Socialists on homosexuality

[Rudolf]

Yawn.

This is attributed to Bakunin from what text?

That quote apparently appears in Historica Judaica by Edmund Silberner. I've been unable to find a copy of this to see where it's from and therefore can't say if it's a legit quote.

[Rafiq]

The text is real. It is from a letter, as a response to the schism of the Hague congress. Here was Engels's indirect response:

"Bakunin has issued a furious, but very weak, abusive letter in reply to the Scissions. That fat elephant is beside himself with rage because he has finally been dragged from his Locarno lair out into the light, where neither scheming nor intrigues are of any more use. Now he declares that he is the victim of a conspiracy of all the European—Jews!”

I don't see how it is a point of controversy that Bakunin was a vicious anti-Semite.

[The Feral Underclass]

That quote apparently appears in Historica Judaica by Edmund Silberner. I've been unable to find a copy of this to see where it's from and therefore can't say it's a legit quote.

It's not legitimate.

[Rafiq]

Here is the endnote given by Libcom in referencing it:

Quoted from Ibid., 296. The circular letter is available as “Lettre aux Internationaux de Bologne (décembre 1871),” in Bakounine, Œuvres Complètes, Volume 2. For more of Bakunin’s anti-Semitic rhetoric, see his “Aux Compagnons de la Fédération des Sections Internationales du Jura (février-mars 1872),” in Michel Bakounine, Œuvres Complètes, Volume 3: Michel Bakounine et les Conflits Dans L’Internationale 1872 (Paris: Editions Champ Libre, 1975). In Bakunin’s reply to Marx and Engels’ “The Alleged Splits in the International,” he denounced the lies of “German and Russian Jews.” See “Résponse à la Circulaire Privée du Conseil Général: Les Prétendues Scissions dans L’Internationale,” in Bakounine, Œuvres Complètes, Volume 3, 121.

https://libcom.org/library/marx-baku...note58_xpqsa9j

[The Feral Underclass]

The text is real. It is from a letter, as a response to the schism of the Hague congress. Here was Engels's indirect response:

"Bakunin has issued a furious, but very weak, abusive letter in reply to the Scissions. That fat elephant is beside himself with rage because he has finally been dragged from his Locarno lair out into the light, where neither scheming nor intrigues are of any more use. Now he declares that he is the victim of a conspiracy of all the European—Jews!”

Provide the source quote so that we can all see what the letter actually says and whether it has been altered in translation, misquoted or taken out of some kind of context. Even this response is unattributed. A quote by Engels in which he personally insults Bakunin is neither proof that this alleged letter contains the quote or that he was an anti-Semite, especially when you consider the motivation Engels might have for portraying Bakunin in a negative way.

I don't see how it is a point of controversy that Bakunin was a vicious anti-Semite.

Because it's a bullshit lie propagated by his political enemies to discredit through misinformation.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

(Hal) Draper cites the paragraph as Bakunin: Lettre aux Int. de Bologne, Archives Bakounine 1.2:109. I haven't read the text, but Draper was generally a careful scholar.

[The Feral Underclass]

Here is the endnote given by Libcom in referencing it:


https://libcom.org/library/marx-baku...note58_xpqsa9j

Yet apparently no one has taken the time to translate the letters and put them on the Internet...Odd.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

In fact most works by Bakunin are not online. I don't know if this is due to a lack of interest, jumpy publishers, or something else. In either case, unless someone on RL has access to the Archives Bakounine or his Ouevres etc., it seems we can't see the letter. But the preponderance of evidence is in this case surely on the side of people like Draper and other scholars not falsifying that letter.

[The Feral Underclass]

In fact most works by Bakunin are not online. I don't know if this is due to a lack of interest, jumpy publishers, or something else. In either case, unless someone on RL has access to the Archives Bakounine or his Ouevres etc., it seems we can't see the letter. But the preponderance of evidence is in this case surely on the side of people like Draper and other scholars not falsifying that letter.

All of his most significant or popular texts have been translated and published either in print or online. Considering the widespread discussion and enduring controversy over this particular aspect of Bakunin's life, it strikes me as bizarre that no one in the course of history has ever translated into English and had published the letter anywhere either online or in print. If this letter is such definitive proof of Bakunin's rabid anti-Semitism, then where is it? Locked away in some compiled and edited collected works in some archive somewhere?...

That quote has been widely attributed to Bakunin by fascists and Illuminati conspiracy theorists, to Leninists and capitalists alike, but without seeing the letter and reading its content, there is absolutely no basis to say that it is legitimate. Considering Bakunin's friends, beliefs and actions it would be entirely inconsistent for him to hold these views.

[Quail]

I can't find the letter anywhere online, so I guess we're going to have trouble finding it. I suppose my view is that even if Bakunin was an anti-semite, it doesn't mean that everything else he said was complete rubbish. It just means he was an anti-semite, in which case ignore his views on Jews and focus on the rest.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

All of his most significant or popular texts have been translated and published either in print or online. Considering the widespread discussion and enduring controversy over this particular aspect of Bakunin's life, it strikes me as bizarre that no one in the course of history has ever translated into English and had published the letter anywhere either online or in print. If this letter is such definitive proof of Bakunin's rabid anti-Semitism, then where is it? Locked away in some compiled and edited collected works in some archive somewhere?...

That quote has been widely attributed to Bakunin by fascists and Illuminati conspiracy theorists, to Leninists and capitalists alike, but without seeing the letter and reading its content, there is absolutely no basis to say that it is legitimate. Considering Bakunin's friends, beliefs and actions it would be entirely inconsistent for him to hold these views.

I don't know if it has been published in print. I suspect it hasn't because, let's be honest, there isn't that much of a market for Bakunin. Or Marx, for that matter. And it hasn't been put online, from what I gather, probably because the people who publish Archives Bakounine object (they've disabled searching through their books on Google Books, for example).

So the question is whether we can trust Draper. I think we can. In those cases where an online edition exists, e.g. with Proudhon's Cahiers, Draper's quote always matches the source material. And I think it's preposterous to imply Draper had some ulterior motive here - his thesis, that the libertarianism of the early anarchists was largely a myth, can be proven if we ignore Bakunin's relationship to the Jews (and focus on his "Alliance of Socialist Democracy" or Proudhon's statements about becoming a general director etc.).

Alternately we can send someone to Amsterdam and beat them with sticks unless they present us genuine Shaky-Toaster-Rama photos of the offending letter.

[Rafiq]

You fail to see that if Engels merely wanted to smear Bakunin, he wouldn't have to resort to accusing him of adhering to a Jewish conspiracy. This is hardly slander by 19th century standards. There are other ways to slander the "fat elephant" - so why would Engels specifically accuse him of making pretenses to a Jewish conspiracy? It makes no sense.

I mean, use reason here - is Engels just randomly making this up? How does that make sense? The reason it hasn't been published online is for the same reason it's not that easy to get your hands on Marx and Engels's collected works (after the whole MIA scandal too) - his anti-semitism probably wasn't a huge feature of his mainstream works (why would it be?) but he was certainly an anti-Semite where it counted. I mean, the grand majority of those who publish his works online are probably for him - why would they go out of their way to publish a few letters or marginal works by Bakunin that encapsulate his rabid anti-semitism? And this is hardly surprising considering the likes of Pierre Joseph Proudhon on the Jews:

Write an article against this race that poisons everything by sticking its nose into everything without ever mixing with any other people. Demand its expulsion from France with the exception of those individuals married to French women. Abolish synagogues and not admit them to any employment. Finally, pursue the abolition of this religion. It’s not without cause that the Christians called them deicide. The Jew is the enemy of humankind. They must be sent back to Asia or be exterminated. By steel or by fire or by expulsion the Jew must disappear.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/s.../1847/jews.htm

My point being that even though anti-semitsim probably didn't feature that heavily in Proudhons works, it was tacitly incorporated and acknowledged. The context of 19th century politics were basically that - in lacking a scientific, cohesive criticism of capitalism, it was not uncommon for "socialists" to become susceptible to reactionary conspiracy theories.

Anarchism in general aside, it is difficult to see how people can still defend Bakunin, who by all accounts was a slimy individual.

[The Feral Underclass]

You fail to see that if Engels merely wanted to smear Bakunin, he wouldn't have to resort to accusing him of adhering to a Jewish conspiracy. This is hardly slander by 19th century standards. There are other ways to slander the "fat elephant" - so why would Engels specifically accuse him of making pretenses to a Jewish conspiracy? It makes no sense.

I mean, use reason here - is Engels just randomly making this up? How does that make sense? The reason it hasn't been published online is for the same reason it's not that easy to get your hands on Marx and Engels's collected works (after the whole MIA scandal too) - his anti-semitism probably wasn't a huge feature of his mainstream works (why would it be?) but he was certainly an anti-Semite where it counted. I mean, the grand majority of those who publish his works online are probably for him - why would they go out of their way to publish a few letters or marginal works by Bakunin that encapsulate his rabid anti-semitism?

But this entire discussion is based on nothing but hearsay. You have no basis to claim that quote is true or accurate. Nothing.

And if it was true or accurate, then why hasn't his enemies published it. I mean, they go on about it enough. Surely it would make all this guessing and hearsay redundant if they just produced this letter...

No one knows what this letter is supposed to have said, so no one knows what Engels was referring to or whether what he was saying was even a fair representation of what Bakunin said.

You're clutching at straws.

Anarchism in general aside, it is difficult to see how people can still defend Bakunin, who by all accounts was a slimy individual.

Because unlike you, people with credibility don't judge or support a set of ideas based on the "slimyness" of the person who wrote them.

[Counterculturalist]

The book referenced in the libcom article exists, the letter is in it, and it says what it's reputed to say.

Check the excerpts from page 109 and 110 in the following links.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=oF8...volume&q=juive


https://books.google.ca/books?id=oF8...ume&q=parasite

I like Bakunin, but unless somebody at google books has a serious vendetta against him, he said what he said. Too bad, but it doesn't do anybody any good to pretend otherwise.

[The Feral Underclass]

The book referenced in the libcom article exists, the letter is in it, and it says what it's reputed to say.

Check the excerpts from page 109 in the following links.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=oF8...volume&q=juive


https://books.google.ca/books?id=oF8...ume&q=parasite

I like Bakunin, but unless somebody at google books has a serious vendetta against him, he said what he said. Too bad, but it doesn't do anybody any good to pretend otherwise.

What am I supposed to be looking at?

[Counterculturalist]

It's the result of a google books search. Look at "from inside the book." Unfortunately, google only allows a small portion of the text to be displayed, but it's enough to see that the exact quote in question is in the book.

The book is Oeuvres complètes de Bakounine: pt. 2. Michel Bakounine et l'Italie 1871-1872: La première internationale en Italie, Editions Champ libre, 1974.

[The Feral Underclass]

It's the result of a google books search. Look at "from inside the book." Unfortunately, google only allows a small portion of the text to be displayed, but it's enough to see that the exact quote in question is in the book.

The book is Oeuvres complètes de Bakounine: pt. 2. Michel Bakounine et l'Italie 1871-1872: La première internationale en Italie.

This is a translation of the letter, not a quote?

[Counterculturalist]

This is a translation of the letter, not a quote?

Yeah, it's the letter in French.

I think that's pretty good evidence for its existence. I mean, I doubt that Editions Champ Libre invented the letter and inserted it into their edition of Bakunin's works just to fuck with people.

[The Feral Underclass]

Yeah, it's the letter in French.

I think that's pretty good evidence for its existence. I mean, I doubt that Editions Champ Libre invented the letter and inserted it into their edition of Bakunin's works just to fuck with people.

Yes, you're right. It is incredibly damning, not to mention disappointing.

I have found the book on amazon so will buy it. It's in French, but at least I will have it and be able to study the letter in full in order to understand what the fuck is going on with it.

We all have the ability to have contradictory points-of-view. In this instance Bakunin clearly followed a popular contemporary position and failed to see beyond the myopia of anti-Semitic values, which he certainly had the capacity to do and should have known better. He was not as enlightened and as forward thinking on this matter as he should have been, especially when you consider how enlightened and forward thinking he was with so many other issues.

Disappointing indeed.

[Rafiq]

No, Bakunin's anti-semitism was just as much a display of cognitive dissonance as Proudhon's.

That is to say, it was not. There was nothing contradictory about it because, quite simply, Bakunin had overtly reactionary tendencies in the domain of politics... If you could even call it that. He followed with his "master" (Bakunin referred to Proudhon as "the master of us all") in his reactionary petite-bourgeois politics caught between the intricacies of the decaying remnants of feudalism and emerging modern society. Alongside his overt Russian chauvinism (Russia being the center of all de-facto reactionary politics in the late 19th century), Bakunin was inarguably someone of no relevance to the industrial (or even post-industrial) proletariat aside from being a source of obfuscation. Few leaders of the Left have been so contemptible, dishonest, and outright unscrupulous. The "libertarian" Bakunin's anti-democraticism would make Bordiga blush. In fact, there is much reason to despise him - for it was his conspiratorial maneuverings in attempting to usurp in secret the First international that had cemented the permanent divide between the red and black.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I have never heard of any applicability of Bakunin's current among the industrial proletariat - I know that he pertained almost exclusively to the rural petty bourgeoisie. He was hardly a huge icon among the anarcho-syndicalists in the United States and Europe, etc.