Paul Avrich (1931–2006)

It’s been a half century since Paul Avrich’s definitive history of the Kronstadt mutiny first appeared — and a full century since the revolt itself. Others have written about how “Red Kronstadt”, whose sailors had been hailed as the “pride and joy” of the Bolshevik Revolution by Trotsky himself, turned on the Communists and tried to trigger a nation-wide “third revolution”. But few have been professional historians.

Avrich’s book is strikingly balanced. He does not shy show more away from acknowledging that the Bolsheviks had little choice but to swiftly crush the rebellion if they intended to stay in power. Nor does he paint the rebels as angels; his references to their anti-Semitism make for painful reading. He does some serious myth-busting, not least the Bolshevik claims — demonstrably false — that White generals and France were behind the rebellion.

He demolishes Trotsky’s later claims that, in spite of being the commander of the Red Army and actually being on the scene when the rebellion was suppressed, he really played a very minor role and bears little responsibility for the events. Zinoviev comes off pretty badly as well, having ruthlessly suppressed not only the Kronstadt sailors but also rebellious workers in the city of Petrograd, which he ruled as a dictator. Both men would fall victim to Stalin’s purges, though Stalin himself played no role in the suppression of this mutiny.

In the end, Avrich paints Kronstadt as a tragedy, which it surely was, but also shows the sailors’ vision of a society of “free soviets” no longer dominated by the Communist Party as a missed opportunity. show less

Wonderfully written, very lucid. Avrich is one of the foremost scholars of anarchism. This is essential and canonical reading for anyone interested in the history of anarchism, with special focus on mid-to-late nineteenth century Russia, and the subsequent period of the rise of the Soviet state in the early decades of the twentieth. The perspective of the Russian anarchists gives a clear view of the negative effects of the rise of the authoritarian left on the whole radical movement in show more Russia. It presents a lot of criticism of the anarchists as well, namely, their seeming inability to coalesce into a cohesive whole. Bitter factionalism are frequently experienced, there is also the anti-intellectual strain which is interestingly discussed by Avrich, among other issues.

Also another great introductory work I recommend is James Joll's 'The Anarchists.' show less

A variegated collection of anarchists' recollections, a strand of American political history which has fallen off of the collective radar but which is somehow managing to re-imagine and remake the future to this very day. A real dog's breakfast of a miscellany, given the topic and format, but you'll get the cultural and social history of anarchism in America here all right. Fascinating to read, for example, that Emma Goldman was considered by one colleague to be of extraordinarily high show more intellect, but that she had no character. Oral history at its best. show less

Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America is a real treasure. It's more than 450 pages long, but I couldn't put it down. The book allowed me to escape into the lives of the real participants of the Anarchist movement of North America in its previous heyday of the 1890s-1930s. Originally published in 1995, Paul Avrich interviewed hundreds of Anarchists and former Anarchists who were mainly in their eighties and nineties in the 1970s, the majority dying within a few years of show more the interviews. I was especially impressed by this, since it gave hundreds of people who had led amazing lives a sort of last memoir before they passed, much in the same style as Working by [by whom?].

It is divided into six sections covering much of the American Anarchist movement. It is mainly centered around the east coast, especially New York. They are 1) Pioneers, which focuses on relatives and close friends of the famous Anarchists like Alexander Berkman and Ben Reitman, 2) Emma Goldman, who was hugely influential and left a strong impression on everyone interviewed 3) Sacco and Venzetti, which details mostly Italian Anarchist experiences around the famous trials and frame-up of the Italian immigrants, 4) Schools and Colonies, which focus on the Modern School movement like the Ferrer school or the Stelton colony in which Anarchists tried to build communities and separate themselves into a lifestyle, 5) the Ethnic Anarchists, focusing on different groups which really brought ideological Anarchism to the United States, like the Russians, Jews, Spanish, and Italian immigrants, 6) the 1920s and beyond, which links the activities after the big decline on the US Anarchist movement after the 1920s until the 1960s and the rise of the "new anarchist movement" starting in the 1980s.

What really struck me about this book was how similar some of the arguments of the Anarchist movement were in the past to those of the present. Past divisions between sub-groups were detailed in the text as well. As Avrich explains, the main split was between the Anarcho-syndicalists/communists and the Anarcho-individualists. Today, the main split is between the Anarcho-syndicalists/communists and the eco-anarchists. The discussion also includes people who got burnt out on anarchists because they thought the anarchists were ineffective. Many do not regret their involvement in the movement and look back on the years they spent in the movement as the best years of their lives.

In the end, the book is very inspiring because so many of the interviewees still call themselves Anarchists and see that the fight for a better world will continue no matter what. Many of them remain idealists and are hopeful that the world they have worked towards will come about someday. They have hope despite having seen the world nearly destroy itself, supposed comrades (like the Communists) betray them, and enough bickering to make anyone cynical. Many of them had not been involved in the Anarchist Movement for many years, or had simply been involved in book clubs or discussion groups that passed on the ideas. And yet they are still committed to the idea that all humans should be free of oppression and that no government can make you free no matter where you are on this earth. show less