Mikhail Vinogradov: "The impossibility of the Soviet Union with a human face"

"Today - 30 years to a referendum on the preservation of the USSR. One of the largest historical myths. Someone invented in the mid -90s that the people shifted their and God's voice - and the politicians trampled down and all that. What was in reality (if I were 15-20 older years - I would write" in fact "). The frontier of 1990 and 1991. The line of the Soviet leadership is growing in the Soviet leadership. The trend, which suddenly began to grow, no one clearly explained to us, although many memoirs (including Gorbachev) have been written, ”writes the president of the St. Petersburg Politics Foundation on his Facebook page.

"There are permissions in the Soviet leadership. A new strange government of Pavlov comes. In Vilnius and Riga, power clashes with the participation of Soviet troops take place. The aesthetics of this trend will be later embodied by 8 and a half persons as part of the State Emergency Committee (" Yandex.cartes "to help you).

The power trend had to somehow be issued. Since the idea of ​​communism was scattered by that time (which ultimately turned out to be fatal for a theocratic state), the theme of counteraction to separatism arose (it was called extremism - although then they did not guess to be called extremism everything). And the topic arises to somehow strengthen and legitimize this trend by holding a referendum on the preservation of the USSR. Even with an indistinct stupid formulation (I won’t retell - you can google).

Preparation for this referendum is with varying success. Some of the Soviet republics refuse to vote, some invent their formulations of questions. And the leadership of the RSFSR behaves the most cunning - it is not against the referendum about sending the USSR to preserve, but at the same time appoints its referendum on March 17 - on the introduction of the post of president of the RSFSR (that is, strengthening the subjectivity of leadership for the torpedoing of the Union). And on March 10, he conducts a record rally on Manezhnaya Square in Moscow in his support.

As a result, on March 17, two referendum passes. Voters decide not to particularly reflect and support both opposing trends. For the preservation of the USSR in 9 republics 77.85%. Including in Russia 71.30%, against - 26.4% (also a lot - this is like now 26.4% would vote for Navalny). But the same voters (71.38%) take and vote for the introduction of the post of President of the RSFSR (in fact, these are the Yeltsin's protresses).

As of March 18, this is what. The power trend was slowly exhausted (and the rally on March 10 became evidence of its impasse). No intelligible mandate was received for anything (conditionally 71.30% voted for Putin and 71.38% for Navalny - what kind of mandate is there). On April 2, the Pavlov government (whose anti -rating after the January exchange of money is slowly striving for Hitler anti -rating) significantly raising prices. A large mining strike begins with the requirements of the resignation of Gorbachev and other justice-deviation-devices.

Feeling that the power trend was drowned in his own illusions, and the miners step on the heels, Gorbachev began on April 23 to redesign the USSR, gathering the leaders of 9 union republics into the Novo-Ogarshevo (thereby leaving the union leadership and, as it were, hinting that the remaining 6 can bring down where they want, since everything is so launched).

On June 12, Yeltsin triumphantly wins the presidential election with 57.3% of the vote in the first round. The power trend has been departing from the knockdown for several months, then in August the State Emergency Committee is organized, in fact, demonstrating the impossibility of the Soviet Union with a human face to the remaining union republics. And all in the end diverge completely - approximately as in 2014, the CIS will die after Crimea, but the Russian audience will not dare to declare this in a rumor.

Summarizing.

1). In 1991, a lot of things were completely. The vote on March 17 was an intrigue (now they would say a purely technological technique) for the design of the power trend. Which by the time of voting was already exhausted. And no mandate was obtained-Russia already intercepted the initiative by the time of voting, selling the interpretation that this vote is not for the USSR, but for the CPSS-KGB-Black GKChP. What was not so far from reality.

2). The voting results were not taken seriously even in the Kremlin, after a month after scoring on it and starting the Novo-Ogarev process.

3). In 1991, voters voted a lot for themselves and themselves were generally confused. The injury from the collapse of the USSR (at least from the Russian layman) will be invented only in the mid-90s. According to the polls of the then VTsIOM, the collapse of the USSR in 1992 was in 6th place in importance for the respondents. Against the background of many economic, social and ordinary trabls, it was not up to geopolitics.

4). It is possible to talk about the significance and twist of voting on March 17 and the immorality of their total ignore. But with the same success we can talk about the betrayal of the results of voting in the battle of Dzerzhinsky and Nevsky. Which was called upon to arrange a power trend, but somehow it did not work out and everyone eventually laughed, parted and forgot. "