to Lenin when he was alive, however, one conversation with the leader was enough for Wells to understand how many lies were wound around his name.

We can say without doubt that Lenin never spoke about immediate creation of paradise on the earth. His dreams were quite material and concrete. Wells was also convinced in it. They spoke not only about electrification but also about country problems, education, adjustment of large manufacture … "And during conversation with me, - Wells recollects, - he almost managed to convince me in reality of his foresight".

Here You are the most amazing: Lenin managed to convince Wells not only in seriousness and practicability of the nearest plans, but also in a reality of prospects on the far future. "Talking to Lenin, - Wells admits, - I understood that communism can be huge creative force … a meeting with this amazing person which frankly recognizes enormous difficulties and complexity of construction of communism and undividedly devotes all the forces to its realization, worked on me vivifying”.

Yes, Lenin was the dreamer. But his dream was fine! He dreamed of quicker restoration of facilities of the country destroyed by war and stupid management of tsar and Provisional government. He dreamed about education of people and about a raising of their cultural level … There were other things the Kremlin dreamer dreamed about... The essence is that all his dreams were about well-being of the country, about better life for people. Now we shall look at the dreams of the White Guard generals and officers. We shall look and compare.  May be after that some of the White Guard defenders will be ashamed of their blind admiration for Kolchak and the like.

So what were the Russian officers? They were, basically, noblemen by origin. But in fact the nobility long time ago became an estate of the decayed people. The majority of noblemen were parasites into whom they were transformed with the centuries-old serfdom and life at other labour expense. It was parasitism legalized therefore the majority of noblemen didn’t have any idea that they live immorally.

Try to recollect with what naive naivete land-owner lady Korobochka suggests Tchitchikov to buy her hemp, bacon and … maids. Usual business: to sell people, to pawn and sell manors together with peasants, to address people as cattle... Even worse: the guilty cow was not flogged in a stable and was not condemned to penal servitude.

Exceptions … Certainly they existed. Among noblemen one can come across conscientious people, capable of shaking from themselves the weight of century traditions and to think: if there really exists a right due to which one human being can own another human being? Whether it was this woken up conscience that led decembrists to the Senate Square?

Among serfs surprising samples also could be met sarcastically enough represented by Nekrasov in already mentioned poem "Who in Russia lives well?". They adored their misters both in favour and in anger and did not wish for themselves any changes. Well the serfdom spoiled soles being the mean of oppression. But nevertheless these were exceptions, the great bulk of serfs was weighed by the slavish share and rose against it from time to time.

The nobility, on the contrary, almost totally consisted of people crippled in the moral attitude. Many public figures and writers spoke about it openly. I shall cite here Chekhov's statement. The writer has enclosed the idea to be expressed by one of heroes of his play "The Cherry garden". Let us listen to what Petya Trofimov says:

“Think, Anya: your grandfather, the great-grandfather and all your ancestors were the landlords owning alive soles and don’t you really see human yeas looking at you from each cherry in a garden, from each leaf, from each trunk, don’t you really hear voices … To own alive soles - in fact it degenerated all of you – those who lived earlier and living now, so your mother, you, the uncle do not notice any longer that you are living in a duty, at the others’ expense, on the account of those people whom you do not let to go further than a lobby …”

Pay special attention to the word degenerated. Yes, it’s really so, a serfdom переродило degenerated soles of noblemen and cancellation of serfdom in 1861 changed little: there was a cancellation of legal dependence of peasants from landowners but economic dependence remained. There still existed a mentality of nobleman: I am an owner, you - my slave. Here now also we shall talk about the Russian officers.

Let us talk now about Russain officers. 

Let's talk and - we shall find out that officers have degenerated to an even greater degree than all nobility as a whole. All such expressions as "the honour I have" and all these talks in general about officer honour is only external attributes like uniforms, epaulets and other gargets.

What is the reason? The matter is that in the days of serfdom absolutely wild custom existed - to enlist nobiliary boys from juvenile age to military service. They grew, spent good time meanwhile their grades grew. This custom refered not only to juvenile, even not born children could be enlisted. Open Pushkin's story "Captain's daughter" and at the very beginning of the story you can find revelations of Petrusha Grinev:

“The mother was still pregnant but I was already written down in Semenovsky regiment as a sergeant, it was a favour of the major of guards – knyaz B - our close relative”.

Here is how business was done. When Petrusha was 17 years his father decided that it’s time to the son to go on service. The behaviour of the young man is very characteristic. He was delighted: "it is difficult - he recollects – to describe my admiration. The idea on service merged in me with ideas on freedom, of pleasures of the Petersburg life. I imagined myself the officer in the guards, that, in my opinion, was top of human well-being”.

Do you think that Petrusha thought everything up by himself? No, certainly, stories about cheerful, carefree officer life which he heard stories from contempoparies and adults influenced a lot. However father of Petrusha was the person with advanced views, he sent the son not to Petersburg but to Orenburg … Well, further Grinev’s adventures are known. I used this example simply wishing to remind of wild custom to write down children of noblemen from the early childhood on service.

The aversion of this custom was stated by Radischev in his "Travel … ". I shall again cite some phrases:

- a staff-officer of seventeen years; the colonel twenty years; the general twenty years … And what father will not want that his children though in the early childhood were in notable grades …

- you can hold one thousand against one that from a hundred of nobles entering service 98 become scapegraces  form the very youth and two from the rest later – in their old age, to tell more correctly …

It’s a curious parity: 98 to 2. However, noble officers led not only wild life but also fairly scoffed at soldiers. Just imagine: on the one hand 18-years officer on service – knowing nothing. He led the childhood and adolescence in lordly luxury. On the other - under the supervision of such officer are recruits, country men who are able to plough, sow, mow, carpenter, etc. These simple peasants happen to find themselves in a double subordination under oppression of the officer and land-owner. Here you are both roughness and cruelty.

The imperial regime encouraged officer’s cruelty. At the time the Prussian system of drilling and discipline under pressure was adopted for the Russian army. First in land-owner place guilty peasants were beat in a stable, now one can mock at them with the help of the rods.

If there were exceptions among officers? Certainly there were. But those were exceptions that is why so many songs and legends were composed about them. For example, Suvorov who "a cracker last with the fighter divided". Denis Davidov who became famous in Patriotic Was of 1812 as the initiator and the head of guerrilla movement. He was true “suvorovets”, respected and loved soldier.

Lermontov in a poem "Borodino" told about such officers - the servant to tsar, the father to soldiers.

Such samples became fewer and fewer. The great bulk of the Russian officers spent time in drunk uproars, cards, love affairs, they treated soldiers cruelly and roughly. XX century began but if there were changes? No changes. Only decomposition of officers that reached absolutely monstrous sizes. Peak of a shame for the Russian army - defeat in the Russian-Japanese war. The society raged.

In May, 1905 Kuprin's story "Poedinok" appeared in print – the story that returned a verdict to all imperial regime and to completely decayed army. Here you are the words that Konstantin Paustovsky wrote:

“Everybody was searching for the reasons of Manchurian defeat. Kuprin in his “Poedinok” expressed what he thinks about the reasons with such a irrefutability that even followers of tsar regime found themselves confused.

 It was impossible to argue with evidence. And this evidence was "Poedinok" - the story and at the same time the document elustrating stupid and decayed up to a core regime and the army kept only on fear and humiliation of soldier, the army which was as though purposely created for inevitable and shameful rout in the first fights”.

Now we shall ask to speak one of heroes of Kuprin’s story - to officer Nazansky. Though he became a drunkard nevertheless kept some rests of conscience. His confession really shakes…

If slavery lasts centuries its collapse will be awful. The more enormous was violence the bloodier will be a punishment. I am deeply, firmly convinced that there will come the time when women begin to be ashamed of us (officers) and at last soldiers will cease to obey.

And it will be done not because we beat those people who are deprived of opportunities to be protected and not because, in the name of official authority we could insult women without being punished and not even because we, having got drunk in pubs, cut to pieces  everyone we met. 

For this and for that, but there is also more terrible and already irreparable fault. We are blind and deaf to all. For a long time somewhere far from our dirty smelly parking huge, new different life is springing up. New, courageous, proud people are appearing, ardent free ideas are lighting up in minds.

And we, having inflated as American Indian cocks, only blink and mumble haughty: "What? Where? Keep silent! Revolt! I shoot!". This turkey contempt for freedom of human spirit will not be forgiven - for ever and ever!"

I advise everyone who trusts as before in existence of any "white idea" to re-read Kuprin's "Poedinok".

There was no "white idea"! There were white officers terrified to lose their habitual life. You say - they loved their Native land? Yes, they did, but only the native land from the small letter that is their nobiliary manor in which it was possible to live magnificently due to another's work.

You say - they had an officer honour? Yes, some of them had, but only very insignificant part of them. The majority of white officers degenerated their "honour" in competitions who will drink more, who will tempt more women.

You say - they had a dream of unique and indivisible Russia? Yes, certainly. For example Kornilov agreed with Germans about passing Petrograd to their possession. Americans and Englishmen hinted Kolchak that in case of his victory a part of Siberia will be given to England and the USA. Murmansk will “go” to Frenchmen, the Far East – to Japanese. Well the remained slice of Russia will be possible to declare "unique and indivisible"!

So whether the White Guards had a dream? Certainly they had. But it was the scanty, egoistic dream. The dream focused on the past. But people did not want to return to the past therefore didn’t follow the White Guards. Why was Vrangel the one who kept longer than others? Because his army consisted mostly of the officers.

Why did Kolchak stand for quite a long time? Because a lot of interventionists fought on his side. Simple people didn’t want to find themselves in his army. They were violently recruited, those ones who didn’t obey were shot or hung up. 


White movement is an attempt of the despaired white officers to grasp fragments of the rotted through regime. Therefore “white” dream is a dream rotted through, mean, reactionary. People followed “red” dream, the dream of the communists. This dream called into the future. This dream joined people together. I have already cited Herbert Wells's words that communist idea possessed huge creative force. It was admitted even by Lenin’s opponents, Berdyaev said:

 - Decomposition of imperial Russia has begun long time ago. By the time of revolution the old regime has absolutely decayed and exhausted … Folks were disciplined and organized in circumstances of Russian revolution through communistic idea, through communistic symbolics. This is an indisputable merit of communism before Russian state.

Here you are an answer to a question why Bolshevics won and White Guards were defeated. “The red dream” turned into the won. It was a victory of the Kremlin dreamer - Vladimir Lenin.


In other::