"Waska listens and eats." Of course, this picture, as already mentioned by previous reviewers, is biased and absolutely custom-made. And party bosses are all right. But all those who have no alternative to criticizing the Soviet economy in general either judge it biasedly or have not studied the history of twentieth-century Russia. By the 1970s, the USSR had turned from a dynamically developing state through the efforts of corn kings and Bessarabian agronomists of various bottling into an irreversibly decrepit organism, the mobility of which was ensured by fake party slogans that no longer had any basis. But no one remembers the period of the construction of the Soviet statehood, when production grew rapidly, and the prices of consumer goods steadily declined, i.e., the period from 1922 to 1954 (note - prices fell in the period 1945-1953). With those who will splash saliva to claim that it was done at the barrels of the punitive VChK-OGPU-NKVD – all, I think, understandable – Gaidar and Chubais applaud you, and Echo of Moscow nervously awaits your interview.
But the fact remains that with the coming of maize and their brilliant agronomists to power, the USSR rolled into tar-tarars. To begin with, these “anti-repressants”, while simultaneously hanging themselves with medals of orders, ruined Tselina, considering Stalin’s plans to prevent soil erosion by planting protective forests with ravings of an old man who imagined himself, then, when it became clear that the bloody dictator was not such a fool, he was bred with greasy, crooked, party-menklatura hands, at a time when northern Kazakhstan was already mercilessly deserted. Then they “undertook” the watering of Central Asia, subsequently destroying the Aral Sea. Plans for the construction of the Transpolar Railway, which have barely been revived, have been canceled. They began to transfer all advanced and high-tech production to the border republics to the detriment of the RSFSR. They ruined the plans of the bloody Beria to build a large aircraft carrier fleet, because the "moral-Pots" knew better what they needed; now 11 AUGs themselves know who completely dominate the world's oceans, and our jersey patriots boast that we have the cruiser "Moscow" and a couple of "Orlans" ("Peter I" da "Admiral Nakhimov"), with power plants which "not everything is so simple"; and in general shipbuilding - so far, we can build more than 45000 tons of our military ships. In addition, the planners, who, apart from Capital and the CPSU charter, believed nothing in the pursuit of the elimination of the vestiges of capitalism, destroyed what the Bolsheviks somehow preserved - the artel associations, and in general the market sector of the economy that existed in the USSR until the mid-1950s; this "felt" to them in the form of clumsy attempts by Kosygin and to conjure something in the mid-1960s. We will keep quiet about state farms and logistics. When the inertia of the first Dokhrushchev five-year plans ended, it was time to think that it was not possible for the bald-headed spectacles to defend their candidate and doctoral studies, but only in line with the Party line.
That the magic of Marx’s maize and economists did not know well is evident at least from the film to which the review is being written. Similar, by the way, filmed a lot, and “Prize” (1974), and “We, the undersigned” (1980), and “Meeting of the party Committee” (1977) – what this, I have already described in my own way in the review of the “Prize”: typical “distractional”, they say “don’t worry”, “don’t think”, “we ourselves know that we are crooked”, “we will fix everything, tolerate, see, even in the movie ourselves ridiculed”. Only they were useless - the hypocrisy, which was then reflected in such paintings, made itself felt after 1985, when the party princelings dropped the poster hypostases and showed the residents of the Union their real murmur. By the way, the cadres on the ground did not change much even after 1991, there and to this day sit the descendants of the time imitated, "democrated" Trotskyists.
What happened to the “elite” of the USSR after 1953-1956 can be allegorically seen in Prosper Merime’s novel Tamango, where the same, brainless, but power-hungry and acquisitive leader Tamango is the image of the party nomenklatura, which debunked in 1956 not only the “mult of their personalities”, but also the foundation of the USSR, which, nevertheless, turned out to be so strong that it needed to be broken as early as 1991.
6 out of 10