From Nezavisimaya Gazeta:
…The focus on rehabilitating the “red emperor” in principle unites the authorities and the opposition.
Departments of the Russian Communist Party have organized competitions to see who will be the fastest to erect monuments to Stalin. For example: if in the Transbaikal region only an announcement has been made, then in Chuvashia a fourth bust has already been erected. And in the Vologda region the governor is supported by the left, who have promised that new monuments to the leader will soon appear. It is clear that the resolution of the 19th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (2025 07 14) “On achieving complete historical justice in the case of Stalin” has, after all, led to an agreement between the authorities and the opposition. And although Zyuganov’s party criticizes the state’s approach to rehabilitating Stalin only as a “red emperor”, it itself apparently believes that it is fine to consider him a “communist tsar”….
And what is the difference? The author of the article apparently believes that neither the Communist Party in the Russian Duma, nor the current rulers in Russia, make any truly honest reference to Stalin. A supervisor of the analytical board of the Russian Communist Party – Sergei Obukhov – puts his finger on a crucial point:
…”It was absolutely necessary to say something about this today at the Congress of the Russian Communist Party, since the party of those in power (United Russia) is trying to use Stalin’s growing authority among the people for their own needs. For example, when they put forward such a thesis about Stalin that he was a ‘red tsar’ or a ‘red emperor’, this completely obscures his positive role as a communist and successor to Lenin, as the creator of Soviet power – a man who embodied in action the Leninist principles of social justice and the victory of labor over capital. But those in power only pay attention to his leadership style, which they are so eager to imitate. ‘Yes, there was a chief in the Kremlin then, and today we also have one there, even if it happens to be someone else’ “….
subsequent 