When is a revolution expected in Russia? Will there be a revolution in Russia: forecast of scientists What will happen if a revolution is arranged.
To understand when there was a revolution in Russia, it is necessary to look back at the era. It was under the last emperor from the Romanov dynasty that the country was shaken by several social crises that caused the people to oppose the government. Historians single out the revolution of 1905-1907, the February revolution and the October year.
Background of revolutions
Until 1905, the Russian Empire lived under the laws of an absolute monarchy. The king was the sole autocrat. The adoption of important state decisions depended only on him. In the 19th century, such a conservative order of things did not suit a very small stratum of society from intellectuals and marginals. These people were guided by the West, where the Great French Revolution had long since taken place as a good example. She destroyed the power of the Bourbons and gave the inhabitants of the country civil liberties.
Even before the first revolutions took place in Russia, society learned about what political terror is. Radical supporters of change took up arms and staged assassination attempts on top government officials in order to force the authorities to pay attention to their demands.
Tsar Alexander II ascended the throne during the Crimean War, which Russia lost due to systematic economic lagging behind the West. The bitter defeat forced the young monarch to embark on reforms. The main one was the abolition of serfdom in 1861. Zemstvo, judicial, administrative and other reforms followed.
However, the radicals and terrorists were still unhappy. Many of them demanded a constitutional monarchy or even the abolition of tsarist power. The Narodnaya Volya organized a dozen assassination attempts on Alexander II. In 1881 he was killed. Under his son, Alexander III, a reactionary campaign was launched. Terrorists and political activists were severely repressed. This calmed the situation for a while. But the first revolutions in Russia were still just around the corner.
Mistakes of Nicholas II
Alexander III died in 1894 in the Crimean residence, where he improved his failing health. The monarch was relatively young (he was only 49 years old), and his death came as a complete surprise to the country. Russia froze in anticipation. The eldest son of Alexander III, Nicholas II, was on the throne. His reign (when there was a revolution in Russia) from the very beginning was overshadowed by unpleasant events.
First, in one of his first public speeches, the tsar declared that the desire of the progressive public for change was "meaningless dreams." For this phrase, Nikolai was criticized by all his opponents - from liberals to socialists. The monarch even got it from the great writer Leo Tolstoy. The count ridiculed the emperor's absurd statement in his article, written under the impression of what he heard.
Secondly, during the coronation ceremony of Nicholas II in Moscow, an accident occurred. The city authorities organized a festive event for the peasants and the poor. They were promised free "presents" from the king. So thousands of people ended up on the Khodynka field. At some point, a stampede began, which killed hundreds of passers-by. Later, when there was a revolution in Russia, many called these events symbolic allusions to a future big trouble.
The Russian revolutions also had objective reasons. What were they? In 1904, Nicholas II got involved in the war against Japan. The conflict flared up over the influence of the two rival powers in the Far East. Inept preparation, extended communications, a capricious attitude towards the enemy - all this became the reason for the defeat of the Russian army in that war. In 1905, a peace treaty was signed. Russia gave Japan the southern part of Sakhalin Island, as well as lease rights to the strategically important South Manchurian Railway.
At the beginning of the war, there was a surge of patriotism and hostility to the next national enemies in the country. Now, after the defeat, the revolution of 1905-1907 broke out with unprecedented force. in Russia. People wanted fundamental changes in the life of the state. Discontent was especially felt among the workers and peasants, whose standard of living was extremely low.
Bloody Sunday
The main reason for the start of the civil confrontation was the tragic events in St. Petersburg. On January 22, 1905, a delegation of workers went to the Winter Palace with a petition to the tsar. The proletarians asked the monarch to improve their working conditions, increase wages, etc. There were also political demands, the main of which was to convene a Constituent Assembly - a popular representation on the Western parliamentary model.
The police dispersed the procession. Firearms were used. According to various estimates, between 140 and 200 people died. The tragedy became known as Bloody Sunday. When the event became known throughout the country, mass strikes began in Russia. The dissatisfaction of the workers was fueled by professional revolutionaries and agitators of leftist convictions, who until then had carried out only underground work. The liberal opposition also became more active.
First Russian Revolution
Strikes and strikes had different intensity depending on the region of the empire. Revolution 1905-1907 in Russia, it raged especially strongly on the national outskirts of the state. For example, the Polish socialists managed to convince about 400,000 workers in the Kingdom of Poland not to go to work. Similar riots took place in the Baltic States and Georgia.
The radical political parties (Bolsheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries) decided that this was their last chance to seize power in the country with the help of an uprising of the masses. The agitators worked not only on peasants and workers, but also on ordinary soldiers. Thus began the armed uprisings in the army. The most famous episode in this series is the uprising on the battleship Potemkin.
In October 1905, the united St. Petersburg Soviet of Workers' Deputies began its work, which coordinated the actions of the strikers throughout the capital of the empire. The events of the revolution took on a most violent character in December. It led to battles on Presnya and other parts of the city.
October 17 Manifesto
In the autumn of 1905, Nicholas II realized that he had lost control of the situation. He could suppress numerous uprisings with the help of the army, but this would not help get rid of the deep contradictions between the government and society. The monarch began to discuss with those close to him measures to reach a compromise with the dissatisfied.
The result of his decision was the Manifesto of October 17, 1905. The development of the document was entrusted to a well-known official and diplomat Sergei Witte. Prior to that, he went to sign peace with the Japanese. Now Witte needed to have time to help his king as soon as possible. The situation was complicated by the fact that two million people were already on strike in October. Strikes covered almost all industries. Rail transport was paralyzed.
The October 17 Manifesto introduced several fundamental changes to the political system of the Russian Empire. Nicholas II had previously held sole power. Now he has transferred part of his legislative powers to a new body - the State Duma. It was supposed to be elected by popular vote and become a real representative body of power.
Also established such public principles as freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of assembly, as well as the inviolability of the individual. These changes became an important part of the basic state laws of the Russian Empire. Thus, in fact, the first domestic constitution appeared.
Between revolutions
The publication of the Manifesto in 1905 (when there was a revolution in Russia) helped the authorities to take the situation under control. Most of the rebels calmed down. A temporary compromise was reached. The echo of the revolution was still heard in 1906, but now it was easier for the state repressive apparatus to cope with its most implacable opponents who refused to lay down their arms.
The so-called inter-revolutionary period began, when in 1906-1917. Russia was a constitutional monarchy. Now Nicholas had to reckon with the opinion of the State Duma, which could not accept his laws. The last Russian monarch was a conservative by nature. He did not believe in liberal ideas and believed that his sole power was given to him by God. Nikolai made concessions only because he no longer had a way out.
The first two convocations of the State Duma never completed their legal term. A natural period of reaction set in, when the monarchy took revenge. At this time, Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin became the main associate of Nicholas II. His government could not reach an agreement with the Duma on some key political issues. Because of this conflict, on June 3, 1907, Nicholas II dissolved the representative assembly and made changes to the electoral system. III and IV convocations in their composition were already less radical than the first two. A dialogue began between the Duma and the government.
World War I
The main reasons for the revolution in Russia were the sole power of the monarch, which prevented the country from developing. When the principle of autocracy remained in the past, the situation stabilized. Economic growth has begun. Agrarian helped the peasants to create their own small private farms. A new social class has emerged. The country developed and grew rich before our eyes.
So why did subsequent revolutions take place in Russia? In short, Nicholas made the mistake of getting involved in World War I in 1914. Several million men were mobilized. As in the case of the Japanese campaign, at first the country experienced a patriotic upsurge. When the bloodshed dragged on, and reports of defeats began to arrive from the front, society began to worry again. No one could say for sure how long the war would drag on. The revolution in Russia was approaching again.
February Revolution
In historiography, there is the term "Great Russian Revolution". Usually, this generalized name refers to the events of 1917, when two coup d'etat took place in the country at once. The First World War hit hard on the country's economy. The impoverishment of the population continued. In the winter of 1917 in Petrograd (renamed because of anti-German sentiment) mass demonstrations of workers and townspeople began, dissatisfied with the high prices for bread.
This is how the February Revolution took place in Russia. Events developed rapidly. Nicholas II at that time was at Headquarters in Mogilev, not far from the front. The tsar, having learned about the unrest in the capital, boarded a train to return to Tsarskoye Selo. However, he was late. In Petrograd, the disgruntled army went over to the side of the rebels. The city was under the control of the rebels. On March 2, delegates went to the king, persuading him to sign his abdication. So the February Revolution in Russia left the monarchy in the past.
Restless 1917
After the beginning of the revolution was laid, the Provisional Government was formed in Petrograd. It included politicians previously known from the State Duma. They were mostly liberals or moderate socialists. Alexander Kerensky became the head of the Provisional Government.
Anarchy in the country allowed other radical political forces, such as the Bolsheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries, to become more active. The struggle for power began. Formally, it was supposed to exist until the convocation of the Constituent Assembly, when the country could decide how to live on by a general vote. However, the First World War was still going on, and the ministers did not want to refuse to help their allies in the Entente. This led to a sharp drop in the popularity of the Provisional Government in the army, as well as among the workers and peasants.
In August 1917, General Lavr Kornilov tried to organize a coup d'état. He also opposed the Bolsheviks, regarding them as a radical left-wing threat to Russia. The army was already moving towards Petrograd. At this point, the Provisional Government and Lenin's supporters briefly united. Bolshevik agitators destroyed Kornilov's army from within. The rebellion failed. The provisional government survived, but not for long.
Bolshevik coup
Of all domestic revolutions, the Great October Socialist Revolution is best known. This is due to the fact that its date - November 7 (according to the new style) - has been a public holiday on the territory of the former Russian Empire for more than 70 years.
At the head of the next coup stood Vladimir Lenin and the leaders of the Bolshevik Party enlisted the support of the Petrograd garrison. On October 25, according to the old style, the armed detachments that supported the communists captured the key communication points in Petrograd - the telegraph, post office, and railway. The Provisional Government found itself isolated in the Winter Palace. After a short assault on the former royal residence, the ministers were arrested. The signal for the start of the decisive operation was a blank shot fired on the Aurora cruiser. Kerensky was not in the city, and later he managed to emigrate from Russia.
On the morning of October 26, the Bolsheviks were already the masters of Petrograd. Soon the first decrees of the new government appeared - the Decree on Peace and the Decree on Land. The provisional government was unpopular precisely because of its desire to continue the war with Kaiser's Germany, while the Russian army was tired of fighting and was demoralized.
The simple and understandable slogans of the Bolsheviks were popular with the people. The peasants finally waited for the destruction of the nobility and the deprivation of their landed property. The soldiers learned that the imperialist war was over. True, in Russia itself it was far from peace. The Civil War began. The Bolsheviks had to fight for another 4 years against their opponents (whites) throughout the country in order to establish control over the territory of the former Russian Empire. In 1922 the USSR was formed. The Great October Socialist Revolution was an event that heralded a new era in the history of not only Russia, but the whole world.
For the first time in contemporary history, radical communists came to power. October 1917 surprised and frightened Western bourgeois society. The Bolsheviks hoped that Russia would become a springboard for starting a world revolution and destroying capitalism. This did not happen.
The protest against raising the retirement age turned out to be just one of the slogans of these speeches. As historians say, this is only an excuse, but not a reason. Judging by the broadcasts, the posters in different cities were much more radical: “Down with the Tsar!”, “Putin is a thief!” etc. The initiator of the speeches was the movement of Alexei Navalny, unregistered by the authorities, who, moreover, was again behind bars in September. But this did not prevent the mass nature of the protests, and perhaps, on the contrary, it only spurred it on. The main thing is that people take to the streets not “for Navalny”, but for their own rights, which shows that this politician, whose name is forbidden to be mentioned on TV in Russia, managed to “ride the wave”.
In Moscow, the rally from Pushkin Square dispersed in a multitude of columns through the center of the city right up to the Kremlin. In St. Petersburg, this day was marked by unprecedented mass detentions. But one should not get hung up only on the capitals - similar, mainly youth actions took place yesterday in dozens of Russian cities. Of course, the official media kept silent about them, but the social turning point is obvious.
The fact is that the elections scheduled for September 9 did not arouse any noticeable public interest, no matter how hard the authorities tried to attract voters to them. The electoral system in today's Russia is built in such a way that no real opposition candidates have the opportunity to run, and therefore the result of these "elections" is absolutely predictable.
For example, according to official data, less than a third (31%) of voters voted for Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, according to official data. These are mostly obedient officials and “propagated” state employees. A simple calculation shows that Sobyanin was elected for a new term by only one-fifth of Muscovites with the right to vote. And since the turnout threshold has been abolished, even if all Muscovites boycotted these “elections”, and Sobyanin voted only one for himself, then such a result would be considered valid.
When elections are turned into an outright farce, power itself opens up a revolutionary perspective. This is an old lesson of history, but in Russia it seems that it has not yet been learned ...
The head of Navalny's headquarters, Leonid Volkov, considers yesterday's events very positive and promising. In his opinion, these are the largest protests this year, covering 83 cities and bringing together up to 100 thousand people in total. Moreover, the speeches took place despite the lack of approval from the authorities and the preventive arrests of the leaders of the regional headquarters. This means that society has set in motion and no longer wants to wait for “permission” from the authorities to protest. Obviously, this is a clear sign of the maturation of a revolutionary situation ...
“The authorities of St. Petersburg staged a military operation against the inhabitants. Road traffic has been blocked, thousands of soldiers and policemen have been rounded up, barbed wire has been brought in, the metro station has been closed, bridges have been blocked - and all just to prevent citizens from holding a peaceful protest. What happened today in St. Petersburg is a shame for the city. People were seized without explanation, beaten, among the detainees were elderly people and young people - all of them, according to the authorities, are dangerous. The number of detainees is still unknown, since many are still sitting on buses and have not been taken to the departments. But the number is in the hundreds. The main and only danger comes from the authorities themselves, which first approved the rally and then banned it.”
In Soviet times, Leningrad was proudly called the "city of three revolutions." Perhaps this historical account is not over yet...
And in Moscow, some protesters stayed overnight with posters near the monument to Pushkin. And today, judging by Youtube channel, a small rally there continues. This vividly reminded me of my student years in the era of perestroika, when almost continuous public debates took place on Pushkinskaya Square. The police dispersed them from time to time, but the people gathered again. And those whom the Pravda newspaper condescendingly called "outcasts" soon won historically...
The authorities seek to suppress the revolution with violence, but the revolution is not necessarily violence on the part of the revolutionaries themselves. The experience of the Eastern European velvet revolutions shows that they won when the former power itself could no longer hold on, because it had lost its meaning. The current Russian authorities are still trying to convince the people that they are protecting them from the West, but this propaganda no longer works when people notice that the authorities are covering up their own predatory policy with these patriotic phrases.
In essence, the revolution in Russia will simply be normal, free elections, which were canceled in the era of Putin's vertical. The main question posed on September 9 - is the story going on?
Russian political scientists, sociologists and economists vied with each other that a revolution in Russia in 2018 is possible. In particular, experts insist on its implementation if the government does not reduce the degree of indignation that has grown in the public in recent years.
Most of the inhabitants of the state are dissatisfied with the actions of officials, people crave a change of power and hope that only this way will return the former well-being to every family. This article will tell about the future of Russia, as well as about the revolutionary mood of citizens.
A few years ago, in 2014, society was stirred up by a message about an impending one that was ready to overwhelm all of Russia, ruthlessly erasing traces of prosperity and joy from people's lives. In those days, economists, heads of banks, and the government of the Russian Federation itself, argued at every turn that this is a false statement, the crisis will not harm the country, because it can be easily prevented.
Officials categorically refused to accept the fact that hard times had come in the state, and it was time to "put things in order in it." But you can’t fool people: they began to save on many familiar things and even on food. It would seem that the situation that occurred in 2008 is repeating itself, and it knocked many out of the established life track.
Various sad and gloomy events took place in 2014, most Russians were forced to leave the country in a hurry and go abroad in search of better conditions. At the end of 2014-2015, the Russian government finally recognized the “invasion of the crisis” and began to develop large-scale anti-crisis measures, but all of them were practically invalid, because time had already been lost. It was at that moment that people started talking about a possible revolution that would happen in 2018.
When will the revolution start?
Nobody undertakes to predict the exact date of the beginning of revolutionary actions. This is such unexplored territory, completely dependent on the desire of the citizens of the Russian Federation, that even clairvoyants and astrologers refuse to build accurate forecasts.
Some political scientists and sociologists, based on polls and other statistical data, say that the revolution may unfold in 2017, because it is this year that the main unrest of citizens falls.
Others argue that mass rallies, protests and demonstrations will be associated with the upcoming presidential elections. Perhaps people will not be satisfied with the outcome of the race for the presidency, so they will decide on such radical actions.
Scenarios of the revolution in Russia
In order to understand what to prepare for, we propose to consider several scenarios according to which the revolution in the country will possibly develop. All these hypotheses were developed by experienced specialists, so the chances of their implementation are quite high.
Riot
As you can see, mass indignation is already beyond simple conversations. Residents of Russia do not sit peacefully on benches under the entrance - they go out to the squares of their cities with posters and loud slogans.
In institutes and other educational institutions, students are surveyed in order to determine their position in life, because modern youth, in most cases, is a participant in rallies, and not always peaceful ones.
Sociologist Natalya Tikhonova believes that mass demonstrations and protests are “still flowers”, active offensives can begin as early as the end of 2017 and last for several months, affecting.
In addition, law enforcement exercises are organized in various regions, where OMON and SOBR fighters are “trained” to stop riots. This means that officials are already preparing for the revolution, although they do not fully believe in it.
A crisis
Leading European economists raise doubts about the revolution in Russia in 2017-2018. They are sure that protests in the country are possible with a probability of 50% and will not be radical. In addition, the 2017-2018 Bloomberg Top Threats ranking also does not mention the revolution.
But this rating speaks of a severe economic crisis that will deal a serious blow to Russia. Experts predict a repeat of the Asian crisis of 1997, caused by the actions of Donald Trump, who unleashed an economic war with China.
Russian economists agree with similar statements. They expect a new round of the global economic crisis, because the economy in the world is subject to cyclical fluctuations and another "jump" in the negative direction can be expected already in 2018-2019.
Revolution in the mind
The political situation in the country can radically change not due to a revolution, but because of a new ideology in the minds of modern citizens. Well-known political scientist Valery Solovey does not support the theory of bloody revolutionary protests.
He is sure that people will stop hating the government and will simply consider it not legitimate. Because of this, it will lose its influence and significance for every Russian.
What do predictors think about the revolution?
Modern people often trust the predictions of clairvoyants who lived many centuries before the events taking place in our country. Such soothsayers were Vanga, Nostradamus, Wolf Messing and others. If we look at their records regarding 2018, then everyone has a different opinion about the immediate future of the country.
Nostradamus claims that Russia should not expect something good and bright during this period, because the time of cataclysms, wars and mass protests is coming. Vanga said that in the period from 2010 to 2020, the Russian Federation will try to regain its former greatness and rise significantly in the ranking of successful countries in the world.
Wolf Messing generally pleases with his predictions - at the beginning of the 21st century, Russia will become a superpower and other countries will be equal to it.
Revolution for Russia today is a dubious prospect. However, some experts predict characteristic unrest in the country in the near future. And this is all despite the government’s “tightening the screws” policy being discussed by them, after the 2011 election rallies, and even despite the large-scale amnesty for so-called political prisoners that took place on the eve of the 2014 Olympics in Sochi.
Let's start off with who and for what reasons needed a revolution in Russia in 1917? There are different opinions on this matter, for example, a politician Nikolai Starikov believes that all the revolutionary upheavals carried out in our country were due to the influence of the West, namely the British Empire, which has been striving for world domination since the 17th century and saw it in the Russian Empire as the main competitor.
According to Starikov's theory, both the revolution of 1905 and the uprising of 1917 and even the overthrow of communism in the 90s were paid for and provoked by Western British agents. The main intention of which was through internal clashes to undermine the existing government in the country and lead Russia to a voluntary collapse.
Nevertheless, Europe, if it really aspired to this, has not yet been able to translate into reality its seemingly well-thought-out and cruel plan. The mistake of the British was that in February 1917, after the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of dual power in Russia, the situation shook so strongly that the internal revolution could no longer do without the establishment of a new political regime. That is why, as a result of the supposedly violent coming to power of the Bolshevik Party in October 1917, headed by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the British allowed a socialist experiment to be carried out in our country. But in this case the British underestimated Lenin himself, who turned out to be a great leader and a serious politician.
Having gained power, the Bolsheviks, despite the collapse of the former empire, which reigned with might and main in Russia in the autumn of 1917, by the spring of 1918 began an active restoration of the country.
There are versions that the prerequisites for the revolution of 1917 in Russia lie in the restless mood at that time in the lower strata of society. Somehow - the lack of food, distrust of the German imperial wife (I remind you that during these years the First World War was going on, where Russia was at war with Germany) and the policy pursued by the tsar, as well as the desire of the peasants to have their own lands. Dissatisfaction with the policy of the king was also observed among circles around the government. Summarizing this information, let's summarize - and the people, and the state officials close to Emperor Nicholas II, to a greater extent, were not satisfied with the power and actions of the monarch. That is why the main slogans of the February Revolution were such words as "Down with the King!" and "Of bread!".
But were the people so hungry in the conditions of the First World War then going on, as in other warring countries? Not! In Russia at that time there was not even the issuance of food by cards, the first coupons appeared only as a result of the overthrow of the monarchy, under the interim government. In this regard, perhaps, Starikov's opinion about the influence of the British - an external influence on the internal rocking of different strata of the people, really took place.
Was the tsar of the Russian Empire so inactive at the time of the revolutionary mood? In this matter, there is no point in denying that Nicholas II did not show due firmness in dispersing the very first revolutionary-minded demonstrations in Petrograd. Perhaps if the uprisings had been stopped in a timely manner, no more powerful surge would have occurred, but everything happened according to a different scenario, which, perhaps, the king himself could hardly believe.
The result of the February and October revolutions was a radical upheaval in the political and social life of Russia.. Looting, massacres of officers and the rich, the release of prisoners from prisons, a civil war, and only then - a course towards restoration, the formation of a new society and new values, the formation of socialism.
It took our country many years and wise leaders to put in order both the political and economic and social situation in Russia. At first, after the disastrous fall of the monarchy, the state turned into an abyss of disasters, but over time, history began to level out. And as a result, such achievements followed - as the complete electrification of the country, the general education of the people - the elimination of illiteracy, the fight against the consequences of the Civil War, the provision of free medicine to all citizens of the Soviet Union, the mass construction of residential buildings, factories, canals, hydroelectric power stations, general industrialization. Victory in the Second World War, the construction of the subway, the creation of a hydrogen bomb, the development of such undeveloped territories as Siberia, the Urals, the Far East, and finally, the flight of man into space! All this is just a fraction of the events and transformations that took place in Russia after the overthrow of the monarchy and the coming to power of the Bolsheviks...
But, as many people know, in the course of such a rapid development of the Union and the strengthening influence of the USSR on the world stage, the country began to gradually move into a stagnant state. On this score, there are many opinions and theories about the possible elimination of the then stagnation and the further development of the country, but already as history, we have the existing consequences - the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Someone connects it again with the influence of the West and the United States on Gorbachev, someone with the incompetence of the country's leadership and the disproportions of the extensive economy, which led to a shortage of goods and empty shelves in stores. Someone claims that Russia simply could not have had any other way of development- it inevitably went towards capitalism, someone is still trying to live according to the principles of the past, tirelessly remembering the Soviet order and customs.
However, I am considering here the question of revolution. And if it is possible to call it those transformations that took place in our country in the period from the beginning of Perestroika announced by Gorbachev and until 1991, when Yeltsin came to power almost by force, then I am inclined to say that the consequences of Perestroika led Russia to a new revolution - the results of which we reaped throughout the 90s.
It must be said that and the post-perestroika coup and the revolutions of 1917, if they were financed by the West and were aimed at the collapse of Russia, they were also powerfully supported by people ignorant of these issues - almost unconditionally, due to real discontent. Where in the case of the overthrow of the monarch people fought for land , and during the end of the restructuring - for the opening of borders and against the deficit that has formed everywhere.
However, both in the first and in the second case, the rates of the Western governments were made incorrectly, which eventually led to cardinal transformations in Russia, temporary unrest, but the preservation of its territories and resources within the country. Those Soviet republics that separated from our state, which joined the European Union, as well as others striving for independence for one reason or another, did not in the least affect Russia's loss of influence on the world stage.
It is amusing that both in the situation with Vladimir Lenin, to whom the British experimentally entrusted the power of a huge country, and in the case of Vladimir Putin, who was appointed to the post of President by some irony by the oligarchs of the Yeltsin era, came to the leading position in the state, the tricks of the West turned into a complete fiasco.
Why did this happen? Perhaps because opponents did not calculate the strength of the once future leaders of the largest country in the world. Perhaps there are other reasons as well. As a result, the last coup in Russia, which took place in the 90s and turned the country onto a new path of capitalism, led to the fact that at the helm of the state stood a man who has a clear position on the West and the United States, and builds a rigid vertical of his own power, within which it is almost impossible to "rock the boat of the revolution".
And now I want to return to the question of the possible emergence of a revolution in Russia in the near future, predicted by some apparently pro-Western experts.
If we look at the history of the coups discussed above, then all of them are connected, in addition to enemy intrigues, with direct discontent among the masses. At the moment, there are many citizens in Russia who are not satisfied with either their standard of living, or the shortcomings of medicine, or the thickness of someone else's wallet.
However, to say that the people do not have bread or there is no other product that was almost completely absent on the shelves during perestroika is simply ridiculous today.. Shops are overflowing with goods, the world of the modern Russian is simply splashing with the variety of existing offers and opportunities.
Who can start a revolution in such conditions?
Yes, the oppositionists are shouting at us from all stands about corruption in the country, and the theme of all the rallies in late 2011 - early 2012 was the fight against the party of "crooks and thieves", but answer me, when were fair elections in our country? When was there no corruption in our country? And at least one revolution in Russia , perhaps, the truth, skillfully introduced to our people in the subcortex by the West, happened against corruption and theft?
No. The mentality of a Russian is so arranged a priori - he does not know how to fully comply with the law. Perhaps,every third compatriot at least once faced with the submission and or accepting a bribe. This is our society. And society cannot fight against itself . Isn't it obvious?
So who needs a revolution in modern Russia?
Naturally - those who intend to destroy this country, those who have laid eyes on our resources and territorial expanses. And who will go here in Russia to revolt against the existing government? Obviously, those who will become fugitives tomorrow are pro-Western people, young people with iPhones and iPads, who will be demonstratively dispersed and whom people from factories and government agencies will never follow. The latter don't care about the West, or corruption, or what the President does.
Speaking about the civil society of Russia, one can say only one thing- he is not. Perhaps people living in St. Petersburg and Moscow believe that they are able to overcome objectionable authorities, attract the attention of the world community, and even receive some letters as "fighters for a free Russia" again from Western human rights organizations. But if these same "fighters" go along the Trans-Siberian Railway to the deep part of the country and start similar conversations with calls for the "overthrow of power" there – locals will twist a finger at the temple looking them in the face.
The people who vote and support the current government are those 120 million citizens living outside the Ring Road and the Moscow Ring Road. These people are more than anything afraid of instability, because they were the ones who starved in the 90s and stood in endless lines for sausage in the Union.
For these Russians, the current President – guarantor of their stability . Moreover, the Urals, Siberia and the Far East generally live their own lives, and they do not care about the wars in Chechnya, or Western grants, and even more so before the revolution. Unfortunately for the opposition and fortunately for the preservation of the territorial integrity of Russia - our compatriots quite often may be displeased with the current government, but they will never tear themselves away from their everyday issues for the sake of dubious transformations of the whole country.
In addition to these purely observational factors, there is another point worthy of attention and indicative. As a result of the low birth rate after the collapse of the USSR, at this stage in our country the level of a young socially active society is rather meager in quantitative terms. That is, thanks to the instability of the 90s, we now have a deplorable demographic situation.
Now tell me who will go to make a revolution?
Our parents who survived the collapse of the Union? Our still "young" uncles and aunts - whose generation almost completely "burned out" on singed vodka and dubious drugs? Or we? Those who have everything - education, and the ability to freely communicate on the Internet, move around the world, and the prospects for getting an interesting job? Against what should we go to rebel and most importantly for whom?
As long as the rallies, which, by the way, were banned as part of the “crackdown” policy, will be held by well-to-do pro-Western oppositionists, nothing will change in our country. The only thing that will follow because of such "events" is the tightening of the law, the strengthening of the vertical, the creation of an increasingly inflexible image of the country's government in the eyes of Western society.
In addition, the impossibility of a revolution in Russia, envisaged by the policy of Vladimir Putin, is indeed able to guarantee us both economic and social stability. Here I do not mean the global economic crisis, which inevitably affects each state in its own way. Is it within the framework of such living conditions that someone will have a desire to destroy everything and turn the country 180 degrees in a new, incomprehensible direction?
In addition, in order for a coup to take place, and this is obvious even for those oppositionists who violently rallied in December 2011 in St. Petersburg and in Moscow, a country like Russia needs a leader - a person who can take the place of the President, a person who the people will believe. In the meantime, such a character is not visible on the horizon, there can be no talk of any coup! Nobody wants to live in troubled times. Moreover, today's Russian society, in which the impression of all the charms and shortcomings of the Soviet period, as well as the August coup, still burns with too vivid a memory ...
But Is a revolution in Russia so impossible as it is seen from existing trends and facts? In fact there is a variant of sudden and unpredictable development of events in our country. And it may be related with the sudden departure of Vladimir Putin from the post of President.
Naturally, our President will not be able to give up the post of head of state for no reason, and in general, such an outcome is rather doubtful. However, Putin is also a man who clearly cannot live forever. But what awaits Russia after Putin? – should be the main question for contemporaries.
Probably, such a situation would become excellent ground just for the revolution, again agitated by Western agents. Perhaps this event would have provoked the entry into the arena of a certain successor - just as unbending and autocratic. The coming to power of pro-Western capitalists is also not ruled out. In any case, Russia is waiting for a new and unstable, shaky position for a couple of decades, in the worst case, a long-awaited for Europe the collapse of the country into separate tidbits of resources.
And, despite the fact that the revolution in Russia today is a dubious, albeit predicted by a number of experts, prospect, Russian society must be prepared for the fact that such a turn of events does take place. What can this lead to? - a question of the future, which only the prophets can predict. How to behave in a spontaneous revolution? - you can ask your parents, since the history of our country over the past century is rich in such twists and turns. What should we be afraid of? - the collapse of the integrity of the country and, as a result, the seizure of natural resources by foreign states.
What do you think about the revolution in Russia? Is it possible in today's conditions?
Everything will happen at lightning speed. During the day we will hear about small riots, and in three or four hours the center of the Russian capital will be crowded with thousands of columns of demonstrators. The first shot towards the people will be the suicide of the authorities.
The well-known Russian political strategist, doctor of historical sciences, professor at MGIMO Valery Solovey believes that a revolution will take place in Russia and in his article he described the scenario for the development of events.
At the same time, Valery Solovey prefaces his article with the following words: “I will repeat once again, especially for lovers of political denunciations. Everything that is written in this note is nothing more than a summary of what I have stated in my articles and books over the past few years. Moreover, some of these publications were awarded with awards and prizes.
Here is the text of this publication by Valery Solovyov in full:
“All revolutions are the same, like the happy families of Leo Tolstoy. All of them go through three stages in their development: the moral delegitimization of the current government, mass political protest, and the overthrow of the old regime. Sometimes these stages practically coincide in time, sometimes they are separated from each other by some interval. For Russia, most likely, the second is true.
Moral delegitimization is also a revolution, but a psychological one. It always precedes a political revolution. Before overthrowing the government, people must massively despise and hate it. This is exactly what is happening in Russia now. In the parliamentary elections, the "party of crooks and thieves" suffered a moral and political defeat.
Despite the grandiose machine of administrative pressure and falsifications, it lost more than 10% in comparison with the results of the last elections and did not achieve the goal of a constitutional majority. And this is according to official data. According to unofficial, but quite reliable, "the party of crooks and thieves" lost in all major Russian cities, including Moscow and St. Petersburg. Only the North Caucasus and some other national republics remain its reliable support. (Now, I hope, it is clear why the North Caucasus is heavily subsidized to the detriment of the Russian regions?)
This is not the end, or even the beginning of the end, but the end of the beginning. The structure of power, lovingly nurtured and nurtured for the past 11 years, began to fail and crumble. In a number of regions, the bureaucratic corps played cautiously but consistently against the EdRa.
At the same time, people are not yet ready to take to the streets en masse and defend their right to free choice. The unanimous vote against the "party of crooks and thieves" does not automatically lead to a collective street protest.
Moreover, after the parliamentary elections, there will be a decline in public activity for some time, which the authorities consider with relief as stabilization. But in reality this will turn out to be nothing more than a temporary pause before a new stage of the revolution. The HOW the presidential elections will be held will give a powerful new impetus to the moral delegitimization of power. But even more important will be the actions of the authorities after the elections.
Contrary to popular belief, revolutions are not necessarily preceded by a deep socio-economic crisis and mass impoverishment. Many revolutions took place against a backdrop of relative social prosperity. Incomparably more important for the political revolution is the so-called "revolution of expectations", that is, the situation when people lived well and hoped to live even better, but their hopes suddenly collapsed. This "revolution of expectations" our fellow citizens will fully experience next year, when it turns out that the authorities are not going to fulfill the pre-election promises, there is no money in the treasury and it is necessary to tighten their belts. It is easy to imagine the reaction of the military and police, who will be able to pay the promised increase in salaries for only a few months.
It is next year that the so-called new “social” (but in fact completely anti-social) laws on education and medicine will come into force, depriving the population of the opportunity to receive quality medical care and education free of charge. In 2012, the fiscal pressure on businesses and the population will sharply increase. Meanwhile, all studies say: increased fiscal pressure from a morally illegitimate government is a direct road to revolution.
Everything starts suddenly. Revolutions always start unexpectedly even for the revolutionaries themselves, the day and hour of none of them was predicted. By no means an ordinary mind of his era, Ulyanov-Lenin wrote bitterly in January 1917 that his generation would not live to see the revolution in Russia, perhaps children would see it.
An insignificant occasion will give impetus to a grandiose dynamic. Anything can serve as this reason: a street picket, a small rally, a spontaneous blocking of the road, the funeral of another victim of ethnic crime, a car hitting a woman with a child with a flashing light (If the straw is dry, sooner or later it will light up). And suddenly - and this is always "suddenly" - a small group of people will begin to turn into a crowd of many thousands, which will move into the city center, sweeping away the flimsy police cordons along the way.
Everything will happen at lightning speed. In the afternoon we will hear about small riots, and in three or four hours the center of the Russian capital will be flooded with thousands of columns of demonstrators, who will be joined by riot police. This is how a nation is born.
And what about the authorities, is it really not going to resist? Will try, of course. It is unlikely, however, that people who are afraid of whistling at a concert will muster the courage to give the order to open fire on civilians. Unless they really want to repeat the fate of Ceausescu and Gaddafi.
And it is absolutely incredible that SUCH orders were carried out. Those who give them away can hope to escape to their billions, accumulated by overwork in the field of serving the Motherland, but where do the executors of criminal orders flee? And crimes against humanity, as you know, have no statute of limitations and do not deserve indulgence.
The first shot towards the people will be the suicide of the authorities. Foreseeing its own future, it does and will do everything to delay its own end. However, the notorious Russian “tightening the screws” will only lead to the breakdown of the rusty thread and the final destruction of the power structure. Violence emanating from a morally illegitimate regime causes not fear and submission, but an explosion of indignation and an irresistible desire of the masses to overthrow it - such is the axiom of revolutions.
This, by the way, is the answer to those who associate the revolution with mass violence and bloodshed. Is there an idea for which those in power are willing to die? Or will there be fanatics willing to die for their offshore accounts?
Those who are obsessed with profit inevitably lose to people driven by the desire for freedom and justice. All revolutions in European countries over the past 20 years have been peaceful and bloodless, and Russia will not be an exception. Even in Romania, the overthrow of the Ceausescu regime was accompanied by only local and short-term violence.
Peaceful revolutions happen very quickly. The question of power in Russia will be resolved as quickly as in 1917 and 1991 - in three or four days ... "
Tags: Russia, Politics, revolution