Thermidor

[Refiner]

Revolutions protesting the ‘evils of the system’, promising “a better world”, having been led by charismatic prophets and men of skill in the use of words, it seems worthwhile at this time to consider the ultimate fate of such revolutions and of those who are to the forefront in the fight to establish the new order.

The physical annihilation of the leaders of the Russian Revolution and the ultimate rise of the cult of personality surrounding Stalin is a fine example.

During the days of the revolutionary struggle and the establishment of power, Stalin was nowhere to be seen and was a virtually unknown figure.

The very commencement of his power dates from his being appointed General Secretary of the Party and his assuming ultimate administrative control of the day to day running of things in connection with the Party organization after control of the state was achieved.

Men of words, and prophets, are often not very inclined towards the tedium of the day to day filling out of paperwork and registering of applications for membership to the party.

A man of more base talents is needed.

Over the course of time, inconceivable though it might be to acknowledge it, Stalin, the Party administrator, eradicated virtually every man who had played any kind of role, held any position of respect, or had made any notable contribution to the revolution. That tiny handful who were spared were all broken men, turned into servile dogs fulfilling petty administrative roles.

In the end noone of any personal authority, or credibility, remained but him. The Godlike leader.

Lenin, the great prophet, was dead.

Trotsky, the primary writer and masterful public speaker, was disgraced, branded as an apostate “enemy of the people”, and exiled.

Zinoviev and Kamenev had confessed, in public trial, to ‘thought crimes’ and been shot as “traitors’.

Bukharin, a primary theoretician of the party, had finally been shot after he had repeatedly confessed to “moral crimes”, repeatedly repented, and been exiled and reinstated into the party numerous times.

There was noone left to tell the story of the things that had occurred in former times.

In fact, with the exception of Trotsky, All of the men mentioned above abased themselves, crawled on their hands and knees to be allowed to remain members of the party, and publicly begged forgiveness of crimes “against the people” that they had confessed to committing, but actually were innocent of.

The causes of these bizarre manifestations, including that of “false confession” are related By Robert Conquest, in his comprehensive book “The Great Terror”, to be common to men who have a desperate "will to believe" in the purpose of the movement they have given so much of their hopes to.

They cant bear the thought of admitting that they might have installed much faith and hard work into an organization that has actually turned into a monster.

Such men have a strong belief in the ultimate aim of the movement and they rationalize Party practises, practises which they may personally disagree with, as “unfortunate” but "necessary" to the achievement of the final utopian aim.

This is called Ends over Means rationalization.

Such men keep silent in the interest of ‘party unity’ when they ought to be speaking out.

Arthur Koestler explains their silence in his book “Darkness at Noon”:

Quote:

...“Some were silenced by physical fear, some hoped to save their heads, others at least to save their wives or sons from the clutches of the Gletkins. The best of them kept silent in order to do a last service to the Party, by letting themselves be sacrificed as scapegoats”.....

Their loyalty to the “aims of the Party” was the factor that caused them to become silent pulp, ground amidst the wheels of the machine they had helped set in motion.

As Trotsky himself said, reflecting the mindset of the true “Party man”:

Quote:

......“ None of us is able to dispute the will of the party, clearly, the party is always right. We can only be right with and of the Party. The English have a saying ‘ My country right or wrong’ ….it is my Party. If the Party adopts a decision which one or the other believes is unjust, he will say, justly or unjustly, it is my party, and I shall support the consequences to the end”.......

Or as Pyatakov (another victim of the wheels) put it:

Quote:

.....“For such a Party a true Bolshevik will readily cast out of his mind ideas which he has believed for years. A true Bolshevik has subsumed his personality into the collective, the Party, to such an extent that he can break away from his own opinions and moral convictions”.........

Or as Bukharin, repentant and weeping, said it:

Quote:

.......“ One is saved by a faith that development is always moving forward. It is like a stream that is running. If one leans out of the stream one is ejected completely. The stream goes thru the most difficult places. But it still goes forward in the direction it must. And the people grow, they build a new society”.....

Such rationalization as this, over time, can lead to the searing of a mans conscience to such a degree that he no longer recognizes evil for what it is and he can become convinced that any vile thing, so long as it serves the higher Ideal of the ultimate aim, is justifiable. Practisers of such thinking after a while, find practises that would have horrified them previously, suddenly acceptable.

For example, resorting to smear tactics to discredit an opponent.

Especially if the opponent is fostering “Disunity”.

Lenin himself gave an example of the rationale behind this:

Quote:

......“Everything that is done in the cause is honest…The great Italian Socialist leader Serrati had tried to prevent their splitting his movement…We have fought and slandered him because of his great merit. It would not have been possible to alienate the masses from him without resorting to those means”.......

With such men, under such circumstances, ordinary human compassion slowly goes out the window and innocents are wiped out simply by virtue of association with, and having been exposed to, the leaven of “Oppositionist thought”.

One is reminded of the fate of those “associated”, even in family bonds, with (for example) Kamenev.

Robert Conquest tells us:

Quote:

......“Kamenevs wife had been arrested on 19 March 1935 and sentenced to exile…she was retried in January 1938 and shot in the Autumn of 1941. As for the sons Kamenev had tried to save, the elder, Alexander, was arrested in August 1936, sentenced in May 1937 and shot in July 1939. The younger was sent to an NKVD childrens home and his name changed to Glebov”....

Fortunately the younger son was young enough not to have been “tainted” with too much “oppositionist” influence, and so he was able to be “reformed”.

Such men of belief and “moral fibre” as these, men who consider themselves deeply moral, become easy prey for a ruthless administrator who, in the end, will sink to any level of debasement to increase his own personal power.

The administrator, when he commences his career, might not consciously be aware of the potential of his own position, but with ongoing success, coupled with his belief in the mission, his power mania grows.

Yet all the while his power is increasing (as in the case of Stalin) the ruthless administrator presents himself as a moderator, one taking the position of the conciliator between factions.

He appears (and indeed may truly consider himself) a peacemaker who wants to smooth the surface of the raging waters and manufacture tranquility.

He is a man of soothing words and late night phone calls aimed at generating harmony.

History demonstrates that, in the thermidore phase of the revolution, you have to be most wary of such a man.

( thermidor: a totalitarian deviation within a utopian movement )

_________________

[Belle]

Wow, Refiner. Thanks for typing all this up.

Here's a few comments from my pea brain:

quote:

---

The causes of these bizarre manifestations, including that of “false confession” are related By Robert Conquest, in his comprehensive book “The Great Terror”, to be common to men who have a desperate "will to believe" in the purpose of the movement they have given so much of their hopes to.

They cant bear the thought of admitting that they might have installed much faith and hard work into an organization that has actually turned into a monster.

---

I think this is why so many people stay in cults after realizing that it’s not what it initially appeared to be. Pride gets in the way and it hurts to realize that we were duped, so much so that some people refuse to face the facts and simply ignore parts of their knowledge of the group so they can pretend it didn’t/doesn’t happen.

quote:

---

Such rationalization as this, over time, can lead to the searing of a mans conscience to such a degree that he no longer recognizes evil for what it is and he can become convinced that any vile thing, so long as it serves the higher Ideal of the ultimate aim, is justifiable. Practisers of such thinking after a while, find practises that would have horrified them previously, suddenly acceptable.

For example, resorting to smear tactics to discredit an opponent.

Especially if the opponent is fostering “Disunity”.

---

We’ve seen this all too well with people, especially the leadership in TWI. It’s pretty pathetic really how quick people were to jump on the bandwagon of “it’s grace” and people who are “spiritual enough” can “handle” the choices they would have them to make, such as not standing up against the sexual perversions and abuse they were aware was going on. They allowed these men and women to take advantage of na? and vulnerable CHILDREN in the name of God! In their minds they had so rationalized the behavior that they not only seared their conscience, they led others to the same fate.

“Disunity” in wayspeak is “not being like-minded”. Someone who was “not like minded” with the leaders in TWI was publicly branded as stubborn and we all know that stubbornness is like witchcraft. If someone was stubborn the leaders needed to let everyone know so that they would not be contaminated by this horrible individual. It was a good lesson for the faithful to learn and especially good for the wavering ones to see so that they would know what was going to happen to them if they decided to leave. -->

quote:

---

He is a man of soothing words and late night phone calls aimed at generating harmony.

---

Can’t says as I had any experience with this. Any late night phone calls I got involved screaming and yelling and condemnation because you reprove those you love. -->

[Refiner]

GDay belle, I didnt type all this up last night, its something I wrote a year ago which I just transferred here.

I think the lesson of history is that, if you are involved in a revolutionary movement,and you have any talent, you had better make sure you wind up the leader of the movement, or else you are going to wind up dead.

It appears that it is not wise to be in the forefront during the years of 'struggle'.

[WordWolf]

It has been reported that Alexander the Great was asked, on his deathbed,

who he willed his empire to.

The reported reply: "To the strongest."

===============

If I was taught right, Trotsky had the quote wrong.

He said it was

"my country, right or wrong",

meaning, I support my country even if it's completely wrong.

The quote was originally,

"My country, right or wrong-

IF RIGHT, TO DEFEND IT, IF WRONG, TO CORRECT IT."

That's how I heard it in history class back when.