Makhnovshchina

For other uses, see Makhnovshchina (disambiguation).

Makhnovshchina Махновщина
1918–1921
Flag described by Viktor Belash Emblem used on currency stamps
Motto: Власть рождает паразитов. Да здравствует анархия! (Russian) Vlast' roždaet parazitov. Da zdravstvuet anarhija!" (transliteration) "Power breeds parasites. Long live anarchy!"
Anthem: Махновщина "La Makhnovtchina"
Location of the core of Makhnovia (red) and other areas controlled by the Black Army (pink) in present-day Ukraine (tan)
Status	Stateless territory
Capital	Huliaipole
Common languages	Ukrainian, Russian
Government	Anarchist republic
Ataman
• 1918–1921	Nestor Makhno
Chairman (RVS)
• 1919	Ivan Chernoknizhny
• 1919–1920	Volin
• 1920	Dmitry Popov
Legislature	Regional Congress of Peasants, Workers and Insurgents
Historical era	Russian Civil War
• Established	27 November 1918
• Disestablished	28 August 1921
Area
• Total	75,000 km2 (29,000 sq mi)
Population
• Estimate	7.5 million
• Density	100/km2 (259.0/sq mi)
Currency	Soviet ruble (руб) Ukrainian hryvnia (₴) Others (unknown)
Preceded by Succeeded by Ukrainian State Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic
Today part of	Ukraine

The Makhnovshchina, also known as Makhnovia or the Free Territory, was an attempt to form a stateless anarchist society in parts of Ukraine during the Russian Revolution of 1917–1923. It existed from 1918 to 1921, during which time free soviets and libertarian communes operated under the protection of Nestor Makhno's Revolutionary Insurgent Army. The area had a population of around seven million.

Makhnovia was established with the capture of Huliaipole by Makhno's forces on 27 November 1918. An insurgent staff was set up in the city, which became the territory's de facto capital. Russian forces of the White movement, under Anton Denikin, occupied part of the region and formed a temporary government of Southern Russia in March 1920, resulting in the de facto capital being briefly moved to Katerynoslav (modern-day Dnipro). In late March 1920, Denikin's forces retreated from the area, having been driven out by the Red Army in cooperation with Makhno's forces, whose units conducted guerrilla warfare behind Denikin's lines. Makhnovia was disestablished on 28 August 1921, when a badly-wounded Makhno and 77 of his men escaped through Romania after several high-ranking officials were executed by Bolshevik forces. Remnants of the Black Army continued to fight until late 1922.

As Makhnovia self-organized along anarchist principles, references to "control" and "government" are highly contentious. For example, the Makhnovists, often cited as a form of government (with Makhno as their "leader"), played a purely military role, with Makhno himself functioning as little more than a military strategist and advisor.

History

The emergence of the Makhnovshchina

Black Army combat group, headed by Fedir Shchus (center)

Following his liberation from prison during the February Revolution in 1917, Makhno returned to his hometown of Huliaipole and organized a peasants' union. It gave him a "Robin Hood" image and he expropriated large estates from landowners and distributed the land among the peasants. Makhno joined an anarchist group called the Black Guards (headed by sailor-deserter Fedir Shchus) and eventually became its commander.

In March 1918, the new Bolshevik government in Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk concluding peace with the Central Powers, but ceding large amounts of territory, including Ukraine. As the Central Rada of the new Ukrainian People's Republic (UNR) proved unable to maintain order, a coup by Pavlo Skoropadsky in April 1918 resulted in the establishment of the Hetmanate. Already dissatisfied with the UNR's failure to resolve the question of land ownership, much of the peasantry refused to support a conservative government administered by former imperial officials and supported by the Austro-Hungarian and German occupiers. The Hetman lost the support of the Central Powers (Germany and Austria-Hungary, which had armed his forces and installed him in power) after the collapse of the German western front. Unpopular among most southern Ukrainians, he saw his best forces evaporate, and was driven out of Kyiv by the Directorate of Ukraine. Peasant bands under various self-appointed otamany which had once been counted on the rolls of the UNR's army now attacked the Germans. These warlords finally came to dominate the countryside; some defected to the directory or the Bolsheviks, but the largest portion followed either socialist revolutionary Matviy Hryhoriyiv or the anarchist flag of Makhno.

At this point, the emphasis on military campaigns that Makhno had adopted in the previous year shifted to political concerns. The first Congress of the Confederation of Anarchists Groups, under the name of "Nabat" (the alarm bell toll), issued five main principles: rejection of all political parties, rejection of all forms of dictatorships, negation of any concept of a central state, rejection of a so-called "transitional period" necessitating a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat, and self-management of all workers through free local workers' councils (soviets). After recruiting large numbers of Ukrainian peasants, as well as numbers of Jews, anarchists, naletchki, and recruits arriving from other countries, Makhno formed the Revolutionary Insurgent Army of Ukraine, otherwise known as the "Anarchist Black Army". At its formation, the Black Army consisted of about 15,000 armed troops, including infantry and cavalry (both regular and irregular) brigades; artillery detachments were incorporated into each regiment. The RIAU battled against the White Army, Ukrainian nationalists, and various independent paramilitary formations that conducted anti-semitic pogroms.

The November Revolution of 1918 led to Germany's defeat in the First World War. By this time, Makhno was leading a rebel movement of 6,000 people against the German Empire in the Yekaterinoslav province, while the German troops themselves were demoralized and did not want to fight, leading them to withdraw swiftly. On 27 November, Makhno occupied Huliaipole, declared it in a state of siege, and formed the "Huliaipole Revolutionary Headquarters". The rebels by this time represented considerable strength, controlling most of the territory of the Yekaterinoslav province. According to Makhno, "The agricultural majority of these villages was composed of peasants, one would understand at the same time both peasants and workers. They were founded first of all on equality and solidarity of its members. Everyone, men and women, worked together with a perfect conscience that they should work on fields or that they should be used in housework... The work program was established in meetings in which everyone participated. Then they knew exactly what they had to do". (Makhno, Russian Revolution in Ukraine, 1936).

Society was reorganized according to anarchist values, which led Makhnovists to formalize the policy of free communities as the highest form of social justice. Education followed the principles of Francesc Ferrer, and the economy was based on free exchange between rural and urban communities, from crops and cattle to manufactured products, according to the theories of Peter Kropotkin.

The Makhnovists said they supported "free worker-peasant soviets" and opposed the central government. Makhno called the Bolsheviks "dictators" and opposed the "Cheka... and similar compulsory authoritative and disciplinary institutions". He called for "freedom of speech, press, assembly, unions and the like". The Makhnovists called various congresses of soviets, in which all political parties and groups – including Bolsheviks – were permitted to participate, to the extent that members of these parties were elected delegates from worker, peasant or militia councils. By contrast, in Bolshevik territory after June 1918, no non-Bolsheviks were permitted to participate in any national soviets and most local ones, the decisions of which were also all subject to Bolshevik party veto.

A declaration stated that Makhnovist revolutionaries were forbidden to participate in the Cheka, and all party-run militias and party police forces (including Cheka-like secret police organizations) were to be outlawed in Makhnovist territory. Historian Heather-Noël Schwartz comments that "Makhno would not countenance organizations that sought to impose political authority, and he accordingly dissolved the Bolshevik revolutionary committees". The Bolsheviks, however, accused him of having two secret police forces operating under him.

Meanwhile, the Petliurites, who formed their army from many conscripted rebel groups and seized power in a number of Ukrainian cities, considered the Makhnovist movement an integral part of the all-Ukrainian national revolution and hoped to draw it into the sphere of their influence and leadership. However, when he received a proposal from the Directorate of Ukraine about joint actions against the Red Army, Makhno answered: "Petlyurovschina is a gamble that distracts the attention of the masses from the revolution." According to Makhno and his comrades-in-arms, Petliurism was a movement of the Ukrainian national bourgeoisie, with which the people's revolutionary movement was completely out of step.

On 26 December, Makhno's detachments, together with the armed detachments of the Yekaterinoslav Provincial Committee of the Bolshevik Party, forced the Petliurists out of Yekaterinoslav. However, taking advantage of the carelessness of the rebel command, the Petliurites returned, and after two or three days expelled the Makhnovists from the city. The Makhnovists retreated to the Synelnykove district. From that moment on the northwestern border of the territory controlled by Makhno, a front arose between the Makhnovists and Petliurists. However, due to the fact that Petliura's troops, consisting mostly of conscripted rebel peasants, began to quickly decompose on contact with the Makhnovists, the front was soon liquidated.

After the Yekaterinoslav operation the Makhnovists settled in Huliaipole, where Makhno planned to begin practical implementation of the anarchist ideal – the creation of a free, stateless communist society in the Huliaipole district. However, the position of the rebels was not yet secure; the Petliurites continued to exert pressure on Makhno trying to lure him to their side, General Denikin was approaching from the south, and the Ukrainian Soviet Army was approaching Makhnovist territory from the north. Therefore, Makhno tried to bide time, strengthen his own force at the expense of potential allies and find a more profitable line of behavior.

On 12 January, the White Army launched an attack on the Makhnovist district from Donbass. They took it on 20 January, and attacked Huliaipole on 21–22 January. In this situation, Makhno finally decided to make an alliance with the Reds, declaring the Petliurites and Denikinists as the most dangerous opponents. The agreement with the Red Army was considered by Makhno as exclusively military, not affecting the social structure of the Makhnovist district.

As part of the Ukrainian Front, Makhno's brigade participated in battles with the White Guards in Donbass and in the Sea of Azov. As a result of the Black Army's advance, the territory controlled by them increased to 72 volosts of the Yekaterinoslav province with a population of more than two million people. Makhno was just as rebellious towards the Red command as he was to the White, constantly emphasizing independence. The Makhnovists set up detachments on the railroad and intercepted wagons with flour, bread, other food products, coal, and straw. Moreover, they themselves refused to sell bread from the surplus stock available in Berdyansk and Melitopol counties, instead demanding industrial goods in direct exchange for it.

Anarchism and the ideas of social reorganization

Peter Kropotkin, the anarcho-communist theorist who laid the groundwork for the organization of Makhnovia

Makhno, who called himself "an anarcho-communist of the Bakunin-Kropotkin school", addressing like-minded people in an early July 1918 letter, urged them:

"Together we will destroy the slave system in order to bring ourselves and our comrades onto the path of the new system. We organize it on the basis of a free society, the content of which will allow the entire population, not exploiting the labor of others, to build their entire social and social life in their own communities, completely freely and independently of the state and its officials, even the Reds... Long live our peasants' and workers' union! Long live our auxiliary forces – an selfless intelligentsia of labor! Long live the Ukrainian social revolution! Yours, Nestor Ivanovich.

A number of guerrilla unit commanders who arose in the Huliaipole district, in the summer of 1918, were also supporters of anarchism. At the beginning of 1919, the influence of anarchism on the rebel army of Makhno continued to grow due to the constant influx of ideological supporters of anarchy. These people enjoyed special privileges with Makhno, held leading positions in the rebel movement, contributed to the development of the Bat'ko's views and behavior, and exalted him as a "people's leader", "a great anarchist", and "second Bakunin". Anarchist ideas predetermined the development of Makhnovism, which inevitably led it to conflict with Soviet power. In February – March 1919, Makhno invited the anarchist Pyotr Arshinov, with whom he served prison time in the same cell of the Butyrka prison, to join the Ukrainian rebellion and organize an anarchist newspaper for the rebels and workers and peasants. Arshinov arrived in April in Huliaipole, was elected chairman of the cultural and educational department of the Military Revolutionary Council, and editor of the newspaper "The Way to Freedom"; since the spring of 1919 he became one of the main ideologists of the Makhnovist movement.

Conflict with the Soviet command

Red Army commander Pavel Dybenko and Nestor Makhno, 1919

Bolshevik hostility to Makhno and his anarchist army increased after Red Army defections. While the Soviet authorities chose not to pay attention to the frankly anti-Bolshevik nature of the resolutions of the February regional congress of Soviets, when the front stabilized in April, the authorities headed for the liquidation of Makhnovia's special status. In the Soviet press, the Makhnovist movement began to qualify as kulak, its slogans as counter-revolutionary, and its actions as harmful to the revolution. Arshinov in his memoirs accused the Soviet authorities of organizing a blockade of the district, during which all "revolutionary workers" were detained. Supply of the Black Army with shells and ammunition, according to him, decreased by five or six times. The Bolshevik press was not only silent on the subject of Moscow's continued refusal to send arms to the Black Army, but also failed to credit the Ukrainian anarchists' continued willingness to ship food supplies to the hungry urban residents of Bolshevik-held cities.

After 19 April the executive committee of the MRC of the Huliaipole region convened the third district congress, which proclaimed the anarchist platform and declared categorically non-recognition of the dictatorship of any party, the division commander Pavel Dybenko announced: "Any congresses convened on behalf of the military revolutionary headquarters, which was dismissed in accordance with my order, are considered clearly counter-revolutionary, and the organizers of these will be subjected to the most repressive measures, up to and including their outlawing".

The commander of the Soviet Red Army's Ukrainian Front Vladimir Antonov-Ovseyenko, who personally arrived in Huliaipole on 29 April, attempted to settle the conflict. During the negotiations, Makhno made concessions – he condemned the harshest provisions of the congresses' resolution and promised to impede the election of the command staff. At the same time, Makhno put forward a fundamentally new idea of the long-term coexistence of various political movements within the same power system: "Before a decisive victory over the whites, a revolutionary front must be established, and he (Makhno) seeks to prevent strife between various elements of this revolutionary front." This idea, however, was not accepted by the Soviet leadership, and Lev Kamenev, the representative of the republic's defense council, again demanded the liquidation of the political organs of the movement and, above all, the MRC.

A new reason for mutual distrust arose in connection with the rebellion of Ataman Grigoriev in Right-Bank Ukraine. On 12 May Kamenev sent a telegram to Makhno, kept in a clearly incredulous tone: "The traitor Grigoriev betrayed the front. Not executing a combat order, he holstered his weapon. The decisive moment has come – either you will go with the workers and peasants throughout Russia, or open the front to the enemies. Oscillations have no place. Immediately inform me of the location of your troops and issue an appeal against Grigoryev. I will consider non-receipt of an answer as a declaration of war. I believe in honor of the revolutionaries – yours, Arshinov, Veretelnikov and others."

The "Bat'ko" gave a rather ambiguous answer: "The honor and dignity of the revolutionary force us to remain faithful to the revolution and the people, and Grigoryev's feuds with the Bolsheviks over regional power cannot force us to leave the front." After the scouts sent by Makhno to the area of Gregoriev's rebellion were intercepted by the authorities, the Makhnovists' final determination of their attitude towards Grigoryev dragged on until the end of May.

In his appeal, "Who is Grigoryev?" Makhno questioned the rebels: "Brothers! Don't you hear in his words a grim call to the Jewish pogrom?! Don't you feel the desire of Ataman Grigoriev to break the living fraternal connection between the revolution of Ukraine and revolutionary Russia?" At the same time, Makhno blamed the events on the actions of the Bolshevik authorities:" We must say that the reasons that created the entire Grigoriev movement are not in Grigoriev himself... Anything that showed resistance, protest, and even independence were stifled by special committees... This created the climate of bitterness, protest, and a hostile mood towards the existing order. Grigoriev took advantage of this in his adventure... We demand that the Communist Party be held accountable for the Grigoriev movement ".

Panteleimon Belochub a soldier best known as one of the commanders of the Black Army

Grigoriev openly disagreed with Makhno during negotiations at Sentovo on 27 July 1919. Grigoriev had been in contact with Denikin's emissaries, and was planning to join the White coalition. According to Peter Arshinov, Makhno and staff decided to execute Grigoriev. Chubenko, a member of Makhno's staff, accused Grigoriev of collaborating with Denikin and of inciting the pogroms. The accounts of Gregoriev's execution differ, and ascribe the final shot either to Chubenko, Karetnik, Kouzmenko or Makhno.

The Bolshevik government in Petrograd increasingly saw the Makhnovists as a threat to their power, both as an example and as a site of anarchist influence. The Bolsheviks began their formal efforts to disempower Makhno on 4 June 1919 with Trotsky's Order No. 1824, which forbade electing a congress and attempted to discredit Makhno by stating: "The Makhno brigade has constantly retreated before the White Guards, owing to the incapacity, criminal tendencies, and the treachery of its leaders."

The Bolsheviks restarted a propaganda campaign declaring Makhnovia to be a region of warlords, and eventually broke with it by launching surprise attacks on Makhnovist militias despite the pre-existing alliance between the factions.

The Bolshevik press alleged that leaders in the Makhnovist movement, rather than being democratically-elected, were appointed by Makhno's military clique or even Makhno himself. They also alleged that Makhno himself had refused to provide food for Soviet railwaymen and telegraph operators, that the "special section" of the Makhnovist constitution provided for secret executions and torture, that Makhno's forces had raided Red Army convoys for supplies, stolen an armored car from Bryansk when asked to repair it, and that the Nabat group was responsible for deadly acts of terrorism in Russian cities.

Vladimir Lenin soon sent Lev Kamenev to Ukraine where he conducted a cordial interview with Makhno. After Kamenev's departure, Makhno claimed to have intercepted two Bolshevik messages, the first an order to the Red Army to attack the Makhnovists, the second ordering Makhno's assassination. Soon after the Fourth Congress, Trotsky sent an order to arrest every Nabat congress member. Pursued by White Army forces, Makhno and the Black Army responded by withdrawing further into the interior of Ukraine. In 1919, the Black Army suddenly turned eastwards in a full-scale offensive, surprising General Denikin's White forces and causing them to fall back. Within two weeks, Makhno and the Black Army had recaptured all of southern Ukraine.

Black Army commanders Simon Karetnik (3rd from the left), Nestor Makhno (center) and Fedor Shchus (1st right), 1919

When Makhno's troops were struck by a typhus epidemic, Trotsky resumed hostilities; the Cheka sent two agents to assassinate Makhno in 1920, but they were captured and, after confessing, were executed. All through February 1920 Makhnovia was inundated with 20,000 Red troops. Viktor Belash noted that even in the worst time for the revolutionary army, namely at the beginning of 1920, "In the majority of cases rank-and-file Red Army soldiers were set free, in all four directions". This happened at the beginning of February 1920, when the insurgents disarmed the 10,000-strong Estonian Division in Huliaipole. The problem was further compounded by the alienation of the Estonians by Denikin's inflexible Russian chauvinism and their refusal to fight with Nikolai Yudenich.

There was a new truce between Makhnovist forces and the Red Army in October 1920 in the face of a new advance by Wrangel's White Army. While Makhno and the anarchists were willing to assist in ejecting Wrangel and White Army troops from southern Ukraine and Crimea, they distrusted the Bolshevist government in Moscow and its motives. However, after the Bolshevik government agreed to a pardon of all anarchist prisoners throughout Russia, a formal treaty of alliance was signed.

By late 1920, Makhno had halted General Wrangel's White Army advance into Ukraine from the southwest, capturing 4,000 prisoners and stores of munitions, and preventing the White Army from gaining control of the all-important Ukrainian grain harvest. To the end, Makhno and the anarchists maintained their main political structures, refusing demands to join the Red Army, to hold Bolshevik-supervised elections, or accept Bolshevik-appointed political commissars. The Red Army temporarily accepted these conditions, but within a few days ceased to provide the Makhnovists with basic supplies, such as cereals and coal.

When General Wrangel's White Army forces were decisively defeated in November 1920, the Bolsheviks immediately turned on Makhno and the anarchists once again. On 26 November 1920, less than two weeks after assisting Red Army forces in defeating Wrangel, Makhno's headquarters staff and many of his subordinate commanders were arrested at a Red Army planning conference to which they had been invited by Moscow, and executed. Makhno escaped, but was soon forced into retreat as the full weight of the Red Army and the Cheka's "special punitive brigades" were brought to bear against not only the Makhnovists, but all anarchists, even their admirers and sympathizers. In August 1921, after making raids all across Ukraine and constant battles with Red Army forces many times larger and better equipped an exhausted Makhno was finally driven by Mikhail Frunze's Red forces into exile with 77 of his men.

Politics

Makhnovia was a stateless and egalitarian society. Workers and peasants were organised into anarchist communities governed via a process of participatory democracy and were linked via an anarchist federation.

When the Insurrectionary Army liberated a town from state control, it would post a notice clarifying that they would not impose any authority on the town:

Workers, your city is for the present occupied by the Revolutionary Insurrectionary (Makhnovist) Army. This army does not serve any political party, any power, any dictatorship. On the contrary, it seeks to free the region of all political power, of all dictatorship. It strives to protect the freedom of action, the free life of the workers, against all exploitation and domination. The Makhnovist Army does not, therefore, represent any authority. It will not subject anyone to any obligation whatsoever. Its role is confined to defending the freedom of the workers. The freedom of the peasants and the workers belong to themselves, and should not suffer any restriction.

The supreme authority in the Makhnovshchina was vested in Regional Congresses. Between each congressional session, interim executive powers were extended to a Revolutionary Military Soviet, which was elected and reorganized by the Congress itself. The vast majority of the Makhnovshchina's decisions were made independently, through a system of local self-governance at the village and district level. Networks of "free soviets" acted as institutions of participatory democracy, where issues would be discussed and dealt with directly.

According to the Soviet historian Mikhail Kubanin, "neither the overall command of the army nor Makhno himself truly ran the movement; they merely reflected the aspirations of the mass, acting as its ideological and technical agents."

Free soviets

Main article: Free soviets

Anarchist organizing villages in the Makhnovshchina

The free soviets were conceived of as the basic form of organization in the Makhnovshchina. These soviets acted independently from any central authority, excluding all political parties from participation, and met to self-manage the activities of workers and peasants through participatory democracy. The soviets acted as the local organs of self-governance and federated together up to the regional and national levels, resulting in the relatively horizontal organization of the soviets. However, the conditions of the war meant that the Soviet model could only be implemented at scale during "periods of relative peace and territorial stability", as the populace was largely concerned with securing food or staying safe from the advancing armies.

Regional Congress of Peasants, Workers and Insurgents

Main article: Regional Congress of Peasants, Workers and Insurgents

The Regional Congresses of Peasants, Workers and Insurgents represented the "highest form of democratic authority" within the political system of the Makhnvoschina. They brought together delegates from the region's peasantry, industrial workers and insurgent soldiers, which would discuss the issues at hand and take their decisions back with them to local popular assemblies. Four Congresses were held over the course of 1919, while one was banned by the Bolsheviks and another was unable to convene due to renewed conflict with the Red Army.

Revolutionary Military Soviet

Main article: Revolutionary Military Soviet

Nestor Makhno and his lieutenants

The Revolutionary Military Soviet (Russian: Революционный Военный Совет, RVS) acted as the executive in the interim between sittings of the Regional Congresses. Its powers covered both military and civil matters in the region, although it was also subject to instant recall at the will of the Regional Congress and its activities were limited to those explicitly outlined by the Congresses themselves. At each Regional Congress, the RVS was to provide detailed reports of its activities and subjected itself to reorganization. When it came to the decisions of local soviets and assemblies, the RVS presented itself as a solely advisory board, with no power over the local bodies of self-government.

The RVS also functioned as the supreme body of the Revolutionary Insurgent Army, acting in concert with its elected general staff and in consultation with insurgent detachments, thus "representing the authority of the civilian over the military." The RVS even came into conflict with the Makhnovist general staff over a number of unilateral decisions by the latter, including the execution of some captured Red Army agents. This eventually resulted in an agreement between the two, which reaffirmed the purview of the RVS as being in "administrative, economic, and financial matters", while the insurgent army itself would concentrate on "military affairs."

The constitution of the RVS was opposed by the Bolsheviks, with Lev Kamenev openly demanding its abolition during a visit to Huliaipole. This demand was refused by Nestor Makhno, as the constitution of the RVS outlined that it could only be disbanded by a Regional Congress, not by any central authority. Despite their own opposition to the Soviet, a number of Bolsheviks routinely participated in Regional Congresses, where one Bolshevik party member was even elected to the RVS.

Economy

Currency-substitute stamps distributed by the Makhnovists

Workers and peasants of Ukraine saw the October Revolution, which had promised "Factories to the Workers; Land to the Peasants!", as the beginning of workers' control of the industrial economy and land redistribution to the peasantry.

Agricultural communes

For the first year of the Revolution, an energized Ukrainian peasantry carried out a campaign of expropriations against the pomeshchiks and kulaks, redistributing land to those that worked it and creating an agrarian socialist economy. In the wake of the Kornilov affair, the revolutionary defense committee in Huliaipole sanctioned the disarmament and dispossession of the local bourgeoisie, bringing all private enterprise in the area under workers' control. Peasants took control of the farms they worked and large estates were collectivized, creating agrarian communes that were settled by previously landless peasant families and individuals, with each commune counting around 200 members.

The first commune, named after Rosa Luxemburg, was highly successful. Though only a few members actually considered themselves anarchists, the peasants operated the communes on the basis of full social equality, including gender equality. They accepted Kropotkin's principle of mutual aid ("from each according to their ability, to each according to their need") as their fundamental tenet. Land was held in common, with shared meals also being eaten in communal kitchens, though members who wished to cook separately or to take food from the kitchen and eat it in their own quarters were allowed to do so. The work was collectively self-managed, with work programs being voluntarily agreed upon through consensus decision-making at general assemblies, and those who were unable to work could notify their neighbors in order for a replacement to be found. Many commune members considered communal life to be the "highest form of social justice", with some former landowners even voluntarily adopting the new lifestyle.

The father of Victor Kravchenko was one of the promoters of a commune called the "Tocsin", which counted 100 families on an estate made up of 200 hectares of wheat fields and orchards. The estate had been divided up and supplied by the local soviet, with many former industrial workers flocking to the new commune due to the promise of "well-being for everybody", while others were driven to communal life by their own ideological commitments. Some peasants even made fun of the urban communists that had joined the commune, although Kravchenko insisted that "such teasing was without malice", as the peasants still undertook to help the unskilled industrial laborers. However, this commune eventually dissolved, "with commune workers quitting one after another".

Industry

While the Makhnovshchina was a primarily agrarian society, efforts were also made to organize the industrial economies in the cities which the Makhnovists briefly occupied, despite the pervasive lack of understanding that the (largely peasant) insurgents had for large-scale industry. Upon the occupation of cities, the Makhnovists organized workers' conferences with the intention of restarting production under a system of workers' self-management. When urban workers asked for the payment of their wages, still in arrears following the end of the White occupation, the Makhnovists responded by proposing they extract payment directly from their customers, albeit exempting the Insurgent Army from such payment.

Railroad workers in Aleksandrovsk took the first steps in organising a self-managed economy in 1919. They formed a committee charged with organizing the railway network of the region, establishing a detailed plan for the movement of trains, the transport of passengers, etc. Soviets were soon formed to coordinate factories and other enterprises across Ukraine.

In Katerynoslav, the local anarcho-syndicalist movement took the reigns on bringing the city's industrial economy under social ownership. Collective agreements were won at a tobacco factory and the city's bakeries were brought under workers' control, with a number of anarcho-syndicalist bakers drawing up plans to ensure food security for the local population.

Money

The Makhnovschina came up against difficulties concerning the issue of money, as its largely peasant base could easily go without money through subsistence farming, while urban workers still needed to buy their own food. When the direct exchange of goods was not possible, the Makhnovschina largely continued to use money, but planned to build a moneyless system of anarcho-communism following the Russian Civil War.

Early on, barter had been a popular means of exchange, with the Huliaipole Soviet even establishing links with textile factories in industrial centers such as Moscow. The Soviet procured wagon loads of cloth in exchange for grain, directly exchanged in quantities determined by the needs of both parties. However, this barter economy was frustrated by the newly established Council of People's Commissars, controlled by the Bolsheviks and Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, which demanded an end to the independent barter economy and called for it to be brought under the control of the government.

Although the anarchists of the Makhnovschina preferred a barter economy, they recognized that the working poor were still in need of money and permitted the use of any currencies, including the Imperial ruble, Soviet ruble and Ukrainian hryvnia. One account even suggests that the Makhnovists printed their own money, which stated on its reverse that "no-one would be prosecuted for forging it".

The regional congresses imposed levies against the local bourgeoisie and banks, extracting about 40 million rubles from the bourgeoisie and seizing 100 million rubles from the banks. An extensive wealth redistribution campaign was subsequently implemented, in which the poor were able to apply for material assistance from the Military Revolutionary Soviet. One resident of Yekaterinoslav reported that thousands of people queued up on a daily basis for the redistribution packages, which they would receive in varying amounts depending on the assessment of their needs, with applicants being awarded up to thousands of rubles. Redistribution measures reportedly continued up until the final days of Makhnovschina control, with an estimate 3–10 million rubles being distributed to the population of Yekaterinoslav alone.

The Makhnovists' unfamiliarity with monetary economics led to high rates of inflation, while the changing military situation resulted in wild fluctuations of currency value, with Soviet rubles appreciating in value as the Red Army advanced into Ukraine. They also neglected to impose price controls, which caused the price of bread to rise by 25% during Makhnovschina control.

Demographics

At its height, the population of the Makhnovshchina was roughly 7.5 million people, spread across 75,000 km² of territory. At its greatest extent, the territory covered five provinces, including the entirerty of Katerynoslav, as well as the northern part of Taurida, the eastern part of Kherson and the southern parts of Poltava and Kharkiv.

While the Makhnovshchina was a predominantly rural territory, it also included a number of large cities, such as Berdiansk, Katerynoslav, Kryvyi Rih, Mariupol, Melitopol, Nikopol, Oleksandrivsk and Yelisavetgrad.

According to Peter Arshinov, 90% of the Makhnovshchina was made up of Ukrainians, 6–8% was made up of Russians and the remainder consisted of Jewish and Greek communities. There also existed small minorities of Georgians, Armenians, Bulgarians, Serbs, Montenegrins and Germans.

Education and culture

As a result of the war, schools had been abandoned and teachers received no wages, meaning education was nonexistent in the region for months. In the summer of 1919, the Bolsheviks dispersed the Nabat Confederation of Anarchist Organizations, leading many of its leading intellectuals to flee to the free territory. Under the stewardship of Volin, Peter Arshinov and Aron Baron, they organized a Cultural-Educational Commission, which distributed leaflets and delivered lectures to the insurgent troops.

Upon the creation of soviets and assemblies in the region, the reconstruction of schools began, with the foundation a new self-managed secular education system, outside of state control. Members of the Cultural-Educational Commission, who had been inspired by the Ferrer movement, began to work towards the establishment of a "unified workers' school", which energized much the local inhabitants to participate in the new education system. The Educational Commission, composed of workers, peasants and teachers, undertook the task of fulfilling both the economic and pedagogic needs of primary and secondary schools. Courses were set up for illiterate and semi-literate adults to help them read and courses for history, sociology and political theory were all offered free of charge to the general public. All of these efforts increased literacy in the region.

The Makhnovists also paid a great amount of attention to theatre, and soldiers from the Black Army often practiced theatre to entertain themselves and keep up morale. The Cultural Commission founded an experimental theatre which put on daily shows for the public, the production of which were also self-managed by the local inhabitants. In Huliaipole, many workers and students began to write and perform in plays.

Flags

A photo showing a flag attributed to the Makhnovists

Multiple variations of the black and red flags were used by the Makhnovists during the Russian Civil War. These banners were inscribed either with anarchist and socialist slogans or with the name of the unit using the flag. Ukrainian anarchist Viktor Belash said in his memoirs that flags with slogans such as "Power breeds parasites. Long live anarchy!" and "All power to the Soviets right now!" were used at the Gulyai-Polye district soviet and Insurgent Army headquarters. A photo showing a flag with a death's head and the motto "Death to all those who stand in the way of the working people." is often falsely attributed to Makhnovists, first in the Soviet Russian book Jewish Pogroms 1917–1921 by Z.S. Ostrovsky, but this was denied by Nestor Makhno, who said the photo "does not show Makhnovists at all". The reverse side of this flag has words translating roughly to "Kish of the Dnieper". The word Kish, meaning a Cossack camp, at this time was used by the Ukrainian People's Republic to refer to battalions of the Ukrainian People's Army.

• 

  One of the flags described by Viktor Belash

• 

  Flag used by the 2nd Insurgent Regiment of the RIAU

• 

  Obverse of the banner attributed to the Makhnovists by Ostrovsky, denied by Makhno

• 

  Reverse of the banner attributed to the Makhnovists by Ostrovsky

Human rights

Civil liberties were first introduced to southern and eastern Ukraine following the February Revolution, but were suspended with the outbreak of the war, when the territory fell under the sequential control of the Ukrainian State, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and South Russia. Following the defeat of the White movement in October 1919 and the subsequent extension of the Makhnovschina throughout the area, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association were all reintroduced.

The implementation of freedom of the press resulted in the appearance of a number of newspapers in the territory, including the official organs of several political organizations. These included the Socialist Revolutionary Party's People's Power (Narodovlastie), the Left Socialist-Revolutionaries' Banner of Revolt (Znamya Vosstanya), the Bolsheviks' Star (Zvezda), the Mensheviks' Workers' Gazette (Rabochaia Gazeta), the Ukrainian Anarchist Confederation's Nabat and the Insurgent Army's own Road to Freedom.

See also

• Armed Forces of South Russia
• Revolutionary Catalonia
• Shinmin Autonomous Zone

References

Sources

• Arshinov, Peter (1974) [1923]. History of the Makhnovist Movement. Detroit: Black & Red. OCLC 579425248.
• Avrich, Paul (1971) [1967]. The Russian Anarchists. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-00766-7. OCLC 1154930946.
• Darch, Colin (2020). Nestor Makhno and Rural Anarchism in Ukraine, 1917–21. London: Pluto Press. ISBN 978-0745338880. OCLC 1225942343.
• Eichenbaum, Vsevolod Mikhailovich (1955) [1947]. The Unknown Revolution. Translated by Cantine, Holley. New York: Libertarian Book Club. ISBN 0919618251. OCLC 792898216.
• Magocsi, Paul R. (1996). A History of Ukraine. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-0830-5. OCLC 757049758.
• Makhno, Nestor (2009). Skirda, Alexandre (ed.). Mémoires et écrits: 1917-1932 (in French). Paris: Ivrea. ISBN 9782851842862. OCLC 690866794.
• Makhno, Nestor (2007) [1928]. The Russian Revolution in Ukraine (March 1917 - April 1918). Translated by Archibald, Malcolm. Edmonton: Black Cat Press. ISBN 9780973782714. OCLC 187835001.
• Makhno, Nestor (1996). Skirda, Alexandre (ed.). The Struggle Against the State and Other Essays. Translated by Sharkey, Paul. Edinburgh: AK Press. ISBN 1873176783. OCLC 924883878.
• Malet, Michael (1982). Nestor Makhno in the Russian Civil War. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 0-333-25969-6. OCLC 1194667963.
• Palij, Michael (1976). The Anarchism of Nestor Makhno, 1918–1921. Publications on Russia and Eastern Europe of the Institute for Comparative and Foreign Area Studies. Vol. 7. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ISBN 0295955112. OCLC 2372742.
• Peters, Victor (1970). Nestor Makhno: The Life of an Anarchist. Winnipeg: Echo Books. OCLC 7925080.
• Shubin, Aleksandr (2010). "The Makhnovist Movement and the National Question in the Ukraine, 1917–1921". In Hirsch, Steven J.; van der Walt, Lucien (eds.). Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870–1940. Studies in Global Social History. Vol. 6. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 9789004188495. OCLC 868808983.
• Skirda, Alexandre (2004) [1982]. Nestor Makhno: Anarchy's Cossack. Translated by Sharkey, Paul. Edinburgh: AK Press. ISBN 1-902593-68-5. OCLC 58872511.
• Subtelny, Orest (1988). Ukraine: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-5808-9. OCLC 20722741.
• Sysyn, Frank (1977). "Nestor Makhno and the Ukrainian Revolution". In Hunczak, Taras (ed.). The Ukraine, 1917–1921: A Study in Revolution. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. pp. 271–304. ISBN 9780674920095. OCLC 942852423. Archived from the original on 23 September 2015. Retrieved 23 September 2015.