In fact, it is a separate thematic two-tiered hall on the 4th floor of the National Museum. It is a shame that such an important topic as the "best manifestations" of the punitive Soviet machine, which went through all the cities and towns of the Union, is shown so haphazardly and incoherently using the example of Georgia. There is logic in the chronology of the exposition, but that's it. Russian Russians, Jews, and Others are missing the clear and obvious message "a country in which a Georgian shot a Georgian, a Russian shot a Russian, a Jew shot a Jew, and further down the list, and then all of each other, cannot have a future," which is replaced in places by the presence of some terrible external enemy in the face of the entire USSR, except the Georgian SSR. But as a reminder that in the Soviet Union they laid down a high bell tower on any national identity, and each Republic was essentially just a colony, from which any resources were siphoned off to please the "center" - it is certainly useful. However, episodes like Ordzhonikidze's mysterious death under the rule of his former friend Dzhugashvili are not mentioned at all, nor the role of Beria and Dzhugashvili in the formation of the firing squad, which killed hundreds of thousands and millions everywhere - and Georgia, unfortunately, did not escape this fate either - although it would seem to be dirty and bloody. This is directly related to the inside of the "Soviet country".
There is a completely strained opinion about the composition in the museum, it's not even a museum, it's an installation of what torture chambers would look like, some doors from the cells, documents about Georgia's independence (naturally, with the support of the ambassadors of England and France, everyone was eager for Baku oil). The description on the walls about the actions of counterrevolutionary figures. The proletarian slogans against the background of red banners and barbed wire are a mockery. Rambling copies of letters on the walls, prisoners' correspondence. There is no hesitation in talking about the help of Britain, Germany and France, about the work of their resentment in Georgia, unexpectedly approaching (jumping from the 1920s to the 1970s) the work of the resentment of Amnesty International and the United States, the coming to power of Gamsakhurdia. Then a video series about the conflict in Abkhazia. It looks crumpled, incoherent, perhaps for weak minds, and there is a wow effect. A thinking person will remain with mixed feelings. It is clear that there was a certain black page in the history of beautiful and beautiful Georgia, but everything is very incoherent, taken out of context.