HOW JEWISH BOLSHEVIKS TRIED TO OPPOSE THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION

Lenin with a bunch of violent Goys
bursting to do some revolution.
by Colin Liddell

My previous article, "Alt-Right Lies: Russian Revolution Not Actually Dominated by Jews," has been stimulating a lively discussion. As usual with any generally healthy discussion, new facts and insights are constantly being thrown up.

One of the most interesting is the fact that two of the most prominent Jewish members of the Central Committee (CC)—and subsequently important members of the early Politburos—were the main opposition to the decision to carry out the revolution, while the non-Jewish members of the CC were entirely behind the resort to violent action.

So, whatever you think of the Russian Revolution—whether you see it as brutal betrayal of the Russian people or else a necessary push towards grim modernisation that potentially saved the country from German conquest and possible extermination—it was the Goy element in the Party that was all for it, while the Jews in the top party leadership were at least more ambivalent.

One of the key meetings that green-lighted the Revolution—there were several others as the Bolsheviks had yet to centralise power—was that held on the 23rd of October (10th of October old style), attended by only 12 members of the 21-member Central Committee.

The World Socialist Website (published by the Trotskyist International Committee of the Fourth International) takes up the story (Jews in bold type):
At 10 p.m., about a dozen of the Bolshevik Central Committee’s 21 members gather at a secret location in Petrograd. The meeting takes place at the apartment of the left-wing Menshevik Nikolai Sukhanov, who is not at home, but whose wife is a Bolshevik.

It is the first meeting of the Central Committee, with Lenin physically present, in months. Lenin, who is still persecuted by the Provisional Government, shows up in disguise. The meeting is organized and chaired by Yakov Sverdlov.

The other CC members attending this historic meeting are: Leon Trotsky, Joseph Stalin, Grigory Zinoviev, Lev Kamenev, Feliks Dzerzhinsky, Aleksandra Kollontai, Grigory Sokolnikov, Georgy Lomov, Andrei Bubnov, Moisei Uritsky and Varvara Iakovleva, who takes the minutes.

The meeting begins with an hour-long report by Lenin, who pleads for immediate action.

Over the past weeks, Lenin has conducted a determined campaign to prepare the Central Committee for an armed insurrection. However, he still must fight considerable opposition from the party leadership’s right-wing, headed by Zinoviev and Kamenev...

The discussion about Lenin’s report is tense and prolonged, and lasts throughout the night into the next morning. Kamenev and Zinoviev continue to oppose Lenin’s call for an insurrection, arguing that the party should instead adopt a “defensive posture” and focus on acquiring the strongest possible representation at the Constituent Assembly. An insurrection, in their view, would be untimely. They argue that it would only precipitate an attack by the counterrevolution, which would find support in the petty bourgeois democracy.

Apart from the ongoing differences with Zinoviev and Kamenev, the discussions among the Central Committee members now revolve not so much about whether or not to prepare the uprising, but when and how. In contrast to Lenin, whose concern is that the right time for the uprising not be missed by the party, Trotsky argues that the insurrection should be prepared by a non-party body, and scheduled so that it can be sanctioned by the Second All-Russian Congress of Soviets, which is due to take place in early November.

In the end, the overwhelming majority of the Central Committee adopts Lenin’s proposed resolution with 10 votes for, and only two, Kamenev and Zinoviev, against it.
Now it should be said that this was not a full meeting of the Central Committee. Almost all the absent members were non-Jews. But of the 12 members present, half were Jewish and half were non-Jewish (although Kamenev was more properly half-Jewish, having a Russian mother, but whatever!).

With four Jews voting for revolution and two voting against, the Jewish members of the Central Committee had a +2 score in favour of insurrection, while the Goyim had a +6 score in favour. This result reveals that there was much more caution on the part of the ethnic Jewish members and perhaps a timid desire to work within the existing power structures and democratic frameworks created by the earlier February Revolution that had removed the Tsar. The Goyim members of the Central Committee, by contrast, were much more willing to throw caution to the wind and plunge the country headlong into a violent civil war that would fundamentally shape the new state that finally emerged from the chaos.

Indeed, the heavily centralised and militaristic character of the later Soviet Union was to a large degree the result of the exigencies of the brutal Civil War which followed. This flushed out the soft, intellectual and often Jewish strain (the likes of Kamenev, Zinoviev, and even Trotsky) and favoured the more robust "Eurasian" types like Stalin and his various henchmen, paving way for the Georgian's rise to absolute power.

This is extremely ironic, given the fact that many Alt-Righters, Jew obsessives, and Hitlercucks like to attribute as much blame as possible to the Jews for the Bolshevik Revolution and its aftermath. However, in its violence, brutality, and stern heroism, the Soviet Union was distinctly un-Jewish in character, much less so than the modern United States, where Jewish attributes have enjoyed a much freer rein and self-destructive success.
__________________________________________________

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. 
Support his workby buying it here. He is also featured in Arktos's new collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.

Become a Patron!

No comments:

Post a Comment