Military Review

The riddle of the "revolt" of the Left Socialist Revolutionaries 6 July 1918

In July, 1918, an uprising of the Left Social Revolutionaries against the Bolsheviks occurred. The Left Social Revolutionaries opposed the policy of the Bolsheviks, condemning the Brest Peace, the surplus and combats. The July 6 uprising began with the assassination of the Cheka officers Yakov Blumkin and Nikolai Andreyev by the German ambassador, Count Wilhelm von Mirbach.

On the way to rebellion

In the fall of 1917, the Bolsheviks were not yet able to hold power alone. They were forced to share power with other leftists. But later, as their position was strengthened, the Bolsheviks headed for the establishment of a one-party regime.

The Left Socialist-Revolutionary Party emerged as the opposition political wing of the Social Revolutionary Party during the First World War and finally took shape in November-December 1917. Their leaders were Maria Spiridonova, Boris Kamkov (Katz), Mark Natanson, Andrei Kolegayev and others. In October, 1917, the Left Social Revolutionaries entered the Military Revolutionary Committee of the Petrograd Soviet and took part in the overthrow of the Provisional Government. At the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets, left Social Revolutionaries joined the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. Initially, the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries refused to enter the Soviet government — the Council of People's Commissars, demanding the establishment of a “homogeneous socialist government” —– from representatives of all socialist parties and movements. However, at the end of 1917, party representatives entered the Council of People's Commissars. Many leftist SRs participated in the creation of the Red Army, in the work of the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission (VChK). At the same time, the party of the Left Social Revolutionaries had different views on a number of important issues than the Bolsheviks. Particularly serious disagreements were on the peasant issue. The Left Social Revolutionaries helped the Bolsheviks fight their rivals — the Cadets, the anarchists, the Mensheviks. In April, 1918, the Left Social Revolutionaries took part in the defeat of the organization of Moscow anarchists. When the Czechoslovak uprising covered a huge territory, and in a number of cities the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries (right and centrists) supported the insurgency, this was the reason for the exclusion of members of these parties from the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. The decision was made on June 15, with the active support of the Left Social Revolutionaries.

In March 1918 of the year, with the signing of the Brest peace treaty, the contradictions between the Left Social Revolutionaries and the Bolshevik aggravated. The left Social Revolutionaries, in protest against the "obscene" world, left the government. At the IV Congress of the Soviets, the Left Social Revolutionaries voted against the Peace of Brest. Sergei Mstislavsky, a member of the Central Committee of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Soviet delegation at the peace talks in Brest-Litovsk, put forward the slogan: “Not a war, so an insurrection!”, Calling on the people to revolt against the Austro-German occupiers. However, although the left SRs withdrew from the CPC, they retained their positions in many people's commissariats, the Cheka, the army, various councils, committees, commissions.

A new reason for the conflict with the Bolsheviks was the Decree of the Central Executive Committee of 9 in May 1918, which confirmed the state grain monopoly. The organization of food detachments for the forced collection of bread began. The surplus system was negatively perceived by the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, whose social base was predominantly the well-to-do and middle strata of the peasantry, who suffered the most from the "food dictatorship" of the Bolsheviks. The two parties finally came to a break when the committees of the poor (commanders), which were oriented toward the Bolsheviks, more and more began to force out the representatives of the Left Socialist-Revolutionary Party from the rural Soviets.

The Third Congress of the Left Socialist-Revolutionary Party, which took place in early July, adopted a resolution that condemned the policy of the Bolshevik Party. The Left SRs condemned excessive centralization, which led to the dictatorship; the use of food detachments operating outside the control and leadership of local councils; support for the committees of the poor. In the opinion of the Left Social Revolutionaries, the measures of the Bolsheviks create a "disastrous front of the city and the country." The congress adopted a resolution “to break the Brest Treaty, which was disastrous for the Russian and world revolution, in a revolutionary way.” The implementation of this decision was entrusted by the Central Committee of the Party

On July 5, at the 5th Congress of Soviets, representatives of the Left Social Revolutionary Party opposed the policy of the Soviet government, condemning the Brest Peace, the surplus and combs. One of the party leaders, Maria Spiridonova, called the Bolsheviks "traitors to the revolution" and compared them with representatives of the Provisional Government. Boris Kamkov promised to drive out of the village prodotryad and commanders. The situation at the Congress of Soviets was tense, the Bolsheviks and the Left Social Revolutionaries blamed each other. The Bolsheviks accused the Social Revolutionaries of provocation, the desire to provoke a war between Russia and Germany. And the Left Social Revolutionaries made a proposal to distrust the Council of People's Commissars, denounce the Brest-Litovsk Treaty and declare war on the German Empire.

The mystery of the "uprising" of the Left SRs on July 6, 1918

One of the leaders of the Left Social Revolutionaries M. Spiridonov.

The rebellion itself did not last long and on July 7 ended in complete defeat of the Left Socialist Revolutionary Party. 6 July, Jacob Blumkin and Nikolai Andreev, having produced a fake letter on behalf of the Cheka, penetrated the German embassy in Money Street. Around 14: 50 they were received by Count Wilhelm von Mirbach. During the conversation, Andreev fired at the ambassador. Blumkin and Andreev were able to get out of the embassy, ​​got into the car waiting for them and hid in the headquarters of the command of the Cheka under the command of the left Social Revolutionary Dmitry Popov, which was located in the center of Moscow (Trekhsvyatitelsky Lane). There were already other leaders of the Social Revolutionaries - Spiridonov, Sablin, Kamkov, Karelin, Proshian and Aleksandrovich. The rebels, arrested (detained) the chairman of the Cheka, F. E. Dzerzhinsky, who arrived there demanding to extradite the killers of the German ambassador. Then 27 of Bolshevik leaders were taken hostage, including the deputy chairman of the Cheka, Latsis, the chairman of the Moscow Soviet, Smidovich, and others.

On the night of July 7, the rebels began to take more active steps: they occupied the central telegraph and began to spread anti-Bolshevik appeals, where they declared the Bolsheviks "agents of German imperialism." However, the Left SRs did not arrest the Soviet government, did not arrest the Bolshevik delegates of the 5th Congress of Soviets, and behaved passively. And despite the fact that most of the parts of the Moscow garrison, except Latvian riflemen, either went over to the side of the rebels, or declared their neutrality, or had low combat effectiveness.

Lenin and the direct military leaders of the Bolsheviks, N. I. Podvoisky, Chairman of the Supreme Military Inspectorate, and I. I. Vatsetis, head of the Latvian Infantry Division, quickly found their bearings and began to take measures to suppress the insurrection. The workers of Moscow were mobilized, Latvian units were brought to combat readiness. Early in the morning of July 7, units loyal to the Bolshevik government went on the offensive and defeated the rebels for several hours. Left Cusher delegates of the 5th Congress arrested. Some of the most active participants in the rebellion were immediately shot. 11 July left Social Revolutionaries were outlawed.

10-11 July, the commander of the Eastern Front of the Red Army, left SR, Mikhail Muravyov, raised a rebellion in Simbirsk. Muravyov, on behalf of the Eastern Front, declared a break in the Brest Peace, declared war on Germany and called everyone under his banner to fight the German army. MN Tukhachevsky and other front-line officers were arrested. However, the rebellion quickly suppressed. At a meeting of the executive committee of the provincial Council, Muravyev was killed.

It must be said that Lenin voiced an opinion regarding the revolt of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, which became dominant in Soviet historiography: he called the uprising "a meaningless and criminal adventure", "an insane attempt" to involve Russia in the war with Germany. He described the leaders of the uprising as "headless" hysterical intellectuals (there is a fair amount of truth in this description).

Oddities Rebellion

First of all, the passivity of the "rebels" is striking. At the beginning of the uprising, they had superior forces — part of the regiment joined them in the Popov detachment. On March 1, the forces of the rebels increased to 1800 bayonets, 80 sabers, 4 armored vehicles and 8 guns. And the Bolsheviks had 720 bayonets, 4 armored cars and 12 guns in Moscow at that time. The leadership of the Bolsheviks was partly arrested, others hesitated. In particular, Lenin doubted the loyalty of the commander of the main shock unit - the Latvian riflemen, Vatsetisa and the head of the Cheka - Dzerzhinsky. The rebels had the opportunity to arrest the delegates of the congress and members of the Soviet government, but did not. A detachment of the Cheka under the command of Popov did not take any active actions until its defeat and "rebelled" in the barracks. Even in the appeal that was sent around the country, there were no calls to overthrow the Bolsheviks, or to go to the aid of the rebels in Moscow. The Left Social Revolutionaries called for a rebellion only against "German imperialism", and not the Bolsheviks.

An interesting fact is that the punishment of the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries was mild, especially in the context of the Civil War and the gravity of the crime - the attempted coup d'état. Only deputy chairman of the Cheka Aleksandrovich Alexandrovich, and 12 people from the Popov Cheka squad were shot. Others received a short time. The leader of the Left Social Revolutionaries, Maria Spiridonova, was sentenced to a year in prison, and then, taking into account her “special services to the revolution,” was amnestied and released. The direct participants in the attempt on the German ambassador, Blumkin and Andreev, were sentenced to imprisonment for three years. Blumkin generally became the closest employee of Dzerzhinsky and Trotsky.

This eventually led some researchers to the idea that there was no rebellion. The uprising was a dramatization of the Bolsheviks themselves. This version was proposed by Yu. G. Felshtinsky. The uprising was a provocation that led to the establishment of a one-party system. The Bolsheviks received a reason to eliminate competitors.

In addition, it is believed that the uprising was initiated by part of the Bolshevik leadership, which wanted to overthrow Lenin. So, in December 1923, Zinoviev and Stalin reported that the head of the “Left Communists” Bukharin received a proposal from the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries to overthrow Lenin by force, establishing a new composition of the SNK. We must not forget that the so-called. “Left Communists”, including Dzerzhinsky (head of the Cheka), N. Bukharin (the main ideologue of the party) and other prominent representatives of the Bolshevik Party, advocated a revolutionary war with Germany. Only the threat of Lenin to leave the Central Committee and turn directly to the masses made them give up on this issue. In the autonomous Moscow regional government, right up until the dissolution of 1918 in May of the year, left-wing communists and left-wing SRs prevailed. Similar alliances existed in other cities.

Dzerzhinsky’s behavior, which came to the rebel headquarters, also raises questions. With this he violated the management of the Cheka and at the same time created an alibi for himself, in case of failure of the plan. And the instigator of the rebellion - Blumkin, after the mission in Persia and the fight against Ungern, became the favorite of Dzerzhinsky in the Cheka and, on his personal recommendation, joined the RKP (b). In addition, it is precisely in the environment of the "iron Felix" that the Anglo-French trace is clearly visible, and the Entente was interested in continuing the war between Russia and Germany. In the spring of 1918, during a trip to the northern capital of Russia, Dzerzhinsky established a close relationship with M. Orlinsky (Orlov). Orlinsky was the head of the Central Criminal Investigation Commission of the Northern Region and before the revolution, he worked in the investigative agencies, developing the “German trace.” He was a supporter of the orientation of Russia in England and France. Orlinsky established links with the British and French intelligence services. He passed on valuable information to Western intelligence agencies. In particular, the British intelligence officer S. Reilly received a significant part of his data from Orlinsky. Dzerzhinsky tried to transfer Orlinsky to Moscow and put the Cheka as the head of the counterintelligence department being formed. But the Petrograd authorities came against, not wanting to lose such a valuable shot. The counter-intelligence structure of the VChK will be headed by Blumkin. In August 1918, Orlinsky will run away from the Bolsheviks and will appear in the ranks of the white movement.

Another person surrounded by Dzerzhinsky, associated with the West, was A. Filippov. Before the revolution, he was associated with publishing, participating in the publication of various publications of the liberal persuasion, which focused on England and France. After the revolution, he actively collaborated with the Cheka, became a secret agent of Dzerzhinsky, while he was accepted into the Socialist Revolutionary and Cadet circles.

Vatsetis in the 1935 year called the Left Socialist-Revolutionary insurrection a "dramatization" of Trotsky. This version is very interesting, especially if we consider Trotsky’s special role in the Russian revolution and its relationship with the United States (or rather, the financial structures of the United States). During the controversy over peace with Germany, Trotsky took a frankly provocative position - speaking against peace and against war. At the same time, Trotsky had close contacts with representatives of the Entente. Meeting 5 in March with the British and American representatives B. Lockhart and R. Robinson, Trotsky expressed readiness to accept military aid from the Entente against Germany. Trotsky, being a representative of the "financial international" in Russia, actively promoted the idea of ​​a military-political alliance with the Entente. But Lenin in this struggle won up.

As a result, it can be said that the Left Social Revolutionaries were only a “tool” of a grandiose conspiracy, in which the “Left Communists” and Trotskyist internationalists took part, as well as the special services of the Entente camp. The true customers of the July 6 insurgency were in England and the USA. The Entente wanted to “return” Russia and again pit it with Germany. However, the “headless” hysterical intellectuals failed the idea. Lenin was able to push his line.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. avt
    avt 2 July 2013 09: 11
    Well, in general, it's good, there is something for an intellectual to think about. The interesting role of Dzerzhinsky in this putsch and the terrorist attack carried out by the officer of the Cheka Blumkin, who later went up the hill, and the role of the VChK detachment under the command of Popov, who allegedly took Dzerzhinsky and his deputy prisoner, who suddenly became from the "classical" historians suddenly left the Socialist-Revolutionary It would be nice to note that Sigismund Rosemblum, better known after marriage as Sidney O, Reilly, also marked himself near Iron Felix.
  2. omsbon
    omsbon 2 July 2013 10: 24
    Stalin was three times right when he drove all this "old guard of revolutionaries" where Makar did not drive calves.
  3. 225chay
    225chay 2 July 2013 10: 34
    Some kind of serpentine around Russia was swirling, a cesspool of agents from England in France and a line of people who destroyed the country.
    And now the "benefactors" are plotting something nasty not less ...
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 2 July 2013 14: 10
      agents of england france and the dash of whom

      write directly - agents of England, France, Germany ...
  4. The comment was deleted.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 2 July 2013 14: 10
      not everywhere, only in the Russian revolution wink
  5. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 2 July 2013 10: 55
    Now there are a lot more of these snakes. For almost 100 years in Russia breed ...
  6. individual
    individual 2 July 2013 12: 00
    In March 1918, with the signing of the Brest Peace Treaty, the contradictions between the Left Socialist Revolutionaries and the Bolsheviks escalated.

    History has no subjunctive mood and our contemporaries will not understand or accept the action of the Bolsheviks for 21 centuries. But undoubtedly, the leadership of the Council of People's Commissars was significantly cleared of temporary fellow travelers (Cadets, Socialist Revolutionaries, Anarchists, Bundists and Mensheviks) by this treaty. The Bolsheviks rallied, the Cheka and the People's Commissariats were strengthened without impurities of other people's ideologies. The Red Army was formed.
    The rebellion of the Left Socialist Revolutionaries, a senseless and criminal adventure, an attempt to draw Russia into the war with Germany failed.
    The very organization of the ssers was beheaded and suited only for carrying out terrorist acts and speeches of individuals, but was not ready for a meaningful positional struggle.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 2 July 2013 14: 16
      And what not to understand and not to accept?
      Well, we survived 199X, when the country (at the household level, not the state) was ruled by the same bastard - any local bandits /
      And in 1917 ...
      A group of criminal gangs without a clan without a tribe (who took money from everyone who gave it - enemies of their country, enemy spies, etc.) united and seized power.

      1. Work out the received
      2. Plunge the country into chaos (for in a different way they did not see how to hold power in their hands)
      signed the Brest Peace. And this despite the fact that the defeat of Germany was already expected.
      After that, they snapped among themselves.
      We now call the winners great, revolutionaries, etc ...

      Indeed, the ITT was right in 1937-38, when he launched this entire revolutionary gang under the knife.
      1. plantagenet
        plantagenet 3 July 2013 00: 18
        For such a CLEANING, Stalin was needed, yes, but the party was needed like this: most of them who were in power, ruthlessly planted others, dutifully destroyed their own kind by the same instructions, given any yesterday’s friend to death or ally. And all the large Bolsheviks, now crowned with the halo of martyrs, had time to be executioners of other Bolsheviks (not counting, as before, they were all executioners of non-partisans). Maybe the 37th year and was NECESSARY in order to show how small all of their WORLD VIEWs were, with which they roamed so vigorously, expanding Russia, crushing its strongholds, trampling its shrines, - Russia, where SUCH reprisal never threatened them . The victims of the Bolsheviks from 1918 to 1936 never behaved as insignificantly as the leading Bolsheviks when a thunderstorm came upon them. If we examine in detail the entire history of plantings and processes of 1936-38, the main disgust is not for Stalin and his assistants, but for the humiliating and ugly defendants - their loathing after their former pride and intransigence.
        A.I. Solzhenitsyn
  7. vostok1982
    vostok1982 2 July 2013 12: 49
    He reveals the reasons for this failed fourth revolution of the Old Men in his book "Who finished off Russia. Myths and truth about the Civil War".
  8. dmb
    dmb 2 July 2013 14: 49
    One can judge the actions of the leaders of the revolution in different ways. But the bottom line is important. And the result is as follows. The power was kept, the state was created. And not just a state, but a superpower, which, with all the trials that fell to its lot, was able to withstand a whole group of countries that are economically much more powerful and for the most part have not experienced such shocks. After all, the point is not one economy. Ideology is also important. Fans of moaning about the lost monarch should be reminded that when comparing the role of Russia in the world under it and the USSR of the 70's, the comparison is clearly not in favor of the monarch. Samsonov rightly noted the role of headless intellectuals-tantrums. God forbid, the rebellion would succeed, I'm afraid that not only the last 20 years, but the entire 90 state of Russia would be associated exclusively with the territory of north-western Russia before Ivan the Terrible.
    1. avt
      avt 2 July 2013 16: 08
      Quote: dmb
      God forbid, the rebellion would succeed,

      Then Trotsky would have won, with his wording “no peace, no war,” whom the Naglo-Saxons financed through the uncle of the banker Abram Zhivotovsky, it was not for nothing that Sigismund-Sidney Rosemblum was spinning there - Oh, Reilly, by the way, Lockhart's case is also from a series of this confrontation between two groups. One Lenin took money for the revolution from the Germans through Gelfand-Parvus, while the other, as I said, from the British.But surely they would not have shed less blood, but taking into account Trotsky's permanent theory of revolution, well, certainly more.
  9. Pablo_K
    Pablo_K 2 July 2013 15: 48
    Who knows how history would turn if this rebellion succeeded.
    But I completely agree that Joseph Vissarionovich was right to shoot
    in the 30s of demagogues and gorlopans who crawled out in 17
    1. Mikhail
      Mikhail 3 July 2013 00: 50
      As Charles de Gaulle said (I quote from memory), "without worthy heirs, Stalin's state is doomed to perish." And so it turned out.
  10. bubla5
    bubla5 2 July 2013 16: 45
    and everywhere Jews
  11. valokordin
    valokordin 3 July 2013 06: 21
    Long live comrade I.V. Stalin: How his country's leadership is groaning, how they are organizing posthumous persecution in the media. one Pravdyuk to the letter M how cleverly perverts history, giving preference to enemies of the people. This Duke on the channel 365 days ruined everything positive on this channel.