Canadian Slavonic Papers

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution by ANTHONY C. SUTTONReview by: Virgil D. MedlinCanadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes, Vol. 19, No. 2, LENIN ANDSOLZHENITSYN (June 1977), pp. 229-230Published by: Canadian Association of SlavistsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40867552 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 04:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Canadian Association of Slavists and Canadian Slavonic Papers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne des Slavistes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 04:42:12 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviews | 229

CarmichaePs work serves as a useful introduction to an understanding of Trotskii, but one which must be supplemented by more specialized research in order to substantiate the author's main conclusions.

[Richard B. Day, University of Toronto]

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. Anthony c. sutton. New Ro- chelle, N. Y.: Arlington House Publishers, 1974. 228 pp. $7.95.

The scholarly pretensions of this potboiler require its review. In ten unrelated chapters Sutton attempts to forge a link of mutual economic interests between international bankers and the Bolsheviks through use of State Department files and, among others, some highly controversial sources. As scholars are familiar with Sutton's sources, he tells us nothing new. He does repeat unsubstantiated allegations, cite irrelevant facts, make unwarranted conclusions, and record it all in an appallingly pedestrian style.

Sutton surmises a link between Wilsonian financier Charles Crane and Leon Trotskii, even though Crane's opposition to the Bolsheviks is abun- dantly clear to any student of the period. The author repeats information found in the works of George Kennan, George Katkov, and Christopher Lasch; thus we already know about the "tug-of-war" for and against Soviet support that occurred between "old-line diplomats" and "financiers like Robins, Thompson, and Sands."

Sutton also alleges conglomerate involvement in the Panamanian, Chi- nese, Mexican, and Bolshevik revolutions (all for profit, not ideological motives), but, with respect to the thesis of the book, he finds only that Max May, vice-president of Guaranty Trust, helped establish the first international bank in the Soviet Union. Though Sutton shows that the American Red Cross Mission to Russia in 1917 reflected in its makeup the Wall Street composition of the parent US organization, he is only "inclined to the interpretation" that the mission was coópted to the financial ends of its endowers, W. B. Thompson and Raymond Robins.

In the second half of the book Sutton attempts to tie togetherThomp- son and the Morgan interests to pro-Bolshevik activities. The author alleges corporate support for the founding of the Soviet Bureau in the US but offers no proof except that a number of US firms corresponded with the bureau. Sutton can only suggest that Morgan interests infiltrated the Bol- shevik movement and the Third International. He also hypothesizes that John Reed was an agent of the Morgan interests as well as of the Bolsheviks. The author fails to prove that the Morgan interests did in fact import Soviet gold into the US - he offers only allegations.

None of these Wall Streeters were secretly Bolshevik, according to Sutton, and, as if to prove it, he describes the Morgan-Rockefeller support of anti-Bolshevik forces. The financiers were without ideology; they sought only profit regardless of the cost to the United States. The consequences of their actions, he concludes, "became a nightmare for millions."

Factual errors in the book are numerous. Sir George Buchanan becomes Sir James, and Tereshchenko is mistransliterated as Terestchenko. Charles Crane travels with Lincoln Steffens and Trotskii to Russia when, in fact, he sailed with the Root mission two months later. Routine inquiries and rumours become documentary proof of allegations. Thus Alexander Keren-

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 04:42:12 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

230 I Revue Canadienne des Slavistes

skii, dominant figure in the Provisional Government of 1917, becomes a German agent and Lord Milner of the British War Cabinet, pro-Marxist!

In his preface the author states that "a sound academic reputation could easily be wrecked on the shoals of ridicule" in presenting such a thesis. Unfortunately Sutton did not find this reason enough to avoid the topic.

[Virgil D. Medlin, Oklahoma City University]

Russian Studies of China. E. Stuart kirby. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1975. xiv, 209 pp. $25.00.

The sub-title of this book "Progress and Problems of Soviet Sinology" is of considerable importance to the potential reader. The general reader will find the work of little interest, while specialists on Sino-Soviet relations will find its information of considerable value.

In late 1971 the first national conference of Soviet sinologists was held in Moscow sponsored by the newly established Institut Dal'nego Vostoka of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. In a very limited edition the report of this conference was published in 1973 entitled, Problems of Soviet Sinology: A Collection of Papers Delivered at the All-USSR Scientific Conference of Sinologists held in November 1971. Professor Kirby presents a detailed synopsis of this Soviet publication, supplemented with his own commentary on its findings. His purpose is to acquaint Western sinologists with what their Russian- Soviet colleagues have accomplished in the past and what, according to Problems of Soviet Sinology, they are planning for the future.

Scholarly studies of China flourished in Russia during the late nineteenth century and in the 1920's. During the ideologically dangerous years of the Stalin era these studies declined drastically, as did Soviet academic endeavours in most disciplines. Sinology in the USSR regained its vigour and status following the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949 only to become practically non-existent after the outbreak of the Sino-Soviet dispute in the early 1960's.

By 1970 the political authorities in the Soviet Union felt the need for a revitalization of Chinese studies in order to provide the regime with academical- ly sound, ideological weapons with which to combat Maoism and ridicule the development of Chinese communism under Chairman Mao's leadership. The Moscow conference was apparently designed to rally Soviet sinologists for a new struggle against the Maoist heresy. As Kirby describes it, the sinologists were issued their "Marching Orders." "The leitmotiv is, however, clear: the injunction by all means, at all times, to combat the real, basic and supreme evil of our age - Maoism and all its works; to substitute, every day and in every way, true Marxism-Leninism" (p. 167).

Kirby's work covers what has been done in Imperial Russia and the USSR on all aspects of Chinese studies: history, international relations, the economy, ideology and politics, social and governmental organizations, literature and the arts, etc. One chapter explains Soviet attitudes (both positive and negative) toward Chinese studies in the United States and Japan. Here, as in all of his chapters, Kirby simply outlines the information provided by Problems of Soviet Sinology. The author's own comments on the Soviet material are usually perceptive, but do tend to be tediously sarcastic.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 04:42:12 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions