Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman's involvement with the Bolsheviks

[yuon]

So, I've heard that Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman were involved with the Bolsheviks at one stage (presumably after they were kicked from the USA).

Does anyone have any more information about this?

I found this:

Eventually Emma Goldman was finally deported to Russia where she joined the Bolsheviks and later assisted them in inciting the communist rebels against the Christian loyalists in the Spanish Civil War.
http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:xb7JOJfGzmEJ:www.dockersunion.com/vb/showthread.php%3Ft%3D439+Default+Emma+Goldman+and+ Alexander+Berkman%27s+involvement+with+the+Bolshev iks&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a
Which seems a bit fucked up really...

[Raúl Duke]

So, I've heard that Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman were involved with the Bolsheviks at one stage (presumably after they were kicked from the USA).

Does anyone have any more information about this?

I found this:

http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:xb7JOJfGzmEJ:www.dockersunion.com/vb/showthread.php%3Ft%3D439+Default+Emma+Goldman+and+ Alexander+Berkman%27s+involvement+with+the+Bolshev iks&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a
Which seems a bit fucked up really...

That quote you show seems a bit...odd.

Yes, there was a time when Goldman, like most anarchists, had more respect for the Bolsheviks and saw them as equal comrades. However, Goldman's time in Russia changed her view about the bolsheviks as she noted many anarchist were imprisoned and the whole Kronstadt affair, etc.

The part about Spain doesn't make any sense because the "christian loyalists" were actually the insurgents against the Republic while the Communists were the loyalists to the Republic.

EDIT: Actually looking at the link why would you take any of it seriously...it looks like a thread about "jewish conspiracy" and everyone knows those people are insane.

[yuon]

Well, I heard about the whole thing with the two anarchists and the Bolsheviks, and then I went looking for stuff, and found that.
Which is, as you say, odd. To put it mildly.

I was hoping for a bit more concrete information, maybe some links to articles or letters, regarding their (positive) opinions (or, heck, any anarchist writings) on the Bolsheviks.

I'm sure I can find all the negative stuff I want, but was liking for more positive stuff.

[Искра]

I think that they were never part of Bolsheviks (since they were a PARTY), but that they supported them in the way that they worked together on revolution.

[Dave B]

There is quite a bit on Berkman’s relationship with the Bolsheviks in his own very readable book the Bolshevik myth. He was in fact asked by the Bolsheviks to translate Lenin’s Infantile sickness or disorder pamphlet, as a kind of endorsement of it.




I was in a room in the Hotel National translating for the British Labor Mission various resolutions, articles, and Losovsky's brochure on the history of Russian unionism, when I received a message from Radek asking me to call on a matter of great urgency. Wondering, I entered the automobile he had sent for me and was driven at a fast clip through the city till we reached the former quarters of the German Legation, now occupied by the Third International. The elegant reception hall was filled with callers and foreign delegates, some of whom were curiously examining the bullet marks in the mosaic floor and walls --- reminders of the violent death Mirbach had met in this room at the hands of Left Social Revolutionists opposed to the Brest peace.


I was conscious of the disapproving looks directed at me when, out of my turn, I was requested to follow the attendant to the private office of the Secretary of the Communist International. Radek received me very cordially, inquired about my health, and thanked me for so promptly responding to his call. Then, handing me a thick manuscript, he said:
"Ilyitch (Lenin) has just finished this work and he is anxious to have you render it into English for the British Mission. You will do us a great service."

It was the manuscript of "The Infantile Sickness of Leftism." I had already heard about the forthcoming work and knew it to be an attack on the Left revolutionary tendencies critical of Leninism. I turned over some pages, with their profusely underscored lines corrected in Lenin's small but legible handwriting. "Petty bourgeois ideology of Anarchism," I read; "the infantile stupidity of Leftism," "the ultrarevolutionists suffocating in the fervor of their childish enthuslasm."

The pale faces of the Butirki hunger strikers rose before me. I saw their burning eyes peering accusingly at me through the iron bars. "Have you forsaken us?" I heard them whisper.

"We are in a great hurry about this translation." Radek was saying, and I felt impatience in his voice. "We want it done within three days."
"It will require at least a week," I replied. "Besides, I have other work on hand, already promised."

"I know, Losovsky's," he remarked with a disparaging tilt of the head; "that's all right. Lenin's takes precedence. You can drop everything else, on my responsibility."

"I will undertake it if I may add a preface."

"This is no joking matter, Berkman." Radek was frankly displeased.
"I speak seriously. This pamphlet misrepresents and besmirches all my ideals. I cannot agree to translate it without adding a few words in defense."

"Otherwise you decline?"

"I do."

Radek's manner lacked warmth as I took my departure.


A subtle change has taken place in the attitude of the Communists toward me. I notice coldness in their greeting, a touch of resentment even. My refusal to translate Lenin's brochure has become known, and I am made to feel guilty of lèse majesté.




http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/bmyth/bmch19.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/bmyth/bmch19.html)

[revolution inaction]

So, I've heard that Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman were involved with the Bolsheviks at one stage (presumably after they were kicked from the USA).

they were quite supportive of the Bolsheviks when they still considered them to be revolutionaries, that is before they where deported to russia, you can find a short artical emma goldman wrote in support of the bolshevikes if you search on onebigtorrent, it might be other places to. edit: found it here http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/goldman/truthaboutbol.html



Does anyone have any more information about this?

I found this:


Eventually Emma Goldman was finally deported to Russia where she joined the Bolsheviks and later assisted them in inciting the communist rebels against the Christian loyalists in the Spanish Civil War.



http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:xb7JOJfGzmEJ:www.dockersunion.com/vb/showthread.php%3Ft%3D439+Default+Emma+Goldman+and+ Alexander+Berkman%27s+involvement+with+the+Bolshev iks&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a
Which seems a bit fucked up really...

the bit you quote seems to be compleatly made up, goldman and berkman where deported to russia, but they didn't join the bolshevics and they left russia in 1921 well before the spanish civil war. "Christian loyalists" is a vary odd way to say fascist to.

Goldman wrote a book about her experiances in russia whisch is quite interesting http://libcom.org/library/my-disillusionment-in-russia-emma-goldman

[scarletghoul]

Yes, anarchists back in the day would take part in socialist revolution even if the leadership didnt match their exact ideological specifications. This wasn't as unusual as it may seem to some sectarian leftists today. For example, Park Yeol, was an active Korean anarchist in Japan, and went on to join North Korea in the Korean War, then lived there for the rest of his life as a Party member.

[Искра]

Yes, anarchists back in the day would take part in socialist revolution even if the leadership didnt match their exact ideological specifications. This wasn't as unusual as it may seem to some sectarian leftists today. For example, Park Yeol, was an active Korean anarchist in Japan, and went on to join North Korea in the Korean War, then lived there for the rest of his life as a Party member.
Which means that he wasn't anarchist any more but contra-revolutionary prick ;)

[yuon]

Thanks to Dave B and radicalgraffiti. :)

scarletghoul I'm sure that anarchists today would take part in a real revolution, even if the "leadership" wasn't ideal ideologically. However, we have learnt from the past. We won't be supporting Leninists any longer if they wish to rule. And civil war will be the least of your worries if, after a socialist revolution, you try to set up a new state structure reminiscent of the old USSR.

There are a lot of people who want a free society, and if a revolution happens, but no freer society comes after, they will be quite angry.

:cool::)

Edit: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE BOYLSHEVIKI (being one of the pieces linked to by radicalgraffiti) is exactly the sort of stuff I was looking for. Goldman explains how actually the Boylsheviki are all good people actually, and aren't the nasty anti-democratic sort that other people think.

[Dave B]

Speaking for myself; I think some of us only need to get away from this idea this idea of Marxism versus Anarchism as if that is all there is on the left.

In fact what we have is Marxism, Anarchism and Leninism.

As a Marxist I do not regard Anarchism as pernicious, in the same way as Leninism is, even if I disagree with aspects of 'Anarchism'.

I would be a bit surprised for instance to find myself about to be 'eliminated' with my back against the wall staring down the barrel of an anarchist gun .

What can be forgotten or ignored is that some anarchist did support the Bolsheviks, however I do think there is a general healthy mea culpa on that from most anarchists.


But there were also Marxists who opposed the Bolsheviks from 1917 onwards and even before that ie 1904.

Predicting in fact that the Bolshevik programme would end up, because of their general vanguardist-Jacobin-Blanquist ideology, in a ‘dictatorship over the proletariat’.

An example of Marxist opposition to the Bolsheviks can in fact discovered from Berkman himself whilst he was still co-operating with them, thus;



The Secretary himself could give me little information about labor conditions in the city and province, as he had only recently assumed charge of his office. "I am not a local man," he said; "I was sent from Moscow only a few weeks ago. You see, Comrade," he explained, evidently assuming my membership in the Communist Party, "it became necessary to liquidate the whole management of the Soviet and of most of the unions.

At their heads were Mensheviki.

They conducted the organization on the principle of alleged protection of the workers' interests. Protection against whom?" he raged. "You understand how counter-revolutionary such a conception is! Just a Menshevik cloak to further their opposition to us. Under capitalism, the union is destructive of bourgeois interests; but with us, it is constructive.

The labor bodies must work hand in hand with the government; in fact, they are the actual government, or one of its vital parts. They must serve as schools of Communism and at the same time carry out in industry the will of the proletariat as expressed by the Soviet Government. This is our policy, and we shall eliminate every opposition."

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/bmyth/bmch23.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/bmyth/bmch23.html)


.

[scarletghoul]

Which means that he wasn't anarchist any more but contra-revolutionary prick ;)
This really sums up the problem with ultra-left anarcho-puritanism today..

Anarcho-communists and statist communists are on the same side, man. Well, they were in just about every successful anarchist revolution.

[Искра]

This really sums up the problem with ultra-left anarcho-puritanism today...
No, that sums anarchist belief on what vanguard party is. Every anarchist is against political parties, moment he's in one he's no longer an anarchist.


Anarcho-communists and statist communists are on the same side, man. Well, they were in just about every successful anarchist revolution
And the sabotage it, because of their OWN interests. I'm not saying that CNT from Spain 36 was right model, no they were also contra-revolutionary (join the government) etc. but "Stalinists" undermined every effort of working class. I don't want another who's right discussion here etc. But I can say that we are not on the same sides... we anarchists are against all authority... party included!

[Morpheus]

Yes, anarchists back in the day would take part in socialist revolution even if the leadership didnt match their exact ideological specifications.

And then we shot or imprisoned by the new regime. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.