Now we are witnessing an active phase of confrontation and the breaking of ideological copies around the theme of World War II. As a rule, such a confrontation intensifies by the anniversary dates. Because of this, one has to see in all this a worked-out strategy for shattering the historical truth about the war, which was enshrined in the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, among other things.
And Nuremberg is opposed by the “truth” of revisionism, which has emerged from the forges of the ideological confrontation of the Cold War. The reason is clear: that Soviet triumph categorically does not fit into the written textbooks of the latest historical knowledge, because the main thesis that the Soviet Union is the “evil empire” and Russia is the heir to vicious and dark energies is written in them. Hence, the Soviet Union is equated with Hitlerism. An important driving force for the revision of historical truth is the leveling of the thesis of the impossibility of victory over Russia by force. It arose naturally after the Soviet triumph of 1945 and for decades saved the world from tremendous upheavals.
The global battle for history is now happening everywhere. Russia, as a country - the successor of victory, defends the truth of Nuremberg. That is her duty. It is significant that it was our country that came to the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE with a Declaration on the inadmissibility of revising the results of the Second World War. At the winter session in Vienna, it was signed by dozens of representatives of foreign parliaments.
It was represented by Vice-Speaker of the Russian State Duma Pyotr Tolstoy, who noted the lack of a political component in this document, as well as the fact that he was the only gesture emphasizing the common victory of peoples over fascism with a focus on the impossibility of its revival. The declaration, according to Tolstoy, called on "to prevent distortion of historical truth, review the outcome of the war and the Nuremberg Tribunal, to curb any attempts to justify the Nazis and their accomplices." “And we also strongly condemn the demolition and dismantling of monuments to soldiers-liberators and the desecration of burial sites,” the document says.
This is the front side of the coin, but there is also a downside. And here we have the report of the deputy head of the Lithuanian delegation, Laurinas Kascunas, prepared for the annual session of the OSCE PA in Vancouver. His main theses have already been voiced: “aggression” of Russia in Ukraine, “occupation of Crimea”, “occupation” of part of Georgia and others in the same vein.
Leonid Slutsky, the head of the State Duma’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, describing the report, noted that "perhaps we have not heard such a concentration of anti-Russian information." Slutsky called him "deceitful and biased." The parliamentarian said that he "abounds in pathologically anti-Russian theses", and urged him not to support.
It must be understood that the current upsurge of discussion of historical memory is associated not so much with the past as with the present and future. This is simply the legitimization of a certain strategy in relation to Russia. Not only are our country trying by all means to take away the victory, but they are also trying to tie it with complexes of guilt. And this is actually a very effective ideological weapon.
One can recall the perestroika years of decay, when a total inferiority and guilt complex was imposed on Soviet society. It was suggested that we ourselves were to blame for everything, including the war.
The situation, in its one-sidedness, was brought to a pathological one. Like, all the problems and the root of ills are only in the Soviet Union - including the reasons for the confrontation with the West. That it is an ugly, non-viable entity that carries only evil to the world, and with its destruction earthly paradise will come. As a result, the Soviet elites capitulated with a clear conscience, and then began to build statehood as if from scratch, according to the patterns of developed capitalism and Western democracy. They took, as suggested, "all the best" from there to become worthy of acceptance into the round dance of civilized countries ...
So inferiority complexes and guilt for everything worked. To get rid of them, the country, like in a 3D cinema, was offered special pink glasses of illusions. All this brought about disintegration, destruction and chaos. And the country until the last believed, hoped and relied on these pink diopters. Deaf was to the voice of reason. I must say that back in 1993, the Russian thinker Alexander Zinoviev wrote that with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Western strategy towards our country did not undergo any changes. He began to fight with Russia ...
We are now clearly observing the phases of the struggle, although they assiduously assure us that everything is our fault and depravity. Then, in 1993, there was neither “occupation” of Crimea and part of Georgia, nor a heated confrontation in the Donbass, as the Lithuanian report now states. Russia itself was cropped and crushed, stood on the verge of a large and deadly strife. But even then it was obvious that the fight against it was on the world agenda.
Now Russia is again imposing a destructive and paralyzing guilt complex, moreover, on a global, historical plane. It is significant that this ideological twist is done through Lithuanian politicians.
Laurinas Kascunas is a leader leading an active anti-Soviet and anti-Russian policy vector, and in this he is an inveterate conservative. This is his Creed. In his report, the Lithuanian parliamentarian focuses on the Russian "occupation" as a fact of modern politics and tries to consolidate this term, to give it an axiomatic character in order to put it into political use once and for all.
This Russian “occupation” and “aggression” is rhymed with the Soviet one. Moreover, everything together is exposed for eternal evil.
“Occupation” is the basic concept that characterizes the attitude of the Baltic countries and a number of other countries to Russia, which elevate it as the cornerstone of their policy. Through this there is an attack on Nuremberg and an attempt to establish a new historical “truth” about the Second World War, according to which the Soviet Union and Germany should share responsibility for it. Accordingly, Russia automatically loses the dignity of a victorious country and is doomed to bear the guilt complex for eternity until its severity tears it ...
It has already been noted above that efforts to rewrite the truth about the war are connected with the ideological justification of not just the possibility, but the necessity of victory over Russia. The logic is very clear and understandable, which cannot be overlooked: communism won, we will defeat Russia.
Such is the obvious concept of Western triumph, built in the ideological field through a system of substitutions, fraud, twists and forgeries, which in reality leads to terrible global upheavals. Unfortunately, our country is all too familiar with all this.
For such shocks, pathological Russophobia is also needed, which, according to the Russian parliamentarian Leonid Slutsky, is filled with “false and biased” theses. Russian politicians call a spade a spade. They are at the forefront of a powerful ideological confrontation. They do not allow the global forgery system to overshadow reality and impose destructive complexes on us. It is also encouraging that in the world, common sense is not yet completely broken on the rocks of historical lies. This is evidenced by the support of the Russian Declaration on the inadmissibility of rewriting the history of the Second World War. Many more understand that the truth about war protects the world.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.