The temptation of guarding: historians, writers and security officers against criticism of the Bolshevik terror
The article discusses the alarming trends that are noticeable in the modern historiography of Stalinist terror, which has been under great pressure from reactionary authors for the last ten years. For more than 25 years, domestic and foreign historians have been studying various aspects of terror on the basis of documents and generally agree with the view that terror was a universal method of government in the Stalin era, being an instrument of social engineering policy. However, the voices of those who believe that the construction of communism was a great goal are becoming louder and that terror does not matter much, since the number of victims of Bolshevism has been greatly exaggerated. The main material for the rehabilitation of Stalinist terror is supplied by historians of the FSB and the Home Office who defend the honor of the uniform, who are very poorly prepared in professional terms and cannot analyze the biased documents of the KGB department. Recently, their influence on civilian historians has increased, therefore, some researchers of Stalinism are refusing to criticize terror and fall into the apology of the Stalinist regime. These historians are captured by concepts that were created back in Stalin's time and justify terror. These researchers also demonstrate bias, misinterpretation of documents and dependence on the Soviet language. The author of the article believes that the professional historical community should oppose to falsifiers, both historians and publicists, objective statistics and competent interpretation of the causes and consequences of Stalin's terror.