"It's not hard to become a knight, offer your seat!" // Soviet Union // 1975 // Artist: Joseph Yefimovsky

"It's not hard to become a knight, offer your seat!" // Soviet Union // 1975 // Artist: Joseph Yefimovsky

  • By - edikl


Please remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity and interest. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification, not beholden to it. Thanks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Yeah, lady, do you know how hard it is to stand up in this armor?


Good way to push for politeness.


It’s honestly short and to the point, I like this alot


*tips helm* M'babushka


wholesome propaganda. nice


Cringe normal people on the underground VS absolute Chad knight


As an American I try and race women to the last available seat, I am so far undefeated.


Besides, "стать - встать" is an extremely cheap rhyme.


> стать - встать [to become - to stand. pronounced stat' - vstat](https://translate.google.com/?sl=auto&tl=en&text=%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C%20-%20%D0%B2%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C&op=translate)


It's still cheap because it's verbs that only differ in one letter.


I wouldn't know. I just wanted to share the brief research I had done. I don't know how to read cyrillic


Strange that a communist state would promote aristocratic traditions


Like offering a seat when using public transit?


As in, be like a Knight. This figure of aristocracy and Monarchy is a good role model.


This has more to do with chivalry. Knights were not necessarily nobles, nor were nobles necessarily knights.


>Knights were not necessarily nobles Yes they were; at least during the high middle ages, knighthood was considered a class of lower nobility. A non-noble fulfilling the military role of a knight, ie. an often mounted soldier in high-end - by the high middle ages mostly plate - armour, was called a man-at-arms.


i see what you mean. perhaps the era and its traditions are so far gone that its safe to promote them. the big enemy for the ussr at that point would probably have been america, and along with it global capitalism and imperialism. none of those things indulged by this knight. the biggest remnant of aristocracy and feudalism at that point, judging only from other posters including [this soviet poster, also from 1975](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fih1.redbubble.net%2Fimage.424903941.6089%2Fflat%2C800x800%2C070%2Cf.u1.jpg&f=1&nofb=1), was perhaps the orthodox church. I am by no means learned in terms of symbols of the orthodox church, that said, I don't think this kind of knight would be one of them.


I really don't think the CCCP would be worried about a band of knights in medieval armor starting an uprising


Feudalism is contrary to the values of liberal democracy too, but those of us from the west don't have a problem with using knights in shining armour as heroic icons in our pop culture.


This is so unrealistic, no soviet has 2 big bags of food.


I only see bread and kefir, nothing special. :)