OK, you`ve got me bang to rights, as they say in the cop programmes. Serves me right for dashing off a reply in anger. And I apologize for not checking up on Nechayev. There`s a very goopd book by Adam Ulam that discusses his influence in some detail.
I still haven`t time to do the job properly, and will post something more fully in the New Year. But I don`t think the Russians are any more violent than anyone else, and I don`t think they can be blamed for the way their country was governed by the tsars, any more than they can be blamed for what Lenin and Stalin did to them. In a country where you can be shot, or sent to die in Siberia for starting political organizations, a little empathy seems to be in order.
I also think, after all this time, it would be nice if historians could bring themelves to give up their hobby of making arrogant, glib and inaccurate remarks about Kerensky and the Provisional Government, and bolstering their position by ignoring any evidence they don`t personally like.
I note that it wasn`t long after publishing this piece of work that Figes started backpedalling, having linked himself to the Russian Boris Kolonitskii. But his semi-retractions have so far only appeared in historical journals, as far as I know. Generally, I find the best way to hang on to any remaining shreds of sanity have is avoid reading what British historians and the British media have to say about the Revolution.
Anyway, Merry Christmas. I`m afraid the 90 year-long torrrent of insults and lies have made me a bit touchy, on behalf of those in the family who died, and those whose testimony is still being rejected in favour of the liars.
Cheers,
StephenKerensky