I think totalitarianism was a constant part of Russian politics since the times of Ivan the Terrible. You seem to be very much impressed by the fact that Stalin was Georgian. But Catarina II was German, and all her successors too. And so what? President Eisenhower was German too. And so what?==
You know I stress that Stalin is georgian and that russians wasn't in charge of USSR until Gorby (which is truth) as answer to as many people indentified "SOviet Union" as "Russia" then began to blame ETHNIC russians for misdeeds of Soviet Union. At same time they compeletly ignore that Soviet Union was international and anti-russian state. State where russian tradition was being destroyed and where the leadership wasn't russian.
Ekaterina II came to Russia as wife of russian czar. Hitler's party was elected by germans on free election.
But Lenin and Stalin came in Moscow as winners over russian side after Civil War. See difference.
They took former capital Moscow and residence of Partriach the Kremlin as their residence. They spoke russian language but they was anti-russians by sense.
It was just like if indians from India won over britons in British Island then set in London. Then renamed empire as "Commonwealth of English speaking people". But someone called it British Empire nevertheless. I presume that britons would be against it.
Soviets didn't support Russian Empire. They just assembled thier own empire from former parts of Russian Empire. They used of cause some of former mechanism too.
SO it is correct when we address events in between 1922-1991 then we talk about Soviet Union and soviet people of 100+ different ethnicities. No "Russia" and no "russians".
BTW ethnically Lenin was half chuvasian and half jew. His mother was jewish. Stalin was georgian. Hruschev, Brezhnev, Chernenko was ukranians.
I'm far from convinced by your arguments. What decides about ethinicity? First of all language . If Russian is your mother tongue then you are Russian, whether your grandmother was Jewish or Kalmuk, what does it matter? (By the way, I'm told Pushkin was a quarter-Negro. Is it true?)
"War was between non-russians supporting bolshevicks and Russian national White Movement. It took 4 years."
I know nothing about ethnic makeup of Bolsheviks. But it is impossible that they could take over power in Russia without active support of russian people. How else could they win the war? They had no wunderwaffe and somebody had to fight in their army. Do you really want me to believe that White Russians were defeated by an army made up of Jews, Latvians, Poles and other minorities? (and White Russia had also the support of English and French) Be serious Ivan.
There was no invasion from Mars in 1917. The civil war that ensued was a war between two segments of Russian society: White Russia and Red Russia. Red Russia won.
"They spoke russian language but they was anti-russians by sense."
That is something I can't understand. The French Revolution destroyed the Church in France and French nobility, which were definitely a great part of French tradition. Was the French Revolution anti-French?
People in Soviet non-russian republics and in satellite countries were forced to learn Russian language, and it was not only communist propaganda but Russian literature and culture and history, and all those stories about how beautiful is Moscow (I can remember them well from my russian textbook). That's what you call anti-Russian empire?
Please tell me exactly in WHAT sense they were anti-Russian.