REMEMBRANCE IN TIME - Index of

34
Remembrance in Time
or releasing our friends, relatives, people and our country from the Bolshevik occupation
and tyranny". They also reminded that even in Bulgaria he has abandoned guerrilla
movement "as a tool and a form of struggle for the overthrow of Bolshevism". They
indicated that Hadjiev has chosen a week position "for verbal struggle against
Bolshevism, as if war is not a struggle and there may be an anarchist, to put the point on
the war and denies other forms and types of resistance, being satisfied with a purely
military work and struggle”. The charges against G. Hadjiev were that "he wants to
implement and to use any cooperation with those communities and individuals to make
personal career and authoritarian "anarchist" party" 13 .
The analysis of these ideological disputes and different positions in resolving the
important issues shows that they turned to personal conflicts. I Rachev and his associates
accused G. Hadjiev in an effort to establish a party, subject to him, despite all anarchist
principles and ideals. According to them, in the discussion of making decisions G.
Hadjiev attempted to “insert authority principles that impose the will of the majority over
the minority and turns the organization to a tool in the hands of the majority, the ordering,
commanding and dominant part of the organization and the “boss” himself” 14 .
Being a man of action, alien to empty talks, Ch. Nestorov also spared no criticism upon
G. Hadjiev saying about him: “He is not a honest man. He thinks one, but speaks another.
He wants to impose his views while he is not talking honestly to his friends being
hypocritical and “slippery”. These maneuvers of him annoy me” 15 .
He set out his opinion about the status, goals and objectives of the organization of
anarchists in the appeal "Let’s be sober" written on July 24 1952 and read at a meeting of
the Paris Group on 15 August same year. He made a genuine and sincere determination:
“The way we go is fatal! The chief stalks his opponents, they stalk him, and we are just a
few jingos. This is the whole tragedy". Hr. Nestorov, as well as I. Rachev, believed that
problems in immigrant anarchist movement are due to differences in the movement that
existed in Bulgaria and continued to extend abroad. He also considered persecution of the
anarchists and lack of responsibility by the so called “chiefs” to be one of the main
problems of the organization... “These people scream now to lead a group but each one
thinks himself to straightforward, orthodox, first class”. Nestorov was clear that full
knowledge of the classic authors does not mean you're an anarchist. He said: “Deeds
shows who is who” and “We deny ourselves in our deeds. We know the ideals but we
don’t know their behest”. Hristo Nestorov called ideals to be the unifying point, leaving
the ambition and vanity in achieving fraternity. Revealing the defects in the community
of immigrant anarchists and the ambition to overcome them were in the context of the
objectives of the struggle against the communist regime. He clearly declared his position:
“Don’t you think that people-shadows behind the Iron Curtain stare at us with their eyes,
stare like martyrs. They are waiting! Bu who they are waiting for... us! We cannot betray
them. They are reaching out their weak hands for us. Great martyrs! We are the spark that
keeps them alive... We have to know what we will do because people behind the Iron
Curtain are waiting for our decisions tomorrow! We have to choose our roles in
tomorrow's bloody theater on whose stage oppressed and oppressors will act. We must
stand sentinel and guide the people’s fight and concentrate their indignation in that fight.
This has to be our position. This is the point of our existence. This is the behest of our
ideals“ 16 . Hristo Nestorov combined the idea of acts that support fight against communist
rule with the needs of cooperating with members of other immigrant political
organizations. A letter to friends on November 19, 1950 spoke of a meeting between