The Russian Revolution in Colour

[cockneyrebel]

Yeah thought it was shit, will still watch the next program though.

Also can someone explain to me (and this is a genuine Q), how it is at all probable that after years of viscious civil war that only 1 in 5 of the Kronstadt sailors had been killed or gone home and all of the rest remained in their posts? Does that seem likely?!

 

[rednblack]

oh that poor lenin,the very man who saved the working classes from opression by butchering them all...good idea though.

eh?

when did he do that then?

(and no - i'm not a leninist)

 

[butchersapron]

Yeah thought it was shit, will still watch the next program though.

Also can someone explain to me (and this is a genuine Q), how it is at all probable that after years of viscious civil war that only 1 in 5 of the Kronstadt sailors had been killed or gone home and all of the rest remained in their posts? Does that seem likely?!

I'd suggest that you need to do a little bit more preparaory research if you're going to dismiss the figures that Getzler came up with. Just saying, i can't believe it, therefore it's not true doesn't really do the job does it?

 

[cockneyrebel]

I'm not dismissing the figures, am I. I just find it incredible that after years of civil war that 80% of the sailors would have survived death and decided to stay in post.

Leaving aside the death rates during the civil war (which on the front line must have been very high), years of warfare take a massive toll on people's physcial and wll-being. Look at other wars, when people at the front have to be rotated for exactly that reason (including the Spanish Civil War). Why would it be so different with the Kronstadt soldiers?

 

[butchersapron]

I'm not dismissing the figures, am I. I just find it incredible that after years of civil war that 80% of the sailors would have survived death and decided to stay in post.

Leaving aside the death rates during the civil war (which on the front line must have been very high), years of warfare take a massive toll on people's physcial and wll-being. Look at other wars, when people at the front have to be rotated for exactly that reason (including the Spanish Civil War). Why would it be so different with the Kronstadt soldiers?

Well one possible reason lies in the fact that they were sailors not soldiers - and not just ordinary sailors but elite sailors, educated and politically aware (probably the most advanced section of the Russian w/c at that time) and that they had a task that only they could do to defend Petrograd from a white fleet coming from the Baltic. If Konstadt fell then so would Petrograd and with it the revolution. There's sound military/Naval resons why the base was built were it was. So there may have been a decision (whose i dont know) to keep the bulk of the sailors at the base to guard that approach -afte all if they went off to join the other Red ARmy conscripts only to let in the Whites by the back door...

 

[cockneyrebel]

But I can’t believe that the Red Army would not have wanted to use such valuable elite troops in the civil war itself, as fighting troops. The Kronstadt soldiers were surely involved in fighting in the civil war?

Did the fleets see much action during the civil war? How many attacks did the white fleets carry out?

And even if they Kronstadt soldiers didn't take part in the fighting (does anyone know how much fighting they saw?), years of being at the front waiting for action in a civil war would take a severe toll on people. Again, would only 1 in 5 people have been rotated?

I mean if this is in anyway true:

In Russia as a whole it was reduced to 43 percent of its former number. The population of Petrograd fell from 2.4 million in 1917 to 574,000 in 1920--cut by 76 percent from its October 1917 figure.

could it be true that 80% of the kronstadt soliders still remained in post?

 

[butchersapron]

Just saying that you can't believe it doesn't challenge the figures in anyway - nor does saying that you think they should have been used elsewhere. You can't force the past to fit what you think should have happened.

Here's Samuel Farbers summary of Getzler's findings as i can't get to the actual book atm:

"this [the class composition] interpretation has failed to meet the historical test of the growing and relatively recent scholarship on the Russian Revolution. . . . In fact, in 1921, a smaller proportion of Kronstadt sailors were of peasant social origin than was the case of the Red Army troops supporting the government . . . recently published data strongly suggest that the class composition of the ships and naval base had probably remained unchanged since before the Civil War. We now know that, given the war-time difficulties of training new people in the technical skills required in Russia's ultra-modern battleships, very few replacements had been sent to Kronstadt to take the place of the dead and injured sailors. Thus, at the end of the Civil War in late 1920, no less than 93.9 per cent of the members of the crews of the Petropavlovsk and the Sevastopol . . . were recruited into the navy before and during the 1917 revolutions. In fact, 59 per cent of these crews joined the navy in the years 1914-16, while only 6.8 per cent had been recruited in the years 1918-21 . . . of the approximately 10,000 recruits who were supposed to be trained to replenish the Kronstadt garrison, only a few more than 1,000 had arrived by the end of 1920, and those had been stationed not in Kronstadt, but in Petrograd, where they were supposed to be trained."

Here

 

[cockneyrebel]

So he is claiming that there was only a 6% death/leave rate. I'm not just saying "I don't believe it", I'm saying that it doesn't tally with the experience of other wars or the rest of Russia. As said after being in battle situations for three years of a civil war, knowing your family and friends might be getting slaughtered, it would inevitably have a severe strain on your physical and mental well being. In those circumstances I find it incredible that only 6% of the sailors died, got severe injuries or left.

Did the Kronstadt sailors not see any fighting at all?

And I'm not saying they should have been used else where, I'm not military expert! I'm saying that I find it strange that in a civil war that you wouldn't use your elite troops in actual fighting.

 

[butchersapron]

Some of them did and some of them didn't - they didn't all go around together you know. The White Fleet was chased back to the black sea and many from Kronstdat did volunteer for the Red Army, and a lot of them came back as well - i.e they weren't killed. That might be down to their generally technically superior training over the peasants and workers who made up the bulk of the RA.

But they were still elite sailors NOT soldiers - and they were based at the single most strategically important Naval base in the country.

 

[cockneyrebel]

So despite the fact that some sailors volunteered for the Red Army and that the fleet did see fighting there was a 6% death/serious injury/leave rate. As said this would fly in the face of looking at warfare and its affect on human beings. The mental/physical strain on people in those circumstances would have been enormous. Look at the figures for the rest of Russia and this is shown to be the case.

Is there any way to get hold of the original material that Getzler uses.

 

[butchersapron]

Yep, learn Russian and ask to go and see the Bolshevik, Red Army and Russian Navy archives...like he did. And as did others like Ewen Maldsley for 'The Baltic Fleet and the Kronstadt Mutiny' who agree with the figures as presented by Getzler, as do a long line of Russians.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Links such as this:

http://www.naval-history.net/WW1CampaignsRNBolshevik.htm

seem to suggest there was significant naval action. And this combined with the fact that some sailors joined the Red Army just makes the 6% figure seem very unlikely.

Ships were sunk, lives lost, sailors joined the Red Army. There was three years of the massive strain of civil war, and you suggest that 94% of the sailors didn't suffer death or serious injury or didn't leave when reports of their families getting massacred came in?

And the problem is I don't know Russian, and am bad at learning languages, but that doesn't mean I should just accept these figures given the above.

 

[butchersapron]

CR overturns decades of historical research via google. Again

And actually, that link suggests not too much activity at all outiside of a few isolated clashes for the baltic fleet which is the one we're concerned with here.

 

[cockneyrebel]

But I think you'd agree that decades of research doesn't mean it's right does it. Look at right-wingers and how they've lied.

But what that link I put up shows is that ships were sunk and lives lost. Added to this the fact that sailors went to join the Red Army and must have heard about the massacres and starvation of their families, added to the strain of three years of fighting and injuries, I find the 94% figure incredible and one that would seem to fly in the face of other wars.

 

[butchersapron]

So let me summarise then:

A number of reliable academic sources suggest a figure - a figure based on study of the actual contemporary records and sources. CR challenges these figures because 'well it doesn't sound likely does it?', is offered possible reasons for the figures repeats 'well it doesn't sound likely does it?' and offers no argument beyond that - no sources, no evidence etc

This is going precisley nowhere. I am though.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Going to lunch, will be back in a bit....

 

[butchersapron]

I'll not be here - i've had enough of circles for today ta.

 

[General Ludd]

The quote "We now know that, given the war-time difficulties of training new people in the technical skills required in Russia's ultra-modern battleships, very few replacements had been sent to Kronstadt to take the place of the dead and injured sailors." seems to be saying that there were less sailors there in 1921 then there were before the civil war, so it is quite plausible that even though they lost say 20% of the original sailors because there were so few replacements sent the proportion of veteran sailors remained over 90%.

But I think you'd agree that decades of research doesn't mean it's right does it.

But if you're going to refute it you'd better do so on the basis of evidence not the arm-waving you're doing at present.

 

[Random]

Yeah, that's a good point, Ludd, the article talks of proportions, not absolute numbers, and it doesn't mention whether some would have been moved from support roles to more direct involvement, etc during the war. Does anyone have numbers for the 1914 numbers of ship-support workers based at Kronny?

In any case, I'd like to point out that 'it doesn't seem likely' that realtively raw, peasant recruits would have been sent to take control of the Baltic fleet's battle ships, which is what the Trot argument against Kronstadt implies.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Butchers you can make sarcastic comments, but I think things like this are worth challenging from either side of the side. And no I don't speak Russian and don't have the orginal Kronstadt sailor sign-up sheets to hand. But just because this is the case doesn't mean that there should be no debate.

General Ludd I think what you say could sound logical, but on the other, by accounts I've read, the sailors were worked like dogs before 1917 so I doubt there was much slack in terms of not replacing people who died or had serious injuries.

To really look at this we would need the figures for how many people were in Kronstadt at the beginning and how many at the end. We'd also need figures for the amount of people who died, suffered serious injuries and left to join the Red Army or because they were worn out.

I think the figures are very important here, and we can't just take the 94% figure on face value without seeing where it comes from. Many figures have been presented as well researched facts in history and turned out to be bollox. It could be the case that only 6% of the sailors were replacements and that the extra work caused by deaths, injuries and people leaving (to the Red Army and through battle weariness) was just taken up by already over worked sailors. However given the barbarity of the civil war I have my doubts looking at other warfare situations.

 

[butchersapron]

But being critical or sceptical of accepted history is one thing, a very useful thing at that - but effectively putting your hands over your ears and saying that you're not listening because it can't be true (which in the absence of any substantial counter-argument, never mind counter-evidence is all that you're doing) is a diferent thing altogther. I've given you some sources in English to go and check if you want to pursue this argument.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Butchers I haven't said the figures aren't true but the link you gave me doesn't show where those figures came from in terms of original sources. Do the other sources?

I'm sceptical because of the reasons I've given, which I don't think are that unreasonable.

 

[butchersapron]

I've told you where they come from - from the Russian archives.

 

[mk12]

Read Here

This was written in 2003. It argues that "New material from Soviet archives confirms the Bolsheviks' position."

The first book was published under the strange title, "The Unknown Trotsky: the red Bonaparte" (Krasnov V.G., Moscow, 2000). This attempts to describe the role of Trotsky during the Russian civil war. The second book – "Kronstadt 1921" (Moscow, 2001) - is a collection of documents about the Kronstadt rebellion. It is important to stress that neither of the two books have been written by Bolshevik sympathizers.

Apparently, these books confirm that "inside Kronstadt there were clashes between the old revolutionary sailors and the new recruits who came from peasant and petit-bourgeois families. This fact can be confirmed by the fact that some ships declared their neutrality, while others moved against the rebels."

 

[butchersapron]

Oh god not again - that's been debunked on here and various indymedia sites so many times...'Trotsky was right'!

I'm out of this one. You never learn do you lot do you?

 

[mk12]

Oh god not again - that's been debunked on here and various indymedia sites so many times...'Trotsky was right'!

I'm out of this one. You never learn do you lot do you?

THis article is more recent than Getzler's book, isn't it?

 

[cockneyrebel]

But I haven't got access to these Russian archives. Were any of them translated into English?

On the link you put up it says:

by the end of 1919 thousands of veteran sailors, who had served on many fronts of the civil war and in the administrative network of the expanding Soviet state, had returned to the Baltic Fleet and to Kronstadt, most by way of remobilisation

This is what I don't get. Are we expected to believe that thousands of sailors who had served on many fronts in the civil war returned to Kronstadt? Looking at the rest of Russia the percentage of deaths and serious injuries on the front line must have been huge and cities like Peterograd were decimated.

And if these 1000s of sailors left Kronstadt, who replaced them before their return?

And as it goes the figures that are given (the 94%) ones are about two warships, what about the rest of them?

How was the above by matt debunked. Any links?

 

[butchersapron]

THis article is more recent than Getzler's book, isn't it?

So? Everything in it has been debunked. The thing itself has no sources or footnotes indicating where it's info has came form or its context. It's the worst sort of hack-polemic, a poltical tract, not a historical or academic investigation. It's a joke peice and to prefrer it to any of the books i mentioned shows how ideological your reading of this is. Be serious, as this is a serious issue.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Be serious, as this is a serious issue.

Be less patronising.

So how was this debunked. And if there were no footnotes or sources, what were they for Getzler's book. I'm sure you'll agree that "russian archives" is not good enough.

And as said above. If 1000s of sailors left Kronstadt, as your links says. Who replaced them before they returned (leaving aside the probability of that happening).

 

[butchersapron]

But I haven't got access to these Russian archives. Were any of them translated into English?

On the link you put up it says:



This is what I don't get. Are we expected to believe that thousands of sailors who had served on many fronts in the civil war returned to Kronstadt? Looking at the rest of Russia the percentage of deaths and serious injuries on the front line must have been huge and cities like Peterograd were decimated.

And if these 1000s of sailors left Kronstadt, who replaced them before their return?

And as it goes the figures that are given (the 94%) ones are about two warships, what about the rest of them?

How was the above by matt debunked. Any links?

This is why you need to read at least one of the books i've mentioned to you - you're demonstrating that your case is constructed on absolutely nothing and that you're arguing a position before doing any research on the most basic of questions. 'I can't beliee it!' is not a persuasive argument.