Get ink

The current anniversary of the February Revolution is characterized by the fact that the official power has almost pulled away from it. As it turned out, the idea put forward by Vladimir Putin, the idea of ​​using the centenary of the revolution to promote national reconciliation does not work, since the anniversary of the events of 1917 is still perceived in a purely party spirit, with polar differences in estimates. Therefore, it was decided that the first persons of the state would not lead the anniversary commissions and glow at events. Here is a striking contrast with the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, held under the slogan "Victory is our everything." The anniversary of the revolution decided to give to the public, including scientific, as little as possible connecting it with the state.

Neither Putin, nor Medvedev, nor members of the government considered it necessary these days to talk about the overthrow of the autocracy - associations with modernity are too dangerous. But those representing the party in the authorities of the Political Range lower than their negative attitude towards the revolution do not hide. She is striving to present her with the result of either a conspiracy (liberals, Masons, revolutionaries, Germans, allies, Bolsheviks or Marxists, etc.), or an accidental combination of circumstances. Vyacheslav Nikonov called the February revolution of "irresponsible and non -poatical", adding: "There can be no sense of pride associated with February events and the subsequent renunciation of Nicholas II. We should recall these events with a sense of remorse or even shame." The deputy even the word "revolution" is afraid to use, so that, God forbid, you can’t get trouble.

Nikonov echoes another Uneneros, Senator Vladimir Dzhabarov. He, however, is not inclined to be touched by the figure of the last Russian king, ranked by the Russian Orthodox Church to the face of saints. Nikolai, according to Dzhabarov, renouncing the throne, threw the country "in such a difficult period of" World War. And he calls the February revolution herself "a revolution-spoke on the overthrow of the current (!) Emperor." And then he adds that even after the abdication of the emperor, one could follow the path of “creating a presidential republic, then there would be no shocks that Russia survived, and it would be much easier for us to all.” Only Putin was not found in February.

But the famous deputy Yevgeny Fedorov and Nikonov are polemicizing: the February revolution was "irresponsible", but was not "non -poatry", because "then there was no question about the separation of Poland, or about the separation of Finland, or about the transition to the federal structure." In fact, how it stood! Almost immediately after its creation, in March, the Provisional Government introduced the Finland Constitution, which provided the Grand Duchy of almost complete autonomy, although already in July, motivating this with military considerations, dispersed the Finnish Sejm. Then it recognized the right of Poland, by that time occupied by the Austro-German troops, to independence. And everything was not so simple with the federation. Its creations urged the national movements in Ukraine, in Transcaucasia, Central Asia, Estonia, Latvia, Cossack regions in the North Caucasus, and the Provisional Government could not not be considered with these requirements. It did not reject the idea of ​​autonomy, but postponed its implementation before the convocation of the Constituent Assembly.

In general, it should be noted that in the anniversary year in the Russian media there are practically no publications about the national revolutions that followed the February revolution in Petrograd. The 1917 revolution still, quite in Soviet traditions, is represented as something unified within the framework of the Russian Empire.

Another United Russia, Senator Arkady Chernetsky, sees in the February Revolution the conspiracy of the generals against his commander-in-chief-imperator and complains: “In the pre-war years, the situation in the Russian Empire was not critical, the country moved in the right direction. And instead of strengthening democratic institutions even in the conditions of the existence of the monarchy or somehow move on to the democratic form moment! "

Even the communist Vasily Ikonnikov, although he believes that the revolution was due to economic and social reasons, but is still forced to make a reservation: "The revolution is not good for any country - you must always try to go evolutionary means." And according to the reference, Mikhail Emelyanov, who also called the revolution tragedy, "the Elite, who betrayed the emperor," destroyed the empire. " In this, he is in solidarity with the monarchist Yegor Kholmogorov, who claims that the elite "waged an underground war against the sovereign." And, of course, on the monarchical sites, the February Revolution appears in the form of a Masonic conspiracy and the first " color ", that is, arranged by external and internal conspirators, a revolution in history. The conspiracy see that the Masons seemed to use the State Duma, the city thoughts and zemstvos to create the authorities of future power, and also played an important role in the congresses of teachers, doctors, agronomists, etc. At the same time, all the liberals and all socialists are attributed to the Freemasons to the right of the Bolsheviks. In Soviet times, they were called the "petty -bourgeois counter -revolution", and now "Masons."

Meanwhile, serious historians have long proved that the 1917 revolution was a completely objective process, and not the result of any conspiracy. So, Sergei Nefedov convincingly demonstrates that all wars, starting with the Crimean, the Russian Empire led to the limit of its capabilities and all of them were accompanied by internal riots. The inflation caused by the war sooner or later gave rise to the food, aggravated by the low land of the peasantry. During the First World War, inflation was especially high, manufacturers held bread, counting on raising prices, and the crisis in the supply of cities began at the end of 1916, and in February 1917, having reached the climax, naturally led to spontaneous unrest in Petrograd, without any conspiracy overgrown with the revolution.

I will add that, being the poorest of all the great powers participating in the war (except Japan), Russia by February 1917 suffered the greatest losses killed and prisoners. It is not surprising that it was enough only for two and a half years of military hardships. And the revolution was inevitable, even if the autocracy by some miracle got out of the February crisis. Then, already in April, the offensive of the Russian army would follow, which would be as failure as Nivel's offensive on the Western Front, which caused the "rebellion of the hundred regiments." And then the explosion of soldier's discontent would inevitably give rise to a revolution in Russia. You can't get away from history.