In any case, all the events that happened later - World War II, almost half a century of military confrontation between the USSR and the West - are consequences of the Bolshevik revolution. It is not accidental that representative conferences took place in many Western capitals, whose participants tried to sum up the historical results of the event, to reveal the influence of the revolution on contemporary world development (it was also about globalization, the new wave of authoritarianism in the world, the role and meaning of populist slogans for gaining power). In general, in full accordance with the cliches of the Soviet press, October is walking around the planet, a Russian journalist, military expert Alexander Golts.

But not in Russia. It seems that the Kremlin set the task of conducting the October "events" as imperceptibly as possible. In order to ensure tranquility, on the eve of grabbing on the streets of those who were unlucky to be in the places indicated by a completely marginal politician as a point of gathering protesters. As for the permitted activities, all of them were given to the Communist Party. It was announced in advance that the Kremlin does not plan anything on this matter. The President has spoken out negatively about any revolutions in principle. Thus, speaking at the Valdai international club, he stated: "Today, referring to the lessons of a hundred years ago, to the Russian revolution of 1917, we see how ambiguous its results were, how closely the negative and, we must admit, positive consequences of those events. And let's ask ourselves: could not it be possible to develop not through revolution, but along the evolutionary path, not at the cost of destroying statehood, ruthlessly breaking down millions of human destinies, but by gradually, consistently moving forward? "During the jubilee, the Kremlin tried to shift the general attention to Putin's forthcoming trip abroad, demonstrating that a possible meeting with the American president is more important for him than the October anniversary.

In my opinion, the Russian authorities have an extremely controversial attitude toward the Bolshevik coup, and this is no coincidence. On the one hand, the achievements of the Soviet government, including the victory in the Great Patriotic War, the transformation of the USSR into a powerful industrial power and, of course, the creation of nuclear weapons, this basis of Putin's power - everything on which the ideological "security" system is based, is the result of October. On the other hand, Vladimir Putin created a kind of autocracy, the peculiarity of which is that every few years the authority of an absolute ruler receives formal approval from the subordinate population.

And this determined the conservatism of the Kremlin. Conservatism in the truest sense of the word. A policy aimed at ensuring that by any means - if the brainwashing does not help - direct force suppression will be used - to preserve the existing order of things intact. In this system of coordinates, the highest value, which must be preserved by any means, is power. Thus, with all the love for the Soviet legacy, the Kremlin was in the position of a defending monarchy. Monarchy, which decomposes and degrades due to its own fear of any changes.

In this situation, any criticism of power throughout the entire political spectrum is easily enemies - from the extreme right to the extreme left. This system of power creates a breeding ground for extremism of all kinds. In this system of power, gendarme provocateurs are given complete freedom of hands. In this system, the chiefs of the country try to resolve the contradictions, leading "small victorious wars". Analogies are obvious with the situation of 100 years ago, and the result is more or less predictable. I suspect that is why the Kremlin so carefully avoids serious conversation about those events.