The Workers' Dreadnought

Weekly suffragette and later left-wing communist newspaper founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Among other major historical events, the Dreadnought captured the outbreak of revolution in Russia and briefly supported the Bolsheviks/Russian Communist Party before the anti-working-class nature of the latter became more apparent to Pankhurst. Over time, the paper then took a more critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by Pankhurst's open letter to Lenin published in November 1922.

Submitted by adri on March 30, 2020

Comments

adri

4 months ago

Submitted by adri on August 22, 2024

Quit scabbing Fozzie; I'm on strike until Steve retracts what he said about me being a "colonialist chauvinist" (i.e. for opposing Native American nationalism—which shouldn't be a controversial position among anarchists and other socialists) who is also supposedly spreading "Russian propaganda" by opposing Ukraine's ambitions to recapture Russophilic regions like Crimea (just like I oppose the military endeavors of Russia and all other capitalist states).

Fozzie

4 months ago

Submitted by Fozzie on August 22, 2024

Hello Adri. Maybe explain in clear terms what I have done that you think is bad?

adri

4 months ago

Submitted by adri on August 22, 2024

Hello Adri. Maybe explain in clear terms what I have done that you think is bad?

Lessening the effectiveness of our strike by scabbing! Once we win the retraction, and maybe also an actual wage of sorts (along with arrears), then we will go back to adding stuff to the archive. Until then, show some solidarity!

adri

3 months 4 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on August 25, 2024

Once we win the retraction . . .

As a gesture of good faith, I've restored all of my submissions back to their original revisions. I will also refrain from posting a satirical list of demands from the fictional Libcom Workers' Union (a rank-and-file union of libcom contributors), in addition to a photo of the libcom penguin sitting on top of King Charles II's throne ordering libcom's volunteer-peasants to return to work. I do this in a spirit of reconciliation and out of a desire to end this strike amicably.

adri

3 months 3 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on August 29, 2024

Thanks for the week-long show of solidarity at least, but it seems that Steve is ignoring the LWU's legitimate grievances—not because he's clever or has read any Pope,[1] but because the libcomonarch is a bit of an ignorant snob. If you're wondering why I hadn't finished this already, it's partly because there are around 308 issues of the Workers' Dreadnought, not including the Woman's Dreadnought, and I wasn't sure if the site could handle all of that. When I was originally working on this, there also weren't any downloadable issues from the LSE like there are now; they only had images of each issue that one had to individually download and compile into a pdf.

1. 'Tis best sometimes your censure to restrain, / And charitably let the dull be vain: / Your silence there is better than your spite, / For who can rail so long as they can write?

westartfromhere

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 3, 2024

westartfromhere wrote: Very good. Just made one minor alteration [to the introduction]:

Capitalised Communist, in "left-wing Communist".

Communism as a peculiar, social-democratic, period of capitalism is capitalised in writing.

This other—"Communism as the positive transcendence of private property as human self-estrangement, and therefore as the real appropriation of the human essence by and for man; communism therefore as the complete return of man to himself as a social (i.e., human) being – a return accomplished consciously and embracing the entire wealth of previous development. This communism, as fully developed naturalism, equals humanism, and as fully developed humanism equals naturalism; it is the genuine resolution of the conflict between man and nature and between man and man – the true resolution of the strife between existence and essence, between objectification and self-confirmation, between freedom and necessity, between the individual and the species. Communism is the riddle of history solved, and it knows itself to be this solution"—is neither left, nor right.

In this sense communism is always correctly written in the lower case. Whether this latter sense can be descried as libertarian communism is debatable. It is not unbounded freedom of the individual as individual freedom is relative to the necessity of the community of struggle to survive.

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 3, 2024

Just so everyone knows, the LWU's strike against Steve is more or less over, so an admin can remove all the above comments if they want; they don't really have much to do with the Dreadnought.

westartfromhere

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 3, 2024

Weekly suffragette and later left-wing communist newspaper founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Among other major historical events, the Dreadnought captured the outbreak of revolution in Russia and briefly supported the Bolsheviks/Russian Communist Party before the anti-working-class nature of the latter became more apparent to Pankhurst. Over time, the paper then took a more critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by Pankhurst's open letter to Lenin published in November 1922.

Should not the introduction to these journals above distinguish between proletarian revolution (strikes, demonstrations, desertion, mutiny, sabotage, free association...) and the seizure of political power under the guise of social-democracy? To ignore this distinction is akin to conflating the spontaneous uprisings of the working class with the bourgeois Peace Treaties that conclude these battles between the classes. Is it fair to apply Lenin's derogatory term, "Left-Wing" Communist, at all? The newspaper proclaimed itself for "International Socialism". Let's take it at its words.

We suggest the following:

Weekly suffragette and later newspaper of "International Socialism" founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Amongst other major historical events covered, the Dreadnought captured and supported the seizure of state power by the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (renamed by itself as the All-Russian Communist Party after the seizure of power) before the anti-working-class nature of the regime became apparent to some observers. Over time, the paper then took a limited critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by the open letters of Herman Gorter and Sylvia Pankhurst to Lenin published in 1921 and 1922, respectively.

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 6, 2024

Stop editing the page westartfromhere... Nobody knows what you're talking about. I mean really, can we not get some admin attention here??

westartfromhere

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 6, 2024

What's not to understand?

Weekly suffragette and later newspaper of "International Socialism" founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Amongst other major historical events covered, the Dreadnought captured and supported the seizure of state power by the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (renamed by itself as the All-Russian Communist Party after the seizure of power) before the anti-working-class nature of the regime became apparent to some observers. Over time, the paper then took a limited critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by the open letters of Herman Gorter and Sylvia Pankhurst to Lenin published in 1921 and 1922, respectively.

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 6, 2024

Well first you've littered this site with your strange and offensive posts (e.g. calling the people who did the redesign for this site bourgeois essentially) and are now going around editing other people's articles without conferring with them. And second your reason for editing the above intro, after I've repeatedly told you not to, makes absolutely no sense. The term "left-wing communist" is an entirely appropriate choice of words to describe Pankhurst, seeing as how she favored worker councils (similar to other left-wing/council communists of the time) and opposed the party rule of the so-called "workers' state" in Russia.

westartfromhere

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 6, 2024

The question posed was, What is not understandable about the draft of the introduction below?

Weekly suffragette and later newspaper of "International Socialism" founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Amongst other major historical events covered, the Dreadnought captured and supported the seizure of state power by the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (renamed by itself as the All-Russian Communist Party after the seizure of power) before the anti-working-class nature of the regime became apparent to some observers. Over time, the paper then took a limited critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by the open letters of Herman Gorter and Sylvia Pankhurst to Lenin published in 1921 and 1922, respectively.

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 6, 2024

Why would I change "left-wing communist" to "newspaper of International Socialism"? You make absolutely no sense.

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 6, 2024

adri wrote: Why would I change "left-wing communist" to "newspaper of International Socialism"? ...

You wouldn't. Others may, however, prefer to use the journal's own self-description, rather than its detractor's — Lenin's — description of ' "Left-wing" Communism'.

Perhaps you would like to answer why you wish to omit a reference to Herman Gorter's open letter to Lenin that predated Pankhurst's? Again, why you wish to omit mention of the seizure of state power by 'the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party'?

And, once again, what in the following paragraph makes absolutely no sense to you?

Weekly suffragette and later newspaper of "International Socialism" founded by Sylvia Pankhurst, first appearing as the Woman's Dreadnought in March 1914 and then as the Workers' Dreadnought in July 1917. Amongst other major historical events covered, the Dreadnought captured and supported the seizure of state power by the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (renamed by itself as the All-Russian Communist Party after the seizure of power) before the anti-working-class nature of the regime became apparent to some observers. Over time, the paper then took a limited critical stance towards Lenin and the so-called "workers' state" in Russia, as evidenced by the open letters of Herman Gorter and Sylvia Pankhurst to Lenin published in 1921 and 1922, respectively.

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 6, 2024

westartfromhere wrote: You wouldn't. Others may, however, prefer to use the journal's own self-description, rather than to its detractor's — Lenin's — description of ' "Left-wing" Communism'.

There's nothing inherently disparaging about the term "left-wing/left" communist. In fact Pankhurst approvingly used the term herself and reprinted tons of writings by various groups and people who employed the label (e.g. Herman Gorter, the Group of Revolutionary Left-Wing Communists of Russia, German left-communists, and others):

Pankhurst wrote: There are signs that it is not only in the East that the Third International is being weakened by the compromises [...] into which the Russian government has thought it necessary to enter, as well as by the [o]pportunist attitude it is adopting in many directions.

Here is the justification for the Revolutionary Left Communist organisations that met in Germany the other day, to form a new International.

Regretfully we say it, though this development was doubtless inevitable: revolutionary proletariat of the world, the day is fast dawning in which you must cease to regard the first Soviet republic as your guide and leader. (Vol. 8 No. 29)

Pankhurst wrote: In Moscow, when Lenin strongly urged us to join the United [Communist] Party, he said: 'Form a Left block within it: work for the policy in which you believe, within the Party.'

But the British Communist Party will not have it so. It declares for the extermination of Left Wing propaganda.

The Right majority in the Communist Parties of other countries has taken a similar line. The Executive of the Third International, after pleading with us to enter, now apparently encourages the excommunication of the Left Wing.

[...]

But the Communist Cause advances; do not doubt it: new tendencies are developing in the movement and must displace the old to make way for themselves. (Vol. 8 No. 28)

adri

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by adri on November 6, 2024

westartfromhere wrote: Perhaps you would like to answer why you wish to omit a reference to Herman Gorter's open letter to Lenin that predated Pankhurst's? Again, why you wish to omit mention of the seizure of state power by 'the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party'?

I'm not "omitting" anything; there's just no point in mentioning Gorter's open letter when Pankhurst's open letter sufficiently illustrates the point I was making. Why on earth would I also write the more verbose "the majority ('bolshevik') faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (renamed by itself as the All-Russian Communist Party after the seizure of power)" instead of just the "Bolsheviks/Russian Communist Party"??

Fozzie

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Fozzie on November 6, 2024

I am also in the faction which feels it's better if introductions can be brief and to the point.

Mike Harman

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by Mike Harman on November 6, 2024

Yes agreed with Fozzie. The introduction is fine. Lots of people use the term left communist or left wing communist to refer to themselves. Adding obscure nitpicking to introductions just makes them unintelligible even to people who might use this site regularly, let alone people just trying to learn about Pankhurst without a lot of backgroun.

westartfromhere

1 month 2 weeks ago

Submitted by westartfromhere on November 8, 2024

If all here are happy to exclude mention of "the seizure of state power by the majority ("bolshevik") faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party"—and Dreadnought's reaction—in the intro, leave it so.

There were so many different political parties in the period subsequent to that seizure of power but by the time that reaction had finished its bloody work there remained only one, the All-Russian Communist Party.