
The Plot to Assassinate Orwell - who-knows
https://lithub.com/the-communist-plot-to-assassinate-george-orwell/
======
markvdb
If you find this interesting, definitely read his book
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homage_to_Catalonia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homage_to_Catalonia)
!

~~~
everybodyknows
For a similarly fascinating, curiously parallel autobiography -- another
western, idealistic leftist losing his illusions about Stalin's regime -- pick
up Whitaker Chambers' _Witness_.

A favorite passage ponders at length a tiny note, smuggled out of a Moscow
prison, where Chambers' now-purged controller awaited execution. From memory:
"'You will meet a man. You will think of him as your friend.' What could it
mean but that he would not be my friend?"

------
emmelaich
David Crook, mentioned in the article as working for the anti-POUM had a
fascinating life. Apparently he apologised for the mentioned spying.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Crook](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Crook)

[https://www.theguardian.com/news/2000/dec/18/guardianobituar...](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2000/dec/18/guardianobituaries1)

Hampstead Heath to Tian An Men - The autobiography of David Crook
[http://www.davidcrook.net/simple/main.html](http://www.davidcrook.net/simple/main.html)

~~~
dmix
Crook's books on living in Chinese communism sound interesting, I managed to
buy them both used on Abebooks. I've always wanted to read what day-to-day
life was like in early Communist china. I've found a lot of older Chinese
people I talk to don't like talking about it or change the subject pretty
quickly, which I understand, people don't like talking about being poor.

The person I last talked to was a teacher in China who lived a decent middle
class childhood in the 1960s and was forced to move to a rural area into
poverty and made to work on a farm for a few years. Eating dinner communally
with large groups of people. She often talks about her regret of not leaving
to Taiwan like some of her family.

~~~
amaccuish
Also look up Sidney Rittenberg [0]. He wrote a book and there's a documentary
on him. He was friends with Mao and imprisoned by him. He wrote a book [1].

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Rittenberg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Rittenberg)

[1] [https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00CPJB7H4/ref=dp-kindle-
redirec...](https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00CPJB7H4/ref=dp-kindle-
redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1)

~~~
dmix
Looks good, thank you. Added it to my wishlist

------
systematical
The Spanish Civil War happens to be one of my favorite historical events. In
no small part because I once was really into anarcho-syndicalist beliefs. Not
so much anymore, but I still enjoy it from a historical perspective.

I highly recommend the Spanish Civil War tour in Barcelona by Nick Lloyd
([https://twitter.com/Civil_War_Spain](https://twitter.com/Civil_War_Spain)).
Unfortunately, the war is still a touchy subject in Spain, so his tour is the
best you'll get until Spain builds a proper museum.

~~~
switch007
> Unfortunately, the war is still a touchy subject in Spain

I find this quite concerning and rather paternalistic, especially when far-
right/fascists keep winning elections and the PP still exists.

I'm not ignorant of the attrocities but Spain needs to be able to discuss
current issues linked to or reminiscent of that era despite it upsetting a lot
people.

It's suppressing free speech, and Spain has a disgraceful recent history of
anti free-spech legislastion passed by the PP in the years following their win
in 2011. Spain passed a gag law in 2013, the same year Vox was created.
Perhaps it seems you have to create a far-right party to enjoy free speech. /s

~~~
squeezingswirls
Such an overstatement is not honest and doesn't help to analyze the current
political situation in Spain, nor helps to understand why the Civil War is a
touchy subject.

Vox is a far-right party but it isn't a fascist one because they play under
the Spanish Constitution rules.

Describing PP in that same political spectrum is a bad joke, the same kind you
make when saying 'Spain has a disgraceful recent history of anti free-spech
legislastion' (sic). Can you please give us any example? Any sentence? Any
ource? Can you honestly say that you can't speak freely in Spain?

In the caricature you've drawn, it looks like the 'fascists' have all the
power, keeping everyone with their mouths shut, but you need to take the whole
picture, from far-right to far-left, and don't forget the disproportionate
power of the regional nationalist parties.

The main point you forget is the interest of many parties to re-write History,
being the Spanish Civil War one of their favorite subjects because, at the
end, most of them were supporting a dictatorship, not a democracy. Or a Franco
dictatorship, or a Stalin dictatorship, but none of them fighting for
democracy or for the original spirit of the II Spanish Republic.

~~~
guiriduro
> Can you honestly say that you can't speak freely in Spain?

Yes, I believe you can. Where to start? The disgusting re-appearance of
political prisoners in Spain, for Catalan leaders expressing the idea that
Catalunya should determine its own destiny, while Spanish politicos laughably
and hypocritically complain about the same in Venezuela (but to the twisted
fascist mind, their political prisoners are just 'criminals' \- I'm sure
Maduro would use the same justification). The destruction of an edition of the
Jueves comic drawing that showed the (then) prince earning a childrearing
grant having sex with his wife. A rapper in exile to avoid being remanded for
singing about the king. Plenty of other examples.

No, free speech is not protected in Spain, quite the reverse.

~~~
squeezingswirls
Sorry but that is not true at all. There aren't 'political prisoners' by any
means in Spain. There are politicians in prison, and that's quite different.

Their imprisonment without bail follows the Spanish Law, based on democratic
principles, and it's quite dishonourable to compare Spain and Venezuela
political situations.

On the other hand, nobody destroyed any edition of 'El Jueves', please see
[https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/Jueves-retira-ejemplares-
po...](https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/Jueves-retira-ejemplares-portada-
abdicacion_0_267723757.html)

Every cover is available even online, even the controversial ones
[https://twitter.com/eljueves/status/834078228541165568](https://twitter.com/eljueves/status/834078228541165568)

They make fun of the Catalonian nationalists too by the way
[https://twitter.com/eljueves/status/1171369631786917888](https://twitter.com/eljueves/status/1171369631786917888)

About Valtonyc, the rapper you're talking about 'in exile to avoid being
remanded for singing about the king' that's not true. He was judged and
sentenced to 3 and a half years of prison for 'crimes of threats, insults to
the Crown, and glorification of terrorism'. To avoid going to prison, he fled.

Yes, free speech is well protected in Spain.

~~~
coldtea
> _Sorry but that is not true at all. There aren 't 'political prisoners' by
> any means in Spain. There are politicians in prison, and that's quite
> different._

Unless they are in prison because e.g. they were driving under influence, or
stealing money, or hit someone, or some other such crime, then it's not
different at all...

> _About Valtonyc, the rapper you 're talking about 'in exile to avoid being
> remanded for singing about the king' that's not true. He was judged and
> sentenced to 3 and a half years of prison for 'crimes of threats, insults to
> the Crown, and glorification of terrorism'. To avoid going to prison, he
> fled._

That is supposed to be a refutation of what the parent wrote?

~~~
squeezingswirls
They aren't in preventive prison due to their political ideas but they're
being accused of committing very specific and serious crimes, like rebellion,
sedition, and embezzlement.

The whole trial has been live streamed.

About your second question, making threats, insulting the Crown, and
glorification of terrorism is not just 'singing about the king'.

That's not free speech.

~~~
coldtea
> _They aren 't in preventive prison due to their political ideas but they're
> being accused of committing very specific and serious crimes, like
> rebellion, sedition, and embezzlement._

Well, rebellion and sedition _are_ political ideas. Political ideas are not
just "more taxes/less taxes", or "healthcare for all/private healthcare" and
other regular everyday party differences.

And of course, the kind of political ideas political prisoners all over the
world get in jail for in regimes that stifle political expression are more
often than not branded "rebellion", "sedition", by those putting them there...

> _The whole trial has been live streamed._

Well, the Moscow trials of Stalin were well reported to the masses as well.
That's neither here, nor there.

> _About your second question, making threats, insulting the Crown, and
> glorification of terrorism is not just 'singing about the king'._

Sure. But wanting the king dethroned (if not beheaded, for effect) is a
totally legit political idea, that was part of most countries progressing to
real civic democracy, and people and politicians should be able to express it.
In a modern democracy, if it must have some relic of feudal times in the form
of a decorative king, said king shouldn't still be anything sacred.

"and glorification of terrorism" there's no shortage of regimes that labeled
anything they didn't like "terrorism".

Heck, the British would also be offended by Americans in the colonies
"insulting and threatening the King" and called their fighting terrorism, so
there's that.

Just because a regime exists, doesn't mean protecting it is just or should
continue to exist.

~~~
squeezingswirls
Generally speaking, everything is political but I'm afraid you're confusing
ideas with actions.

Those politicians are not in prison for 'having an idea', they're in there for
actively acting against the current Spanish Constitution, against the Spanish
Law, and against the regional Catalonian Law as well.

All of that using Public Funds.

About free speech, it's a Right with some limits, as any Right. For example,
tell me whether in your opinion, thanks to that Right, anyone can 'sing'
promoting hate against transsexuals, or promoting to kill Afro-Americans, or
to torture children.

~~~
coldtea
> _Those politicians are not in prison for 'having an idea', they're in there
> for actively acting against the current Spanish Constitution, against the
> Spanish Law, and against the regional Catalonian Law as well._

Well, wasn't Mandela in prison for similar things? Acting against the "current
law" is not enough in itself to make one's imprisonment just.

Especially if they didn't hurt/kill anyone, but acted politically (spoke,
organized, etc), even if the established laws forbids it.

> _About free speech, it 's a Right with some limits, as any Right. For
> example, tell me whether in your opinion, thanks to that Right, anyone can
> 'sing' promoting hate against transsexuals, or promoting to kill Afro-
> Americans, or to torture children._

It wouldn't be nice, but they should be able to sing those things. For example
there are all kinds of e.g. death metal songs that speak of killing people in
satanic rituals, torturing virgins, heck even torturing children should be
there. Should metal be banned?

More importantly, when there are "some limits" (as opposed to no), it's not
just the blatantly clear cases (e.g. don't talk against killing afro-
americans) that are problematic, but the gray ones.

One man's freedom fighter's are another man's terrorists for example, so e.g.
the Clash singing about Sandinista could be said to "promote terrorism".

Or e.g. "promoting hate towards the Crown". Well, "God save the Queen, she's
not a human being, it's a fascist regime" by Sex Pistols, is a mighty fine
song.

Or how about interpretation? Someone might write a song about e.g. black crime
in their neighborhood, and it could be interpreted as "racism against blacks"
if they're not black themselves.

Or they could consider some "democracy bringing war" celebrated in the media
and government, as "resource grabbing" attempt. Should they be able to sing
about it?

And tons of other things besides.

------
PavlovsCat
For the sibling comment asking about Orwell's stance on Stalin:

> _One could not have a better example of the moral and emotional shallowness
> of our time, than the fact that we are now all more or less pro Stalin. This
> disgusting murderer is temporarily on our side, and so the purges, etc., are
> suddenly forgotten._

\-- George Orwell, in his war-time diary, 3 July 1941

------
75dvtwin
It is a short story but here are 'summary exerpts' that perhaps will serve as
interest to others, to read the full story.

\- The Communist Plot to Assassinate George Orwell

\- When George Orwell returned to Barcelona for the third time, on June 20th,
1937, he discovered that the Spanish secret police were after him. He had been
forced to return to the front in order to have his discharge papers
countersigned and, in his absence, the Communists had initiated a purge of
their perceived enemies. Orwell was on the list.

\- David Crook, a young Englishman .... He was eager to join up with the
International Brigades and fight the Fascists. He was descended from Russian-
Jewish immigrants ... Like many young men who grew up after the First World
War, he was attracted to left-wing causes. He moved to New York City, where he
attended Columbia University and embraced radical politics, joining the Young
Communist League.

\- He (David Crook) .. Recovering in Madrid, he socialized with the literary
set ... At this point he came to the attention of Soviet intelligence agents.
After recruiting him, the NKVD sent him to a training camp in Albacete, where
he was given a crash course in sabotage and surveillance techniques.

\- ... He compiled reports on the Orwells, Kopp, and McNair and, at meetings
in a local café, delivered them folded up in a newspaper to his handler, Hugh
O’Donnell (code name “Sean O’Brien”). ... Crook reported that Kopp and Eileen
were having an affair, the kind of information the NKVD valued for blackmail
purposes.

\- While on the run, Orwell persisted in the “ineradicable English belief that
‘they’ cannot arrest you unless you have broken the law,” even though
“practically everyone we knew was in jail by this time.”

\- The Orwells and their friends made it to France and safety (the first
newspaper they read contained a premature report announcing McNair’s arrest
for espionage). A secret police file, dated July 13th and prepared for the
Tribunal for Espionage and High Treason in Valencia, denounced Orwell and
Eileen as “confirmed Trotskyists.” The report was compiled with information
from Wickes (and almost certainly Crook). Orwell had fled just in time.

\- Orwell needed to tell the world, and most importantly his fellow left-
wingers, the truth about what was going on in Spain.

------
wtdata
What I find interesting, is the great number of people - specially in the last
decade when reading 1984 suddenly became popular - that keeps telling us all
that Orwell's works are a warning specifically against fascism and point
Orwell's role in Spain as proof that he was himself a communist.

Orwell left quite clear that after having seen both Nazism and Communism in
action, he was staunchly against both forms of totalitarianism.

~~~
southerntofu
> he was staunchly against both forms of totalitarianism

Indeed! But unlike capitalism, communism does not require totalitarian
structures of power. They're actually quite incompatible.

Empires describing themselves as "communist" are more so "state capitalist".
The USSR was not a classless society nor a free society so it cannot be called
communism: some people had more rights/resources than others (the opposite of
"communism").

In marxist views, dictatorship of the pretend-proletariat (red elites are
usually not common people) is a capitalist stage of a society advancing
towards communism but cannot be considered communism. No pretend-communist
country ever outgrew this phase (because power structures do not dissolve by
themselves, we have to destroy them).

Orwell was a trotskyist. If we forget just for a minute the lies and
inconsistencies of Trotsky (who was a mass-murdering psychopath), trotskyists
are libertarian communists. They advocate self-organized cooperation/sharing
without central authority (no state). Orwell was therefore close to anarchist
ideas. You can feel his admiration for anarchists in his book "Homage to
Catalonia".

When the USSR started to overthrow the CNT-led anarchist revolution in
Catalunya, anarchists allied with trotskyist militias to fight against fascism
and authoritarian communism. They failed of course, because what can you do to
survive against two power-hungry emperors (Franco/Staline) who agree to
destroy you?

~~~
tuxxy
> ... anarchists allied with trotskyist militias to fight against fascism and
> authoritarian communism.

This is not true. The Soviet backed militias forced Anarchists to either fight
for their militias or be part of their purge. The Soviets used force to squash
the growing (and large) anti-authoritarian sentiment among the Spanish Civil
War Republicans.

~~~
southerntofu
Well, that's exactly what i meant. Communist militias wanted to annihilate
both anarchist and trotskyist militias, so those allied during the street
battles of Barcelona. Are we not saying the same thing?

------
southerntofu
This article is amazing, but I'm a bit sad the article does not mention the
international power plays that led to this very situation.

The USSR seized control over the revolution (murdering all the anarchists)
because the French and UK parliaments refused to support the war against
Franco. They were afraid it would start a war with Hitler and Mussolini who
were big supporters (both material and ideological) of the Franco regime, and
that anarchism would then spread to their home country (threatening their own
privileges).

The year is 1936. To anyone with an understanding of how imperialism/fascism
operates, it's very clear that fascism has to be annihilated by force because
it's an ideology that aims to kill all that does not fit.

But the moderate liberals/conservatives of the western world refuted this,
claiming inaction was the best of actions against fascism. THIS is what led to
the second world war: abandoning any idea of social progress in the name of an
illusion of peace.

The social revolution in Catalunya was led by millions of anarchists, many of
which were organized in the CNT union. But as western capitalist "democracies"
refused to provide weapons to the anarchists, the USSR filled the power vacuum
and seized power by organizing/supplying the republican military, on the
condition they adopt authoritarian hierarchies.

Before that, the revolution was defended by self-organized militias federated
from the bottom-up: no uniform, no authority. Just cooperation between
autonomous units who had common interests in fighting fascism. Notably, this
transition of military power from the people to the communist party forbid
women from the battlefield!

All this is partially explained in Orwell's Homage to Catalonia. With the new
rise of fascism from the US to Turkey, from France to India... i think there's
plenty of lessons to learn from this era.

------
gadders
My step-Granddad who was Scottish and a communist/socialist fought in the
Spanish Civil War. I guess this is how people made their feelings known in the
days before Twitter :-)

He always used to tell me about how he had to bury some hand grenades at the
base of a tree as he didn't know how to use them.

------
dangxiaopin
Just curious why contrary to the usual HN policy of reusing the headline
verbatim, the word "communist" was edited out?

~~~
dang
Because it's baity. We have enough trouble keeping people from going on
generic ideological tangents as it is.

The policy is " _Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or
linkbait._ "
([https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)).

~~~
julienreszka
This is exactly what Orwell is talking about in his books. Why are you trying
to control our thoughts dang, go find a real job

~~~
dang
Yes, but Orwell wrote about it intelligently. If he had let a million internet
users comment in his books, they wouldn't be worth reading either.

~~~
angry_octet
# It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.

I can imagine the twitter clock-splaining... "It's 13-hundred dontcha kno.",
"I hate it when daylight savings ends" etc.

------
aalleavitch
Unlike authoritarian communism, anarcho-socialism never got the chance to
succeed or fail on its own merits. It was strangled in the crib.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
Anarcho socialism hasn’t succeeded yet, but I still believe it must succeed in
the future if we are ever to see real freedom for the masses and to avoid near
total destruction of the Earth’s biosphere.

If anyone wants to downvote me, I ask that you choose one of two alternatives.
First, tell me why you want to downvote. Or, read this article by Albert
Einstein talking about the necessity of socialism:
[https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-
socialism/](https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/)

~~~
systematical
Capitalism will reach its end one day, long after we are gone, but that will
be because of its own technologic achievements and not because of 19th-century
socialist philosophy. Capitalism will become so efficient at some point that
in its quest for more and more efficiency, it will end resource scarcity. Once
scarcity is eliminated, capitalism "withers" away.

That's my hope anyway. In the short-term, I'd like to see free markets begin
erasing more borders and reducing the number of nations. Hopefully, the recent
nationalist fad is just that and we can get to more EU style setups, more
globalism, and more cooperation. A disgusting amount of resources is spent on
the military. Capitalism has the ability to solve our problems. Borders are in
the way.

Edit: Is it the socialists, anarchists, or capitalists downvoting me? Hard to
say. My ideas definitely don't have many friends.

~~~
Miner49er
Your main idea is Marxist. Marx said the same thing, that Capital would end
itself, through the elimination of scaricity. Though I think he was wrong
about that, things like UBI proves that it always finds a way to survive.

But anyway, you are both saying Marxist and pro-capitalist things, so I would
guess you're just being downvoted by everyone.

~~~
miceeatnicerice
Surely it was going to be the rise of class consciousness that overthrew
Moloch? Though if we're all involved in the process ourselves, and only gain
this consciousness through work, the end of Capitalism isn't so much a violent
overthrowing from outside as much as a growing, positive realization of what
was inside it anyway.

Maybe that's exactly what things like UBI point to: life as an adventure
rather than a slave camp. The paranoid part of me then wants to find a bigger
and more evil capital to criticise in the Marxian manner.

------
gedy
I'm not versed enough in political theory to know myself, but why have
seemingly all communist movements and governments been so riddled with purges,
paranoia, and violence?

~~~
RangerScience
I would hazard a guess that it has something to with most _revolutions_ being
riddle with purges, paranoia and violence, and then that most (AFAIK) modern
revolutions are communist movements.

In other words, AFAIK (which isn't far), it's a trait of revolutions, not of
communist movements.

~~~
oh_sigh
Why were those things notably absent in the US revolution?

~~~
WaxProlix
From dragonwriter's post elsewhere in the comments:

> Americans sometimes forget that what we call our “revolution” was not an
> anti-elite revolution but an elite-led regional separatist movement
> coordinated by the local governments acting in concert, and so avoided many
> of the challenges found in genuine revolutions.

------
hutzlibu
The article is still click-bait. There was no plan to assassinate Orwell.
There was a plan to arrest him and make him sign some confessions and/or maybe
die in prison, but he was simply not important at that time. Just some
foreigner, who fought for a marxist militia, not under Stalins control - and
that was enough.

But by doing so, they created a powerful enemy. I believe animal farm and 1984
are due to their popularity a very big reason, bolschewism went down in the
end.

