On Freedom of Speech
Yes, the right to freedom of speech is a great achievement of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. This right significantly contributes to a country’s political and economic development. I understand this well, given my age, my service in the Soviet Army, and my background as a historian. I have lived through the era of the dictatorship of the proletariat to the time of “decaying capitalism,” and I fully grasp the importance of free speech.
As an officer in the Soviet Army, I was responsible for explaining the government’s domestic and foreign policies to personnel. Political education sessions were held twice a week for all ranks, lasting two hours each. For officers, there was also Marxist-Leninist training according to a specific program. This meant that the leadership of the army had a solid understanding of the party’s policies and government direction.
The Role of Propaganda and Misinformation
An information war against socialist Russia and the USSR began from their very inception. In my opinion, we were losing this battle from the start. We lacked an accurate picture of how the people in other countries truly felt about us—the world’s first workers’ and peasants’ state.
In 1941, I was 11 years old and believed that German soldiers—workers dressed in military uniforms—would not fight against us, based on the slogan “Workers of the world, unite!” But I was wrong. They fought, and not only German workers but workers from across Western and Eastern Europe. They fought fiercely. Meanwhile, we, relying on reports from our press, considered the proletariat of these countries our brothers.
Post-War Challenges
After the war, the information war against the USSR intensified. What we see today—neo-fascism spreading across Europe, the desecration of monuments to Red Army soldiers, and the encouragement of such acts by European leaders—should not surprise us. Its roots lie in the post-war years.
We believed we were liberating Europe from fascist oppression. They, however, lamented that fascism had failed to defeat the Soviet Union. For them, fascism was more familiar and acceptable than socialism. It wasn’t about socialism itself; European countries have always harbored animosity towards Russia.
Historical Context and Missed Opportunities
Looking at history, Europe has consistently treated Russia with disdain, hostility, and hatred. Take 1812, for example—no Bolsheviks, no socialism. Russia saved Europe from Napoleon, sacrificing countless lives and enduring the destruction of cities and villages. What was the reward? The fruits of victory were claimed by European countries, leaving Russia with nothing.
Russia bears some blame for Europe’s dismissive attitude. After the war, did we demand reparations from European countries that participated in the Nazi coalition? No. We limited ourselves to Germany. Worse, we even provided aid to some of these countries. This leniency allowed them to disrespect us.
The Soviet Union and Freedom of Speech
During the existence of the socialist bloc, serious crises frequently arose in almost every member state of the Warsaw Pact. Yet, due to the lack of free speech in our country, we learned about these crises only through “enemy broadcasts.” We consistently lost on the information front because we lacked freedom of speech and democracy.
While it’s understandable why the Soviet government restricted free speech—such freedom might have accelerated the collapse of the Soviet system—this suppression created distrust toward the media and the government itself. By the 1960s, this lack of freedom had cultivated a layer of intellectuals who later undermined the foundations of Soviet power, contributing to the USSR’s downfall.
Modern Reflections on Leadership and Society
Freedom of speech and democracy can either save or destroy a state, depending on the intentions of their proponents. Even democracy can produce dictators. Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin, and Dmitry Medvedev were all elected democratically. But what have they achieved for the people?
While Putin initially made efforts to stabilize the country and prevent its collapse, I don’t see this as an extraordinary accomplishment—it’s a president’s duty. However, why has poverty increased over the past seven years? Why are there 22 million poor people in a country with vast natural resources? And why does the number of billionaires keep growing?
A Message to the President
President Putin, you’ve recently mocked the Soviet period, yet it provided you with a free education that prepared you for your presidency. Back then, we didn’t have 22 million impoverished citizens. I suggest you study the Soviet government’s experience more closely. Why didn’t it allow such massive exploitation of the Russian people? Why weren’t foreign citizens in positions of power?
Criticizing the cult of personality while creating one for yourself is hypocritical. Television programs like Moscow. Kremlin. Putin are nauseating. Every show starts and ends with you to emphasize how “healthy” you are. But the ordinary people are tired of this. It’s time to leave the stage before you’re forced out.
In what sense did you lack freedom of speech the most? Didn’t the massive participation in the workplace soviets and above allow the people to express their concerns and opinions? I would like some elaboration of these problems from your perspective
The issue of democracy and human rights has likely existed since the formation of organized human society in one form or another. I believe there is no single, universally acceptable understanding of democracy and human rights that suits all social groups and forms of government. Each country has its own interpretation of democracy and human rights. Yes, elections exist, and the people vote. But do they truly know whom they are voting for? Hardly. People elect those who can present themselves better, and that costs a great deal. Hence the so-called democracy and human rights.
In my view, achieving democracy and human rights requires a certain level of political literacy within society. Unfortunately, our society is largely politically illiterate. Otherwise, the people wouldn’t allow the government to do what is happening in the country today. In Russia, there are 20 million people living in poverty and 50 million on the verge of it. These issues are too complex to fully explain in such a brief note.
In the history of Russia, there has never been a genuine sense of democracy. What prevails is reverence for individuals, and this stems from the level of political literacy within society. This is not a complete answer, but it’s difficult to provide a comprehensive one on such complex topics in such a short format.
Can you ask your grandfather if he had the opportunity to research the Soviet archives?
Just in case anyone here doesn’t have context for who this account is.
And since I’ve just become aware of both of your existences, boy am I going to have fun asking you lots of questions. To kick off the first question of hopefully many more to come; Can you ask your grandfather if he had the opportunity to research the Soviet archives?
Certainly, I did not research the archives. I was an officer, engaged in defending the air and later the space borders of our homeland, the Soviet Union. I worked with historical archives during my thesis project titled “Relations Between Ossetia and Russia in the Second Half of the 18th Century.” From that research, I concluded that without Russia, my Ossetia could have perished.
If we are talking about human rights or democracy, based on what I saw and experienced, I can say that there was no democracy or human rights in the Soviet Union. It was all written down, but the Marxist-Leninist theory allowed no alternative theories in our country—this is unequivocal.
I can recount the documents I was introduced to under signature. There were no rights. If I couldn’t be found on the military base within five minutes, the first offense would result in 10–15 days of detention, and for the second, I could face a tribunal with a sentence of up to two years. Time served in the penal battalion didn’t count as military service, so the three years of mandatory service had to be completed in full. That was the kind of “democracy” and “rights” I had. And such “rights” were not exclusive to soldiers.
“Freedom of speech” in the liberal doxa is the promise that everyone will be validated in having uninformed opinions on serious matters. Under socialism it is the promise that problems can be identified so they are solved. It’s unfortunate that the Soviets weren’t as good as the should have been on the latter, but I think that even if they were we would still have been gaslit into thinking that they were unfree because the well-off could not scream nonsense on in front of a crowd and get away with it
There is no universal understanding of human rights—each state interprets them in its own way. In socialist systems, the primary goal is to solve problems, but achieving this requires a high level of political literacy in society. Unfortunately, our society, like many others, is largely politically illiterate. This is why, even with mechanisms like the soviets, not all problems were resolved as effectively as they should have been.
wtf is this
