Without the Kronstadt sailors October 1917 may have turned out differently. The Kronstadt sailors were an active support base for the Bolsheviks. Trotsky summed up their importance by labeling them “the pride and joy of the revolution.”
By early 1921 Trotsky’s view of the sailors had changed. The Kronstadt sailors had to be crushed. The authoritarian government could not allow dissent and the Kronstadt sailors were a major source of dissent. They had first voiced economic concerns and then they aired political concerns. Helene Carrere d’Encausse writes that the sailors took up the slogan “The Soviet without the Communists.” On February 28, 1921 sailors drafted a resolution, according to Victor Sebestyen, that included “free elections to a new parliament, free trade unions independent of the Communist Party, a free press, the abolition of the Cheka – and a range of other broadly democratic reforms.“ While calls for higher pay and more food rations could be tolerated to an extent a direct attack on the political power of the Regime could not be. The leader of the Kronstadt sailors was Stephan Petrichenko.
Lenin told Trotsky “This is a rebellion and they must be shown no mercy. They must be destroyed. There will be no compromise” d’Encausse states “from every viewpoint it was unthinkable, impossible to accept that the working class, the sailors, Bolsheviks until then, could oppose the regime.” Lenin sent Trotsky and Tukhachevsky with 20,000 Red Army troops to Kronstadt. They arrived on March 4, 1921.
Before the Red Army attacked Petrichenko sent one last message to the Kremlin. As relayed by Sebestyen, Petrichenko said “Barely three years ago, you – Lenin, Trotsky, Zinoviev and all of you – were denounced as traitors and German spies. We, the workers and sailors, had to come to your rescue and saved your skins from the Kerensky government. It is we who placed you in power. Have you forgotten that? Now you threaten us with the sword. You are playing with fire. You are repeating the blunders and crimes of Kerensky. Beware that a similar fate doesn’t overtake you.”
Tukhachevsky described the days of fighting as follows “It wasn’t a battle, but an inferno, They fought like wild beasts. I cannot understand where they found the strength for such furious rage. Every house had to be taken by storm.”
d’Encausse summarizes the days of fighting as follows: “The dead amounted to thousands on both sides. The army, which had to march over ice fields, suffered nearly 10,000 dead, wounded, or missing. After the victory, it massacred the defeated, executing those considered leaders without even the pretense of a trial. Then the Cheka judged and sentenced hundreds if not thousands of the survivors, put them before a firing squad or sent them to concentration camps.”
The sailors from Kronstadt had helped seal the Bolshevik victory in the October 1917 revolution but when they challenged the political authority of the Soviet Union they were mercilessly destroyed.
See Lenin by Helene Carrere d’Encausse and Lenin by Victor Sebestyen for more details on the Kronstadt Rebellion
Great literature should do more than entertain us. It should provide a roadmap to improving our lives.
In A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens introduced readers to Sydney Carton, one of literature's most compelling and deeply flawed characters. Dickens also gives him an unusual title: the Jackal.
His struggles raise questions that remain relevant today.
Are we defined by our past mistakes? Can we overcome our weaknesses? What separates the people we are from the people we could become?
Lessons From the Jackal is a 25-day character study exploring these questions through Sydney Carton’s life, decisions, relationships, and personal development.
This is not a traditional course on A Tale of Two Cities. Our reading assignments will focus specifically on Carton, with sufficient background provided to understand his story. No previous knowledge of the novel is necessary.
Each day will feature selected readings, historical comparisons, reflection questions, discussions, and practical challenges ...
Charles Darnay has demonstrated throughout the novel that he is a man of principle. He rejected his aristocratic inheritance because he believed the privileges enjoyed by his family had been obtained through the suffering of others. He established an independent life in England and attempted to distance himself from the injustices of his ancestors.
Now, when Gabelle appeals for assistance, Darnay once again attempts to act according to his convictions. His willingness to help is admirable. But is it wise? Darnay seems to believe that his honorable intentions will protect him from the dangers of revolutionary France. He fails to appreciate that the revolutionaries may judge him not by his personal conduct but by the family into which he was born. Perhaps more troubling is his decision to conceal his intentions from Lucie and Doctor Manette.
By doing so, Darnay deprives himself of the advice of those who care most about his welfare. He also makes a decision that could dramatically alter their ...
