Trolling? I’m genuinely asking to engage. I generally consider myself well-read on these topics and think I have a pretty critical eye on the relevant writing. So when I see something that goes against what I’ve researched for years I genuinely want to find sources that can challenge that
You haven’t bothered to give me more than 2 sentences. I’d love to see any sources you might have for your claims
I’m pro-revolutionary. I support Emma Goldman; I support the Left SRs that brought about the Russian revolution in the first place; I support the Black Army that defeated the Whites; I support the Kronstadt sailors that prevented the revolution from turning into a liberal revolution (which, by the way, the Bolsheviks originally believed it should be. They were pretty orthodox Marxists. It was the Kronstadt sailors that pushed them to embrace a more “permanent revolution” theory)
Do you think it’s at all possible that you’re the one demonizing revolutionaries here? Just wondering, have you tried actually engaging with Goldman’s criticisms? Have you read her work? Do you consider it to be counterrevolutionary as well?
What about Stepan Petrichenko? He lead the Kronstadt rebellion. He was also instrumental in bringing about the 1917 revolution. He’d been there throughout the whole thing. How is he counterrevolutionary when he was one of the original revolutionaries?
Big claims require big sources. If by “supported by” you mean in spirit, then yeah obviously the Allies would’ve supported any rebellion against the Bolsheviks. But if you’re claiming they had any material support, please provide a source
What’s your excuse for the execution of the Left SRs? The SRs had much more widespread support throughout Russia than the Bolsheviks and were responsible for the vast majority of assassinations of the Tsar’s appointments. Probably the single most responsible party for bringing about the revolution in the first place (which makes sense considering the Bolsheviks were basically nonexistant in Russia because of their exile).
What about the Makhnovtsi? Without them, the Red Army would’ve probably ended up losing against the Whites. Why did the Red Army crush them as soon as they stopped being useful? They were also the only major leftist group that were explicitly anti-anti-Semite. If they hadn’t been crushed, Ukraine would probably be devoid of Nazis today. What’s your excuse for that?
around 2,000 sailors were executed afterwards. That’s how many “infiltrators” there were?
Do you consider Emma Goldman herself a counterrevolutionary? What’s your opinion of her?
The Kronstadt rebellion was a tragic end to the group of people that were probably the most responsible for bringing the Bolsheviks to power in the first place. The execution of these sailors is probably the moment Emma Goldman lost faith in the Bolsheviks
It’s worth noting this was actually a huge step back. After the October Revolution when the Bolsheviks rewrote all the laws they specifically and purposefully left out anti-homosexuality laws. Twice. I don’t think it’s completely fair to make so many excuses for him when his predecessors were clearly ahead of him on this
For which part? The bit about Lenin’s warning is from Lenin’s Testament[0] in the post-script:
Stalin is too coarse and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealing among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a Secretary-General. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, more polite and more considerate to the comrades, less capricious, etc. This circumstance may appear to be a negligible detail. But I think that from the standpoint of safeguards against a split and from the standpoint of what I wrote above about the relationship between Stalin and Trotsky it is not a [minor] detail, but it is a detail which can assume decisive importance.
Also in the testament he said of Stalin
I think that Stalin’s haste and his infatuation with pure administration, together with his spite against the notorious “nationalist-socialism” [Stalin critised the minority nations for not being “internationalist” because they did want to unite with Russia], played a fatal role here. In politics spite generally plays the basest of roles.
Also there was 21 members and 10 candidate members of the Central Committee at the time of the Revolution in 1917. You can look up the history of each of the members and see that, for the ones who made it through till Lenin’s death, Stalin had them executed in order to consolidate all power. These members include Zinoviev and Kamenev who represented the “left wing” of the party. Trotsky was the only original member that survived but he was banished and never returned to Russia. Stalin would use him as a scapegoat for many years afterwards; using alleged involvement in “Trotskyist groups” as an excuse to imprison or kill other members of the party.
[0] https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1922/dec/testamnt/index.htm
Wild to see a community that’s supposed to be a fan of Lenin making excuses for Stalin… Lenin’s last dying wish was that the party find a way to get rid of Stalin. Stalin literally had all of the original members of the Bolsheviks – everyone that was there during the October Revolution – killed. He pretty much stood against everything Lenin (and obviously his arch-rival Trotsky) stood for
not deadly for you, just deadly for others. Masks aren’t to protect yourself, they’re to protect other people. Something that seems to be extremely difficult to grasp for Americans that have had decades of being told that they’re the center of the universe