Pavel Dybenko: Lenin’s February 23rd is fabrication!

Why “Lenin’s version” regarding the events of February 23rd holds no water.

In previous writings I have attempted to illuminate the struggles between Pavel Dybenko and Lenin.
I have been met with indifference at best frowned upon at worst.
Seems contemporary historians such as Suvorov, who writes without citation, and Archdeacon Kuraev continue to espouse Lenin’s historical account.  Or worse yet, Dr. Zubov’s steadfast belief, although incorrect, in the often illuminated abuse of spirits by the sailors.
Oh that rascal Dybenko!
American writer Louise Bryant (witness of events in 1917) shared a contradictory picture of the morality the sailors under Dybenko held themselves.  And it wasn’t just Bryant, a number of intellectuals, politicos, sailors, Generals and Admirals all have written about Dybenko as being keen witted, respectful, and one whose character demonstrated strength and courage.
When reflecting upon the events of 1917 one can not dismiss the decades long pursuits or historical actions taken by the Tsars sailors on behalf of the Russian citizenry.
In 1917, largely due to the armed might of the sailors a Tsar would abdicate his throne.  As spring came to Russia, the sailors organized under Pavel Dybenko’s leadership so as “the sailors one voice could be heard by the government.”
Dybenko’s leadership did not buckle under the attempts by the Kerensky led government to subordinate the sailors to the latter’s authoritarian desire.  In fact this refusal by Dybenko to neuter the sailors lawful organization Tsentrobalt would be the creation of conflict between Dybenko and Kerensky.
Lenin openly declared his successful insurrection would be impossible without the support of the Baltic fleet!
Often historians share Dybenko was a Bolshevik and therefore the sailors were nothing more than fanatics of Lenin’s designs.  Yet how did the sailors go from a decades long confrontation with the Tsar culminating in abdication and declaring the replacing government ineffectual to supporting a non democratic leader such as Lenin?
How does the “Soul of the Baltic Fleet” go from a highly respected hero to coward and drunkard?
Lenin largely rode the path to power on Dybenko and the sailors determination.
Controlling this “armed fist” was imperative for whomever would lead Russia.  Lenin wanted to be ruler Dybenko had to go!

There were numerous signs...
Kerensky declaring to General Krasnov that Dybenko was his enemy meaning the enemy of the existing governmental structure.
The Dybenko Cossack accord agreeing to Lenin and Trotsky’s removal from government.
Lenin, according to Podvoisky, wanted Dybenko to face a Military Tribunal immediately.  Such a move was premature...in due time.
Dybenko receives more votes than Lenin cast for representation to the Constituent Assembly.
Later in November, at the Sailors All Russian Conference, Lenin is witness to the devotion and admiration the sailors, the armed fist, had for Dybenko.
The writers of the times also spoke to Dybenko as the hero of the revolution...that of course had to change!
The year 1918 comes to pass, the harvest that was supposedly “October” would slowly fade away.
The disparaging of Pavel Dybenko commences!
Dybenko will be promoted to an uneducated buffoon who without Kollontai couldn’t write a coherent sentence...a drunkard with a faulty compass... an unreliable loose cannon!
Contradicting everything known about Dybenko.

Lenin reacts bitterly by decreeing if Dybenko’s “Democratization of the Fleet” is not changed due mainly to the fleets maintaining its independence from government, he would disallow funding for the Naval Ministry and educational programs for the sailors.
The fleet must be subordinate.

The assassination of two former Provisional Government Ministers blamed on the sailors although Dybenko authored a published condemnation and its was widely held that the so called assassins came directly from Dzerzhinsky’s offices.

Lenin’s refusal to allow Dybenko to speak during the government’s discussions on the Treaty of Brest Litovsk.

Dybenko’s public opposition to the Treaty and his view points as part of a group of intellectuals who wrote in dissent of Lenin’s stance in the gazette “The Kommunist”.

To ensure that Dybenko and the revolutionary mindset of the sailors would be destroyed one only
has to look closely at the negotiations of the Treaty and its affect on the Russian Navy.

Plenty of news accounts setting the table for Dybenko and his followers to be looked at as anarchists and against Lenin’s wishes.

Which brings us to Lenin’s coup de grace...the nonsense that becomes the “written word” of the events of February 23rd.

The first fact one has to consider when supporting Lenin’s version is the historical written word of Bonch Bruyevitch after having viewed the sailors detachment being sent to Narva “Not impressed”and “rag tag bunch”.   What Bonch-Bruyevitch, Lenin and subscribing historians don’t share is that this very group led by Dybenko were none other that the heroic sailors of the Northern Flying Squad sent in December to defend the newly formed Soviet regime in battle at Orenburg against Ataman Dutov.  Heroic deeds preserved in memorial by monument at the Field of Mars.  Even it’s leader, Pavlov, was among those sailors who appeared with Dybenko.

Lenin and supporting historian’s don’t share that commander P M Bulkin’s retreating detachment from Revel joined Dybenko’s men.  That headquarters according to Pavlov failed to adequately supply detachment with artillery or men...

Narva would be lost giving Lenin and Trotsky the reason to completely control the military and more specifically the fleet.

At first government publications decried Dybenko would be arrested for his opposition to the Treaty of Brest Litovsk, then for Dybenko’s haphazard retreat from Narva, then added to Protocol 82...Krylenko’s indictment against Dybenko: drunkenness and terror!

Of course first Minister of Justice Shteinberg who would go on to defend Dybenko at his upcoming trial without hesitation stated Dybenko’s arrest and subsequent trial had nothing to do with the events of Narva!  Political differences with those in power were the real reasons.

Cui Bono?
Lenin ruled Russia...Trotsky goes on to rule the military and Dybenko is unceremoniously removed from government and the consciousness of Dybenko and the sailors would forever be swept under the rug of historical significance.

Until now.....