It’s amazing how this persecution complex always results in whitewashing fascists. Yeah, a CPC Korean communist party member killed a leading figure among the Korean anarchists, but the anarchists were also under siege from Japan and it was Japan that wiped them out. If killing one member was the deciding factor in Japan wiping them out, then it sure seems like their organizational structure wasn’t remotely anarchist to begin with.
I don’t really have know why the guy was killed or if it was justified and I certainly am not defending it, but between that and militarily overrunning the anarchists, I’m relatively confident about which was the greater contributing factor to their failure.
Not a CPC member, it was a Korean communist party member. The CPC were allies and it was their control of the neighbouring territory that kept the KMT from being a problem for the anarchists, and also kept the Korean communists from being belligerent. Mao liked them. The CPC however were pushed out of the region by the KMT and then everything that followed occurred.
It is truer to argue that this anarchist zone only existed successfully because it had the CPC as its friendly neighbour to keep it safe. As soon as it lost that neighbour it lost the ability to defend itself.
As a Spaniard, anarchists here claim the same thing: Soviet agents murdered a proven total of 10 anarchists in Spain (at least some of them sponsored by Nazis, knowingly or not), which of course gets used to say that “the USSR made Republican and Anarchist Spain lose the civil war”, never mind them being the ONLY country to sell weapons to the antifascists.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised but I’m impressed that people blame the USSR not just for the anarchists failing but even for the Republicans failing despite the extremely (imo overly) conciliatory attitude the USSR took toward the Republicans, meanwhile the anarchists couldn’t help themselves but repeatedly try to sabotage Republican logistics with their little communications building, but no, it’s the “Stalinists” who committed a crime by helping the Republicans take the building in response. No matter what they do, they are wrong from every perspective.
The argument usually goes “the only way to win the civil war was to spread an anarchist revolution over to the fascist side, and the USSR prevented this because they’re evil/dumb”. It’s just non-falsifiable bullshit that can be regurgitated ad-infinitum despite a total of 0 examples of Anarchism defeating fascism on a country-wide level.
Didn’t Spanish anarchists also launch a rebellion in 1870s and got owned, because they relied on local militias and didn’t create a unified army? Or am I mistaken?
There have been several “commoneer revolts” in Spain over the years, but I’m unaware of the particular one you’re talking about. If I had to guess, anything before 1900s was done without much ideological development on the way
It’s amazing how this persecution complex always results in whitewashing fascists. Yeah, a
CPCKorean communist party member killed a leading figure among the Korean anarchists, but the anarchists were also under siege from Japan and it was Japan that wiped them out. If killing one member was the deciding factor in Japan wiping them out, then it sure seems like their organizational structure wasn’t remotely anarchist to begin with.I don’t really have know why the guy was killed or if it was justified and I certainly am not defending it, but between that and militarily overrunning the anarchists, I’m relatively confident about which was the greater contributing factor to their failure.
Not a CPC member, it was a Korean communist party member. The CPC were allies and it was their control of the neighbouring territory that kept the KMT from being a problem for the anarchists, and also kept the Korean communists from being belligerent. Mao liked them. The CPC however were pushed out of the region by the KMT and then everything that followed occurred.
It is truer to argue that this anarchist zone only existed successfully because it had the CPC as its friendly neighbour to keep it safe. As soon as it lost that neighbour it lost the ability to defend itself.
Thank you for the correction. I should have looked it up first.
As a Spaniard, anarchists here claim the same thing: Soviet agents murdered a proven total of 10 anarchists in Spain (at least some of them sponsored by Nazis, knowingly or not), which of course gets used to say that “the USSR made Republican and Anarchist Spain lose the civil war”, never mind them being the ONLY country to sell weapons to the antifascists.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised but I’m impressed that people blame the USSR not just for the anarchists failing but even for the Republicans failing despite the extremely (imo overly) conciliatory attitude the USSR took toward the Republicans, meanwhile the anarchists couldn’t help themselves but repeatedly try to sabotage Republican logistics with their little communications building, but no, it’s the “Stalinists” who committed a crime by helping the Republicans take the building in response. No matter what they do, they are wrong from every perspective.
The argument usually goes “the only way to win the civil war was to spread an anarchist revolution over to the fascist side, and the USSR prevented this because they’re evil/dumb”. It’s just non-falsifiable bullshit that can be regurgitated ad-infinitum despite a total of 0 examples of Anarchism defeating fascism on a country-wide level.
excuse me what
Didn’t Spanish anarchists also launch a rebellion in 1870s and got owned, because they relied on local militias and didn’t create a unified army? Or am I mistaken?
There have been several “commoneer revolts” in Spain over the years, but I’m unaware of the particular one you’re talking about. If I had to guess, anything before 1900s was done without much ideological development on the way
I think they meant Cantonal Rebellion
Probably this, but I’m not entirely sure.