Skip to comments.Roots of Soviet Terror
Posted on 11/23/2001 12:21:27 AM PST by Askel5
THE ROOTS OF SOVIET TERRORAccording to Professor Richard Pipes, former Director of the Russian Research Center at Harvard University, "the roots of Soviet terrorism, indeed of modern terrorism, date back to 1879"(6), when a Congress of an organization called Narodnaya Volya (The People's Will) met in the small Russian town of Lipetsk. On 1st March 1881, this group succeeded, after a succession of failures, in murdering Tzar Alexander II, even though he was known as the Tzar Liberator, because he had freed the Russian serfs in 1861.
The philosophical underpinnings of the group, and of Soviet-spawned terrorism, may be found in the Catechism of the Revolutionary by Sergei Nechaiev (assisted by his mentor, the former artillery officer, Michael Bakunin). The son of a priest (Stalin studied to be a priest), and one of the most evil men who ever lived, Nechaiev "passionately embraced the cause of revolution.
In 1869, he organized a society in Moscow for the purpose of preparing mass insurrection. He shrank from nothing to attract followers, resorting to deceipt, terrorism and murder.(7) By studying Nechaiev's hideous writings, today's student of continuing World Revolution (and of its enhanced weapon, terrorism) can gain the necessary insight into the mentality we are confronted with. For in the Catechism, Nechaiev wrote:
The Revolutionist is a doomed man. He has no private interests, no affairs, sentiments, ties, property nor even a name of his own heart and soul, not merely by word but by deed, he has severed every link with the social order and the civilized world.
[ ] after falling out with Michael Bakunin and the breakup of his organization by the Tzarist police, which led to the arrest of some 300 operatives, Nechaiev had fled to Switzerland. Bakunin left this description of his erstwhile terrorism comrade:
Nechaiev is as ruthless with himself as he is with others. He is a fanatic, but a very dangerous one, association with whom may be fatal to all concerned. His methods are abhorrent.Professor Pipes explained why "The People's Will" is the model for the modern terrorist organization, just as Nechaiev's Catechism of the Revolutionary established the mindset which infects the barbarous hordes of Muslim and Marxist terrorist who have 'graduated' from terrorism training camps modeled on those originally established under the supervision of KGB Colonel Kotchergine in 1966 [around Havana, Cuba some 10 months after the Jan. '66 Tricontinental Conference of 513 delegates representing 83 groups from the Third World]:
The People's Will was the first to consider the enemy to be the whole system capitalism, religion, law and everything which kept the body politic intact. (12)The successor, both in method and also partly in respect of ideology, to the Narodnaya Volya movement, was the party of the Social Revolutionaries (SRs), who launched attacks on the Russian Imperial Government in the early years of the 20th century with the deliberate purpose of destroying the awe in which the Russian population held the regime.
Professor Pipes observed:
They felt that as long as people feared the Government, and believed it to be omnipotent, there was no possibility of Revolution. So the murder of Government officials or supporters of the Government was an important step in causing the numinous glow surrounding the government to evanesce.
THE DEFENCE OF TERRORISM BY TROTSKYIt was of course Leon Trotsky (Braunstein) who followed in the footsteps of Nechaiev and Bakunin by adding to the literature of terrorism with his tome entitled The Defense of Terrorism, also called Terrorism and Communism, which appeared in the English language in 1921.(13) On page 23 of this polemical work, Trotsky proclaimed that:
The man who repudiates terrorism in principle i.e., repudiates measures of suppression and intimidation towards determined armed counter-revolution, must reject all idea of the political supremacy of the working-class and its revolutionary dictatorship. The man who repudiates the dictatorship of the proletariat repudiates the Socialist Revolution, and digs the grave of Socialism.
This piece of subtle "backwards reasoning" was framed so as to imply that the Communists' 'sacred cows' would be violated by anyone who denied the necessity of terrorism to enhance the prospects for Revolution. In other words, those who did not support terrorism were not revolutionaries, and neither were they even socialists: they were scum, to be despised and destroyed.
Trotsky's lust for blood evidently knew no bounds, even though he was by far the most literate and profound of the founding revolutionaries:
That the proletariat will have to pay with blood, that, in the struggle for the conquest of power and for its consolidation, the proletariat will not only have to be killed, but [will also have to] kill of this, no serious revolutionary can ever have any doubt One cannot live by phrases about the great truth that under Socialism we shall need no Red Terror.But Trotsky himself attributed the revolutionary doctrine that Communism cannot be "constructed" without terrorism to Lenin. According to David Shub, an exiled Russian revolutionary, and author of a classic short life of Lenin(14), "Lenin at every opportunity kept hammering into our heads that terror was unavoidable." In order to give physical expression to his demonic desire to embark upon state terror [ (15) ] Lenin identified and appointed the son of a rich Polish landowner named Felix Dzerzhinsky, from Poland's Vilno province.
"He was fair, slightly round-shouldered, with a short pointed beard and transparent eyes with dilated pupils," wrote Shrub. "There were moments when his friendly smile gave way to icy sternness. At such times, his eyes and ascetic bloodless lips revealed a demoniac fanaticism. Rigorous self-denial, incorrigible honesty, and a frigid indifference to the opinions of others, completed his make-up. His natural modesty, unassuming air and quiet manners set him apart."
"On 20th December 1917, Lenin instructed Dzherzhinsky to organize an Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-revolution and Speculation. Under the name Cheka, the Soviet secret police soon became the symbol for a system of terror such as the world has never seen.(16)
The Cheka's initial headquarters was the Smolny Institute a former girls' school in Leningrad the selfsame building in which Anatoliy Sobchak presided as Mayor of St. Petersburg, and to which Vladimir Putin was posted after functioning as 'assistant' to the 'dean' of Leningrad University [immediately following] his return from Russia from East Germany [where he had] successfully directed removal of East European regimes and their replacement by 'non'-communists in 1989-1990]. (17) [ ]
Thus the Soviet regime, nurtured in the hellish tradition of Nechaiev's "People's Will" aberration, bathed itself in blood from the outset. Indeed, as Trotsky proclaimed, the revolution makes no sense without terror
Since we are now truly living in the era of the World Revolution, terror has been exported by the Soviets globally. The only factor preventing the West from understanding and accepting this obvious truth is the misguided belief that the Leninist Soviet revolutionaries abandoned, all of a sudden, their global revolutionary intentions and ideology and suddenly became 'like us.'
DEMYSTIFICATION AND OFFICIAL OVERREACTIONThe indiscriminate use of terror adopted with relish (even though Lenin's secretary said that Dzerzhinksy's liquidation of over 1,500 inmates in the early stages of the Red Terror was 'a mistake') also had another, more subtle effect, which should (but won't) serve as a warning to President Bush and Tony Blair in the present circumstances.
As Pipes explained:
It should be noted that not only did the terror campaign demystify Russian rulers in the eyes of the people but it also caused the Government to overreact.
Nechaiev is as ruthless with himself as he is with others. He is a fanatic, but a very dangerous one, association with whom may be fatal to all concerned. His methods are abhorrent.Recognized this "beat", of course, thanks to the current survey of the Protocol agit-prop:
He has come to the conclusion that to create a workable organization one must use as a basis the philosophy of Machiavelli and adopt the motto of the Jesuits: "Violence for the Body; lies for the soul."
Moreover, the art of directing masses and individuals by means of cleverly manipulated theory and verbiage, by regulations of life in common and all sorts of other quirks ... belongs likewise to the specialists of our administratived brain. Reared on analysis, observation, on delicacies of fine calculation, in this species of skill we have no rival, any more than we have either in the drawing up of plans of political actions and solidarity.
In this respect the Jesuits alone might have compared to us,
but we have contrived to discredit them in the eyes of the unthinking as an over organization, while we ourselves all the while have kept our secret organization in the shade.
However, it is probably all the same to the world who is its sovereign lord, whether the head of Catholicism or our despot of the blood of Zion! But to us, the Chosen People, it is very far from being a matter of indifference.
Just had a few days' discussion on Judaism, Zion, messianic times and being "Chosen" on another thread that truly looks as if it's going to stand regardless the sensitive subject matter throughout. (hooray!)
I include that last bit, rather, as part of my theory that these "Will of the People" terrorists, as refined by the leninists, are a Chosen People so truly diabolical that only they can tap what believers conceive of as the Anti-Christ and what yet moral "strictly reason" sorts suspect is a Cult of Personality crescendo sufficient to cause trusting, bewildered sheeple to clamor for the branding ... and the shearing of their civil liberties, privacy and personal property that is prerequisite to taking one's chances in the decidedly Secured and dutifully Prosperous charnel house of the World State.
...the Revolution makes no sense without terror, since it primary methods are those of Satan: pressure, coercion, intimidation and harassment
This is one reason I argue so vehemently against the Alchemy of Pragmatism, by the way. Any choice for evil is a win for that evil when triumphs even (and especially) when men do nothing, much less employ it.
And it's why I'm so horrified of our talk of "taking a page from Israel" re: overt political assassination and rationalizing in advance the option always to choose a useful evil ... unlawful detention, torturous extraction of information, intimidation by ID card, harassment of any and all who fail to get with the program by casting suspicion and hurling of personal smears.
Those waves have beat against the shores of FR for two months now and the toll is decidedly irreversible on many counts.
Looking at the bottom of the page still open before me, attacked most viciously and used as tools of discord are primarily those whose roots run so deep they cannot be plucked out and reconditioned. I believe that's why Religion's made such a big comeback (the rebuilt Cathedral of Christ our Savior re-upped well in advance) for this final push to make the still pools of the East find a level with the heretofore undammed rapids of the West as our economic roundtables and anti-terrorist alliances bring us, finally, through the front door to the World State.
I know it's fashionable to deride anyone who believes in "conspiracy" of any sort but I do maintain all battles come down to the one battle. If every selfless human act perpetrated in love is a win for "our" side ... surely that means any evil act perpetrated for self-gain or utilitarian and pragmatic furtherance of some purely material objective (including the bending and breaking of souls) is a win for "their" side. We are, all of us, co-conspirators at the essential Either/Or level.
I'm gonna tell you something, Flaca, and I want you to listen tight.
May sound like I'm talking about me. But I'm not, I'm talking bout you.
As a matter of fact, I'm talking about all people everywhere.
When I come down here to Texas I was looking for something. I didn't know what. Seems like you add up my life and I spent it all stompin' other men or, in some cases, getting' stomped. Had me some money and had me some medals. But none of it seemed a lifetime worth the pain of the mother that bore me. It's like I was empty.
Well, I'm not empty anymore. That's what's important. To feel useful in this old world. To hit a lick in against what's wrong or to say a word for what's right even though you get walloped for saying that word.
Now I may sound like a Bible-beater yelling up a revival at a river-crossing camp meeting. But that don't change the truth none. There's right and there's wrong. You gotta do one or the other. You do the one and you're living. You do the other and you may be walking around but you're dead as a beaver hat.
The cool thing about this little bit is the way it resounds with the voice of an Individual who -- without coalition or waiting for some 'Mother May I?' consensus -- obeys like a Man his conscience (that inner copy of the law which distinguishes us as Humans) and fights the good fight with all his heart.
THAT is my ideal "co-conspirator" and one reason I love to hang around folks like you, Independentmind. Trust you got your counters cleaned and enjoyed a great Thanksgiving!
"Then, in 1792, patriotism culminated in foreign wars; and the pressures of conflict, internal and external, pushed terrorism to new lengths. Because they were reminiscent of aristocratic ways, elegance, manners, wit were denounced as treason. The King was deposed, and a new calendar opened with ''Year One of French Liberty.'' In revolutionary newspeak, liberty, of course, meant its opposite: a police state, in which spying, denunciation, indictment, humiliation and death threatened all. The sententious religion of universal brotherhood gave way to the polemics of paranoia: Rousseau with a hoarse voice, as Mr. Schama puts it. Personal scores became political causes. Nuts came out of the woodwork. Marat was one, but a nuttier enthusiast, the Marquis de Bry, gauging the mood of the hour, offered to found an organization of tyrannicides - 1,200 freedom fighters dedicated to the murder of kings, generals and assorted foes of freedom.
"Thus was the joy of living replaced by the joy of seeing others die. Mr. Schama is at his most powerful when denouncing the central truth of the Revolution: its dependence on organized (and disorganized) killing to attain political ends. However virtuous were the principles of the revolutionaries, he reminds us that their power depended on intimidation: the spectacle of death. Violence was no aberration, no unexpected skid off the highway of revolution: it was the Revolution - its motor and, for a while, its end.
"In the National Assembly Mirabeau had argued that a few must perish so that the mass of people might be saved. It turned out that more than a few would perish. Politicians who graduated from rhetoric to government found that rhetoric made government impossible. If patriotism was to triumph, politics had to end; liberty had to be suppressed in the name of Liberty; democracy had to be sacrificed so that Democracy should live. Speaking from the ruthless precinct of the Committee of Public Safety, [in 2001 we have an "Office of Homeland Security" -- R] Saint-Just, who is one of Mr. Schama's favorite antiheroes, insisted that the Republic stood for the extermination of everything that opposed it. And absence of enthusiastic support was opposition enough.
"With the likes of Saint-Just and Robespierre (a state scholarship boy, typical of old regime meritocracy), doublespeak was in the saddle. Murderously weepy, sadistically moralistic, fanatically denouncing as fanatics those who did not share their fanaticism, men like Robespierre stood for the will of the people as long as the people's will matched their own visions. Ever offering to die for their beliefs, they got the sour satisfaction of undergoing the martyrdom they professed to seek: murderers murdering murderers before being murdered in their turn, until the last days of July 1794 brought an end to the Terror, though not to continuing terrorism."
Further to ours earlier, Annalex. Terror's just the calling card of all revolutionaries ... PARTICULARLY those who've positioned themselves as the Conditioners fit to carry out (and, by any means necessary, Impose) "The People's Will".
In the early 80s, the Picayune printed a letter of mine, questioning the secularist values of the "Enlightenment." I don't remember much of what I wrote, apart from the pointed comment that "nothing really good ever happened after 1789."
Absolutely. But Al Qaeda and the Nechaev gang are related closer than that: they both put people's will before the sovereign individual.
The same Picayune I read? 1880's, you mean?
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
I believe Al Qaeda and others ...
|Abu Nidal Organisation
Arab Organisation of 15 May
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine
Lebanese Armed Revolutionary Faction
Organisation of the Armed Arab Struggle
Palestine Liberation Front
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
(General Command Popular Struggle Front)
In Western Europe, the Soviets had, by the mid- 1980s, acted as midwives for
Basque Fatherland and Liberty group
are the strange fruit of the same tree.
(Don't bother with the "links" ... I'm lifting this from an unfinished post. =)
| "My [major] concern is that the Americans may stop halfway in their battle against the Taliban if the latter surrender bin Laden.
If the United States does not finish the Taliban whatever it costs, Taliban leaders and militants will become like a disturbed swarm of bees that will fly out of Afghanistan and create their nests all over the world.
This won't eliminate terrorism but just spread it around the globe."
--Retired Russian Col. Gen. Viktor Kot,
On a more sobering note ... George S. Patton is spinning in his grave.
Once that is done we must give the Afghans something to live for, but it must be done first. There is no peace after a partial victory, only a brief calm while everyone reloads.
Of course his advice re: "finishing them off" seems sound. The only time such advice wouldn't seem sound is when Long-Range planners have something more devious in mind ... as with the continued use of Saddam.
But again ... the former Soviets have enjoyed thoroughly their ability to speak the truth of late. I rate this right up there with Chernomyrdin's "Bombs Rule Out Talks of Peace" NYT article upon the bombing of Serbia.
Fantastic stuff, really, which only underscores how magnificently they've trained us to chase our tail at will.
Not that we don't still place all our trust in the Dynasty's advisors, natch.
Here's one for you, Askel5. Thought I'd give you a taste of what will be going up after the election.