Lenin was Evil

If only there were more Russians like Andrei Zubov, a professor of philosophy at the Moscow State Institute of International Affairs, writing in the Moscow Times (good luck trying to find this kind of thing in the Russia press):

In the small town where my dacha is located, the main street is called Soviet Army, and an iron statue of Lenin stands right in the middle of it. Although the children love to play around the statue, it is a terrible place for games. The children’s parents, however, have another opinion. “Let the kids play around Grandfather Lenin,” they say. “Who is he bothering? After all, he is a funny man.”

There is nothing funny about the hundreds — perhaps thousands — of Lenin statues and memorial plaques with his profile still adorning Russia’s cities, towns and villages. As soon as my eye catches a Lenin image, I turn away in disgust. I flinch every time I am on the metro and hear the words over the loud speaker: “Next stop: The Lenin Library.” As a historian, I know all too well what crimes Lenin committed, how much blood was shed as a result of his direct orders, how many millions were killed or suffered from hunger and disease when Lenin and his comrades unleashed the Civil War and Red Terror.

Lenin’s hatred for all religions resulted in endless violence against the Russian Orthodox Church and other faiths. After receiving millions of Deutsche marks from Germany, which helped fund the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, Lenin signed the shameful Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany on March 3, 1918. No leader has done as much harm to Russia as Lenin. If there were no Lenin, there would have been no Stalin, Beria, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov or Gorbachev. Nor would there have been a NKVD or KGB. Without Lenin, there would never have been a Soviet Union, and Russia would have had a completely different fate. Although Russia would probably not have become a paradise on earth, it definitely would not have denigrated into the gulag hell that it became.

There is nothing funny about Lenin. He is evil.

Why, then, are there still so many Lenin statues and Lenin streets in so many Russian cities? It is not because of simple neglect or that nobody has the time or money to dismantle all of them. In fact, many actually have been restored since 1991.

Lenin was the father of the Soviet Union, but that country disintegrated in December 1991. Nonetheless, Lenin has remained Russia’s leader — at least in the legal sense. This is due to President Boris Yeltsin’s decision on Dec. 26, 1991, when the Russian Republic of the Soviet Union was declared to be the legal continuation of the Soviet Union. In his book “Presidential Marathon,” published in 2000, Yeltsin wrote: “It was an absolutely competent, logical and legally sound step — particularly in respect to our foreign affairs, in which we are tied by an entire set of serious obligations.” President Vladimir Putin supported Yeltsin’s decision when he said in 2005 that the collapse of the Soviet Union was “the greatest geopolitical catastrophes of the 20th century. … We preserved its largest part under the name of the Russian Federation.”

On Dec. 26, 1991, Yeltsin could have chosen a different path for Russia’s future — the legal succession of pre-Soviet Russia, which is a completely different legal concept from legal continuation. Legal succession would have laid the foundation for the de-communization of Russia. This would have allowed the country to preserve the old, “White” Russia that the Bolsheviks destroyed on Nov. 22, 1917, when they annulled all Russian laws, including those that protected the people’s property and rights, and in its place created an entirely new government for the “workers and peasants.” For five years after the Revolution in November 1917, the Reds and Whites remained in struggle for power. During this time, pre-Communist laws were observed in White Russia. But in October 1922, the last White army left Russian territory, and the Reds were the victors. On Dec. 30, 1922, the Soviet Union was established, and the Bolsheviks’ illegal, criminal seizure of Russia was completed.

Russia’s decision to adopt legal continuation of the Soviet Union is like Masha Petrova who, after she marries, becomes Masha Ivanova, but she still remains the same person. Similarly, if Lenin is the founder of the Soviet Union, and if Russia is the continuation of the Soviet Union, then everything is clear: Lenin remains the founder of modern-day Russia.

What about the “Old Russia” — the Russia that we lost in 1917? We haven’t found it. In 2002, the Foreign Ministry celebrated its 200th anniversary, but everyone who participated in the celebrations thought that it was a bad joke. The country’s current diplomats are not the heirs of pre-Bolshevik Russia — Prince Alexander Gorchakov or Serge Sazanov. They are the heirs of former Soviet Foreign Ministers Leon Trotsky, Vyacheslav Molotov and Andrei Gromyko. In this sense, the FSB is more honest. In its 90th-anniversary materials, it made no mention of pre-Bolshevik Russia and boasted of its exclusively Soviet lineage: “90 years of the Cheka, NKVD, KGB and FSB.”

So we continue to live in a Soviet country. Today’s Communists are thrilled with this and happy to see their glorious leader in statue form. When they see a Lenin statue, they can cry with ecstasy, “Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will always live!”

But I and millions of Russians are far from ecstatic at the sights of Lenin. We are ashamed that Lenin is still alive. We must remember the millions of victims of Lenin, the churches he bombed, the defiled mosques and synagogues.

I want to live in a genuine Russia, one free of all the attributes of the Soviet Union — its lies and disdain for individual rights — and one without Lenin. I don’t want to live in an imitation Russia, whose only real claim to the pre-Bolshevik Russia is limited to its superficial government symbols — the tricolor flag and the double-headed eagle.

In 2000, Yeltsin, having looked back at the consequences of his decision on Dec. 26, 1991, to turn post-Soviet Russia into the legal succession of the Soviet Union, wrote in his book “Presidential Marathon”: “Now I think to myself, what kind of Russia would we be living in had we chosen another path, if we had revived the legal succession of pre-Soviet Russia — the Russia that the Bolsheviks destroyed in 1917. … We could have lived according to completely different rules — not by the Soviet principles of class struggle … but by laws and principles that respect individual rights. We wouldn’t have to start from scratch and build freedom of the press and parliament that already existed in Russia up until 1917. … Most important, we, Russians, would have felt like citizens of a newfound motherland. … It would have been a bold step to admit our historical mistakes and restore the country’s historical succession. Perhaps some day Russians will want to take that step.”

For the 10 years since Yeltsin wrote those words, Russians have lived in a Soviet Russia. But now, 20 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, a new generation has been born who never spent a day in Lenin’s Soviet Union. Therefore, it will be easier for this generation to build the new Russia that Yeltsin dreamed of. To make that dream come true, a good place to start would be to finally remove Lenin from the mausoleum and to remove all of the Lenins from their pedestals.


16 responses to “Lenin was Evil

  1. Agree with topic…Lenin was Evil ! And all who did support him to get a power – as well.

  2. Billiam Jonez

    Lenin was a great man who deserves respect. He tirelessly worked even after his first stroke (which left him mute and bedridden for days) to help the workers and farmers shake off the shackles of agricultural slavery, solving minor productivity problems in factories and visiting collective farms to see if and how they could be improved. He even helped the peasants build the infrastructure for these new farms on multiple occasions. I would go so far as to compare him to the American president Abraham Lincoln for his tireless efforts to end the virtual enslavement of the Russian people by their Monarchs. Your glorification of the pre-Revolution Russian Empire is certainly couched in romanticized notions of the past. The truth was the Tzars presided over a thousand years of absolute monarchy and serfdom. This even meant not being able to leave your farm without your feudal lord’s permission, a practice mirrored during the Stalin era but certainly not under Lenin. His ideals were clearly not shared by his immediate successors, Stalin especially, and Lenin said as much before he passed in his final testament. The ideals of the revolution (in a nutshell, SHARING AND CO-OPERATION rather than the rampant greed and cutthroat attitudes found in capitalistic or mercantile societies) were wonderful, the outcome of those ideals being turned on their heads and corrupted was the horrendous atrocities of Stalinism and widespread famines due to FORCED collectivization, where previously it had been a voluntarily and gradual process under Lenin, and the police certainly weren’t going around confiscating seed-corn and shooting children for picking up scraps of wheat until Stalin either. Certainly he was not a perfect man, but as for his hatred of religion, is it really hard to imagine WHY he went to such lengths to dismantle the religious establishments within the country? It was because the Church was just as complicit in this process of enslavement and servitude as the Tzars were, and indeed often came out in support of the various Tzar/Tzarina-led crackdowns on peasant mobs who were understandably fed up with the status quo.

    • Someone who has never lived under Communism I supposed?

      • Peasants, by the way, were all freed in 1913, and given land. With my own eyes I saw original documents – death orders to hundreds of people, were under his signature Lenin systematically added: “Absolutely, death squad!” In Lenin’s own words: “There can be no revolution without death squad!” And the rest of your comment is simply ignorant… lie.

        Yuri Spilny
        “Love and Grow Happy and Rich:

  3. Marxist Hypocrisy 101

    Billiam: “Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, War is Peace.”

  4. john christian olalde

    what do you want to be? like u.s.a.? people live in a hypocrite democracy? legalizing same sex marriage,marijuana and prostitution? the land of the fool and the home of the greed?

    killing in the sake of revolution is a just. for god also obeyed the israelites to conquer and to kill.

    in a government in order to succeed. elimination of the opposition is a must. in democracy it tears the dignity and moral value of the people. in democratic country they never respect leaders. instead they whine to something which is impossible to achieve. in democracy people became a gambler,rapist,murderer without a cause,transgender,whiner,anarchist,rallyist,irresponsible,lusty,drugusers,prostitutes,sex maniacs,alcoholic,unlawful,invading of privacy,papparazi and many more. thats what you want? your free? your free to degrade yourself

    • Killing people in a revolution is a must huh. So these are the people you think are good.Stalin, Hitler, Pol pot, Czar Nicholas the 2nd,Mao Ze Dong, also to all you lenin fans lenin in the end of his rule created the NEP (state capitalism) since there where famines he needed capitalism to fix it which it did.

  5. Billiam Jonez: The Tzars also presided over the overthrowing of serfdom in Russia. A sentence is of course an oversimplification of such a complex event. The basic point is: you can level all the criticisms you want at Imperial Russia, however it was moving in the right direction albeit slowly (and far too slowly for the Reds),

  6. What to expect of someone with such demonic face but diabolical acts? Modern history, fabricated for someone’s needs, both on East and the West, usually pictures Lenin as a good, benevolent leader who had misfortune of bad health and couldn’t finish his dreams about communist paradise, while Stalin takes a role of Asiatic, cruel despot. On the contrary; the most diabolic movement ever had been the “red terror” created and inspired with Lenin. It is the only catastophe that, in terms of numbers, brutality and determination of villains outmach Holocaust. Red commissaries, priests of new faith, adviced executors, who were on the age of losing their minds due to massive killings they committed, to drink the blood of their victims because “that will bring them to sobriety again”. Stalin, by historical facts, was responsible for much less deaths than perceived by modern ” hystorians”.And lot of them might be called “righteous kill” because, in famous purges, infrastructure of that satanic organisation, Lenin’s legacy, hade been wiped out. Some light on the matter is brought in, remarkably thorough observation ; The Dictators: Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia by R. Overy.
    In short: the most evil men in all the history is Lenin, Belzebub himself!

  7. To those equating the pre-Soviet regime with the Tsar, the regime overthrown by Lenin was not the Tsar’s it was Kerensky’s government, which was going to be a democratic republic but was overthrown before it could get off the ground.

    And including Kerensky himself most identified with socialism but more in what today would be called “social democracy”.

    People praise Lenin by saying he promoted “sharing and cooperation” over greed. That’s a LIE! He spoke those pretty words but in reality communist party officials got away with special privileges, and the higher up in the party the more privileges you got. Certain schools were made better than other schools because they needed “show schools” for their Potemkin Village. When food was scarce in at least part because the Bolsheviks prohibited farmers from using available equipment communist party officials would eat banquets while common people would starve. So-called equality in the Soviet Union was a sham!

    The countries in the world whose cultures and whose economies are best characterized by sharing and cooperation are NOT dictatorships they are social democracies like those in Scandinavia. Had the October Revolution failed Russia was well on its way to becoming the first social democracy. People would’ve had freedom and equality, but instead they got tyranny and a caste system that called itself equal.

  8. Pingback: 5 Reasons Marxism has Nothing to Offer Millennials – African Liberty Organization for Development

  9. Pingback: 5 Reasons Marxism Has Nothing to Offer Millennials -

  10. Pingback: 5 Reasons Marxism Has Nothing to Offer Millennials · 2ViewNews

  11. Pingback: 5 Reasons Marxism Has Nothing to Offer Millennials - TheLead.com

  12. Pingback: 5 Reasons Marxism Has Nothing to Offer Millennials · 2ViewNews

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s