Kronstadt
There are fourteen fucking pages of it.
Dev
It's by the Sparts. Therefore, is going to be full of out and out lies. Why would you encourage anyone to waste a second of their time reading it? If it said anything worthwhile about the new archives, then surely it would've been reported by some non-mentally ill sect?
the only bit i am interested in is there questioning of Getzler's claims, and the new archive stuff.
You know they probably entirely made it up, right?
Anyone read this? http://www.icl-fi.org/english/esp/59/kronstadt.htmlMaybe the anarchist faq needs updating?
Looking at it now and I'd say not really. It's the Sparts 'summary' of the documents a 'summary' that is short on figures but long on opinion.
Some of it is weird ie
"Delegations of sailors from the warships Petropavlovsk and Sevastopol went to Petrograd and saw that these rumors were false. When they returned to Kronstadt on February 27, they did not, however, dispel the lies."
Other bits are disengenous, there is no mystery as to why the PRC existed before the mass meeting as the previous evening is had been set up at a mass meeting of the Petropavlovsk and Sevastopol crews
And then there is the bit about the red army moving across the ice faster than bullets from a machine gun - quite an achivement
The stuff on the whites actually proves there was no white involvement until the rising had already broken out - and then the boasted involvement is form a handful who were pretending to be Red Cross or who had infiltrated the Red Cross!! General Kozlovsky had of course been put in Kronsdadt by Trotsky himself! So the best they can claim is that under threat of food and medicine running our they were willing to take both from the Red Cross (which was infiltrated by the whites). That standard of 'proof' reveals Lenin to be a German agent as he was willing to accept significantly more help from German imperialism.
As to presenting confessions extracted by the Cheka as proof - well this is just stupid. Are the sparts unaware of all the trots who confessed to the Cheka of plans to posion wells and derail trains?
Their apprach to Getzler is weird (apart from anything else he is hardly an anarchist so what's with the headline of that section). He gives definite figures in relation to year on enlistment, they reply with various opinions that simply repeat what the trots have always claimed.
This pretty much typifies the whole article, a claim of new material but in reality just a re-heating of old opinon.
It's also pretty irrelevant, the defeat of kronstadt 'saved' the revolution for what exactly.
Stalin?
Agree totally with Joe, it's just the same old, same old. Does anyone take seriously something that has been put out by the Sparts? Stick with Getzler and Avrich
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4




It's by the Sparts. Therefore, is going to be full of out and out lies. Why would you encourage anyone to waste a second of their time reading it? If it said anything worthwhile about the new archives, then surely it would've been reported by some non-mentally ill sect?