V.O. Klyuchevsky on this occasion wrote:
"The subject of history — the past that does not pass as a legacy, a lesson, an unfinished process, as the eternal law. By studying grandfathers, we are learning about grandchildren, i.e., studying ancestors, we are learning about ourselves. Without knowledge of history we must recognize[20] ourselves as fortuities, who not knowing how and why we came into the world, how and what for we live in it, and towards what we should strive to achieve, as mechanical dolls that are not born, but are made, are not die according to the laws of nature, of life, but break by someone's childish whim" (V.O. Klyuchevsky. Works in 9 volumes. — Moscow, "Thought", 1990, v. 9, p. 375).
"What all these phenomena mean? What is the meaning of this chaos? This is the task of histor[ical] studying. We can't go by touch in the dark. We m[ust] know the force that guides our private and people's life. (…)» (V.O. Klyuchevsky, cited publication, v. 9, p. 433).
These statements relates to the history in its whole entirety and minuteness, but they also determine the requirements to selection of facts and their interconnections, which represents versions of history, generated by different schools of historical science: one and the same algorithmic of development, objectively present in life, must be recognizable in the adequate to life conceptions of the historical past, and its fame should be the basis for predictability of the future in its possible multivariability.
The historical facts in so doing — just illustrations of the manifestation of the algorithmic itself. That is, the algorithmic can be one and the same (both in one and the same society, and in societies being compared with each other), but the illustrative facts may be different in the works of different historians; in addition, detailing of description of the algorithmic can also be different — depending on the tasks the historian is solving. But the algorithmic of the real life in any case must be recognizable. But this requires personality orientation of the researcher on the perception of history not in aspect of identifying and registering plenty of heterogeneous facts, but in the aspect of identifying algorithmic of development / degradation as such through facts[21], which become known from the entire set of the available to the researcher sources.
And enough one single fact that is "not fit" into the constructed by historians conception of the historical past in order to recognize this conception historically deceitful.
And into the conception of "history", which the "truly Russian patriot" M.S. Solonin expressed in words: "Without reservations, without equivoques ("on the one hand", "on the other hand") the unconditional recognition of Stalin as the creator and leader of the anti-people totalitarian dictatorship. The criminal dictatorship, committed countless and terrible in their cruelty mass crimes against the Russian people, against other peoples of the USSR, committed equally cruel crimes against the people of other countries of the world. These indisputable, from the historical science point of view, facts, must be, finally, recognized at the state level"— a lot of things does not fit.
So, to Mark Semenovich, the advice can be given: Before pronounce the sentence to J.V. Stalin and stalinism,understand for a start the world history of at least the last three millennia and the role in it of your tribesmen (even if not in flesh, than in spirit) and their masters… — Then also the history of the era of "stalinism" will appear in a different light[22].
For the present, we can say that the scientific and methodological basis of the "de-Stalinization" is inadequate to Life and that's why "de-Stalinization" in the form, intentioned by M.A. Fedotov, M.S. Solonin and so on and so forth, — will not take place; and even attempts of its implementation will provoke consequences, — not only unpredictable for the regime of the "great combinator" with manners of the "grand inquisitor", but unpleasant for him.
Internal Predictor of the USSR
16 Dec 2010 — 7 Jan 2011
[1] Formulation of the task in such a way – THIS is the path to the predictable failure of the regime, in part because that "public consciousness" is one of the marxism's fictions, non-existent in nature, because consciousness is always individual.
[2] This is the expression of the intention of "human rights" activists to induce the President to commit yet another act of legal nihilism, because such a Presidential decree would be contrary to article 13.2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: No ideology may be established as state or obligatory.
That is, if such a decree is issued, praise to A.D. Sakharov and his crowd is not forbidden, (and this is a certain ideologeme), but to remember the achievements of the Soviet people under the leadership of J.V. Stalin and to pay tribute to Stalin as the leader and man – would be a violation of the Presidential decree with all the ensuing of this fact legal consequences.
In our opinion, in sociology must be no taboo topics and opinions, but sociological science and society must overcome false and erroneous opinions. Trying to do it through legislation and fulfilling law enforcement practices – means to condemn society for the recurrence of mistakes and delusions.
[3] F.M. Dostoyevsky «The Brothers Karamazov», part two, book five, ”The Grand Inquisitor”. Cited from the publication on the Internet http://www.pereplet.ru/misl/inkv.html through the link, placed on the website “Modern russian thought“: http://xray.sai.msu.ru/~lipunov/text/misl/misl.html.
(English version was cited from https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/grand.htm)
[4] See, in particular, the works on this subject that you can find on the Internet:
V.V. Rozanov. “Legend about the Grand inquisitor of F.M. Dostoyevsky”.
R.M. Cabo. “Legend about the Grand inquisitor of F.M. Dostoyevsky”.
A. Maceina. “Cor inquietum”.
[5] Some researchers consider it as forgery, created in the surroundings of bishop Macarius, based on Filofey's works.
[6] Filofey. The epistle to the Grand Prince Vasily about correcting the sign of the cross and about sodomite fornication. (http://old-ru.ru/07-19.html).