text:
Home / The unknown revolution, 1917-1921 - Volin / Book II: Bolshevism and anarchism
Part II: About the October Revolution
CHAPTER 1: Bolsheviks and Anarchists Before October
Here we find occasion to go back and review the respective positions of the Bolsheviks and the Anarchists prior to the October Revolution.
The position of the Bolsheviki on the eve of that revolution was characteristic.
It is well to recall, however, that Lenin's ideology and the position of his party had changed considerably since 1900. Aware that the Russian labouring masses, once started in revolt, would go far and would not stop at a bourgeois solution -- especially in a country where the bourgeoisie hardly existed as a class -- Lenin and his party, in their desire to anticipate and dominate the masses in order to lead them, ended by formulating an extremely advanced revolutionary programme. They now envisaged a strictly Socialist revolution. And they arrived at an almost libertarian conception of the revolution, with almost Anarchist slogans -- except, of course, with regard to the fundamental point of demarcation -- the taking of power and the problem of the State.
When I read the writings of Lenin, especially those after 1914, I observed a perfect parallelism between his ideas and those of the Anarchists, except for the idea of the State and power. This identity of understanding, recognition, and prediction seemed to me already very dangerous for the true cause of the Revolution. For -- I did not fool myself -- under the pen, in the mouths, and in the acts, of the Bolsheviks, all these great ideas were without real life, without a future. These writings and these words, fascinating and overpowering, would remain without serious consequences, because the subsequent acts [of the Bolsheviki] certainly were not going to correspond to their theories.
But I was sure that, on the one hand, the masses, in view of the weakness of the Anarchist movement, would blindly follow the Bolsheviks, and that, on the other hand, the latter inevitably would deceive the masses and mislead them into an evil course. For beyond any doubt they would distort and pervert their proclaimed principles.
That is what happened in fact.
In order to quicken the spirit of the masses, and gain their sympathy and confidence, the Bolshevik Party launched, with all the strength of its agitational and propaganda apparatus, slogans which until then had particularly and insistently been voiced by the Anarchists:
Long live the Social Revolution!
Down with the war! Immediate peace!
And especially:
The land to the peasants!
The factories to the workers!
The labouring masses swiftly seized upon these slogans, which expressed their real aspirations perfectly.
From the lips and under the pens of the Anarchists, those slogans were sincere and concrete, for they corresponded to their principles and called for action entirely in conformity with such principles. But with the Bolsheviks, the same slogans meant practical solutions totally different from those of the libertarians, and did not at all tally with the ideas which the words appeared to express. For the Bolsheviki, they were only slogans.
Social Revolution meant for the Anarchists a really social act: a transformation which would take place outside of all political and statist organizations, and all out-moded social systems -- both governmental and authoritarian.
But the Bolsheviks pretended to wage the Revolution specifically with the aid of an omnipotent State, of an all-powerful government, of dictatorial power.
If a revolution did not abolish the State, the government, and politics, the Anarchists did not consider it a social revolution, but simply a political revolution -- which of course might be more or less coloured by social elements.
But achievement of power and organization of "their" government and "their" State spelled the Social Revolution for the "Communists" [the label which the Bolsheviki adopted later].
In the minds of the Anarchists, social revolution meant destruction of the State and capitalism at the same time, and the birth of a new society based on another form of social organization.
For the Bolsheviks, social revolution meant, on the contrary, the resurrection of the State after the abolition of the bourgeois State -- that is to say, the creation of a powerful new State for the purpose of "constructing Socialism".
The Anarchists held it impossible to institute Socialism by means of the State.
The Bolsheviki maintained that it could be achieved only through the State.
This difference of interpretation was, as will readily be seen, fundamental.
(I recall big posters on a wall in Petrograd, at the time of the October Revolution, announcing lectures by Trotsky on The Organization of Power. "A typical and fatal error," I said to comrades, "for if it is a question of social revolution, one should be concerned with organizing the Revolution and not with organizing power.")
Respective interpretation of the call for immediate peace also was notably different.
To the Anarchists that slogan was a call for direct action by the armed masses themselves, over the heads of the governors, the politicians, and the generals. According to the anarchists, those masses should leave the front and return to the country, thus proclaiming to the world their refusal to fight stupidly for the interests of the capitalists and their disgust with the shameful butchery. Such a gesture, frank, integrated, decisive -- the Anarchists believed -- would produce an enormous effect upon the soldiers of the other nations, and might lead, in the last analysis, to the end of the war, perhaps even to its transformation into a world revolution. They thought that it was necessary, taking advantage of the immensity of Russia, to draw the enemy on, cut him off from his bases, cause his Army to disintegrate, and put him out of the fighting.
The Bolsheviks, however, were afraid of such direct action. Politicians and statists, they wanted a peace through political and diplomatic channels, the fruit of discussions with the German generals and "plenipotentiaries".
The land to the peasants! the factories to the workers! By these words the Anarchists understood that, without being the I property of anyone, the land should be put at the disposal of all those who desired to cultivate it (without exploiting anyone) and of their associations and federations, and that likewise the factories, works, mines, machines, et cetera, should be at the disposal of all the workers' productive associations and their federations . Methods and details of this activity would be regulated by those associations and federations, by free agreement.
But to the Bolsheviki this same slogan meant the nationalization of all those elements. For them the land, the works, the factories, the mines, the machines, and the means of transport should be the property of the State, which would permit the workers to use them.
Again, the difference of interpretation was fundamental.
As for the masses themselves, intuitively they understood all those slogans rather in the libertarian sense. But, as we have said earlier, the voice of Anarchism was relatively so weak that the vast masses didn't hear it. It seemed to them that only the Bolsheviks dared to proclaim and defend these glorious and just principles. This was all the more true in that the Bolshevik Party proclaimed itself every day on the street corners as being the only party struggling for the interests of the city workers and the peasants; the only party which, once in power, would know how to achieve the Social Revolution.
"Workers and peasants! The Bolshevik Party is the only one which defends you. No other party knows how to lead you to victory. Workers and peasants! The Bolshevik Party is your own party. It is the only party that is really yours. Help it to take power and you will triumph."
This leitmotif of the Bolshevik propaganda finally became an obsession. Even the left Social Revolutionary Party, which was much stronger than the small Anarchist groups, could not rival the Bolsheviks. However, it was then strong enough so that the Bolsheviki had to reckon with it and offer it, for some time, seats in the government.
Finally, it is interesting to compare the position of the Bolsheviks to that of the Anarchists, on the eve of the October Revolution, on the question of the workers' soviets.
The Bolsheviki expected to achieve the Revolution, on the one hand, through an insurrection of these Soviets, which were demanding "all power" for themselves, and, on the other hand, through military insurrection which would support the action of the Soviets (the whole proceedings of course under the immediate and effective direction of the party). The working masses had the task of vigorously supporting this action, In perfect accord with their point of view and their "tactics", the Bolsheviks launched the general slogan of the Revolution: "All power to the Soviets!."
As for the Anarchists, they were suspicious of this slogan and for good reason -- they knew well that that formula did not at all correspond with the real plans of the Bolshevik Party. They knew that in the last analysis the latter sought highly centralized power for itself. (That is, for its central committee and ultimately for its leader, Lenin, who, aided by Trotsky, as is now generally known, directed all the preparations for the taking of power).
"All power to the Soviets!" was therefore, in reality, according to the Anarchists, only an empty formula, subject to being filled later with any kind of content. And it was a false, hypocritical, deceptive formula -- for, the Anarchists declared, if "power" really should belong to the Soviets, it could not belong to the Bolshevik Party, and if it should belong to that Party, as the Bolsheviks envisaged, it could not belong to the Soviets.
That is why the Anarchists, while admitting that the Soviets should perform certain functions in the building of the new society, did not accept the formula without reservations. To them, the word power rendered it ambiguous, suspect, illogical, and demagogic. They knew that, by its very nature, political power could not really be exercised except by a very restricted group of men at the centre. Therefore this power -- the real power -- could not belong to the Soviets. It would actually be in the hands of the party. Then what did the formula "All power to the Soviets" truly mean?
Comment and doubts having to do with that theme were expressed by the Anarcho-Syndicalists in an editorial entitled Is This the End?, published in their weekly, Golos Truda. 1 Pointed questions were asked in that editorial.
"Will the eventual realization of the formula, All power to the Soviets -- rather the eventual taking of political power -- be the end? Wili this be all? Will this act accomplish the destructive work of the Revolution? Will it completely prepare the ground for the great social construction, for the creative spirit of the people in revolt? Will the victory of the 'Soviets' -- if it is achieved -- and, again, the 'organization of power' which will follow it, effectively signify the victory of labor, of the organized forces of the workers, the beginning of genuine Socialist construction?
Will this victory and this new 'power' succeed in leading the Revolution out of the impasse in which it finds itself? Will they manage to open new creative horizons for the Revolution, for the masses, for everyone? Are they going to point out the true course for the Revolution to constructive work, the effective solution for all the burning questions of the period?"
It would all depend, the Anarcho-Syndicalist organ contended, on what interpretation the conquerors put on the word power and their idea of the organization of power. It would depend, too, on the way in which the victory would be utilized by the elements holding power after that victory.
Plainly pessimistic, the editors of Golos Truda cited several circumstances vitally necessary to a just and equitable handling of the situation by the Bolsheviki. Only if certain factors existed, they averred, could the new crisis become the last one; only then could it signify the beginning of a new era. Those factors embodied five ifs:
"If by 'power' one wishes to say that all creative work and all organizational activity throughout the whole country will be in the hands of the workers' and peasants' organizations, supported by the armed masses;
If one understands by 'power' the full right of these organizations to carry on this activity and to federate to this end . . . thus beginning the new economic and social construction which will lead the Revolution to new horizons of peace, economic equality, and true liberty;
If . . . 'power to the Soviets' does not signify installation of lobbies of a political power . . . ;
If, finally, the political party aspiring to power . . . liquidates itself after the victory and yields its place effectively to a free self-government of the workers; and
If the 'power of the Soviets' does not become, in reality, statist power of a new political party."
But, the Anarcho-Syndicalists held, if "power" actually meant the activity of the authoritarian and political lobbies of the Bolshevik Party, lobbies directed by its principal authoritarian and political centre (the central power of the party and the State); if the; "taking of power by the Soviets" really meant usurpation of power by a new political party, for the purpose of reconstructing, by means of this power, from above and by that "centre", the whole economic and social life of the country, and thus resolving the complex problems of the moment and of the period -- then this new stage of the Revolution would not be the final stage either.
Golos Truda did not doubt for an instant, it stated, that "this new power" would neither begin nor understand the real Socialist construction, nor even satisfy the immediate essential needs and interests of the population. And it did not doubt that the masses would quickly become disenchanted with their new idols and be forced to turn to other solutions after having disavowed those new gods. Then, after an interval -- of uncertain length -- the struggle would of necessity begin again. This would be the commencement of the third and last stage of the Russian Revolution -- a stage which would be a Great Revolution in itself.
"This will be a struggle [the editorial continued] between the living forces of the creative spirit of the masses, on the one hand, and the Social Democratic power, with its centralist spirit, defending itself bitterly, on the other. In other words: a struggle between the workers' and peasants' organizations acting directly and on their own, taking the land and all the means of production, transport, and distribution, to establish, in complete independence, a really new human existence -- this on the one hand, and the Marxist political authority on the other; a struggle between the authoritarian and libertarian systems; a contest between two principles which have been battling for pre-eminence for a long time: the Marxist principle and the Anarchist principle."
And, the Anarcho-Syndicalist editors concluded, only a complete and definitive victory of the Anarchist principle -- the principle of the free and natural self-organization of the masses -- would spell a true victory for the Great Revolution.
They did not believe, they declared, in the possibility of achieving the Social Revolution through the political process. They did not believe that the work of new social construction, and the solution of the vast, varied, and complex problems of that time could be achieved through a political act, by the taking of power by the top or centre. "Those who live," they predicted, "shall see!
CHAPTER 2: Anarchist Position on the October Revolution
On the same day, the Union for Anarcho-Syndicalist Propaganda published a statement in Golos Truda in which it indicated clearly its position on the question of political power. It summed up the situation in two compact paragraphs:
"I. Inasmuch as we give the slogan 'All power to the Soviets', an entirely different meaning from that which, in our opinion, is given by the Social Democratic Bolshevik Party, 'called upon by events to lead the movement'; inasmuch as we do not believe in the broad perspectives of a revolution which begins with a political act, that is, by the taking of power; inasmuch as we do not support any action of the masses for political goals and under the control of a political party; and finally, inasmuch as we conceive of an entirely different way, both for the beginning and the subsequent development of a real social revolution, we do not support the present movement.
"2. Nevertheless, if the [proposed] action by the masses should commence, then, as Anarchists, we will participate in it with the greatest possible energy. For we cannot put ourselves out of touch with the revolutionary masses, even if they are not following our course and our appeals, and even if we foresee the defeat of the movement. We never forget that it is impossible to foresee either the direction or the result of a movement by the masses. Consequently, we consider it our duty always to participate in such a movement, seeking to communicate our meaning, our ideas, our truth, to it."
CHAPTER 3: Other Disagreements
Beside the great divergences of principle which separated the Anarchists and the Bolsheviks, there existed differences of detail between them. Let us mention the two most important incidental points of variance -- the question of the purported "workers' control of production" and that of the Constituent Assembly.
Contemplating the workers' problem, the Bolshevik Party prepared to begin [moving toward a solution] by instituting the so-called workers' control of production -- that is, the introduction of workers into the management of private enterprises.
The Anarchists objected that if this "control" were not to remain a dead letter, and if the workers' organizations were capable 6f exercising effective control, then they also were capable of guaranteeing all production. In such an event, private industry could be eliminated quickly, but progressively, and replaced by collective industry. Consequently, the Anarchists rejected the vague nebulous slogan of "control of production". They advocated expropriation -- progressive, but immediate -- of private industry by the organizations of collective production.
We want to emphasize, in that connection, that it is absolutely false -- I insist on this, because the false assertion, sustained by ignorant people and by those of bad faith, has been fairly widespread -- it is false, I say, that in the course of the Russian Revolution, the Anarchists knew only how to "destroy" and "criticize", "without being able to formulate the least positive ideas". And it is false that the Anarchists "did not themselves possess, and therefore never expressed sufficiently clear ideas on the application of their own conception". In looking through the libertarian press of the period [in Russia] (Golos Truda, Anarchy, Nabat, et cetera), one can see that this literature abounded in clear and practical expositions of the role and functioning of the workers' organizations, as well as the method of action which would, permit the latter, in! co-operation with the peasants, to replace the destroyed capitalist and statist mechanism.
What the Anarchists lacked in the Russian Revolution was not clear and precise ideas, but, as we have said, institutions able, from the start, to apply those ideas to life. And it was the Bolsheviks who, to achieve their own plans, opposed the creation and the functioning of such institutions.
The [Anarchist] ideas, clear and exact, were formulated, the masses were intuitively ready to understand them and to apply them with the help of the revolutionaries, intellectuals, and specialists. The necessary institutions were sketched out and could have \ been rapidly oriented toward the true goal with the aid of the same elements. But the Bolsheviki deliberately prevented the spreading of those ideas and that enlightened assistance, and the activity of the [projected] institutions. For they wanted action only for themselves and under the form of political power.
This complex of facts, specific and incontestable, is basic for ; anyone who seeks to understand the development and meaning of the Russian Revolution. The reader will find in these pages numerous examples -- chosen from among thousands -- bearing out my statements, point by point.
We come now to the other controversial issue mentioned -- the Constituent Assembly.
To continue the Revolution and transform it into a social revolution, the Anarchists saw no utility in calling such an assembly, an institution essentially political and bourgeois, cumbersome and sterile, an institution which, by its very nature, placed itself "above the social struggles" and concerned itself only, by means of dangerous compromises, with stopping the Revolution, and even suppressing it if possible.
So the Anarchists tried to make known to the masses the uselessness of the Constituent Assembly, and the necessity of going beyond it and replacing it at once with economic and social organizations, if they really wanted to begin a social revolution.
As seasoned politicians, the Bolsheviks hesitated to abandon the Constituent Assembly frankly. (Its convocation, as we have seen, occupied a prominent place on their programme before the seizure of power). This hesitation had several reasons behind it: Onthe one hand, the Bolsheviki did not see any inconvenience in having the Revolution "stopped" at the stage where it was, provided they remained masters of power. The Assembly could serve their interests if, for example, its majority were Bolsheviks or if the Deputies approved their direction and their acts. On the other hand, the masses were closely attached to [the idea of] the Assembly, and it was not prudent to contradict them in the beginning. Finally, the Bolsheviks did not feel themselves strong enough to risk furnishing a trump card to their enemies, who, recalling the formal promises of the party before the seizure of power, could cry Treason! and disturb the masses.
For, since the latter were not thoroughly curbed and subjugated, their spirit was on guard, and their temper was very changeable; the example of the Kerensky government still fresh in memory. Finally, the party decided on this solution: to proceed with the calling of the Constituent Assembly, while supervising the elections minutely and exerting maximum effort to make sure that the results were favourable to the Bolsheviki regime.
If the Assembly was pro-Bolshevik, or at least docile and without real importance, it would be manoeuvred and used for the ends of the government. If, however, the Assembly was not favourable to Bolshevism, the leaders of the party would observe closely the reactions of the masses, and dissolve the gathering on the first favourable occasion. To be sure, the game was somewhat risky. But counting on its vast and profound popularity, and also on the lack of power in the hands of the Assembly, which, moreover, was certain to compromise itself if it took a stand against Bolshevism, the risk was accepted. The events which followed demonstrated that the Bolshevik Party did not deceive itself.
Fundamentally, the promise of the Bolsheviks to call the Constituent Assembly as soon as they assumed power, was to them, only a demagogic formula. In their game, it was a card which might win everything at one toss. If the Assembly validated their power, their position would speedily and peculiarly be confirmed throughout the country and abroad. If the contrary should be the case, they felt that they had sufficient strength to be able to get rid of the Assembly without difficulty.
CHAPTER 4: Some Reflections
Naturally the popular masses could not recognize all the subtleties of these different interpretations. It was impossible for them -- even when they had made some contact with our ideas -- to understand the real significance of the differences in question. The Russian workers, of all the workers in the world, were the least familiar with political matters. They could not be aware either of the machiavellianism or the danger of the Bolshevik interpretation.
I recall the desperate efforts with which I tried to warn the city workers, in so far as it was possible, by word of mouth and by writing, of the imminent danger for the true Revolution in the event that the masses let the Bolshevik Party intrench itself solidly in power.
In vain I argued; the masses did not recognize the danger. How many times did they object in words like these: "Comrade, we understand you well. And moreover, we are not too confident. We agree that it is necessary for us to be somewhat on guard, not to believe blindly, and to maintain in ourselves a prudent distrust. But, up to the present, the Bolsheviks have never betrayed us. They march straightforwardly with us, they are our friends. And they claim that once they are in power they can easily make our aspirations triumph. That seems true to us. Then why should we reject them? Let us help them win power, and we will see afterward."
Unheeded, I pointed out that the goals of the Social Revolution could never be realized by means of political power. To doubting listeners I repeated that once organized and armed, the Bolshevik power, while admittedly as inevitably impotent as the others, would be infinitely more dangerous for the workers and Wore difficult to defeat than they had been. But invariably thos to whom I talked replied in this wise:
"Comrade, it was we, the masses, who overthrew Tsarism. It was we who overthrew the bourgeois government. And it is we who are ready to overthrow Kerensky. So, if you are right, and if the Bolsheviki have the misfortune of betraying us, and of not keeping their promises, we will overthrow them as we did the others. And then we will march finally and only with our friends the Anarchists."
Again in vain I pointed out that for various reasons, the Bolshevik State would be much more difficult to overthrow. But the workers would not, or could not, believe me.
All this, however, is not at all astonishing when in countries familiar with political methods and where (as in France) they are more or less disgusted with them, the labouring masses and even the intellectuals, while wishing for the Revolution, are still unable to understand that the installation in power of a political party, even of the extreme left, and the building of a State, whatever its label, will lead to the death of the Revolution. Could it be otherwise in a country such as Russia, which never had had the slightest political experience?
Returning on their battleships from Petrograd to Kronstadt after the victory of October, 1917, the revolutionary sailors soon began discussing the danger that might result simply from the existence of the Council of People's Commissars in power. Some maintained, notably, that this political sanhedrin was capable of some day betraying the principles of the October Revolution. But, on the whole, the sailors, primarily impressed by its easy victory, declared while brandishing their weapons: "In that case, since the cannons have known how to take the Winter Palace, they will know how to take Smolny also." (The former Smolny Institute in Petrograd was the first seat of the Bolshevik government, immediately after the victory.)
As we know, the political, statist, governmental idea had not yet been discredited in the Russia of 1917. And it still has not been discredited in any other country. Time and other historical experiences certainly are needed in order that the masses [everywhere], enlightened at the same time by propaganda, will finally be made entirely aware of the falsity, the vanity, the peril of the idea.
On the night of the famous day of October 25, I was on a street in Petrograd. It was dark and quiet. In the distance a feW scattered rifle shots could be heard. Suddenly an armoured car passed me at full speed. From inside the car, a hand threw a packet of leaflets which flew in all directions. I bent down and picked one up. It was an announcement by the new government to "workers and peasants" telling of the fall of the Kerensky government, and giving a list of the "People's Commissars" of the new regime, Lenin at the head.
A complex sentiment of sadness, rage, and disgust, but also a sort of ironic satisfaction, took hold of me. "Those imbeciles (if they are not simply demagogic imposters, I thought) must imagine that thus they have achieved the Social Revolution! Oh, well, they are going to see . . . And the masses are going to learn a good lesson!"
Who could have foreseen at that moment that only three years and four months later, in 1921, on the glorious days of February 25 to 28, the workers of Petrograd would revolt against the new "Communist" government? '
There exists an opinion which has some support among Anarchists. It is maintained that, under the prevailing conditions [in October, 1917], the Russian Anarchists, momentarily renouncing their negation of politics, parties, demagogy, and power, should have acted "like Bolsheviks", that is to say, should have formed a sort of political party and endeavoured to take power provisionally. In that event, it is asserted, they could have "carried the masses" with them, defeated the Bolsheviki, and seized power "to organize Anarchism subsequently".
I consider this reasoning fundamentally and dangerously false.
Even if the Anarchists, in such a contingency, had won the victory (which is exceedingly doubtful), that winning, bought at the price of the "momentary" abandonment of the basic principle of Anarchism, never could have led to the triumph of that principle. Carried away by the force and logic of events, the Anarchists in power -- what nonsense! -- could only have achieved a variety of Bolshevism.
(I believe that the recent events in Spain and the position of certain Spanish Anarchists who accepted posts in the government I thus throwing themselves into the void of "politics" and reducing to nothing the real Anarchist action, confirms, to a large extent, my point of view.)
If such a method could have achieved the result sought, if it were possible to fight power with power, Anarchism would have no reason to exist. "In principle" everybody is an "Anarchist" If the Communists, the Socialists, et al., are not so in reality, it is precisely because they believe it possible to arrive at a libertarian order by way of politics and power. (I speak of sincere people). Therefore, if one wants to suppress power by means of power and the "carried away masses" one is a Communist, a Socialist, or anything you like, but one is not an Anarchist. One is an Anarchist, specifically, because one holds it impossible to suppress power, authority, and the State with the aid of power, authority, and the State (and the "carried away masses"). Whenever one has recourse to such means -- even if only "momentarily" and with very good intentions -- one ceases to be an Anarchist, one renounces Anarchism, one rallies to the Bolshevik principle.
The idea of seeking to carry the masses along with power is contrary to Anarchism, which does not believe that man can ever achieve his true emancipation by that method.
I recall, in this connection, a conversation with our widely known comrade, Maria Spiridonova, animator of the left Social Revolutionary Party, in 1919 or 1920 in Moscow. (At the risk of her own life, she assassinated, in the old days, one of the most ferocious satraps of the Tsar. She endured tortures, barely missed death [by hanging], and remained imprisoned a long time. Freed by the Revolution of February, 1917, she joined the left Social Revolutionaries and became one of their pillars. She was one of the most sincere revolutionists, devoted, respected, esteemed.)
During our discussion. Maria Spiridonova told me that the left Social Revolutionaries believed in power in a very restricted form; a power reduced to a minimum, accordingly very weak, very humane, and especially very provisional. "Just the bare minimum, permitting it, as quickly as possible, to weaken, to crumble, and to disappear!"
"Don't fool yourself," I advised her. "Power is never a ball of sand, which, when it is rolled, disintegrates. It is, on the contrary a snowball, which, when rolled, increases in size. Once in power, you would do like the others."
And so would the Anarchists, I might add.
In the same connection, I remember another striking incident.
In 1919 I was active in the Ukraine. By that time the Russian masses already were keenly disillusioned about Bolshevism. The Anarchist propaganda in Ukrainia (where the Bolsheviks had not yet totally suppressed it) had begun to achieve a lively success.
One night some Red soldiers, delegated by their regiments, came to the seat of our Kharkov group and told us this: "Several units of the garrison here are fed up with the Bolsheviks. They sympathize with the Anarchists, and are ready to act. One of these nights they could easily arrest the members of the Bolshevik government of the Ukraine and proclaim an Anarchist government, which certainly would be better. Nobody would oppose it. Everybody has had enough of the Bolshevik power. Therefore we ask the Anarchist Party to come to an agreement with us, to authorize us to act in its name in preparing this action, to proceed to arrest the present government, and to take power in its place, with our help. We put ourselves completely at the disposition of the Anarchist Party."
Of course the misunderstanding was evident. The term "Anarchist Party" alone bore witness to it. These good soldiers had no idea of what Anarchism really meant. They may have heard it spoken of vaguely or attended some meeting.
But the fact was there. Two alternative solutions were available to us: either to take advantage of this misunderstanding, have the Bolshevik government arrested, and "take power" in the Ukraine; or explain to the soldiers their mistake, give them an understanding of the fundamental nature of Anarchism, and renounce the adventure.
Naturally we chose the second solution. And for two hours I set forth our viewpoint to the regimental delegates.
"If," I said to them, "the vast masses of Russia arise in a new revolution, frankly abandoning the Government and conscious that they need not replace it with another to organize their life on a new basis, that would be the proper, the true Revolution, and all the Anarchists would march with the masses. But if we -- a group of men -- arrest the Bolshevik government to put ourselves in their place, nothing basic is changed. And subsequently, carried along by the very same system, we could not do any better! than the Bolsheviki."
Finally the soldiers understood my explanations, and left swearing to work henceforth for the true Revolution and the Anarchist idea.
What is inconceivable is that there exist in our day "Anarchists" -- and not a few of them -- who still reproach me because we did not "take power" at that time. According to them, we should have gone ahead and arrested the Bolshevik government and installed ourselves in their place. They maintain that we lost a good opportunity to realize our ideas -- with the help of power. But that would have been contrary to our principles.
How many times have I said to an audience, in the midst of the Revolution: "Never forget that no one can do anything for you, in your place, above you. The 'best' government can only become bankrupt. And if someday you learn that I, Voline, tempted by politics and authoritarianism, have accepted a governmental post, have become a 'commissar', a 'minister', or something similar, two weeks later, comrades, you may shoot me with an easy conscience, knowing that I have betrayed the truth, the true cause, and the true Revolution."
1. Petrograd, October 20, 1917.
‹ Part I: Two Conceptions of the Revolution up Part III: After October ›
Steven.
The unknown revolution, 1917-1921 - Volin
Volin, 1882-1945 - Rudolf Rocker
Introduction: Essential Preliminary Notes
Book I: Birth, growth and triumph of the revolution (1825-1917)
Book II: Bolshevism and anarchism
Part I: Two Conceptions of the Revolution
Part III: After October
Part IV: Repression
Part V: The Bolshevik State
Book III: Struggles for the real social revolution
Appendix: Photographs


text:
By Beth Stibal | January 12, 2023
Two Florida lawmakers want more cameras in the House
(WASHINGTON, D.C.) — After the contentious vote for House Speaker earlier this month, there are Florida lawmakers, from both sides of the aisle calling for more cameras to give the public a glimpse into how House business is conducted.
Video from C-SPAN showed the moment the Sergeant at Arms restrained a GOP representative confronting Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz during clashes on the House floor. Gaetz held up the Speaker vote by voting "present" rather than for Kevin McCarthy.
Now Rep. Gaetz and another Florida lawmaker, a newly-elected 25-year-old Democrat, want those cameras to have increased access all the time. Maxwell Frost, the first Gen Z congressman from Florida says he's also on board with that along with other lawmakers saying the same thing. C-SPAN weighing in with a thumbs up to more access as well.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The instance U.S. Civil Service Commission. General Information in Regard to the U.S. Civil Service Including List of Civil Service Employees in the Various Departments of the Government and List of Positions Not Subject to Competitive Civil Service Examination represents a material embodiment of a distinct intellectual or artistic creation found in University of San Diego Libraries. This resource is a combination of several types including: Instance, Electronic.


text:
Webinars SharePoint Framework - In Eric Shupps's Own Words
SharePoint Framework - In Eric Shupps's Own Words
Eric Shupps
I'm Eric Shupps, SharePoint Server MVP, President of Binary Wave.
I've been doing SharePoint development since the dark days of the Tahoe Project before it was called SharePoint. So I've been around awhile through the early 2000 revs into 2007, and all the way now into 2016 and the Office 365.
Well, I started working with it in the early beta bits last year and worked with it through GA, and working with some of the various pre-release things that come out. So I've had some fairly good hands-on time with it so far.
I like that the Framework brings extensibility without all the overhead of working on the server. You don't have to have a fully installed dev environment, you don't have to be running all the heavyweight server stuff. It's something you can spin up. You [Andrew Connell] and I work on our Mac Books. We can deploy code from our Mac Books. Folks can work on Linux or whatever flavor they want to of that, or if they want to stick with their traditional Windows environment they can do that as well. But there's no server-side install, it's direct to the client, and it's all done in client-side technologies. I think that opens up the platform to a lot of people who weren't prepared for the very steep learning curve for traditional SharePoint development.
I like where they're going with it. If the team can execute on their vision of bringing a client-side extensibility model to where we stand on Office 365 and hopefully SharePoint on premises today … if they can bring those pieces together, which is a big ask considering the breadth and width of the server-side APIs and where we've been with the add-in model and what not, but if they can really bring these things together I think we've got something really powerful that will give us capabilities that we've never had in the cloud and quite frankly that other cloud platforms don't have, and then translate that down on premise you get a pretty powerful story.
My impression of the road map is they've set a pretty ambitious agenda. I think they were smart to go with web parts out of the box as a basic extensibility concept. It's something we're sorely lacking in the add-in model that they focus their attention on, which is good. I think when we see the new publishing experiences people are really gonna like those, and of course, those are built on top of the Framework, so they're using their own toolset to deliver a new set of capabilities. I'm really excited to see where that goes. And if they can further extend that to give us some of the capabilities in the cloud that we have on premise in terms of overall extensibility, I think that's a really good direction for them to go. It's a lot of work to pull of if they can make it happen, but I think they're going in the right direction.
Well, it's interesting you should ask that, because the one thing that's missing from the tool set is integration with ID of choice from most SharePoint developers, and that would be Visual Studio. I love the new tool chain, and I like the VS code and everything being done with modern web technologies, that's great, but the target base for SharePoint development is and always will be within the enterprise. So I would ask people to stay tuned. We're working on a community project that hopefully will address those concerns for folks, and bridge that gap between the enterprise and the pure web development community.
Change would assume that we have the ability to go in a different direction, and I'm not really sure that we do. I think it's too early, in other words, to say what would we change or what would we do differently about what we have. They've taken a direction, for a lot of different reasons, to go with this modern web stack in terms of development. That's going to be very confusing for a lot of people, but they didn't really have an option in that. So we can say "Oh we'd like to see that change, we'd like to see it go back to a traditional server-side model", but that's not possible, nor do I think it's actually the right thing to do at this point.
I think there's … in order to get this stuff out, to not have the traditional, we gotta wait three years for a new platform to come along, and for them to tool it, and support it and all that. We're beyond that now. So, I think people just need to be patient and let the process mature. For those who are having struggle adapting to it, yeah that can be a steep curve if you're a traditional server-side .NET developer, but I would encourage people to focus less on the tool set and more on what you can get out of the product, especially as it matures more and we get more capabilities.
The biggest challenge is definitely the tool chain. For most folks that's a very hard bridge to cross, from where they were in ASP. NET in the C server-side type of development over to sort of this wild, wild West of JavaScript Frameworks and things that change so rapidly, and tool sets that seem to come and go with the setting sun. That is a challenge, there are certainly some Frameworks that are gaining adoption. I'm not sure that the tooling the way we have it now is following the trends there, about where most people are going in the web development community, but they've also made a choice not to block people out of using other Frameworks. Where is in the past it was .NET or nothing, and now we have I think more options available to folks. So that's a good thing, I think.
People are going to struggle, there's no question about it, but when we look back people struggled with building web parts in 2007. People forget that there was a day where we didn't have any tooling, where we were running makeCAB, and making our own Diamond Directive files to build these WSP things. There was no tooling. Now it's easy cause it's all baked into Visual Studio, but it wasn't back then, and we're kind of in that same boat again. Although I would argue that the tool chains, although they may be unfamiliar, actually fairly robust within the web development community … so there's going to be a period of transition that may be a little rough. But on the other side of that, I think people will like what that gives them in terms of overall capabilities.
In terms of future of the Framework, I think that the near-term future is pretty clear. They've identified a road map where they want to go with this thing. They've already started building their own modern experiences which are betting on heavily with this tool set. I think that secures the near-term future pretty well, 12, 18 months out. If they can execute, as I mentioned earlier, on their vision for this I think we have a pretty long runway for this Framework … if people adopt. Now the community may not adopt, they may decide it's not for them, we have to be honest with ourselves that this is a fourth development model that we're working on. Some people have lost interest, for some it's just too much change, especially enterprise developers who are used to a very consistent tool set and ALM story. So we'll have to see, but if they can deliver us even a portion of the capabilities we have for customization at the server-side APIs, if they can do that in the cloud with all the other capabilities that Office 365 brings to the table, I think they've got some runway in this.
Do you have any Advice or Words of Wisdom?
I would encourage people who are looking at it now, and wondering if they should or shouldn't jump into it and work on it, to just go ahead and take the leap. You're only gonna learn new things outside of our traditional bubble for SharePoint development, we've kind of been insulated for a lot of stuff, usually running behind the game. We've been telling people for years, get on the JavaScript bandwagon, learn this disconnected, remote API model, even if you're writing .NET and CSOM, learn to break out that server-side chain … and I think this furthers that opportunity.
Find a Framework, or no Framework if you want, just write raw JavaScript in jQuery if that's what you like to do, but get out of the comfort zone of the way we've traditionally built SharePoint stuff and look for new opportunities to learn the tool sets. Because if maybe you decide not to do SharePoint in a couple of years you'll be ahead of the game a little bit in catching up where the rest of the development community is at, or be able to transition to other parts of the staff. Maybe you want to do teams development, or you want to do something inside of one of the other product areas of Office 365. So learning it now, getting ahead of the game, I think will pay dividends in the long run.
President, BinaryWave | Microsoft MVP
Eric Shupps is the founder and President of BinaryWave, a leading provider of enterprise software solutions for SharePoint. Eric has worked with SharePoint Products and Technologies since 2001 as a consultant, administrator, architect, developer and trainer. He is an advisory committee member of the Dallas/Ft. Worth SharePoint Community group and participating member of user groups throughout the United Kingdom. Eric has authored numerous articles on SharePoint, speaks at user group meetings and conferences around the world, and publishes a popular SharePoint blog at sharepointcowboy.com.


The test is five days away. It is normal to have some anxiety right now (okay, it is normal to have a lot of anxiety right now). But, there is still time to review, and still time to gain a better understanding of how areas are tested, and still time to continue to memorize the law. You need to believe that in order to make the best use of the remaining time. Actively work at remaining calm and maintaining a positive attitude – it will only lead to a better study period in these next few days.
If you would like to be added to our July 2013 Bar Exam Tips Email List, click here.
I highly recommend that you review as many essays as you can. Of course, continuing to work on memorization is important. But, anyone who has reviewed past California bar exam released answers will tell you that the graders' focus is not on perfect rule statements. The bar examiners know that you can go look up a rule. A passing answer will evidence that you know what the issues are and that you know how to resolve the legal problems. This is key.
I am not suggesting that you shouldn't strive to write perfect or near perfect rule statement. But, it is more important to evidence a true understanding of the legal issues presented by each fact pattern and to resolve these issues to your best ability. Your focus should be on issue coverage (identifying as many of the relevant issues as possible) and on the analysis (fully explaining why something is an issue and how it could be resolved). All too often examinees write towards the answer – by this I mean that many examinees first (before writing anything) try to figure out what the correct answer is and then write towards that conclusion. A better approach is to present all possible issues and to discuss all possible resolutions of those issues.
Okay, I promised more "predictions" . . . so here we go . . .
Property – Property is a possibility. I think that Constitutional Law, Evidence and Property are all about equal in terms of the chances of each subject showing up on your next bar exam (and that Criminal Law is a possible topic that might repeat – although I do not necessarily think you are likely to have four MBE topics – but it is possible). What is most likely for Property (if it were tested): Easements is very possible (either on its own or – in a possible land sale contract setting). I also think that Covenants and Equitable Servitudes are possible.
Also, if you were to get an essay on Easements and it was in the land sale context – the scenario could go like this: Betty is granted an easement by Grant for a 20-foot road. She receives this easement by express grant, but never records. Betty uses the road and ultimately paves a thirty-foot wide road and begins using it for part residential and part commercial use. Grant sells his land (the servient tenement, the land that is burdened by the easement) to Buyer. The issues become 1) Does Betty have a valid Easement, 2) Does Buyer take the land subject to Betty's easement etc.
1. Is the easement appurtenant or in gross, 2. Is the Easement affirmative or negative easement, 3. Creation – how was the easement created (PING)? 4. Scope – what is the scope of the easement and was the scope exceeded – or was the easement overburdened? 4. Was the easement terminated.
With respect to whether Buyer takes the land subject to Betty's easement will likely require a few discussions: 1) a discussion of notice and potentially recording act statues and 2) a potential Warranty Deed discussion where you discuss the present and future covenants. **Incidentally, I think this is as likely an essay testing scenario in Property as a straight Covenants/Equitable Servitudes essay. Bear in mind that in Property, the favorite area of testing is the area of landlord tenant. While this was tested recently, it does not mean the examiners could not do it again. It is just not my first pick for what will come your way. However, be ready for it.
Community Property – most are "predicting" community property. I do think it is very likely. There is not a lot to community property (in terms of what the California bar examiners test). So, like all subjects, you simply need to know it. However, I would be certain to know the Accounting Methods for Value Enhanced Separate Property businesses (Van Camp and Pereira). Simply know this topic. Because there is not a lot to this subject, we typically see the same issues tested over and over from one testing round to the next (transmutations come up a lot, the fiduciary duty between husband and wife and rights to equal management and control also come up a lot). In addition, I would be mindful of the following scenario (this would just be one part of a Community Property Essay): husband sells diamonds to a third party way below market value. Wife wants the diamonds back. The issues that come up are: 1) equal management and control, 2) fiduciary duty (the duty owed between husband and wife is of the highest level), 3) whether the third party buyer is a "Super BFP" (a buyer who purchased for value without notice of the marriage). Keep in mind that if the buyer paid way below market value, then they probably are not a "purchaser for value" and so whether they knew of the marriage or not, will not likely matter. You could then potentially discuss remedies – the remedies available would likely be a constructive trust or tracing (if the buyer sold the diamonds for cash). Yes, remedies concepts can show up pretty much anywhere. The key is to simply use your common sense – don't write your answers in a vacuum – rely on both your knowledge of the law and common sense and focus on resolving the legal issues at hand (this is something that applies to all subjects).
Professional Responsibility – Professional Responsibility is tested on the essay section of the bar exam on virtually every bar examination administration. In fact, the California bar examiners have only skipped Professional Responsibility from the essay portion of the exam twice since 1994. It will be tested on either the essays or the performance test (as that is what the bar tells us – from 1994 tested every bar round on the written portion – this can be either the essays or the performance tests or both). So, not a real surprise that I would be predicting this topic. However, there are some areas that are favorites (typically) and some areas that have not been tested as recently as others. Bear in mind, there is only so much to Professional Responsibility – so the same issues repeat frequently. Therefore, a review of any of the recent Professional Responsibility Essays would be appropriate.
Professional Responsibility in the context of a corporation – Some are predicting that you might see PR in the context of a corporation. The scenario is often this: where the Lawyer is representing a corporation and then a lower level employee meets with Lawyer (perhaps offsite) and confides in Lawyer about a past or ongoing fraud on the part of the corporation). This is being predicted because it is a past favorite and we haven't seen it for a while. In this scenario the Lawyer's client was supposed to be the corporation and now the issue or problem that arises in the facts is that Lawyer – in meeting with the lower level employee – is also the lower level employee's attorney – that an attorney-client relationship formed when Lawyer met with lower level employee. And, of course there is now a conflict of interest. You might also have the opportunity to discuss the rules about crimes that the client has committed, is committing or is about to commit and the rules with respect to what Lawyer may or must do. This area has been tested quite a bit historically, but not recently. Therefore, it is a very likely possibility.
Other Professional Responsibility favorites are: 1) Mom hiring attorney for her son and 2) Lawyer engaging in a sexual relationship with his/her client. All of these areas present many of the same issues: breach of the duty of loyalty, breach of the duty to give candid advice, and especially – conflict of interests. Keep in mind that when dealing with conflict of interests in Professional Responsibility, the bar examiners embrace answers that discuss both potential conflicts and actual conflicts.
Okay, that is it for today. Remember that these are just possible scenarios. I do not have a crystal ball.
Be positive, believe in yourself, and know that you CAN do this. The bar examiners are not looking for perfection. Simply do your best and trust that you are capable and that your best will be more than good enough.
Next July 2013 Bar Exam: Some Final Thoughts and a Few Handouts . . .


text:
Call Us (210) 686-0888 to get your personalized insurance quote
Small Business General Liability Quote
Commercial Auto Insurance Quote Form
Workers Compensation Quote Form
Business Owners Policy Quote
Home > Newsletter Signup
Stay in touch with the latest events, news and offers at Insurance Xchange.
To join our mailing list, please insert your e-mail address below. Submit your request by clicking the finish button. Your information will not be sold or distributed to any unrelated third party companies.
None Current Customer Friend - Online - Internet Search Engine Bing Search Engine Google Search Engine Yahoo! Search Engine Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Online Blog - Advertisement - Direct Mail E-Mail Internet Ad Radio Ad Television Ad Yellow Page Listing - Other - Driving By The Office Business Card Flyer Local Event
Automobile Boat Builders Risk Dental Flood Gen Liab Homeowners Mexico Coverage Motorcycle Pkg Recreational Vehicle Renters Towing Umb Umbrella Work Comp
Hold Down the Control Key To Select Multiple Items
To allow us to better serve your needs please fill out as much information as possible. All items are optional.
January February March April May June July August September October November December / 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 / 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 1949 1948 1947 1946 1945 1944 1943 1942 1941 1940 1939 1938 1937 1936 1935 1934 1933 1932 1931 1930 1929 1928 1927 1926 1925 1924 1923 1922 1921 1920 1919 1918 1917 1916 1915 1914 1913 1912 1911 1910 1909 1908 1907 1906 1905 1904 1903 1902 1901 1900
Your Anniversary
To view more information about Insurance Xchange's data collection and usage policies, please view our Privacy Policy. By using the Insurance Xchange website, you consent to the data practices described in our Privacy Policy. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.
(210) 686-0888 930 SW Military Drive, Suite 102 | San Antonio , TX 78221
Home Our Products Customer Service Payment Options Report a Claim About Us Our Carriers Partners Blog Contact Us Refer A Friend
930 SW Military Drive, Suite 102
E: info@the-ix.com


Orders: All orders are subject to written acceptance by Shur-Co®, LLC, whose corporate office and mailing address is PO Box 713, 2309 Shur-Lok St., Yankton, South Dakota 57078-0713. Price and availability information are subject to change without notice.
Payment Options: We accept VISA, MasterCard and Discover/Novus. To open a credit account with Shur-Co®, LLC, please call us direct at 1-605-665-6000 or toll free at 1-800-474-8756.
Taxes: We are required by law to collect sales tax on products shipped to states where we have outlet stores. If tax exempt, a copy of your tax exempt certificate must accompany your order. Please call us at 1-605-665-6000 or 1-800-474-8756 for further information. Shur-Co®, LLC has locations in the following states: North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Ohio, Illinois, Colorado, Texas, Florida and Michigan. Tax will also be collected on products shipped to other states where applicable.
Currently, all customer orders taken through ShopShurCo.com are subject to sales tax, if applicable for your location. If you have a tax exempt form on file with Shur-Co®, LLC, please contact us at 1-800-474-8756 to place your order.
Shipping: We are currently unable to ship orders outside the continental United States via our website. For orders outside the continental U.S., please call us at 1-605-665-6000 or 1-800-474-8756 to order direct. Please allow five business days plus transit time for stocked items; non-stocked items will be shipped within six to 10 business days. Shipping charges are based upon location and vary by product. All orders will be shipped F.O.B. Shur-Co®, LLC, Yankton, SD. Items that do not meet UPS size and weight requirements will be shipped via common carrier. Orders with large items, such as steel tubing, may be packaged separately. Changes to shipping information must be made by calling the Shur-Co®, LLC Customer Service Department. Other shipping options are available; please call us at 1-605-665-6000 or 1-800-474-8756 to learn more.
Claims for Shortages: All claims must be made within 10 days of receipt. Claims for damages or loss in transit must be made with the carrier. No collect calls will be accepted. To ensure delivery of items, we must have your complete street address, city, zip code and telephone number. When you receive your shipment, examine the carton(s) carefully. Be sure you have all the cartons listed on the delivery receipt. If a carton is damaged, open it and inspect the contents before signing for delivery. If merchandise is damaged, describe the damage on the truck delivery receipt. Failure to document damaged or missing merchandise on the delivery receipt releases the freight carrier of ALL liability; as a result, repairs or replacements will be the customer's responsibility.
Warranty: We warrant that all new products are free from defects in materials and workmanship.* This warranty is effective if products are properly installed and used for the purpose for which they were intended and applies to the original buyer only. Except as set forth above or as set forth in any product-specific warranty documentation, we make no other warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular use.
Returns of a product for warranty must be accompanied by a Return Merchandise Authorization number (RMA#), which can be obtained by calling Customer Service at 1-866-748-7435, and sent, with freight paid by us, to Shur-Co®, LLC, 2309 Shur-Lok Street, P.O. Box 713, Yankton, SD 57078 USA. All products returned without an RMA# will be refused. When we issue the RMA#, we will also issue a call tag to have UPS (or other freight company) pick up the product. C.O.D. warranty returns will not be accepted. We will pay no storage charges for a warranty product return prior to pickup by us or the freight company. If a warranty product return is scheduled to be picked up by us, we will pick up the product at our earliest convenience.
If the product returned is found, in our judgment, to be defective in material or workmanship, our obligation under this warranty is limited to the repair or replacement of the product, which will be made by us. Repair or replacement will be at our discretion, with replacements being made using current products performing in the equivalent function. Labor charges, other than those incurred at our factory, including, but not limited to, any labor to install a repaired or replacement product, are not covered under this warranty. All expenses associated with delivering defective products to our factory and delivering repaired or replacement products from our factory to the owner will be paid by us.
If the product returned is found, in our judgment, to be non-warrantable, the owner will be contacted to authorize repair work, the purchase of a replacement product or return of the product, all of which will be at the owner's expense. Payment authorization must be received by us before any non-warrantable product is repaired, replaced or returned. All expenses associated with delivering the repaired non-warrantable product, a replacement product or the non-warrantable product from our factory to the owner will be paid by the owner.
In no event will we be liable for any damages of any kind or nature to person, product or property, including, but not limited to, indirect, incidental, special, consequential or punitive damages of any kind, or damages for loss of profits or revenue, even if we have been advised of the possibility of such damages. There are no warranties for used products or products that have been repaired, altered, modified or subjected to misuse, negligence or accident. We will not repair or replace products that fail or malfunction due to ordinary wear and tear, except as expressly provided in a product-specific warranty. The use of non-Shur-Co®, LLC parts in conjunction with Shur-Co®, LLC products will void this product warranty.
*Certain products have specific warranties that differ from this warranty, for example motors and electronics. Product-specific warranty documentation is available for these items. In the event of a conflict between this warranty and a product-specific warranty, the product-specific warranty will govern.
Return Policy: All sales are final. See "WARRANTY" above for information on warranty returns.
Other: All prices, product listings, sizes, weights and manufacturing details are subject to change without notice. No person is authorized to modify the foregoing conditions of sale whatsoever. Please contact our Customer Service Department at 1-605-665-6000 or 1-866-SHURHELP for further information.
Security: Our servers use Secure Sockets Layer (SSL), an advanced encryption technology that works with all popular web browsers such as Microsoft Internet Explorer, Firefox, Google Chrome and AOL. This technology attempts to safeguard your personal information. We do not sell your personally identifiable information to others.
A Word About Our Products: Here at Shur-Co®, LLC, we take pride in manufacturing the highest quality products possible. Our staff and engineers are constantly researching and developing new products and innovating new ideas to update our current products.
Copyright: All site design, text, graphics, interfaces and the selection and arrangements thereof are ©2010 - 2014 Shur-Co®, LLC, all rights reserved. Permission is granted to electronically copy and print hard copy portions of this site for the sole purpose of placing an order with Shur-Co®, LLC or using this site as a shopping resource. Any other use of materials on this site, including reproduction for purposes other than those noted above, modification, distribution or republication without prior written permission of Shur-Co®, LLC is strictly prohibited.


Deposition Author(s): Samara, N.L., Ringel, A.E., Wolberger, C.
A Role for Intersubunit Interactions in Maintaining SAGA Deubiquitinating Module Structure and Activity.
Samara, N.L., Ringel, A.E., Wolberger, C.
The deubiquitinating module (DUBm) of the SAGA coactivator contains the Ubp8 isopeptidase, Sgf11, Sus1, and Sgf73, which form a highly interconnected complex. Although Ubp8 contains a canonical USP catalytic domain, it is only active when in complex with the other DUBm subunits. The Sgf11 zinc finger (Sgf11-ZnF) binds near the Ubp8 active site and is essential for full activity, suggesting that the Sgf11-ZnF helps maintain the active conformation of Ubp8. We report structural and solution studies showing that deletion of the Sgf11-ZnF destabilizes incorporation of Ubp8 within the DUBm, giving rise to domain swapping with a second complex and misaligning active site residues. Activating mutations in Ubp8 that partially restore activity in the absence of the Sgf11-ZnF promote the monomeric form of the DUBm. Our data suggest an unexpected role for Sgf11 in compensating for the absence of structural features that maintain the active conformation of Ubp8.
Department of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 725 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205-2185, USA.


Need Service Now? We answer calls 24/7.
Upholstery cleaning Cringila. Need Couch Cleaning Cringila?. We offer sofa cleaning, Furniture Cleaning & protection services in Cringila. Call 1800 133 326 for the same day service. Lounge shampooing, Scotchgard Fabric & Leather Protection, upholstery stain removal included in our service!!
Mark's Upholstery Cleaning Cringila is the most reliable, dependable and professional cleaning service providers in Cringila. Our company have been in upholstery cleaning business for years and have proved the history of customer satisfaction. We understand the requirements of our customers and thus provide only the best available options to each of your queries. Upholstery cleaning Cringila provide all sorts of upholstery cleaning services in all metropolitan regions of Cringila. We have a wide range of services that are being catered to our most valuable clients in best possible manners. We offer cleaning services for both residential and industrial sectors.
Our upholstery cleaning services are admired by our previous customers and if you have any doubts about our services then you are most welcome to learn about the experiences of our existing customers on our website. Their testimonials give you an astute insight about their experiences.
Over the time with use, home furniture upholstery started to look filthy. Thus, keeping your sofas steam cleaned will prolong the life of your upholstery furniture. Here are the 7 signs to identify if you need professional upholstery cleaning service.
We offer not only professional couch steam cleaning, but also fabric sofa steam cleaning & protection, Leather lounge cleaning and protection services at affordable prices in Cringila.
Our specialised services at Marks Upholstery also include Sofa Bed Cleaning in Cringila. No matter what the type of sofa bed is, our professional team can clean it thoroughly to the perfection. Our experts, first of all, inspect your sofa bed to investigate its fabric, and stained areas, and then decide the cleaning process such as steam cleaning or dry cleaning. Once the cleaning procedure is completed, we also deodorise your upholstery. Hence, if you are searching for the best upholstery cleaning service providers in Cringila, look no further.
Marks Upholstery Cleaning also offers suede couch cleaning services. Suede couches these days are becoming the popular choice among the homeowners as they do not get stained and dirty easily. Moreover, they are quite easy to clean and maintain on your own. However, with the regular use, suede couches tend to get dirty and stained and the cleaning you do at home, may not fall enough. But worry not, our professional couch cleaning experts, all the ways to clean and maintain your couches irrespective of their fabric.
Why Professional Upholstery Steam Cleaning Cringila is Important?
There are many reasons why you need to have upholstery cleaned all the times.
Filthy Couches are home of dirt.
Dirty sofas fabric may contain harmful germs.
Ordinary Cleaning does not remove bacteria etc from your upholstery.
Our Fabric or Leather Lounge Steam Cleaning expert can steam extract dust from your upholstery.
Upholstery Dust can cause respiration problems.
Sofa Germs must be removed by hot water extraction methods.
Moreover, stained couches may lead to serious infections.
Body oil may stick with your fabric upholstery.
Furthermore, dead skins along with bacterial and fungal must need to remove by professional from your upholstery.
On the whole, with children and pet at home and the continuous visit of companions and organizing of parties, upholstery cleaning turns out to be considerably more critical.
What is Our Upholstery Cleaning Process?
We try to deliver the best service to our valuable customer and follow the unmatched upholstery cleaning process to cater the finest results.
Marks Upholstery Cleaning Cringila has cost-effective solutions for mattress cleaning. Thus, our 24×7 helpline makes it easier for you to get a free quote.
Altogether, call and renew your upholstery!
We have a team of licensed upholstery cleaning professionals who are certified in providing cleaning services. Each of our team members holds a legal and valid license of upholstery cleaning. Our team is professional with highly-qualified and professional skills who truly justifies with the given work. Our company firmly believes in complete customer satisfaction, thus the motto of our company is customer satisfaction.
We prefer quality our anything else, considering the needs and requirements of the customers our team thoroughly analyzes the situation and then provides the best solution for it. Whether you are looking for carpet cleaning services or sofa cleaning services we have it all. Our team is equipped with latest upholstery cleaning tools and machines which is used to clean your most admired and valuable sofas, carpet, rugs and any other upholstery. We understand the value of your household items and make sure of the proper safety measure to avoid any sort of damage.
Our team at Marks Upholstery Cleaning Cringila including intelligent, qualified, trained, and certified cleaners. In brief, the company was established with a single objective to have complete customer satisfaction in each cleaning project and our team struggles to achieve the same by living across Cringila.
Charles leads the Southern suburbs and ensures to provide 100% customer satisfaction for every upholstery cleaning project that he takes.
Further, Stephen delivers outstanding upholstery skills in the Northern suburbs.
Brenden is responsible for providing unbeatable upholstery cleaning services in the Eastern suburbs.
Also, Mark takes charge of the Western suburbs and makes sure that all our clients get the best of cleaning services.
Throwing your upholstery not only waste your time, but also your effort. Do you find it justly impossible to get it cleaned and get rid of all those stains that have made their place on the couch for years?
We at Marks Upholstery Cleaning Cringila can help you bring back your lovely couch and regenerate it completely to give it an absolutely new feel. What is more? Additionally, our services come at most affordable prices and we deliver our professional services all across the Cringila.
Marks Upholstery Cleaning Cringila is a leading name in the cleaning industry. Further, we are certified, licensed, experienced, equipped with the latest equipment. Moreover, our technicians are specialists in cleaning all sorts of upholstery made of any kind of fabric.
Thus, get a complete makeover for your upholstery today!
We offer 24/7 upholstery cleaning services throughout the year. You can book your appointment by calling us at 1800 133 326 and one of our employees would definitely get back to you. In emergency situations, we offer best upholstery cleaning services coupled with most reliable upholstery cleaning tips.
Marks upholstery provides carpet cleaning in domestic areas as well as in industrial areas.
We offer full cleaning, maintenance, and protection services.
We offer stain removing services from rugs, couches, and sofas.
Dry cleaning services for carpet, sofas and other upholstery items.
There are numerous competitors in the market which you can find in Cringila but we prefer quality over the competition. Our aim is to provide satisfactory services to our clients rather focusing on market competition. If you want reliable and affordable upholstery cleaning services in Cringila then feel free to contact us any time you want, we are here to help you.
I do not know the fabric of my furniture; can you ensure it will not be damaged during cleaning?
How often should I get my upholstery professionally cleaned?
Do you Clean a Leather Sofa?
The manufacturer's recommendation is to use a dry cleaning method for cleaning my upholstered furniture. Can your company cater me?
How often should I get my office upholstered chairs cleaned?
Can you ensure stain removal from my upholstery?
Is fabric and leather upholstery treated in the same manner?
Will there be any chemical residues after upholstery cleaning?
How is Marks Upholstery Cleaning different?
Marks Upholstery Cleaning has well trained their cleaners to do a flawless upholstery cleaning job. I have been using their services for many years now and I am fully satisfied. They are well equipped to handle the upholstery cleaning task and clean almost all types of upholstery. I am really impressed with them as the team is very helpful and are honest. They always gave me the desired result. I found them very hardworking and professional. Thank so much Marks Upholstery Cleaning team for always providing me with your best upholstery cleaning services.
We initially chose Marks Upholstery Cleaning Melbourne because they were local. But we felt so delighted with the job that we would never use now. They had the latest cleaning methods & equipment and my upholstery looked like new. It is not just clean but has been sanitized as well.
We received a stunning leather upholstery cleaning service from Marks Upholstery Cleaning few days back. They were punctual, friendly, and highly professional. All-in-all a full value for money service.
One of my friends suggested me this company and I am glad I gave this person a chance to clean my sofa and armchair. They cleaned my sofa and armchair with perfection and offered me a nominal price. The process of booking their sofa cleaning service was very easy. I am highly impressed by their customer service. The team of Marks Upholstery Cleaning knows very well to handle their clients and answer all your calls. No doubt they are no1 upholstery cleaning service provider of Sydney as they provide high-quality upholstery cleaning service at best prices.
You will not find a company like Marks Upholstery Cleaning who provides outstanding same day service. Their years of experience are shown in the way they handle their upholstery cleaning assignments. I have used their service thrice and I am more than satisfied. All my upholstery was cleaned spotlessly by cleaners of Marks Upholstery Cleaning on the same day of putting a request at their office. They are very passionate about their work. The best thing is they provide superior upholstery cleaning services without making a bend in their customer's pocket. Happy to use their services.
I called Marks Upholstery Cleaning Melbourne for my dining table chairs that had got stains on them. With one phone call and one visit the job was done meticulously with no complaints at all. And I had to pay a small amount and was saved from damaging my precious chairs. Thanks.


According to the Nihon Keizai Shimbun report, China ranks first in 80% of its fields in terms of cutting-edge technology research topics such as batteries and biology, and is accelerating R&D investment. Cutting-edge technology research is about the industrial competitiveness of the next 5-20 years. China strives to gain patent and technical strength and accumulate strength through years of research and development, thus laying a foundation for industrialization. China is increasingly paying attention to intellectual property protection. According to the annual report of the World Intellectual Property Organization at the end of last year, in 2017, China's domestic patents, trademarks, industrial designs and other types of intellectual property applications ranked first in the world, an increase of 15% over 2016.
In an interview with the media, the CEO of Belgian Business Consulting pointed out that the world's leading IPR filings are the result of China's economic growth and efficient governance policies. The Chinese government has launched a series of policies to promote innovation and encourage entrepreneurship; the development of higher education in China has enabled more and more college students to participate in basic research and become a necessary condition to support the development of new technologies; China is a world leader in many industries. These industries are also driving the development and innovation of technology. steel coil manufacturers China has data in global technology competition because China has a large population and is more willing to share data. This has brought huge amounts of data to Chinese technology companies, which will help them develop the latest technologies such as cutting-edge financial technology and artificial intelligence.
From basic science to applied technology, China's many scientific and technological innovations are benefiting people from all over the world.
As one of the four major satellite navigation systems in the world, every step of China's self-construction and independent operation of Beidou is highly concerned by foreign media. At the end of 2018, China's Beidou system opened its global service. The British website reported that China has exported more than 70 million "Beidou" civilian operating system chips and modules to more than 90 countries. Beidou is sharing the "Chinese miracle" with the world.
The US technology website, The Next Web News reported that the Beidou satellite navigation system not only benefits China, but also benefits other countries. Currently, the demand for satellite services is growing year by year. According to reports, by 2025, the number of GNSS navigation devices in the Asia-Pacific region (mainly smartphones) will increase from 1.9 billion in 2015 to 4.3 billion, surpassing the total of the EU and North America, and is expected to become a market growth in this area. The main driving force. The continuous development of Beidou satellite navigation system is justified. In addition, on December 22, 2018, the first star of another Chinese satellite system, "Hongyun Project", was successfully launched and entered the planned orbit. The first star of "Hongyun" is China's first low-orbit broadband communication technology verification satellite. Its successful launch marks a breakthrough in the construction of China's low-orbit broadband communication satellite system. China has also made a substantial breakthrough in building a space-based Internet.


text:
Home » Browse » Academic journals » History Journals » The Historian » Article details, "Playing with Fire: Woodrow Wilson,..."
Academic journal article The Historian
Playing with Fire: Woodrow Wilson, Self-Determination, Democracy, and Revolution in Mexico
By Frank, Lucas N.
SERVING AS PRESIDENT from 1913 to 1921, Woodrow Wilson led the United States at a time when its influence continued to expand even as it struggled to develop the parameters within which it would project its newfound clout. In 1913, the United States was already a global economic powerhouse. It became the world's largest economy in 1870, and by 1913 its manufacturing output exceeded those of Britain and Germany, second and third in the world respectively, combined. (1) In 1898, the United States took over most of what remained of Spain's overseas empire in a matter of four months. With this victory, the United States took control of territorial possessions around the world and in doing so sparked intense debates about the proper goals of US foreign policy. During his presidency, Wilson was confronted with the First World War and omnipresent political, social, and economic turmoil globally, with one revolution spilling over the country's southern border. The foreign policy Wilson devised in response to these crises became his greatest legacy, but historians still disagree on what motives guided him.
A variety of historians argue that commercial interests motivated Wilson's foreign policy. Robert Saunders thus suggests that "Wilson sought an unchecked hegemonic world role for the United States based on its own well-being and security." (2) Saunders launches an all-out assault on the character of Woodrow Wilson, suggesting that his policies were in pursuit of personal objectives. Lloyd Ambrosius provides a better articulated but equally critical portrayal of Wilson's foreign policy. (3) Ambrosius argues that Wilson was more interventionist than either of his Republican predecessors, Theodore Roosevelt or William Howard Taft, and that his interventions in Latin America were driven by Wilson's interpretation of the American national interest and his support for capitalism. Margaret MacMillan treats Wilson during his stint in Paris after the First World War critically as well, but she portrays him likewise rather as an impractical and inflexible idealist than a cynical champion of American economic interests. (4) The challenge to Wilson's supposed idealism continued in Erez Manela's (2007) award-winning book. (5) In this work, Manela proposed that the President's empty self-determination rhetoric ignited revolution in the post-war era. Manela suggested that, while Wilson "did not exclude non-European peoples from the right to self-determination as a matter of principle," he did not believe them currently ready and "envisioned them achieving it through an evolutionary process under the benevolent tutelage of a 'civilized' power." (6)
A less cynical school of historians argues that Wilson's idealistic beliefs were the driving force behind his foreign policies rather than simple rhetoric. However, they argue that Wilson's belief in self-determination emerged and evolved during his presidency. Arthur S. Link suggested that Wilson first committed himself to self-determination after his military intervention at Veracruz failed. (7) Thomas Knock argues that Wilson's idea for the League of Nations and his commitment to self-determination crystallized during his 1916 re-election campaign. (8) While Wilson's motivations are not the focus of their works, Lorenzo Meyer and Mark Gilderhus also argued against the primacy of US material interests as the driving motivation behind the United States' actions in Mexico. (9) In the light of this lively and enduring debate, a case study of Woodrow Wilson's foreign policy towards the Mexican Revolution offers a unique perspective on his driving principles and goals and the lengths to which he was willing to go to achieve them.
In 1913, Woodrow Wilson assumed the presidency during a critical time in US-Mexican relations. The Mexican Revolution began in 1910 when Francisco Madero (1873-1913) declared his candidacy for the presidency of Mexico, challenging the incumbent, Porfirio Diaz (1830-1915). …
Publication: The Historian
Publication date: Spring 2014
Frank, Lucas N.
Wilson, Woodrow (American president)--Foreign policy
Mexican Revolution, 1910-1920--Analysis
Autonomy (Political science)--Analysis
Presidents (Government)--Foreign policy
United States foreign relations--History
Artists of Power: Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Their Enduring Impact on U.S. Foreign Policy By William N. Tilchin; Charles E. Neu Praeger Security International, 2006
FREE! Foreign Policy of Woodrow Wilson, 1913-1917 By Edgar E. Robinson; Victor J. West Macmillan Company, 1917
The Mexican Revolution: Conflict and Consolidation, 1910-1940 By Douglas W. Richmond; Sam W. Haynes Texas A&M University Press, 2013
In Search of the Female Bandit in the Novel of the Mexican Revolution: The Case of la Pintada By Baker, Pascale Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, Vol. 89, No. 7, 2012
Changes in Occupational Earnings along the U.S.-Mexico Border between 1900 and 1920 By Mora, Marie T. Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. 39, No. 4, December 2005
Lessons from History: Defining Moments in the American Presidency and Foreign Policy By Claunch, Ann Social Education, Vol. 72, No. 1, January-February 2008
The Carter Syndrome: Barack Obama Might Yet Revolutionize America's Foreign Policy. but If He Can't Reconcile His Inner Thomas Jefferson with His Inner Woodrow Wilson, the 44th President Could End Up like No. 39 By Mead, Walter Russell Foreign Policy, No. 177, January-February 2010
DOES THE BUSH FOREIGN POLICY REVOLUTION HAVE A FUTURE?: In Search of Monsters By Daalder, Ivo H. Lindsay, James M. The World Today, Vol. 60, No. 1, January 2004
Protecting Family & Country: America Can Best Protect Her Own People and Their Freedoms by Embracing the Noninterventionist Foreign Policy Our Founding Fathers Envisioned By Telzrow, Michael E. The New American, Vol. 24, No. 8, April 14, 2008
The Man Who Helped Shape Wilson's Foreign Policy By Marx, Claude R. The Washington Times (Washington, DC), August 20, 2006
The High Ground in Foreign Policy By Eagleton, Thomas St Louis Post-Dispatch (MO), January 7, 1996
Senator Hopes for Foreign Policy Transformation By Ebert, Joel News Sentinel, June 12, 2016
FREE! isolationism The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., 2018


Continuing the search for interesting musical sounds, we headed to Brighton to record Alistair Strachan and Iain Paxon from the band Hamilton Yarns. Known for their variety of prog-folk, the pair often play instruments in the most unusual way and experiment with objects to create soundscapes and experimental music. Both are multi-instrumentalists and for the recording session Alistair played the melodica, the piano, some interesting percussion from the Caribbean islands and his main instrument the cornet – a very similar instrument to the a trumpet (well, our untrained eyes couldn't tell the difference!) and Iain played drums and other percussive objects, as well as the piano.


text:
De Opstand van Dersim vond plaats in Turkije aan het eind van de jaren 1930.

Het in meerderheid door Zaza-alevieten bewoonde Dersim (het huidige Tunceli) was rond 1935 een van de weinige gebieden in Turkije waar de regering weinig controle had. De Turkse regering probeerde meer controle over dit gebied te krijgen. De lokale bevolking verzette zich hiertegen. Hiervoor waren er andere opstanden in Turkije geweest die uit de hand waren gelopen. Om te voorkomen dat dit weer zou gebeuren, greep het Turkse leger preventief hard in. Als reactie op de militaire acties kwam de lokale bevolking toch in opstand. Bij de militaire acties werden volgens moderne schattingen circa 8000-13.000 burgers gedood. Ook werden er ongeveer 12.000 burgers naar Centraal- en West-Turkije verbannen.

Door verschillende mensenrechtenorganisaties worden deze militaire acties als genocide of etnocide bestempeld. Op 23 november 2011 bood de Turkse premier Erdoğan voor het eerst formeel namens de Turkse staat excuses aan voor de gruweldaden.

Geschiedenis van Oost-Anatolië
Geschiedenis van Koerdistan
Dersim
Opstand Dersim
Dersim
1937
1938
Militaire operatie in de 20e eeuw

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
><TITLE
>Qtc.Enums.Core.QRegExp</TITLE
><LINK HREF="haddock.css" REL="stylesheet" TYPE="text/css"
>

Qtc.Enums.Core.QRegExp

type PatternSyntax

eWildcard

eFixedString

eRegExp2

type CaretMode

eCaretAtZero

eCaretAtOffset

eCaretWontMatch

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Coastside International Limited was set up on Tuesday the 20th of February 2001. Their current partial address is Co. Kerry, and the company status is Dissolved with the company closing on Wednesday the 27th of July 2011. The company's current directors have been the director of 1 other Irish company between them.


By now you probably realize how much this senior appreciates World Heritage Sites. They exist all over the world and can be found in almost every country. While this link has all the 26 World Heritage sites in the UK, I want to offer a new tentative listing in the UK that is worth checking out as each of these may very well become major tourist attractions once they make the list.
Fountain Cavern, Anguilla – a limestone cavern which contains Amerindian glyphs carved into the rock.


text:
Abellio strike pickets at Walworth garage on Thursday (Picture: Guy Smallman)
Abellio bus bosses in south and west London suggested they'd make a new pay offer in talks with Unite union officials as Socialist Worker went to press. But on the picket lines, no one was holding their breath.
The determination of the 950 strikers is clear and they were set to call ten more strike days between 24 December and 26 January. Effective picketing has meant that only 19 out of about 150 of Abellio's buses were on the road during a strike in early December.
Some of the buses that managers moved out overnight to be used by agency workers remained empty all day. Workers said "a sense of community" had developed on the picket line during the strike. They said several strikers remained on picket duty hours after their time on the rota had finished.
The strike seems to be putting pressure on Abellio bosses. It's important that workers keep up the strike schedule despite offers of talks, which bosses often use as a tactic to deflate a campaign.
A vote for new tube strikes —but still no dates called
London Underground workers have voted to keep striking over job cuts, pensions and working agreements. But the RMT leadership hadn't announced any strike dates as Socialist Worker went to press.
Over 91 percent voted yes in the ballot on a 53 percent turnout, showing tube workers won't give up their fight to save 600 jobs and pension entitlements. But RMT union leaders called too few strikes over the previous six months, allowing bosses to ride out the sporadic disruption.
They should announce a programme of action, in unity with other strikes wherever possible.
Great Western Railway engineers stage winter walkout over pay freeze
Some 350 Great Western Railway (GWR) engineers were set to strike on Thursday 15 December as they suffer a third annual pay freeze. The workers previously walked out in October.
Despite GWR's parent company First Group making pre-tax profits of £654 million in 2021-22, the company is refusing to offer the workers a pay rise. The striking workers are based at depots and stations in London, Exeter, Tiverton, Plymouth, Swindon, Swansea, Reading, Penzance, Oxford and Bristol.
The Unite union said it would call more dates if a resolution isn't soon found.
Around 150 bus engineers employed by Go North East were set to strike between 19 and 25 December. The Unite union members have rejected a 10 percent pay increase—a real terms pay cut.
Picket lines were planned in Consett, Dunston, Gateshead, Hexham, North Shields, Sunderland and Washington.
Low paid security staff for the Eurostar train service were set to walk out for four days in December in a fight over pay.
The over 100 members of the RMT union—some of who are paid just £10.66 an hour—are contracted out to facilities management company Mitie. Strikes were set to take place on 16, 18, 22 and 23 December.


text:
Graf Lambsdorff: EU 'clearly went too far' in Brexit concessions
By Manuel Müller | EURACTIV.de | translated by Sam Morgan
Alexander Graf Lambsdorff [European Parliament]
Comments Print Email Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp
EXCLUSIVE / The European Council agreed in February to a number of reforms proposed by Britain to try and counter the risk of the UK leaving the bloc in a June referendum. Alexander Graf Lambsdorff spoke to EURACTIV Germany about the historic vote.
Alexander Graf Lambsdorff is Vice-President of the European Parliament and an MEP with the liberal ALDE group.
Before the European Council summit in February you warned that the planned "emergency brake" would be discriminatory and put a nail in the coffin of European freedom of movement. Did the Council go too far in its concessions to the British government?
On this issue, it clearly went too far. We are talking about one of the four fundamental freedoms of the internal market, which from a liberal point of view is the most important part of European integration.
Those in favour of an emergency brake on the free movement of workers, will see that sooner or later others will come up with the same idea regarding the free provision of services, the free movement of goods and the free movement of capital – destroying the internal market as we know it.
For the emergency brake to come into force, the EU directive on free movement has to be modified, which can only be done with the consent of the European Parliament. Should the Parliament use this opportunity to amend the Council's proposal?
I'm sure that I will certainly not agree to a change of the directive, as it would restrict one of our basic fundamental freedoms. I assume that many in my group, as well as my colleagues in the EPP and S&D group will feel the same.
What position the other groups take remains to be seen. But I believe that we in the Parliament have an institutional responsibility to protect the common European interest, which is incompatible with measures that will help bring down the internal market.
If the deal were to be altered, would the UK not interpret that as the European Union failing to follow through with what it has promised?
Who counts as the "the European Union" here? Member state leaders have met within the framework of the European Council, but their agreement is in no way a document of the European Union, but a text of hybrid character, which is unspecified and not legally binding.
At the moment, the whole thing is nothing more than a deal that has been hammered out down the local bazaar. The European Union, however, is a community of law, in which there are regulated responsibilities. If the British are going to put all their eggs in one basket, in a promise made like this, which has not yet complied with our clean process of law, then, for me, this process of law is more important and preferable.
Your colleague, Dominique Riquet, and other MEPs are now campaigning for Brexit and has even said "let them leave!". Would that perhaps be the best solution for everyone?
As a liberal, I want Britain to remain. The country is free-market oriented, is in favour of free trade, is a tolerant society and has an excellently functioning democracy. Thus, it has always contributed to the enrichment of the EU.
As a European politician, I have to say, of course the UK is an incredibly laborious member state. In this respect I do understand where Riquet and others that want progress in European integration are coming from and I know that the UK has sometimes blocked progress in that regard.
Nevertheless, the bottom line is that, as a German and as a liberal, I would prefer the UK remain and continue to contribute constructively to European unification.
How do you think the referendum will go?
(Laughs) If you give me a crystal ball, I'll tell you. The result hangs on a knife edge, it is extremely difficult to predict what will happen; it's certainly not clear-cut either way.
Live: Countdown to Brexit referendum
EURACTIV's editorial content is independent from the views of our sponsors.
Alexander Graf Lambsdorff
UK EU referendum
UK referendum on Europe
Tweets by Borderlex
One response to "Graf Lambsdorff: EU 'clearly went too far' in Brexit concessions"
Elvin Eastwood says:
well if the outcome of the EU referendum is for "OUT" then it will not really matter.. what concession's MR Cameron got from the EU. but its nice to know there not worth the paper there written on .


I was very pleased with my transaction with Cape Bottle Company. They are extremely helpful and knowledgeable about their products.
I would like to thank everyone over at Cape Bottle Company for all of their hard work and excellent customer service!
↑ Post a comment about Cape Bottle Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved - Copyright 1995-2019© Cape Bottle Co., Inc.