Yeltsin center cartoon story. "History of Russia" from the "Yeltsin Center. The main question of the dispute: does Russia need freedom

In just 10 minutes, this video briefly outlines the history of Russia, though only from the point of view of liberalism - that very radical Russophobic liberalism that triumphed in Russia in the 90s, from which our country still has not fully recovered and which someone clearly trying to get it on again...

The summary of the Yeltsin Center video is as follows:

Russian democracy was born much earlier than Russian autocracy: independent ancient Russian cities were initially controlled by people's assemblies - veche. But then autocracy triumphed in the country, the veche government was suppressed and that terrible Russian “thousand-year slavery” and “tyranny” began. One of the first "tyrants" at the very beginning of the video is the great holy prince Alexander Nevsky, who dealt with the very same Novgorod veche. Grand Duke Ivan the Third is colorfully depicted as a monster, forcibly, with the help of iron chains, united the Russian lands into a single Moscow principality. Each subsequent ruler of Russia is presented in much the same vein, with slightly less or slightly more frightening comments; and more or less positively told only about the era of Nicholas II. The Soviet era, of course, is presented as one big continuous Gulag, which is presented as a kind of natural continuation of the entire previous history of continuous "tyranny". And only at the end of the 20th century Russia was unspeakably lucky: a small “spark” was lit in it - Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, depicted as an airplane pilot guiding the country in the “right direction”, and then the “main luminary” of Russian history and the “greatest liberator” from thousand years of slavery and tyranny - Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin!

It is difficult to call this video anything other than a frank liberal falsification of our history! But the worst thing is that, as its employees admitted to us, 2,000 visitors pass through this propaganda center every day, and first of all - schoolchildren and students who are taken in groups on its excursions! Recently, various public and political figures, up to the President, have spoken about the inadmissibility of falsifying our history and the need to counteract it. So what's the matter - resist! And as soon as possible - because in a few years it may be too late ...

FROM THE CREATORS OF "TURKISH GAMBIT"

First of all, the patriarch of the national cinema was outraged by the 9-minute cartoon, which is shown to all visitors of the Yeltsin Center on a huge screen at the very beginning of the exposition. Behind the scenes, Liza Boyarskaya talks about how hard life has been in Russia since ancient times: civil strife, the Tatar-Mongol yoke, serfdom, Stalinist repressions, and so on. And at the end of the cartoon, the radiant Boris Nikolayevich appears and stops the tanks. “This is how the history of a new free Russia began,” Elizaveta Mikhailovna sums up.

This video was shot by the director of "Turkish Gambit" Janik Fayziev. And the script was written by several dozen historians under the guidance of Doctor of Political Sciences, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor of Moscow State University and MGIMO Yuri Pivovarov.

However, even the employees of the Yeltsin Center admit that there is no historical truth in this cartoon.

Cartoon about the history of Russia in the Yeltsin Center. History of Russia from the Yeltsin Center

This video is about the history of freedom and liberalism in Russia. But nowhere do we say that it is historical and that it tells the history of Russia. People who do not know history will simply not understand this cartoon, - says Elena Volkova, press secretary of the museum.

At our request, the cartoon was analyzed by a senior researcher at the Museum of the History of Yekaterinburg Evgeny Burdenkov:

Analyzing this video from a historical point of view is as pointless as analyzing a Disney cartoon from a historical point of view. Because there is no history. Yeltsin may be good, he may be bad, but this does not change the concept itself - that the author considered only the personality of the leader. Where is the nation? Telling the history of a people through its rulers is not the right approach. Conditionally in this video, Yeltsin is no different from the other rulers presented. The video is designed for a very average layman. A man came and in 5 minutes understood the whole story and that Yeltsin was such a good ruler? And the story is not served in 5 minutes in the form of a finished product. Cartoon is just a set of stamps!

From the "Yeltsin Center" was delighted with the star of "Lord of the Rings" actor Ian McKellen. Although, perhaps, there are people who will find confirmation of Mikhalkov's words in this fact. Like, what else can a gay from the decaying West like. Photo: N. Krutenkov

"THIS IS THE TEMPLE OF THE DEITY"

Yeltsin Center, indeed, from its very opening was accompanied by scandals. Patriot bloggers from the Urals even staged a picket near the museum demanding that it be closed.

“The Yeltsin Center, which will house six State Historical Museums of Russia in terms of area, is made like a temple of a deity,” blogger Ilya Belous, the organizer of the action, was indignant. - A cult of his personality is being created. In a similar way, the Institute of National Memory of Ukraine once created a cult of Stepan Bandera for the new Ukrainian state, broken away from the Soviet Union. Once in the Yeltsin Center, visitors, according to all the canons of neurolinguistic programming, are exposed in a dark room to a cartoon about the history of Russia, in which the entire past of our state is presented as a war of tyrants against its own people, which ended with the advent of Boris Yeltsin.

Well-known Ural host Innokenty Sheremet believes that the center of the first president should be in Yekaterinburg. But it should be a completely different museum:

We must remember Yeltsin. Moreover, he is our countryman. But the museum should be a little different. Now this is some kind of “light version”. More precisely, these are dreams of how we wanted to see the 90s. In this museum there is nothing about Yeltsin's "family", very little about the war in Chechnya, there is no Berezovsky.

"AND THE CHILDREN LOVE IT!"

However, most visitors to the Yeltsin Center do not see the museum as a threat. And even come here with children.

And my child really liked the video that Nikita Sergeevich scolded, - young mother Natalya Valyugina laughs, holding her 7-year-old son by the hand. - The video is well perceived by the children's consciousness, besides, there are no distorted facts ...

In the hall dedicated to the 1998 default, we find a group of students. On the screen, young Sergei Kiriyenko, with a lost look, reports to Yeltsin that the domestic economy will not do well.

When the default happened, I was 2 years old, - Evgenia, a third-year philologist, recalls. - But my parents and grandmother told me in colors what a terrible time it was. Well, here I am again convinced of this.

Now, you know, the 90s are back in fashion, - adds a friend of Evgenia Pavel. - But I don’t want to live at that time after everything that I saw here. It seems to me that Mikhalkov "ran into" the museum in order to once again promote himself. After all, his latest films are still slag.

WITH MY OWN EYES

That resident of Yekaterinburg who has never been to the Yeltsin Center is bad. This is now our main attraction, along with the Church-on-the-Blood. Nikita Sergeevich's rebuke is an excellent reason to visit the museum of the first president again and try to look at the exposition more closely.

So, I awaken the inner Mikhalkov in myself and with a decisive step I get to the Yeltsin Center. At the entrance, the 10-meter marble Boris Nikolaevich froze in thought. “He is way too important. And you can’t say that you loved to drink, ”the inner Mikhalkov chuckles. I go up the stairs. The whole building whimsically shimmers with all the colors of the rainbow. Podtsvetka is a separate attraction of the capital of the Urals.

As we have repeatedly said, the halls of the museum are divided into seven days. They are called like that - the first day, the second day ... Each of them is the stages of Yeltsin's career. In the first hall, for example, you find yourself in 1987 at the reconstruction of the XXVIII Congress of the CPSU. There, the future president criticized the party and left the CPSU.

Yeltsin Center is generally one of the most sophisticated and modern museums in Russia. Here you will find not just dusty racks with boring exhibits. History literally comes alive here. If we are talking about the August coup, then you find yourself on real barricades. And above them on the big screen is a report about those events.

A separate pride of the creators of the museum is that almost all the exhibits of the museum are real. From the cowboy boots of George W. Bush, which the US leader gave our president, to the nuclear suitcase.

“Where is Chechnya?”, the inner Mikhalkov wakes up again. “After all, so many of our guys died ...” There is a platform here dedicated to this sad page in our history. Here, without embellishment, it tells about the massacre in Grozny. The walls are riddled with bullets. If you look into these holes, you will see photos of the fighting. However, there is one “but” - this part of the exposition is located in the very corner, and not every visitor will guess to look there.

Specifically

The Yeltsin Center opened at the end of November 2015. During this time it was visited by 228,067 people. Of these, 21,559 schoolchildren. 3,066 excursions took place here.

The creators of the Yeltsin Center emphasize that their site is not only and not so much a museum. The center is a cultural and discussion space. Rock concerts are regularly held here (Zemfira, Mumiy Troll, Andrei Makarevich), film screenings (retrospectives of films by Alexei Balabanov) and round tables (disputes about the results of the 90s, "Decembrists in historical memory", "Sverdlovsk constructivism"). There is also a place for events for children: the play “Visiting a ladybug”, a school for young cooks, a Christmas tree decoration day or a northern bear day. Basically, all these actions are apolitical. But there are also games with telling names "How to become president" or "Wind of change".

10 celebrities who don't think the Yeltsin Center is dangerous for Russians. Many stars who have visited Yekaterinburg visit the Museum of the First President of Russia

MEANWHILE

"I will not deny what was said": Mikhalkov wrote a letter to Naina Yeltsina

Russian director Nikita Mikhalkov, in an open message to the widow of the first president of Russia, Naina Yeltsina, explained in detail his position on the activities of the Boris Yeltsin Presidential Center in Yekaterinburg.

He once again stressed that he really had not been to the museum, but he had a complete understanding of its activities.

The fact that Naina Yeltsina was indignant at the words of Nikita Mikhalkov about the Yeltsin Center.

Do you know what kind of cartoon is played continuously in the Yeltsin Center? Well, take the time and see...if you don't puke.

Falsification of the history of Russia from the Yeltsin Center:

This cartoon is not on the website of the Center. It is not posted on the Internet. Are they shy, right? There is only a not very good copy taken by one of the visitors on a mobile phone. I don’t know what Nikita Mikhalkov meant there, the important thing is that all Yekaterinburg schoolchildren are forced to watch this. Mandatory. For visiting this nest of enemies of Russia is included in the school curriculum of Yekaterinburg and its environs without fail.

Russian democracy was born much earlier than Russian autocracy: independent ancient Russian cities were initially controlled by people's assemblies - veche. But then autocracy triumphed in the country, the veche government was suppressed and that terrible Russian “thousand-year slavery” and “tyranny” began.

One of the first "tyrants" at the very beginning of the video is the great holy prince Alexander Nevsky, who dealt with the very same Novgorod veche. Grand Duke Ivan the Third is colorfully depicted as a monster, forcibly, with the help of iron chains, united the Russian lands into a single Moscow principality. Each subsequent ruler of Russia is presented in much the same vein, with slightly less or slightly more frightening comments; and more or less positively told only about the era of Nicholas II.

The Soviet era, of course, is presented as one big continuous Gulag, which is presented as a kind of natural continuation of the entire previous history of continuous "tyranny". And only at the end of the 20th century Russia was unspeakably lucky: a small “spark” was lit in it - Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, depicted as an airplane pilot guiding the country in the “right direction”, and then the “main luminary” of Russian history and the “greatest liberator” from thousand years of slavery and tyranny - Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin!

It is difficult to call this video anything other than a frank liberal falsification of our history! But the worst thing is that, as its employees admitted to us, 2,000 visitors pass through this propaganda center every day, and first of all - schoolchildren and students who are taken in groups on its excursions!

This clip, concocted by liberals, looks very strange: the history of Russia, starting from the Middle Ages, is shown as a series of unsuccessful attempts by the "country of slaves" / as Russia is called in this cartoon / to get closer to Western democracy.

And only Yeltsin descended from heaven as a messiah, raising the people to the heights of true democracy.

This is not just a lack of awareness of the role and place of statesmen in Russia, or a depreciation of their merit in the fact that Russia exists in its current form. This is another false meanness of liberals who need to direct the brains of visitors in the direction they need. Moreover, the cartoon is made as a fairy tale about the eternal struggle between good and evil - the evil here is slave Russia, the good is Western democracy.

It is impossible to agree with the content of the film: the history of Russia is shown exclusively in a negative way. In this sense, the authors of the film, more precisely, the authors of the idea, moved in the logic of the Bolshevik historians, who painted all the tsars in black paint and showed the history of Russia exclusively as the struggle of its people against the tsarist regime. Here the people were not engaged in anything else, for a century or so since the twentieth they were engaged in the “fight for freedom” and nothing else.

Here is the same thing. Everything is presented from the point of view of a modern liberal. The conversation begins about Ivan the Terrible. Every possible visual effect is used to scare the viewer. Especially a child. Tsar Ivan is terrible, approaching, crushing people, huge, growing. It has nothing to do with history.

The tricks are completely blatant. They say: Ivan the Terrible introduced the oprichnina, they show terrible people who cut everyone with sabers. Then - the next proposal: the result of which was a civil war in the country. I thought for a second: what kind of civil war under Ivan the Terrible, because HE introduced the oprichnina? It turns out that we are talking about the Time of Troubles, which began many years AFTER the death of the Terrible Tsar and had nothing to do with his actions. Did False Dmitry I appear because there was an oprichnina? And False Dmitry II appeared because there was an oprichnina? But there would be no oprichnina, the Poles would never come to Moscow, there would be no Seven Boyars, there would be no Minin and Pozharsky, there would be nothing at all if Ivan IV would convene parliament and introduce democracy, right?

You understand, this has nothing to do with history. The Russian Time of Troubles and the tragedy of the 17th century has an external outline that is much larger than an internal one. The Poles and Swedes began to tear the country apart because of the betrayal of part of the elite. Precisely, probably, due to the fact that Ivan the Terrible did not stifle treason in his time, they betrayed not him, but Boris Godunov and Vasily Shuisky. Not to mention the fact that it is now precisely established that the death of Grozny's wife was due to poisoning, the death of his son, and even himself, is very suspicious.

But the authors of the introductory film need to show in five minutes that everything has always been bad in Russia, but she always wanted “reforms”. And the Yeltsin ones. You and I understand who the authors of this film will like. Anyone who will advocate for a weak Russia will please them. In fact, they do not like any of the leaders of Russia. Nobody but Gorbachev and Yeltsin. A little sympathy for Nicholas II. Why? So he's a "reformer" after all. Parliament created the Constitution. So the authors mold him into a "reformer".

But everything is in order. The next person to be shown after Ivan the Terrible - they have a free interpretation of history - is Peter I. 100 years were easily squandered. Peter I is shown as an evil tyrant. He wanted to cut a window to Europe, and did not reckon with any losses. They show a frame: Peter I cuts down a tree, it breaks into pieces, they fly and kill people. People fell to the left, he waved his ax to the right - the tree fell into fragments, again people fall dead. Here it is the Russian government! All on blood and murder!

The next one to be shown is Catherine II. The beginning, it seems, is positive: she advocated enlightenment, so that there were subjects, not slaves. but after that, at the end, it is again served with a negative sauce. Next - Alexander I. He seemed to be good, he wanted the Constitution, but he did not make it. This is where reformers come in. Every tsar has a reformer like Chubais who, if they had listened, the whole life would have gone differently. Napoleon, of course, would not have attacked Russia if Speransky had carried out some reforms much earlier. The logic is this. Manipulation in everything.

Then they show Nicholas I. This, of course, is a fabulous villain. Decembrists on the square. And he shot them, the rebels, with cannons. And they end about this king with the following phrase: the defeat in the Crimean War was the logical conclusion of his reign. It's not a quote, it's meaning. The tsar was conservative, so he lost in the Crimean War.

Then they immediately go to Alexander II. I think, how will they show that the Tsar was killed by terrorists? Showed. From his liberal point of view: he started the reforms, but then abandoned the reforms and therefore he was killed. That is, it turns out that this is normal: the head of the country refused to reform, and you can kill him.

It's hard to watch this "cartoon" calmly. Such a concentration of lies per square centimeter that just rolls over. And this lie is obligatorily hammered into the head of the Ural youth and children.

Text excerpts are taken from various sources. Partly from the description of the video on YouTube, partly

In just 10 minutes, it briefly outlines the history of Russia, though only from the point of view of liberalism - no, not the liberalism that is studied as one of the economic theories, but the very radical, Russophobic political liberalism , which triumphed in Russia in the 90s, from which our country has not yet fully recovered and to which someone is clearly trying to lower it again ...

The summary of the Yeltsin Center video is as follows:

Russian democracy was born much earlier than Russian autocracy: independent ancient Russian cities were initially controlled by people's assemblies - veche. But then autocracy triumphed in the country, the veche government was suppressed and that terrible Russian “thousand-year slavery” and “tyranny” began. One of the first "tyrants" at the very beginning of the video is the great holy prince Alexander Nevsky, who dealt with the very same Novgorod veche. Grand Duke Ivan the Third is colorfully depicted as a monster, forcibly, with the help of iron chains, united the Russian lands into a single Moscow principality. Each subsequent ruler of Russia is presented in much the same vein, with slightly less or slightly more frightening comments; and more or less positively told only about the era of Nicholas II. The Soviet era, of course, is presented as one big continuous Gulag, which is presented as a kind of natural continuation of the entire previous history of continuous "tyranny". And only at the end of the 20th century Russia was unspeakably lucky: a small “spark” was lit in it - Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, depicted as an airplane pilot guiding the country in the “right direction”, and then the “main luminary” of Russian history and the “greatest liberator” from thousand years of slavery and tyranny - Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin!

If anyone thinks I'm exaggerating, watch this 10 minute video for yourself...

Of course, one must seriously question the purpose of opening such an openly propagandist liberal "center". Through which, as we were told by the staff, 2000 visitors pass daily, and first of all - schoolchildren and students who are taken in groups on its excursions! I was glad to know that the exposition of the center had already been accused of "falsifying history" - it seems, by the communists. I really hope that both the conservatives and the Orthodox will react.

The summary of the Yeltsin Center video is as follows:

Russian democracy was born much earlier than Russian autocracy: independent ancient Russian cities were initially controlled by people's assemblies - veche. But then autocracy triumphed in the country, the veche government was suppressed and that terrible Russian “thousand-year slavery” and “tyranny” began.

One of the first "tyrants" at the very beginning of the video is the great holy prince Alexander Nevsky, who dealt with the very same Novgorod veche. Grand Duke Ivan the Third is colorfully depicted as a monster, forcibly, with the help of iron chains, united the Russian lands into a single Moscow principality. Each subsequent ruler of Russia is presented in much the same vein, with slightly less or slightly more frightening comments; and more or less positively told only about the era of Nicholas II.

The Soviet era, of course, is presented as one big continuous Gulag, which is presented as a kind of natural continuation of the entire previous history of continuous "tyranny". And only at the end of the 20th century, Russia was unspeakably lucky: a small “spark” was lit in it - Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, depicted as an airplane pilot directing the country in the “right direction”, and then the “main luminary” of Russian history and the “greatest liberator” from thousand years of slavery and tyranny - Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin!

It is difficult to call this video anything other than a frank liberal falsification of our history! But the worst thing is that, as its employees admitted to us, 2,000 visitors pass through this propaganda center every day, and first of all, schoolchildren and students who are taken in groups on its excursions!

This clip, concocted by liberals, looks very strange: the history of Russia, starting from the Middle Ages, is shown as a series of unsuccessful attempts by the “country of slaves” / as Russia is called in this cartoon / to get closer to Western democracy.

And only Yeltsin descended from heaven as a messiah, raising the people to the heights of true democracy.

This is not just a lack of awareness of the role and place of statesmen in Russia, or a depreciation of their merit in the fact that Russia exists in its current form. This is another false meanness of liberals who need to direct the brains of visitors in the direction they need. Moreover, the cartoon is made as a fairy tale about the eternal struggle between good and evil - the evil here is slave Russia, the good is Western democracy.

It is impossible to agree with the content of the film: the history of Russia is shown exclusively in a negative way. In this sense, the authors of the film, more precisely, the authors of the idea, moved in the logic of the Bolshevik historians, who painted all the tsars in black paint and showed the history of Russia exclusively as the struggle of its people against the tsarist regime. Here the people were not engaged in anything else, for a century or so since the twentieth century they were engaged in the “fight for freedom” and nothing more.

Here is the same thing. Everything is presented from the point of view of a modern liberal. The conversation begins about Ivan the Terrible. Every possible visual effect is used to scare the viewer. Especially a child. Tsar Ivan is terrible, approaching, crushing people, huge, growing. It has nothing to do with history.

The tricks are completely blatant. They say: Ivan the Terrible introduced the oprichnina, they show terrible people who cut everyone with sabers. Then - the next proposal: the result of which was a civil war in the country. I thought for a second: what kind of civil war under Ivan the Terrible, because HE introduced the oprichnina? It turns out that we are talking about the Time of Troubles, which began many years AFTER the death of the Terrible Tsar and had nothing to do with his actions. Did False Dmitry I appear because there was an oprichnina? And False Dmitry II appeared because there was an oprichnina? But there would be no oprichnina, the Poles would never come to Moscow, there would be no Seven Boyars, there would be no Minin and Pozharsky, there would be nothing at all if Ivan IV would convene parliament and introduce democracy, right?

You understand, this has nothing to do with history. The Russian Time of Troubles and the tragedy of the 17th century has an external outline that is much larger than an internal one. The Poles and Swedes began to tear the country apart because of the betrayal of part of the elite. Precisely, probably, due to the fact that Ivan the Terrible did not stifle treason in his time, they betrayed not him, but Boris Godunov and Vasily Shuisky. Not to mention the fact that it is now precisely established that the death of Grozny's wife was due to poisoning, the death of his son, and even himself, is very suspicious.

But the authors of the introductory film need to show in five minutes that everything has always been bad in Russia, but she always wanted “reforms”. And the Yeltsin ones. You and I understand who the authors of this film will like. Anyone who will advocate for a weak Russia will please them. In fact, they do not like any of the leaders of Russia. Nobody but Gorbachev and Yeltsin. A little sympathy for Nicholas II. Why? So he's a "reformer" after all. Parliament created the Constitution. So the authors mold him into a "reformer".

But everything is in order. The next person shown after Ivan the Terrible - they have a free interpretation of history - is Peter I. 100 years was easily squandered. Peter I is shown as an evil tyrant. He wanted to cut a window to Europe, and did not reckon with any losses. They show a frame: Peter I cuts down a tree, it breaks into pieces, they fly and kill people. People fell to the left, he waved his ax to the right - the tree fell into fragments, again people fall dead. Here it is the Russian government! All on blood and murder!

The next one to be shown is Catherine II. The beginning, it seems, is positive: she advocated enlightenment, so that there were subjects, not slaves. but after that, at the end, it is again served with a negative sauce. Next - Alexander I. He seemed to be good, he wanted the Constitution, but he did not make it. This is where reformers come in. Every tsar has a reformer like Chubais who, if they had listened, the whole life would have gone differently. Napoleon, of course, would not have attacked Russia if Speransky had carried out some reforms much earlier. The logic is this. Manipulation in everything.

Then they show Nicholas I. This, of course, is a fabulous villain. Decembrists on the square. And he shot them, the rebels, with cannons. And they end about this king with the following phrase: the defeat in the Crimean War was the logical conclusion of his reign. This is not a quote - this is the meaning. The tsar was conservative, so he lost in the Crimean War. Then they immediately go to Alexander II. I think, how will they show that the Tsar was killed by terrorists? Showed. From his liberal point of view: he started the reforms, but then abandoned the reforms and therefore he was killed. That is, it turns out that this is normal: the head of the country refused to reform, and you can kill him.

It's hard to watch this "cartoon" calmly. Such a concentration of lies per square centimeter that just rolls over. And this lie is obligatorily hammered into the head of the Ural youth and children.