XVI Международная студенческая научная конференция Студенческий научный форум - 2024

The current trends of «reshaping» the existing world order with dynamically changing priorities from universal globalization to a collective agreement to isolate and «abolish» the designated «undesirable» state are impossible if the principle of historical impartiality and objectivity is observed. In manipulative processes at the state level, anti-Russian countries of the West involve proven techniques that reanimate the «old myth» of aggressive Russia, adjusting historical facts to suit the current conjuncture, as a result of which modern society lives in a situation of «repeatedly rewritten, falsified, in some places «cleaned up» and untruthful history» [1, p. 162], which is a characteristic feature of the era of post-truth based on distortion and falsification of objective facts in order to effectively manage the consciousness of the masses to achieve, among other things, specific goals, including the specifics of the post-truth era [1, p. 162], which is a characteristic feature of the post-truth era, based on the distortion and falsification of objective facts in order to effectively manage the consciousness of the masses to achieve, among other things, specific political goals.

First mentioned by Serbian-American playwright Steve Tesich, the phenomenon of «post-truth» in 1992 in the weekly The Nation described, in the author's view, blatantly false falsified facts that gave legitimacy to U.S. aggressive actions in Iraq. The increasing amount of public unquestionable distortion of facts led to the fact that a little more than a decade after its first mention, the term «post-truth» was recognized by the compilers of the Oxford Dictionary as «word of the year» and was interpreted as a word referring to circumstances in which personal beliefs and emotions are more important in the formation of public opinion than reliable verified facts or authoritative opinion [2].

The consistent work of the West to create a «favorable» history is based on the appeal to the emotional component, which, unfortunately, loses out to the proven facts and evidence of experts - the rational grain. The only way to counter such a trend is through education. Nobel laureate V.L. Ginzburg wrote: «I understand patriotism in the following way: to the best of one's ability, a person should try to educate the population». In other words, only an enlightened person, i.e. an educated person, will be able to distinguish truth from post-truth. Nowadays, more and more people have access to large amounts of information, including archival and documentary information, which provides an opportunity to oppose ideas imposed from the outside.

The subject of special interest in the current realities are the results of the Second World War, brazenly and aggressively falsified by both the Allies and all those interested in the «abolition» of the victorious nation. The results of the poll of 1600 people in 42 subjects of the Russian Federation conducted in 2009 by the the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center confirmed that the population of our country (34%) is interested in preserving and protecting from falsification of the history of the Great Patriotic War [3]. A similar survey conducted on April 19, 2023 shows a significant increase (98%) in the number of Russians interested in the protection of historical memory. Unfortunately, only a third of our compatriots (33%) correctly identified the date of the beginning of World War II, which confirms the need for consistent multidimensional work not only to preserve but also to «reanimate» historical memory [4].

The logical consequence of the anti-Russian collective West's longstanding efforts to revise the outcome of the war was the condemnation of the 1939 non-aggression treaty signed between the USSR and Germany, which was reflected in the relevant resolution of the European Parliament in September 2019. A little earlier, in 2009, the Polish Sejm adopted a resolution that qualified the liberation in 1939 by the Red Army of the lands of Western Belarus and Western Ukraine occupied by Poles as aggressive actions against Poland [5].

Russian President Vladimir Putin called the European Parliament's resolution «the height of cynicism» during his annual meeting with journalists in December 2019. Putin in December 2019 during his annual meeting with journalists, also emphasizing the fact that in 1934 Poland was one of the first countries to conclude a non-aggression agreement with Germany, while the Soviet Union was one of the last European countries to do so [7].

The substitution of facts in the post-truth era occurs not only through their distortion, but also through the deliberate omission of «inconvenient» ones. Thus, the West has created an «information bubble», which does not cover the negotiations between England and Germany in the fateful year of 1939 behind the back of the USSR in order to find a compromise and the desire to oppose the Soviet Union together with the Nazis [8, P. 76].

Western historians consistently work to find facts that support the myth of the preventive nature of Germany's war against the Soviet Union, deliberately omitting anything that disproves this theory. The evidence of the «pre-emptive nature» of Germany's actions described by some historians and Wehrmacht generals is based on the measures taken at the time by the Soviet Union to improve the country's defense capabilities and strengthen its borders, defining this as preparations for an attack on Europe, ignoring the USSR's consistent and persistent work to create a system of collective security in Europe, deterring the aggressor's actions. Contradicts the theory of «preventive war» and the record of 31 July 1940 in the diary of Chief of Staff Colonel-General F. Galder the following words of Hitler: «England will lose all hope in the event of the defeat of Russia. Then dominate in Europe and the Balkans will be Germany ... Russia must be eliminated. The deadline - spring 1941» [8]. The ambiguity of the described myth is also confirmed by the English historian B. Liddell Garth, who describes the moment of crossing the border of the USSR by German troops as follows: «The generals became convinced how far the Russians were from aggressive intentions, and realized that the Fuhrer had deceived them» [9]. In other words, the facts that refute the «preventive nature» of the war unleashed by Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union, confirm the use by the parties concerned of a propaganda technique aimed at concealing the truth [10].

The falsification of the facts of the Second World War is comprehensive, so it concerns all its stages: the preconditions, the course of the war, and its results. One of the most debated and controversial topics is the issue of the failure of the «lightning war» plans against the Soviet Union, so successfully implemented in Western Europe. Western and American historians explain the reasons for the failure of the numerous invasion forces by numerous water obstacles, vast distances, environment, unfavorable climate, etc. [10], but not the selfless resistance of the Red Army soldiers and the entire Soviet people. However, the heroic resistance of the Soviet troops thwarted the plans, according to which Directive No. 21 gave several months for the conquest of the Soviet Union. After three weeks (!) of fighting the German tank and motorized divisions were reduced by 40%, the number of soldiers and officers - by 110,000 people. The dedication of the Soviet soldiers is confirmed by the entry in the diary of F. Galder, left on the eighth day of the war: «Information from the front confirms that the Russians everywhere are fighting to the last man» [8].

The analysis of domestic, German and Anglo-Saxon historiography on the issue of studying the USSR's contribution to the victory over Nazi Germany and its allies allows us to unite the trends in their coverage in several directions:

1. The majority of Russian historians, based on reliable facts, prove that the decisive role in the victory belongs to the USSR with the undoubtedly common efforts of the armies and peoples of the anti-Hitler coalition, confirming it, in particular, by the fact that the Nazis and their accomplices on the Eastern Front suffered more than 70% of their losses.

2. The task of Western historians is to downplay the role of the army and people of the Soviet Union in achieving victory, achieving this by exaggerating the role of combat operations in other theaters of war and the contribution of the Allied forces to the course and outcome of the war. In extremely rare cases, it is proposed to accept as fact the «equal contribution» of the participants of the anti-Hitler coalition to the overall Victory.

3. American historiography (successfully imposing its own version of the victorious country, including through cinema) declares the decisive role in the victory in World War II of the United States, giving an exaggerated assessment of the Second Front opened in the summer of 1944, emphasizing the «irrefutable» importance of Lend-Lease, which allegedly made a decisive contribution to the victory of the USSR on the Eastern Front [11].

4. Among the main reasons for the defeat of Nazi Germany in the Western historiography are mostly named incompetent, inept leadership of military actions of Hitler, for example, describes the categorical prohibition of the Fuhrer to Paulus to break through the encirclement, which, according to former generals of the Wehrmacht, was the cause of the Stalingrad disaster of the 6th German Army. Hitler is attributed sole responsibility for the short-sighted policy that led to the betrayal of allied countries of Nazi Germany [11].

5. The excessive cruelty of the occupiers, which led to nationwide struggle and confrontation, is referred to by Western historians as a version of the «missed Russian chance».

6. Insulting to the victorious people, but traditional version for the West is the description of the actions of the barrier units, as well as the powers of the officers of the special departments and troops of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affaires, which explain the resilience and persistence of the Red Army soldiers. The British writer and historian E. Beevor in his book «Stalingrad», describing the battle of the same name, emphasizes that the Red Army fighters fought not for the Motherland, but for the Stalinist regime, led into battle by barrier units and commissars, confirming this with undocumented figures of soldiers shot by the People's Commissariat of Internal Affaires during the Battle of Stalingrad. According to official documents on the Stalingrad and Don directions from August to October 1942 (issuance of order № 227 «Not a step back!») People's Commissariat of Internal Affaires bodies from among the soldiers who left their positions were detained 140,775 people, of whom 3980 - arrested, 1,189 - shot, the rest - returned to the units. Total repression could deprive the army of fighters, which was obvious to the military and political leadership of the time [11].

7. In the course of pseudo-scientific history, the feat of the inhabitants of besieged Leningrad is deheroized. During 872 days of cruel isolation, the city continued to provide the front with military products and did not stop resisting. However, Boston University professor A. Peri claims that on the basis of the studied content of 125 diaries published his work «War from Within. Diaries from the Siege of Leningrad», in which he concludes that people in the city at that time were not interested in the fate of the country, their city, or even their neighbors. The only thought that the besieged Leningraders had was food, in support of which the author cites carefully and «point by point» selected diary entries with cases of cannibalism described in them. In this connection, it is fair to note that it is inadmissible for a researcher adhering to the principle of objectivity to draw generalized conclusions that offend people's feelings. The refutation of the entire libel of A. Pieri is served by the announcement of V.V. Putin in January 2020 at the event dedicated to the memory of the victims of the Holocaust and the opening of the monument to the feat of Leningrad, a fact that makes us bow our heads before the selflessness of Leningraders who during the blockade years donated 140 tons of blood to treat the wounded defenders of the city.

Another outburst of Russophobia today can be explained by the need of the ruling Western European and American elite to subjugate the consciousness of citizens by all means, including «dirty» distortion of history. In the post-truth era, the low education of the population and the desire to get «information quickly» is a fertile ground for the substitution of objective facts through the impact on emotions, which allows the «unscrupulous» media to manipulate the masses, as a result of which it becomes possible in real life monologue, addressed to an audience of thousands of people, of the main character of the feature film called «Network»: «Why can I tell you about what is important to you? Because you and the other 62 million Americans are listening to me right now, because less than 3% of you read books, because less than 15% of you read newspapers, because for you the truth is what you see on television, because there is now a whole generation that has never known anything but television. Television is the gospel, television can make and remove presidents, popes and prime ministers.... Television is the most terrible force in the whole godless world...» In other words, such a phenomenon in our modern world as «post-truth» is ambiguous, because for the disseminators of fakes «post-truth» is a source of income, and for society - it is a formidable weapon in the hands of a manipulator.

REFERENCES

1. Алексеев, С. В., Плотникова, О. А. Мифы и фальсификации в российской истории // Знание, понимание, умение. – 2015. – № 1. – С. 162–171.

2. Oxford Dictionaries Premium https://languages.oup.com/ (Дата обращения: 27.01.2024г.)

3. Криворученко, В. К. Борьба с фальсификацией истории на постсоветском пространстве: история или политика? // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия «История России». – 2012. – № 4. – С. 121–130.

4. Вторая мировая: что помним, о чем забыли https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/vtoraya-mirovaya-chto-pomnim-o-chem-zabyli (Дата обращения: 27.01.2024г.)

5. Ибрагимова, Г. Ш. Проблема фальсификации событий Великой Отечественной войны / Исторические исследования : материалы IV Международной научной конференции (Казань, май 2016 г.). – Казань: Бук, 2016. – С. 61–63.

6. Семиряга, М. И. Тайны сталинской дипломатии, 1939–1941. – Москва: Высшая школа, 1992. – 302 с.

7. Полная стенограмма большой пресс-конференции Владимира Путина – 2019 [Электронный ресурс] // Сайт газеты «Комсомольская правда». – 2019. – 19 дек. – Режим доступа: https://www.spb.kp.ru/ daily/27070/4139588/ (дата обращения: 29.03.2023).

8. Гальдер, Ф. Военный дневник. Ежедневные записи начальника Генерального штаба сухопутных войск. 1939– 1942 гг. /пер. с нем. – Т. 3. – Кн. 1. – Москва: Воениздат, 1971. – 368 с.

9. Лиддел, Гарт Б. Вторая мировая война. – Москва: Воениздат, 1976. – 768 с. – С. 151.

10. Вестфаль, З., Крейпе В., Блюментрит Г., Байерлейн Ф., Цейтцлер К., Циммерман Б., Мантейфель X. Роковые решения. – МJCRDF: Воениздат, 1958. – 320 с. – С. 64–82.

11. Филиппов, Э. М. С позиций историзма и научной объективности // Защита и безопасность. – 2007. – № 3 (42). – С. 45–46.

12. Глезеров, Сергей. Пристрастный «нейтралитет». Почему взгляд британского историка на Вторую мировую войну вызывает такое неприятие в России // СанктПетербургские ведомости. – 2015. – 11 сент. – № 169 (5542).