The revelations of "daddy's storyteller Mueller"
A conversation about Professor Andrei Zubov should generally begin with the fact that he is a typical person. Neo-fascism is rearing its head not only in some of the former Soviet republics, but also in Europe.
They try to downplay the horrors of Hitlerism and the scale of the crimes committed by that government, at the same time underestimating the degree of their complicity in them - after all, all of Europe either surrendered to the Third Reich, or allied with it openly and ideologically, and now they are ashamed to remember this, they do not want to. And they are trying to downplay the role of the Soviet Union in the victory over this monster, and in general to appoint the Soviet Union itself to the role of the monster. If you remember everything, it turns out that a fair amount of the atrocities of the fascist regime in the occupied territories were committed by the occupied citizens themselves, and not at all from the SS, but of their own free will and with enthusiasm.
All this was foreseen a very long time ago, many decades ago. Some foresaw that their time would come when it would be possible to start rewriting history, and people would accept it, while others foresaw these plans and half a century ago we were warned of this danger.
Through the mouth of Müller, the chief of the Gestapo, in Julian Semyonov's novel "Seventeen Moments of Spring", this plan was already voiced at that time:
“The gold of the party is a bridge to the future, it is an appeal to our children, to those who are now a month, a year, three years old ... Those who are now ten do not need us: neither we, nor our ideas; they will not forgive us hunger and bombing. But those who now do not understand anything yet will tell legends about us, and the legend needs to be fed. We need to create storytellers who will transform our words in a different way, accessible to people in twenty years. . As soon as somewhere instead of the word "hello" they say "heil!" to someone's personal address - you know, they are waiting for us there, from there we will begin our great rebirth! "
Andrei Zubov is just one of those "storytellers who will transform the words of the Nazis in a different way, accessible to people in seventy years." And he is not alone, there are many of them.
But let's listen to what Zubov says in his interview with Radio Liberty:
“Back in the“ Coffee Maker ”of our institute, I told my friends how, they say, it’s a shame that Stalin didn’t lose the war to Hitler. and would replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime. Hitler is the angel of Russian history. "
We are all more or less aware of how the allies planned to "liberate" us - fortunately, the documents on the "Unthinkable" plan, in which it was assumed that the Allies, together with the captured Nazis, would again attack the Soviet Union weakened by the war, and by common efforts will finish him off completely - all this has already been declassified today. As well as Churchill's hysterical telegram, in which he begs Truman to subject the USSR to atomic bombing.
But the most interesting thing is the justification of murderers, war criminals and executioners by the fact that someone (allegedly) committed even more terrible crimes. This is absolutely Vlasov's position, because Vlasov also fought against Hitler at first, but then he considered that Hitler was “a lesser evil” than Stalin, and began to kill his people, to fight against his country on the side of Hitler.
The evolution of the intellectual, or "and here they knocked from below"
Characteristic is the gradual evolution of the views of Zubov, who in 2011 still criticized Vlasov for his betrayal, but radically changed his attitude to the Vlasov problem, and in general to the characterization of the war as Patriotic, about which he even wrote a whole textbook “History of Russia. XX century ”, from which at the time of publication even Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn had distanced himself, who at first embraced the idea of creating such a project with great enthusiasm.
However, Zubov and his co-authors in the book agreed to the point that even Solzhenitsyn - not the most, to put it mildly, a big fan of Stalin - decided that this was too much for him and refused to co-authorship and demanded that the data on his participation be deleted.
The typical method used by Zubov, whitewashing the fascists and justifying them and their accomplices, is to ascribe big crimes to someone else. Although it is not clear how one atrocity can be justified by another. Here is a typical example from the professor's speeches:
"Bandera" were called fascists, although, of course, this was not true. It was a typical nationalist organization of the war period with its own army, with its own terrorist wing. Then many acted in this way. Of course, some leaders of the Ukrainian national movement were carried away by the idea of Mussolini's corporatism. But Mussolini still called Joseph Stalin his best student. I think that Stalin was a greater fascist than Bandera and even Mussolini.
That is, according to his logic, the Banderaites are not fascists because allegedly Stalin was a greater fascist than Bandera. Or here's another:
Everything was attributed to the Banderaites: the genocide of the Ukrainian people, and the extermination of Jews, and cooperation with Hitler and all imaginable atrocities. The Banderaites are an example of the great lie of the Soviet system. Although from the point of view of the science of history, it was a national liberation movement, anti-communist.
A very interesting approach, especially considering that the genocide carried out by the Banderaites was not only documented, but also officially recognized by European states - for example, Poland, which recently condemned the Volyn massacre as a genocide of the Polish people.
But Zubov finds a justification for the crimes of Stepan Bandera's supporters:
Bandera was a hundred times less cruel than the Beria or Abakumov NKVD, which fought against the Bandera. Therefore, any attempt to free them from this state was already an element of justice. And in this sense, the Bandera movement is more justified from the point of view of morality than the Stalinist Soviet state.
It is completely incomprehensible how the atrocities of the Banderaites against civilians and, in general, all the war crimes committed by them independently and jointly with the Nazi troops are connected with the post-war attempts of law enforcement agencies to bring them to justice for these atrocities. Zubov deliberately makes a "mess" to compare the incomparable.
In reality, the Banderaites were recognized war criminals who knew exactly what they had done and tried to avoid responsibility. That is, Zubov does not consider real fascists and their accomplices to be fascists. And who does he consider to be fascists? You will laugh, but ... us!
Now we have no return to the USSR. All property is owned not by the state, but by a dozen people. All who cooperate with the authorities receive their share of the property. By all economic parameters, our regime is not socialist. It is much more reminiscent of the regime of the fascist state, where private corporations were created under state control. It is no accident that the fascist state was called corporate. This corporate capitalism is now being built in Russia.
Thus, according to Zubov, the fascists are not fascists, but Russia, which defeated the fascists, is a fascist state. In exactly the same way, Zubov justifies the parades of SS veterans. Recall that according to the decision of the Nuremberg Tribunal, the SS was recognized wholly a criminal organization. That is, no part of the SS, no unit can be considered legal and not involved in war crimes - the tribunal condemned the entire organization wholly, and specifically mentioned this fact in a separate paragraph - that no exceptions can be made for anyone.
In fact, the whole of Europe knows that the parades of SS veterans are a direct violation of the verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal, but everyone turns a blind eye - these are the new members of the EU and NATO, how can you criticize them! Zubov does not criticize them either, although he writes history textbooks.
In a word, in the list of the PARNAS party under the honorable third number is not just a Russophobe, but a person with openly Vlasov views, who justifies the crimes of the Nazis and their accomplices on the territory of our country and justifies the neo-fascists of our time. As they say, when he thought that he had already reached the very bottom, they knocked from below.
And before that, he wrote a school history textbook - and his hair stands on end from what "history" he wrote there. He also taught at MGIMO - and also for many years. And we wonder where people come from who despise their country! So they were not just taught this, but demanded to learn exactly the "necessary" version of history on pain of "twos" and deductions.
Now he travels around the cities of Russia and speaks at rallies with Kasyanov, trying to run for the State Duma. I suppose there is no need to explain to anyone what the appearance of such a deputy in Russian politics will mean.
Specially for
"Hitler is the angel of Russian history." No, these words, blasphemous for everyone in our country, do not belong to the odious Goebbels, but they were uttered just the other day. And it was not at all some fan of Bandera who had taken a sip of vodka, and not a scumbag with a swastika shaved on the back of his head, but a quite fine-looking gentleman with a sleek professorial beard, living in the city of Moscow, Andrei Zubov (on the picture).
By occupation, Zubov is indeed a professor, a doctor of sciences and not just any, but historical ones. And today he is no longer just a historian, but a political activist who is listed as the third in the electoral list of the liberal party PARNAS. And the professor said this ode to Hitler not in his kitchen, but in an interview with the American Radio Liberty. Franking with a reporter about the details of his biography, Zubov admitted that in his youth he was a zealous anti-Soviet. “I,” he said, “back in the“ Coffee Maker ”of our institute, told my friends how annoying it was that Stalin did not lose the war to Hitler. Because all the same, in the end, the allies would free us, but then the British and Americans would establish democracy in our country and replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime. "
Considering that this was not enough, Zubov, answering the questions, then “gave a pair”, adding: “In comparison with Stalin, Hitler is an angel of Russian history”.
The liberal historian explained this monstrous comparison by the fact that Stalin exterminated more people than Hitler. However, this does not change anything. To call the possessed Fuhrer an "angel" in any context is blasphemy and cynical mockery of the memory of millions of his victims.
However, such a statement was made by Zubov, of course, not by accident. The professor had already mentioned Hitler before, back in 2014, during the annexation of Crimea to Russia.
In an article published in the Vedomosti newspaper, he compared this fateful event for Russia with ... the Hitlerite Anschluss of Austria. “In Germany,” wrote Professor Zubov, “99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire, 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day turned into the German Memel. In all these lands, most of the Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation of the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West ... And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician? And six years later Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all started so radiantly! ... History will repeat itself, ”Zubov concludes with false pathos.
The professor's hints from history are clear.
He compares Russia's actions in the case of the return of Crimea to the capture of European states by the Nazis, threatening her with defeat and death, recalling the defeat of Germany.
But wouldn't he, as a doctor of historical sciences, not know that we are talking about completely different events, which under no circumstances lend themselves to comparison? That Crimea revolted only after a coup d'etat was carried out in Kiev and a pro-fascist junta came to power in Ukraine? What on the peninsula, if its inhabitants had not made their historical choice, would have been arranged the same bloody massacre, which the Kiev punishers then staged in the Donbass?
Of course, Zubov knows all this very well, he can't help but know, as a man who taught at MGIMO for many years and, of course, has become quite adept in politics. But why then does he turn everything upside down?
The answer is simple. This is the usual method of liberals - if there are no weighty arguments against the current government, which they call to overthrow, then they must be thought up.
Compare, for example, the actions of the Russian leadership with Hitler, and portray the expression of the will of the people of Crimea as "Russia's aggression."
And Zubov has been doing it for a long time and methodically. For example, he said at one time on "Echo of Moscow" about Nadezhda Savchenko: “Nadezhda Savchenko is a person who clearly did not want to be a hero - she was an ordinary hero of Ukraine, one of thousands of people who stood up to defend their country from Russian aggression then, in the spring and summer of 2014. But God awarded her a special fate - she was captured and accused, as everyone knows, of having had some part in the deaths of Russian journalists ... But in any case, it is quite clear - among the thousands of victims and incredible lawless and southeastern Ukraine over the past two years, even if the Savchenko case has something under it, it drowns in this sea of crimes, which, naturally, were committed by both sides, but the aggressor, of course, was Russia, not Ukraine ... "
But Zubov and his associates are trying in vain. In response to his words of praise about Hitler, a whole storm of indignation broke out on the network.
Here are just some of the comments:
User Dmitry Ermakov wrote: “Nothing new. Read The Brothers Karamazov. Smerdyakov: “In the twelfth year, there was a great invasion of Russia by the Emperor Napoleon the first of France ... and it’s good if these very French conquered us then: an intelligent nation would subdue a very stupid one and annex it to itself. There would even be completely different orders, sir "
Alexei Safronov: “It is not for nothing that Zubov is a member of an anti-people party with foreign funding. This can only be said by a traitor to his own people, who must be prosecuted for promoting the genocide of our people, desecrating the memory of the dead, and for openly calling for betrayal of the Motherland. It was not Stalin who fought the war, but the people who were sentenced to extermination by the very sponsors who financed Hitler and today are financing PARNAS ”.
Elena Ivanova: “Pluralism, in this case, is inappropriate and, it seems, is prosecuted. And how many years did this unfinished Vlasov teacher teach? "
Answering Elena's question, let's say that Zubov taught for a long time. And not just anywhere, but in one of the most privileged educational institutions in Moscow - at MGIMO. From where he was finally expelled recently.
As can be assumed, due to the too original interpretation by the former professor of modern history of Russia. Here, apparently, he got into politics, deciding to break into the State Duma under the wing of PARNAS. What for? And, probably, in order, as his friends, the liberals, urge, "to return Crimea to Ukraine."
Historian Andrei Zubov is one of the first Russian intellectuals to speak out openly against the annexation of Crimea. On July 1, a professor who is in opposition to the Kremlin's official line was fired from MGIMO.
Nevertheless, Andrei Zubov launched an on-line history department on the Novaya Gazeta website. Together with his colleagues, he tries to explain the historical background of the current situation in Russia, the danger of the syndrome of greatness and the need for decommunization.
Explain everything that is still poorly perceived by Russian society.
"If you see that a friend is delusional in a dream, in no case should he be woken up abruptly, he should quietly start to say something pleasant, then the dream will change, and he will wake up in a good mood. This is exactly what we are doing with our sick society, "- says the historian.
Some of the lectures are dedicated to Ukraine. Historians talk about how the Ukrainian national movement arose, who the "Bandera" people are, how alternative forms of political outlook were formed on the territory of our country.
- Why is it important for the Russians to know who the Bandera supporters were right now?
In our common country, the Soviet Union, the technology of creating myths was highly developed. Huge historical stages and important facts were either hushed up or distorted. We hardly knew the real story.
And at different times in different ways: in the 20s, some facts were distorted, in the 40s - others. We are not accustomed to the invaluable historical fact.
Until now, the attitude to history in Russia is not as a science that needs to be studied and which is useful only under this condition, but as an ideology that needs to be created.
In the Soviet Union, in order to stigmatize something, especially after the Second World War, one simply had to call it fascism. So the "Bandera" were called fascists, although, of course, this did not correspond to reality.
It was a typical nationalist organization of the war period with its own army, with its own terrorist wing. Then many acted in this way. Of course, some leaders of the Ukrainian national movement were carried away by the idea of Mussolini's corporatism. But Mussolini still called Joseph Stalin his best student. I think that Stalin was a greater fascist than Bandera and even Mussolini.
| photo: novayagazeta.ru |
Soviet troops were at war with a powerful rebel army on the territory of Ukraine. How do you call it?
To say that these were Ukrainian patriots meant to cross out ourselves. The Soviet government was very proud of the fact that it gave all peoples the right to national revival.
Everything was attributed to the Banderaites: the genocide of the Ukrainian people, and the extermination of Jews, and cooperation with Hitler and all imaginable atrocities. The Banderaites are an example of the great lie of the Soviet system.
Although from the point of view of the science of history, it was a national liberation movement, anti-communist.
Stepan Andreevich Bandera was born and lived in that part of Ukraine, which until 1939 was part of Poland. And he saw all the Soviet horrors from the peaceful and rich (in comparison with Soviet Ukraine) Galicia. He saw how during the Holodomor, when people dying of hunger rushed across the border into Polish territory, they were shot by Soviet border guards. And for this he hated the Soviet regime.
Any nationalism is a terrible joke, especially with a weapon in hand. But Bandera was a hundred times less cruel than the Beria or Abakumov NKVD, which fought against the Bandera.
Therefore, any attempt to free them from this state was already an element of justice. And in this sense, the Bandera movement is more justified from the point of view of morality than the Stalinist Soviet state.
This needs to be explained - consistently and systematically.
After 70 years, the myth about Bandera turned out to be extremely relevant. Suddenly the Russians began to hate the Banderaites en masse. They were also supplemented by myths about the right sector, Ukrainian punishers. All these myths that prevent Russians from thinking critically.
This includes Soviet ideological attitudes.
And this is understandable. For the descendants of the NKVD officers, their grandfathers really fought with Bandera. There are especially many such descendants in Crimea, where former NKVD officers were sent to retire.
- Is there an antidote against this ideological mechanism?
We must calmly explain what the Ukrainian organization of nationalists really was, who Stepan Bandera was, who his associates were. And why the Soviet authorities hated him so much that they were not even too lazy to send their agent in 1959 to kill him with an ampoule of potassium cyanide.
Now, "Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!" Has returned to the cultural turnover. With these words Ukrainian nationalists greeted each other, and now we are. Doesn't that scare you?
Look, now Tatars, Jews and Russians who live in Ukraine call themselves Ukrainians.
I myself happily spoke these words in Moscow. For me, your revolution is the liberation of Ukraine from the Soviet thieves' regime.
This is a great achievement. Moreover, in a way, I believe that this is an example for us.
Because Ukraine for us is some part of this large former state. And she now manages to break through to something more worthy and this is a great lesson for us. Ukraine is being liberated from the Soviet.
 |
| photo: novayagazeta.ru |
But this is how a very small number of Russians think. Most, judging by the ratings of the authorities, want us to return to the stall, under the influence of a certain myth about the "Russian World".
A month and a half before the start of your revolution, one Ukrainian political scientist from Kharkov in a conversation gave a very clear definition of the difference between Ukraine and Russia.
“We are ruled by bandits and the SBU is on their parcels, and you have the KGB, and they have bandits on the parcels,” he told me then. And I must admit, this is an unfortunate truth.
You have a chance to break out of this.
You are now going to Europe. I believe that the Russian Federation should also go to Europe. There is no alternative to the European way.
Do you see the prerequisites for this? It seems that Russia is just confidently stepping into the past. There are no free media, civil rights are violated, but Putin's rating is growing. How do you explain this?
Everything is much more complicated. Firstly, this is not a return to the USSR. All property is owned not by the state, but by a dozen people.
All who cooperate with the authorities receive their share of the property.
By all economic parameters, our regime is not socialist. It is much more reminiscent of the regime of the fascist state, where private corporations were created under state control. It is no accident that the fascist state was called corporate.
This corporate capitalism is now being built in Russia.
Will Putin be able to build a fascist-type state? I think no, not the same global context. At the beginning of the century, after the defeat of the triple alliance powers in the First World War, everyone on the continent was fond of fascism.
The peoples of these countries had a complex that they were deceived, robbed and these peoples needed to achieve revenge.
When it comes to revenge, there is always a need for a national leader and mobilization of the economy. And hence the totalitarian regimes that, to one degree or another, have emerged throughout Europe.
And after 1945, the Western part of Europe came to a completely different concept - from "man is a cell of the national organism" to "man is the main value." This completely different mentality has made it possible to build a new democratic Europe.
Now you are also approaching this understanding.
Why is a different ideology still in demand in Russia, in which a person is a cell of a state organism? Is the field of ideas weak?
Because in our country, as well as in your country, the detalitarianization of consciousness has not been carried out.
In Germany, Austria, Italy, the denazification and defascization of consciousness was carried out. Moreover, this process has been going on for many decades.
And relapses occurred even back in the 90s, when the famous dispute between historians in West Germany and those who actually justified Nazism took place.
In the 90s, the process of decommunization began in the Baltics and Bulgaria. Likewise, the communist period was declared criminal, and the ideologists and leaders of communism were people who committed crimes, and the fighters against communism were heroes. Property taken by the communists was also returned. This is a whole range of measures.
We had none of this. And so we remained bearers of the Soviet mentality. What the world condemns, we still do not even consider bad. And this affects the perception of reality.
Since 1993, I have been talking about the need for decommunization in Russia and in general throughout the post-Soviet space.
- The fact that the Ukrainians began to destroy the monuments of Lenin, can it be considered a request for de-Sovietization?
You started this process intuitively. But in order to systematically approach this issue, it is necessary to study the experience of Eastern Europe.
One cannot be limited to monuments. Lustration is being actively discussed in your society now.
This is very good, but lustration should be not only those who committed crimes under Yanukovych, but also those who committed crimes before 1990.
Yes, they are already old, but at least their crimes must be condemned. The issue of restitution also needs to be addressed. This issue has already been resolved in Poland, the Czech Republic, the Baltic states. Serbia passed a proprietary restitution law two years ago.
By recognizing the confiscation of private property by the Soviet system, one cannot enter a Europe where human rights, including property rights, are respected.
Therefore, Ukraine faces the same tasks. If you do not set them and work in this direction, then you will have a Soviet relapse.
- In Russia, on the contrary, they glorify the Soviet. Is this the relapse you're talking about?
Yes, all the same Soviet people are sitting in government offices. They want to justify the "Soviet" as the basis for the current course of the country.
And, of course, all this talk about decommunization is thrown across their throats, on the contrary, they glorify Andropov. And hence the relevance of the myths of the Soviet period - both about Bandera and the hand of the West.
Crimea is also a Soviet relapse.
Those regions of Ukraine in which Soviet mental forms have been preserved to the greatest extent - Eastern Ukraine and Crimea - they are the ones that gather near the Lenin monuments.
It would seem that Lenin ruined you, killed you, took property and land from your grandfathers. But people do not think critically, they are again guided by Soviet cliches.
- A myth has been created that Ukraine is ruled by a junta, but rather a junta can be called a regime that rules in Russia?
We have rigged elections in 2007, 2008, 2011 and 2012. We are ruled by an illegal illegitimate regime, we do not stop repeating this.
The regime that came to power in your country is, of course, revolutionary. He did not have full legitimacy. But you tried to return to full legitimacy as soon as possible by holding the presidential elections in compliance with all the rules and regulations.
The Ukrainian politicians who have now come to power were called "junta" just because they did not want to deal with them. With Yanukovych, who represented the same thieves' regime as in Russia, it is easy to deal with.
And it is dangerous for the Kremlin regime to deal with politicians who are elected by the people and who see it as their task to build a real democratic state in Ukraine.
It is dangerous for such a state to be close at hand. After all, this is a different Russia.
For many centuries Ukraine has been a different Russia. In Ukraine, under the Lithuanian-Polish state, Magdeburg Law is approved.
This is a different Russia, more European, cultural. In the 17th century, under the first kings of the Romanov dynasty, there was a terrible fashion for Ukraine. Ukrainian scholars-monks, Ukrainian boyars, politicians came to Russia, created schools and taught the tsar's children. Another Russia made a cultural inoculation of Muscovite Russia.
And now there may be a repetition. Not in the sense that Russia will take over Ukraine. And in the sense that independent Ukraine, being very close in culture, language, religion, will be able to give a lot after it has passed this difficult path in European integration and the restoration of those cultural forms that were destroyed during the communist regime.
- How long do you think the "construction" of the new Ukraine will take?
I am already an old man, and I can tell you that I have been working at a construction site all my life: I write, I teach, I speak. But this is our way. Be prepared to devote your entire working life to this.
Formally, you will be able to carry out the reforms in five years. But in order to change the structures of consciousness, you will need more time.
But you can look back and say: "We have built a new Ukraine." You see how hard it is for me in my years to look back and see that so far we have not built anything.
And instead of building the future, we are constantly fighting the past. Wonderful prospects are now open before you, continue to act.
"Hitler is the angel of Russian history." No, these words, blasphemous for everyone in our country, do not belong to the odious Goebbels, but they were uttered just the other day. And it was not at all some fan of Bandera who had taken a sip of vodka, and not a scumbag with a swastika shaved on the back of his head, but a quite fine-looking gentleman with a sleek professorial beard, living in the city of Moscow, Andrei Zubov (on the picture).
By occupation, Zubov is indeed a professor, a doctor of sciences and not just any, but historical ones. And today he is no longer just a historian, but a political activist who is listed as the third in the electoral list of the liberal party PARNAS. And the professor said this ode to Hitler not in his kitchen, but in an interview with the American Radio Liberty. Franking with a reporter about the details of his biography, Zubov admitted that in his youth he was a zealous anti-Soviet. “I,” he said, “back in the“ Coffee Maker ”of our institute, told my friends how annoying it was that Stalin did not lose the war to Hitler. Because all the same, in the end, the allies would free us, but then the British and Americans would establish democracy in our country and replace the cannibalistic Stalinist regime. "
Considering that this was not enough, Zubov, answering the questions, then “gave a pair”, adding: “In comparison with Stalin, Hitler is an angel of Russian history”.
The liberal historian explained this monstrous comparison by the fact that Stalin exterminated more people than Hitler. However, this does not change anything. To call the possessed Fuhrer an "angel" in any context is blasphemy and cynical mockery of the memory of millions of his victims.
However, such a statement was made by Zubov, of course, not by accident. The professor had already mentioned Hitler before, back in 2014, during the annexation of Crimea to Russia.
In an article published in the Vedomosti newspaper, he compared this fateful event for Russia with ... the Hitlerite Anschluss of Austria. “In Germany,” wrote Professor Zubov, “99.08% voted for unification with Austria, in Austria itself, which became the Ostmark of the German Empire, 99.75%. On October 1, 1938, the Czech Sudetenland were also reunited with the consanguineous Germany, on March 22, 1939 - the Lithuanian region of Klaipeda, which in one day turned into the German Memel. In all these lands, most of the Germans really lived, everywhere many of them really wanted to unite with the Hitlerite Reich. Everywhere this reunion took place with fanfare and shouts of jubilation of the crowd, distraught in chauvinistic frenzy and with the connivance of the West ... And everything seemed so radiant. And the glory of Hitler shone at its zenith. And the world was in awe of Great Germany. The accession of regions and countries to the Reich without a single shot, without a single drop of blood - isn't the Fuhrer a genius politician? And six years later Germany was defeated, millions of her sons were killed, millions of her daughters were dishonored, her cities were wiped off the face of the earth, her cultural values, accumulated for centuries, turned to dust. 2/5 of the territory was torn away from Germany, and the rest was divided into zones and occupied by the victorious powers. And shame, shame, shame covered the heads of the Germans. And it all started so radiantly! ... History will repeat itself, ”Zubov concludes with false pathos.
The professor's hints from history are clear.
He compares Russia's actions in the case of the return of Crimea to the capture of European states by the Nazis, threatening her with defeat and death, recalling the defeat of Germany.
But wouldn't he, as a doctor of historical sciences, not know that we are talking about completely different events, which under no circumstances lend themselves to comparison? That Crimea revolted only after a coup d'etat was carried out in Kiev and a pro-fascist junta came to power in Ukraine? What on the peninsula, if its inhabitants had not made their historical choice, would have been arranged the same bloody massacre, which the Kiev punishers then staged in the Donbass?
Of course, Zubov knows all this very well, he can't help but know, as a man who taught at MGIMO for many years and, of course, has become quite adept in politics. But why then does he turn everything upside down?
The answer is simple. This is the usual method of liberals - if there are no weighty arguments against the current government, which they call to overthrow, then they must be thought up.
Compare, for example, the actions of the Russian leadership with Hitler, and portray the expression of the will of the people of Crimea as "Russia's aggression."
And Zubov has been doing it for a long time and methodically. For example, he said at one time on "Echo of Moscow" about Nadezhda Savchenko: “Nadezhda Savchenko is a person who clearly did not want to be a hero - she was an ordinary hero of Ukraine, one of thousands of people who stood up to defend their country from Russian aggression then, in the spring and summer of 2014. But God gave her a special fate - she was captured and accused, as everyone knows, of having had some part in the deaths of Russian journalists ... But in any case, it is absolutely clear - among the thousands of victims and incredible iniquities that have been committed in eastern and southeastern Ukraine over the past two years, even if the Savchenko case has something underneath it, it drowns in this sea of crimes that, naturally, both sides committed, but the aggressor, of course, was Russia, not Ukraine. .. "
But Zubov and his associates are trying in vain. In response to his words of praise about Hitler, a whole storm of indignation broke out on the network.
Here are just some of the comments:
User Dmitry Ermakov wrote: “Nothing new. Read The Brothers Karamazov. Smerdyakov: "In the twelfth year, there was a great invasion of Russia by the emperor Napoleon the first of France ... and it would be good if these very French conquered us then: an intelligent nation would have conquered a very stupid one and annexed it. There would even be other orders, sir."
Alexei Safronov: “It is not for nothing that Zubov is a member of an anti-people party with foreign funding. This can only be said by a traitor to his own people, who must be prosecuted for promoting the genocide of our people, desecrating the memory of the dead, and for openly calling for betrayal of the Motherland. It was not Stalin who fought the war, but the people who were sentenced to extermination by the very sponsors who financed Hitler and today are financing PARNAS ”.
Elena Ivanova: “Pluralism, in this case, is inappropriate and, it seems, is prosecuted. And how many years did this unfinished Vlasov teacher teach? "
Answering Elena's question, let's say that Zubov taught for a long time. And not just anywhere, but in one of the most privileged educational institutions in Moscow - at MGIMO. From where he was finally expelled recently.
As can be assumed, due to the too original interpretation by the former professor of modern history of Russia. Here, apparently, he got into politics, deciding to break into the State Duma under the wing of PARNAS. What for? And, probably, in order, as his friends, the liberals, urge, "to return Crimea to Ukraine."
