UnSpun 067 – Jacob Duellman: “The New Kids on the Block: Sketches of Fabian Infiltration”

Live at 5pm tonight on UnSpun #67, Jacob Duellman returns to continue our discussion on connections to Sir Victor Gollancz and his communist propaganda publishing house The Left Book Club. We also look into Sir Israel Gollancz, The New Kids, the Fabian Society, The New Statemen, the Webbs, and much more, weaving together an understanding of so many things we've studied over the last few years and how they've come about. Don't miss it!

Please follow and like us:

  3 comments for “UnSpun 067 – Jacob Duellman: “The New Kids on the Block: Sketches of Fabian Infiltration”

  1. RogerArno
    May 14, 2017 at 4:11 am

    I think you will find a man named Willi Münzenberg interesting, he was a central hub.

    …Among the means used to promote the Stalinist chic was the Left Book Club, in which Katz played a large role. It will be remembered that Münzenberg was one of the inventors of the book club in its modern form – and a year and a half before he dispatched Otto to Moscow in 1929, Willi assigned his man to be administrator and agent-in-place at Universum Bücherei, his book club in Berlin. The Left Book Club was more or less a cookie-cutter version of Universum Bücherei
    The front men of course, were English: John Strachey, Harold Laski and Victor Gollancz. Of this trio Strachey was a witting agent; Viktor Gollancz almost certainly so, and Laski a very sophisticated innocent.
    …The name—Left Book Club—misleads a little: Like Universum Bücherei, it was much more than British communism’s bookshop by mail. It was how Stalinist opinion was “networked” in England. The Club offered Mûnzenberg’s familiar array of camps and conferences and propaganda tours of the USSR, and it organized the usual cadres for directing opinion in every area from the theater and art to sports. When ever propaganda required, the rabbits of protest would leap from the clandestine cap. There were clubs to celebrate Soviet cinema. Soviet art, Soviet anything—joined to the usual untiring search for intellectual legitimacy. This craving for the prestige of cultural big names amounted to an institutional neurosis for the apparat.

    On Life time actors.

    …Leading this list were two members of the minor Russian aristocracy: the Baroness Moura Budberg, who was mistress to both Maxim Gorky and H. G. Wells. and the Princess Maria Pavlova Koudachova. Exactly what the Baroness Budberg’s connection to the Soviets may have been remains mysterious, though its importance cannot be doubted. We have more certain knowledgc about the Princess Koudachova, who first became secretary. later mistress, wife, and at last widow to the once enormously celebrated pacifist novelist Romain Rolland. Maria Paviova Koudachova was an agent directly under Soviet secret service control. There is some questionable evidence to suggest that she was trained and assigned to Rolland’s life even before she left Russia after the Revolution. In any case, after Koudachova was permitted to Ieave Soviet Russia, she sought out the novelist in Switzerland and there began what was her entire life’s work: insinuating herself into every corner of his existence and managing it for the apparat. It was a remarkably successful effort. The Central Party Archives in Moscow contain innumerable files documenting activities in which Rolland’s prominence and wishful principles were exploited, used, and reused while he danced the dance of “innocence.” By the time she married Rolland, the Princess had come to dominate the author’s every public move, and she continued to do so until the day he died, whereupon she became the manager of his legend and archives. Throughout, Koudachova worked in close and regular collaboration with, among others, Münzenberg’s agents.
    Romain Rolland’s vanity required that he see himself as possessed of an almost uniquely self-directed and courageous mind. In truth, he was a quite self-infatuated person, easily led and easily frightened. As Koudachova steadily pulled him more and more deeply into his life as a Stalinist apologIst, she was in turn supervised by Gibarti, and no doubt many other agents as well. Through all the years of manipulation, Rolland kept him self complacent with half-ignorance, the deniability within. True, by 1932, he clearly understood that Gibarti was a Comintern operative: There exists a letter to Henri Barbusse from Rolland, expressing sudden panic that his own repuation might be sullied by exposure of Gibarti’s real role. But could he ever let himself grasp the real role of his own wife? After meeting Maxim Gorky in 1934, Rolland confided to Koudachova how shocked and saddened he was to sec Gorky surrounded by political spies in his own household. What the Princess replied is not on record. That she was a secret service operative, however, and one expressly planted in Rolland’s life, cannot be doubted. Babette Gross put it to me plainly in the summer of 1989. “She was an apparatchik,” she said flatly. “And she ran him.”

    On history or more accurately the description of history.

    1. Alan Wilson and Baram Blackett

    2. C K Raju
    “The Western history of science was designed by priests during the Crusades and Inquisition. Colonialism made this ultra-chauvinisitic story the “standard” and any realistic corrections are dismissed as chauvinistic! The story created awe of the West, and fooled people into aping the West as the right way to “catch up”. This worked like a leash to enslave people mentally.”

    “The calculus developed in India, and was transmitted to Europe. Newton and Leibniz did not “independently rediscover” it.”

    “Mathematics is supposedly based on Euclid’s Elements. But did Euclid exist? Was the Elements a religious book?.”

    “Is the authority of science being misused to control people’s behaviour by persuading them about the validity of a certain set of values.”

  2. John Cokos
    May 17, 2017 at 10:02 am

    Is that the same Victor Lasky from the early Labor movement ?

Leave a Reply