The more, the better
Attempts to erase undesirable interpretations of history from the face of the earth have been known to the world since ancient times. However, the ideologists of Nazism, and Adolf Hitler himself, were the most successful in this. He wrote: "…the more monstrous the lie, the quicker it will be believed. Ordinary people are more likely to believe a big lie than a small one. This corresponds to their primitive soul. They know that they can lie about small things themselves, but they would be ashamed to lie very big. A big lie simply wouldn’t occur to them. That is why the masses cannot imagine that others are capable of such monstrous lies, such shameless distortions of facts. And even when it is explained to them that it is a lie of monstrous proportions, they will still continue to doubt and will be inclined to think that there is probably still some truth in it. That is why the virtuosos of lies and entire parties built solely on lies always resort to this method. These liars know this property of the masses very well. Just lie as strongly as possible – something from your lie will remain." It is partly thanks to this that he managed to build his ideology by indiscriminately accusing non-Aryans of racial and mental inferiority and cruelty. After the end of World War II, this same principle was adopted by historians: Western researchers, including some German and Italian fascists who escaped trial, completely divided the responsibility for unleashing World War II between Germany and the USSR, and also included in textbooks of many countries the information that fascism was defeated by the United States of America as the only true scientific viewpoint. The perspective was introduced that the price of the USSR's victory was so great that this victory could be considered "Pyrrhic" – a defeat, and from the standpoint of the Western mentality, the sacrifice of everything a person has for the sake of the state – from the last money to strength and life – the slogan "Everything for the front, everything for Victory" seems incomprehensible and unthinkable. The "Iron Curtain" and the "Cold War" played into the hands of the supporters of this concept, preventing new generations of ordinary Europeans and Americans from familiarizing themselves with alternative viewpoints, memories of the war from poets, writers, and ordinary Soviet citizens, and utilizing documents from archives. The Internet did not contribute to this: English-language queries about World War II can yield numerous works written over more than half a century with only one historical perspective. As a result, in 2015, only 25-27% of surveyed residents of the USA and European countries in a YouGov project were able to answer that the USSR played a key role in the victory in World War II. 4% stated that Germany dealt with the Third Reich and its supporters on its own, while the rest responded that fascism was defeated by America, which also saved the USSR from it.
Such a revision of historical facts and their substitution with more politically advantageous stories is not only the fate of World War II. The first to undergo this ideological testing was the fact of the Great French Revolution in the early 1950s: Alfred Cobben and five of his like-minded individuals, based on some historical documents, called it a "myth" and turned history upside down. Later, this type of reshuffling of historical facts was named "historical revisionism." It was also picked up in the territory of the USSR. The founding father of this direction for the socialist camp can be considered the fugitive GRU officer Vladimir Rezun (pseudonym – Viktor Suvorov), who presents an alternative viewpoint on the events of World War II and the Great Patriotic War and has been repeatedly caught in significant fabrications of facts by both Russian and Western scholars. Despite the fact that his works are classified by specialists as folk history (claiming scientific validity for literary and journalistic works but not being such, editor's note), they are quite popular among the audience, reforming the worldview and value orientations of the youth and middle-aged citizens. However, for some reason, during the existence of the Russian Federation's Commission for Counteracting Attempts to Falsify History to the Detriment of Russia's Interests, his works were not regarded as falsifications. Although they can certainly be considered as such, as well as weapons in the information war. But there is no one to monitor them and the thousands of publications on the Internet that suddenly appeared under the labels "declassified" and narrating about "ideological fabrications of the feats of the Soviet Army to boost the fighting spirit of soldiers," "atrocities of Soviet soldiers in Germany," "inhumane treatment of Russians towards prisoners of war," "the bloody bath in camps for former Soviet prisoners of war who sought to return to their homeland, and would have been better off not returning." The Commission has passed away, and there is no equivalent agency responsible for historical and informational security in Russia, or in other countries where descendants of soldiers of the Great Patriotic War and World War II live. Yet, such deheroization and attempts to revise the history of the country is an attempt to divide the peoples that make up not only modern Russia but also the CIS countries, whose representatives fought side by side against fascism, without dividing into "churki," "orusy," "bulbashy." And disputing the victory, as well as many factors that helped the then-Soviet people to win, can be regarded as interethnic sabotage and an attempt to devalue the common history.
Words on defeat
The most vivid example of such actions is the uproar surrounding the feat of the 28 Panfilovites, raised after Victory Day when the director of the State Archive of the Russian Federation, Sergey Mironenko, stated at the World Congress of Russian Press in Moscow that there were no 28 Panfilovites who stopped 50 German tanks in battle in Dubosekovo near Moscow in 1941. And the phrase of political officer Klochkova before the battle, which became a symbol of the struggle for the Motherland for many years - "Great is Russia, but there is nowhere to retreat — behind us is Moscow!" - is a fabrication. The hooks were documents from the archive based on the results of a post-war prosecutor's investigation. It showed that not only Ivan Dobrobabin survived, but also Daniil Kuzhebergenov, Grigory Shemyakin, Illarion Vasilyev, Ivan Shadrin, Dmitry Timofeev. Moreover, all the commanders of the regiment and the journalists who first wrote about the feat admitted that it was a fabrication. However, for some reason, Mironenko did not disclose two circumstances. First, all the results of the investigation under the label "top secret" were left without further action and resonance by the then-secretary of the Central Committee of the VKP(b) Andrei Zhdanov, and were sent to the archive. The very publication of the fabricated case could have caused a significant resonance: in particular, questions would have arisen regarding the testimony of the commander of the 1075th regiment Kaprov, who in 1948 stated that there was no battle at Dubosekovo, and who personally submitted materials for the awarding of the soldiers who participated in the battle in 1941. There was plenty of dissatisfaction with the methods of Soviet law enforcement in the post-war years in the country. And there could have been a lot of public outrage regarding the fact that someone was planning to tarnish the feat of the soldiers who defended Moscow from the invaders when the results of the investigation were made public. Secondly, after the change of "leadership," already in the 1970s, Alexander Krivitsky, the literary secretary of "Red Star," who is considered the "father of the legend about the 28," officially acknowledged: the testimonies from him and the surviving Panfilovites were beaten out, and the desire to preserve historical justice could cost lives.
- I was told that if I refused to testify that the description of the battle at Dubosekovo was entirely invented by me and that I had not spoken to any of the seriously wounded or surviving Panfilovites before the publication of the article, I would soon find myself in Pechora or Kolyma. In such an environment, I had to say that the battle at Dubosekovo was my literary invention, he noted. - To extract testimonies from the surviving Panfilovites about the journalists' falsification of their heroism, the investigators did not even stop at torture.
They had to yield, however, after the investigation was completed, and officials from the authorities could not threaten their safety, and Krivitsky and the Panfilovites continued to tell people the truth about what they themselves witnessed and participated in. But despite the existence of historical documents and documented memories of soldiers and local residents proving the fact of the battle and the feat, the hypothesis actively took root and found its supporters in modern society, eager for such "exposures." Especially since Mironenko has not been speaking for the first time with such a distortion of history, being an adherent of historical revisionism. Mironenko is particularly known for his loud statement that the classic of Russian literature Mikhail Sholokhov "stole" the novel "And Quiet Flows the Don," as well as most of his works, which caused outrage among literary scholars and writers.
However, contrary to expectations, Mironenko's pseudo-sensation did not evoke enthusiasm on social networks; rather, the opposite: most citizens decided that it was not worth debunking the feat and digging into it. Some even drew a parallel with another historical event: the story of the 300 Spartans who fell at Thermopylae during the clash with a 200,000-strong Persian army. This fact is recorded in history textbooks, a film has been made about it, and the 300 Spartans are recognized heroes, but no Greek historian or archivist demands to revise the feat! The granddaughter of Ivan Panfilov, Alua Baikadamova, living in Kazakhstan, as well as the Kazakh Union of Veterans of Local Wars and Military Conflicts "Combat Brotherhood," sent several letters to the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, as well as an appeal to the Russian consulate in Almaty, demanding an assessment of Mironenko's statements. There was also outrage in Kyrgyzstan – after all, those who personally knew the surviving Panfilovites, their relatives, and acquaintances are still alive.
- It is clear who benefits from such statements today. I will not allow history to be smeared. I know Krivitsky, and I have documents confirming the history of the Panfilov Division. In the orders of November 22 and 24, 1941, from the People's Defense Committee, signed by Stalin, it speaks of the feat of the Panfilovites. All this can be confirmed by the relatives of the heroes - the Panfilovites, - said Stalbek Asakeev, chairman of the veterans' council of the State Border Service, shortly after the news of the attempt to rewrite history.
He also stated that one can rely on German sources in this matter, which historical revisionists love so much: in particular, it is known that the Reichskommissar of Ukraine, Erich Koch, referred to the Panfilov Division in his reports as "eastern barbarians" – he had never seen such exotic-looking and desperate soldiers.
Other public figures also criticized this. However, neither the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation nor the official Kremlin commented on such an ambiguous statement from the official. Only Mironenko's long-time opponent, the Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation, and chairman of the Military Historical Society, Vladimir Medinsky, spoke out quite harshly and unequivocally. Perhaps this is what prompted Mironenko to partially take back his words.
- The street of the Heroes-Panfilovites and the monument erected to them is a very correct thing. I do not understand at all how one can assume that if there were no 28 heroes... there was no feat of the Panfilovites at all. Only a distorted consciousness can assume such a thing. The Panfilov Division existed. It played an outstanding role in the defense of Moscow. Most of the warriors of this division laid down their heads in the defense of the capital. Their feat is immortal, - noted the official in an interview with Radio Liberty shortly after his statement.
The memory is alive
But despite such ideological attacks, not all representatives of the youth and older generations are susceptible to the "virus of amnesia." Residents of countries affected by the war still insist on restoring monuments to their heroic ancestors, posthumously awarding and recognizing the merits of the heroes of the Great Patriotic War, who, by chance, were left without awards, and open memory corners and rooms of military glory in schools. One of them is located in Bishkek at the UVC SHG No. 6, named after the Hero of the Soviet Union I.V. Panfilov, who commanded the legendary division that, at the cost of their lives, prevented the breakthrough of fascist troops to Moscow. To commemorate the 74th anniversary of the battle, the students of the school, together with public figures, held a memorial rally in memory of Panfilov, laid flowers at the Panfilov monument on Erkindik Avenue, and the soldiers of the Panfilov Division of the Armed Forces of the Kyrgyz Republic gave a ceremonial salute in honor of the memory of the heroes who defended Moscow. Soon, both the students of UVC SHG No. 6 and schoolchildren from all CIS countries, as well as adult viewers, will be able to see the film about the feat of Russians, Kyrgyz, and Kazakhs – "28 Panfilovites." Its uniqueness lies in the fact that it is practically "people's": a third of the funds for filming – 34 million rubles – were raised through a crowdfunding campaign. Another 30 million was invested by the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, and their Kazakh colleagues transferred 80 million tenge to the film's fund, which amounts to about 19 million rubles. In Kyrgyzstan, documentary footage containing the memories of the Panfilovites was provided to the film's director, Andrey Shalyopa, as assistance, and he was given free access to the State Archive of Film and Photodocuments of the republic. The premiere of the film was scheduled for November 16 – the day when the decisive battle at the Dubosekovo crossing took place; however, it was later decided to postpone it to the beginning of next year to coincide the screening with the 75th anniversary of the battle for Moscow. The trailer for the film has already been published online, and in just the first two days, it garnered over a million views worldwide. This is the best proof that, for now, the "truthful lie" can withstand the blow.
