Talk:Zinoviev Letter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Zinoviev Letter is part of the WikiProject Russian history, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
The Zinoviev letter was a gimmick. I do not believe that it can be described as 'instrumental in the election victory of 1924'. By the time it was published, the government was already falling apart, having exhausted its policy proposals, the Liberals (upon whom Labour was electorally dependent) was moving away from the government, and it was naturally a short-lived experiment, essentially a reaction to the protectionism of the Conservatives. Where 'Red' influence was important, the government's decision to withdraw its prosecution against J.R. Campbell was much more important in this respect. The reason that the Zinoviev letter was seen as instrumental in the 1924 election result is that it has entered Labour mythology as a convenient explanation, pointing to Tory 'dirty tricks' to justify the outcome.
[edit] Is it really black and white?
From what I understand from our history classes, the Zinoviev letter has been confirmed as genuine by the opening of russian archives. If not that then I'm pretty sure there isn't a clear division in those who support in either side... Can someone add a neutrality issue tag? Moshe Gordon 00:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
