The Anarchist Library

Anti-Copyright

To what extent was Makhno able

to implement anarchist ideals
during the Russian Civil War?

Kolbjǫrn Markusson

Kolbjǫrn Markusson
To what extent was Makhno able to implement anarchist ideals
during the Russian Civil War?
no date provided

submitted by anonymous without source

theanarchistlibrary.org no date provided

 Malet, Michael. Nestor Makhno in the Russian Civil War (MacMil-
lan Press: London, 1982).
Marshall, Peter. Demanding the Impossible (PM Press, 2010).
Narodne zhittya, 17 September 1917.
Palij, Michael. The Anarchism of Nestor Makhno, 1918-1921 (Uni-
versity of Washington Press: Seattle, 1976).
Revolutionary Military Soviet and Command Staff of the Revolu-
tionary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine (Makhnovist), Declaration
(7 Janurary 1920).
Savchenko, V. Avantyuristy grazhdanskoi voiny (Izd-vo Folio/
AST: Kharkov/Moscow, 2000).
Serge, Victor. Year One of the Russian Revolution (Holt, Rinehart
and Winston: Chicago, 1970).
Shubin, Alexandr. ‘The Makhnovist Movement and the National
Question in the Ukraine, 1917–1921’, in Anarchism and Syndical-
ism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870-1940: The Praxis of
National Liberation, Internationalism, and Social Revolution, Steven
Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds.) (BRILL: Leiden, 2010).
Shubin, Alexandr. Anarkhiya – mat poryadka (Moscow, 2005).
Skirda, Alexandre. Nestor Makhno: Anarchy’s Cossack (AK Press:
Edinburgh, 2004).
Subtelny, Orest. Ukraine: A History (University of Toronto Press:
Toronto, 1988).

15
Bibliography
Archibald, Malcolm. Atamansha: The Story of Maria Nikiforova,
the Anarchist Joan of Arc (Black Cat Press: Dublin, 2007).
Arshinov, Peter. History of the Makhnovist Movement (1918–
1921), Lorraine Perlman and Fredy Perlman (trans.) (Black & Red:
Contents
Detroit, 1974).
Avrich, Paul. ‘Russian Anarchism and the Civil War’, The Russian Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Review (1968), 296-306.
Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Portraits (Princeton University Press:
Princeton, 1988).
Azarov, Vyacheslav. Kontrrazvedka: The Story of the Makhnovist
Intelligence Service (Black Cat Press: Edmonton, 2008).
Belash A. V. and Belash, V. F. Dorogi Nestora Makhno: istorich-
eskoe povestvovanie (Proza: Kiev, 1993).
Cultural-Educational Section of the Insurgent Army (Makhno-
vist), WHO ARE THE MAKHNOVISTS AND WHAT ARE THEY
FIGHTING FOR? (27 April 1920).
Danilov V. and Shanin T. (eds.), Nestor Makhno, Krest’yanskoe
dvizhenie na Ukraine. 1918–1921. Dokumenty i materialy
(ROSSPEN: Moscow, 2006).
Kantowicz, Edward R. The Rage of Nations (Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing: Michigan, 1991).
Kobytov, S., Kozlov, V. A. and Litvak, B. G. Russkoe krest’yanstvo.
Etapy dukhovnogo osvobozhdeniya (Moscow, 1988).
Lenin, V. I. Collected Works 32 (Progress Publishers: Moscow,
1965).
Magocsi, Paul Robert. A History of Ukraine (University of
Toronto Press: Toronto, 1996).
Makhno, Nestor. The Struggle Against the State and Other Essays,
Alexandre Skirda (ed.) and Paul Sharkey (trans.) (AK Press: Edin-
burgh, 1996).
Makhno, Nestor. The Ukrainian Revolution, Malcolm Archibald
and Will Firth (trans.) (Black Cat Press: Edmonton, 2011).

14 3
ship as ‘Napoleonic’ and only Voline and a few others maintaining
their support for the Makhnovist cause.36 The Makhnovists’ inex-
perience at administering urban economies was exposed during
their occupation of Ekaterinoslav and Aleksandrovsk in late 1919
as their decision to make all currency legal tender, a contradiction
in anarchist-communist ideals, led to confusion and inflation in the
cities.37 Peter Arshinov explained the failure of the Makhnovist
movement to implement anarchism firstly by their preoccupancy
with military affairs that culminated with final defeat at the hands
of the Red Army in August 1921, following Trotsky’s second repu-
diation of the alliance.38 Secondly, the ‘cowardice’ and purism of
Russian anarchists in refusing to support the Makhnovists with
the necessary educational and intellectual tools to entrench an-
archism as a mass movement failed to make the Makhnovists a
theoretically-coherent movement.39
In conclusion, Nestor Makhno and his comrades had succeeded
in laying the foundations for anarchist development during the
Russian Civil War by building a peasant mass movement to chal-
lenge capital and the state. However, the preoccupancy of fighting
a war on almost four fronts for the entire duration of the anar-
chist experiment’s existence plagued the economic, political and
social development of anarchist ideals. Furthermore, as noted by
contemporary historians, the lack of support amongst Russia’s an-
archist intelligentsia in providing ample theoretical structure to the
Makhnovist movement was a crucial factor in the stagnation of an-
archism in Ukraine and Russia, leading to the destruction of the
movement at the hands of the Bolshevik regime that it never re-
covered from.

36
Ibid.
37
Avrich, ‘Russian Anarchism and the Civil War’, 299.
38
Arshinov, History, 117.
39
Arshinov, History, 136-137.

13
their excesses’.30 In the context of the Civil War on several fronts Born on October 26 (N.S. November 7) 1888 in Gulyai-Polye,
against numerous enemies, the Kontrrazvedka’s approach to logis- Ukraine, Nestor Ivanovych Makhno was a revolutionary anarchist
tics was not particularly abnormal; however, they were entirely in- and the most well-known ataman (commander) of the Revolution-
consistent with anarchist principles of economic free association, ary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine during the Russian Civil War.1
mutual aid and non-coercion, being more characteristic of Bolshe- Historiographical issues regarding the extent to which Makhno
vik prodrazvyorstka (grain requisitioning).31 and the Makhnovists implemented anarchist ideals in south-east
One of the major shortcomings of the Makhnovist movement Ukraine have been noted by contemporary Russian anarchist and
was its failure to successfully implement and embed anarchist ide- historian Peter Arshinov. Makhno’s own memoirs and the newspa-
als to civilian urban life. At its peak, the volnaya territoriya com- per Put’ k Svobode, both valuable material documenting anarchist
prised a large area in south-east Ukraine with a population of seven activity in Ukraine, were lost during the Civil War.2 With much of
million, including the cities of Berdyansk, Donetsk, Alexandrovsk, the contemporary evidence impossible to reconstruct, historians
Ekaterinoslav and its unofficial capital of Gulyai-Polye.32 The Con- have attempted to understand the nature of the Makhnovist move-
federation of Anarchist Organisations, also called Nabat, developed ment and the ‘social revolution’ in Ukraine with surviving evidence
independently of the Makhnovist movement, yet maintained close whilst separating myth and legend about Makhno from historical
links, and developed a strong presence in southern Ukrainian cities fact. This essay will argue that Makhno and the Makhnovist move-
such as Kharkov.33 The Makhnovist movement and Nabat worked ment were inspired by anarchist ideals in an attempt to establish a
together in Ukraine for the mutual goal of spreading anarchist ‘free and completely independent soviet system of working people
ideas, with the Cultural-Educational Section of the Insurgent Army without authorities’ during the Civil War.3 However, the war itself
being largely comprised of Nabat agitators and theorists like Vo- hindered the political and economic development of the anarchist
line.34 However, it would be incorrect to identity Nabat as an organ ‘free territory’ before finally being defeated and dissolved by the
of the Makhnovist movement or vice-versa as the former would Bolshevik-led Red Army in August 1921.
often criticise the latter’s military conduct, alliances with the Bol- In order to understand the context of Makhno’s attempt to im-
shevik Red Army and especially the judicial and punitive actions plement anarchism in south-east Ukraine during the Civil War, it is
of the Kontrrazvedka during the Civil War.35 This would eventu- important to consider the inspiration and development of such ide-
ally lead to a break between Nabat and the Makhnovists in late als. Makhno himself, from a poor Ukrainian peasant background
1920, with Aron Baron going as far to criticise Makhno’s leader- and working as an apprentice artist and iron-worker in his teenage
years, had joined the Peasant Group of Anarcho-Communists in
30
Alexandr Shubin, Anarkhiya – mat poryadka (Moscow, 2005), 272. Gulyai-Polye in 1906 at the age of eighteen in response to repres-
31
V. I. Lenin, Collected Works32 (Progress Publishers: Moscow, 1965), 187.
32 1
Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible (PM Press, 2010), 473. Paul Avrich, Anarchist Portraits (Princeton University Press: Princeton,
33
Paul Avrich, ‘Russian Anarchism and the Civil War’, The Russian Review 1988), 112.
2
(1968), 296-306 (298). Peter Arshinov, History of the Makhnovist Movement (1918–1921), Lor-
34
Cultural-Educational Section (Makhnovist), WHO ARE THE MAKHNO- raine Perlman and Fredy Perlman (trans.) (Black & Red: Detroit, 1974), 14.
3
VISTS (27 April 1920). Cultural-Educational Section of the Insurgent Army (Makhnovist), WHO
35
Malet, Nestor Makhno, 172. ARE THE MAKHNOVISTS AND WHAT ARE THEY FIGHTING FOR? (27 April 1920).

12 5
sion from the Tsarist authorities.4 His early anarchist activities of The nature of the army in relation to anarchist principles has been
robbery and terrorism had led to his arrest several times, before the source of contention within historiography, notably the issue
finally being convicted and sentenced to death in 1910; later com- of ‘voluntary mobilisation’ and conscription. Avrich has suggested
muted to life imprisonment and his eventual release in 1917 due to that the Makhnovists, in responding to the conditions of the Civil
a general amnesty following the February Revolution.5 Makhno’s War on several fronts, used conscription in the areas they oper-
own experiences as a peasant and urban worker, as well as repres- ated in.25 However, other scholars such as Michael Malet have chal-
sion from the Tsarist regime, was an important factor in motivating lenged this thesis, citing evidence from both the Makhnovists ap-
his attempt to implement anarchism and his virulent hatred of the pealing for volunteers rather than ordering conscripts in 1920 as
ruling class and the state. In his memoirs, Makhno recounted his well as Trotsky’s corroborating statements that the Makhnovists
experiences working on a wealthy Mennonite estate at age eleven: lacked the ability to enforce conscription.26 In both theory and
At this time I began to experience anger, envy and even ha- practice, the Makhnovists applied anarchist concepts of a volun-
tred towards the landowner [Janzen] and especially towards his teer militia whereby the peasants and workers were encouraged
children – those young slackers who often strolled past me sleek through moral sentiments of duty to support the Makhnovist cause,
and healthy, well-dressed, well-groomed and scented; while I was rather than coercion.27
filthy, dressed in rags, barefoot, and reeked of manure from clean- Despite calling for the abolition of the Cheka and other ‘compul-
ing the calves’ barn.6 sory authoritative and disciplinary institutions’ in their declaration
Paul Avrich has noted that Makhno was first and foremost a on 7 January 1920, the Makhnovists have been accused of maintain-
peasant and worker, not a philosopher or political theorist, yet ing their own counter-intelligence forces during the Civil War.28
was well-acquainted with the anarchist ideas of Mikhail Bakunin From April 1919, the civilian section of the Kontrrazvedka operated
and Peter Kropotkin and strove for a classless, stateless, moneyless from the cities of Maryupol and Berdyansk and was charged with
society in south-east Ukraine.7 The extent to which Makhno and the responsibility of logistics within the Makhnovist movement,
the Makhnovists applied the theories of anarchist-collectivism and such as providing provisions for the military wing.29 The Kontr-
communism in practice during the Civil War, however, is debate- razvedka’s activity in civilian affairs and forced requisitioning of
able and will be discussed in due course. supplies was the source of criticism from anarchists in Ukraine,
Makhno’s return to Gulyai-Polye following his release from with Makhno himself remarking that their actions caused him
prison and his involvement in organising peasants’ unions in ‘mental anguish and embarrassment when he had to apologize for
1917 led to him gaining what Edward Kantowicz considers a
25
Ukrainian ‘Robin Hood’ image, with large estates expropriated Avrich, Anarchist Portraits, 121.
26
Michael Malet, Nestor Makhno in the Russian Civil War (MacMillan Press:
London, 1982), 105-106.
4 27
Avrich,Anarchist Portraits, 112. Palij, Anarchism of Nestor Makhno, 155.
5 28
Ibid, 112. Revolutionary Military Soviet and Command Staff of the Revolutionary
6
Nestor Makhno, The Ukrainian Revolution, Malcolm Archibald and Will Insurgent Army of the Ukraine (Makhnovist), Declaration (7 Janurary 1920).
29
Firth (trans.) (Black Cat Press: Edmonton, 2011), 16. Vyacheslav Azarov, Kontrrazvedka: The Story of the Makhnovist Intelligence
7
Avrich, Anarchist Portraits, 112. Service (Black Cat Press: Edmonton, 2008), 9.

6 11
Hungarian and German control.20 Furthermore, much of the peas- from the wealthy gentry and given to the peasants.8 The anarchist-
antry became disappointed at the Central Rada of the UNR’s fail- communist Peasant Union (or Gulyai-Polye Soviet after August
ure to implement a national land reform programme and displayed 1917) led by Makhno had usurped the nominal power of the pro-
open hostility to the quasi-feudal Hetmanate regime established on Kerensky Social Committee in the local area in March 1917, and
the 29 April by Pavlo Skoropadskyi via a coup d’état.21 The Treaty with it, executive power in political, social and economic affairs.9
of Brest Litovsk can be thus considered a catalyst for the Makhno- Makhno’s role as a peasant leader and organiser between the Febru-
vist movement in Ukraine in drawing support from the increas- ary and October Revolutions in Gulyai-Polye and the wider Eka-
ingly radicalised peasantry, with much of the peasantry joining ei- terinoslav province was thus a departure from the terrorist and
ther ataman Nikifor Grigoriev’s peasant bands or Makhno’s Revo- criminal activity of his teenage years that led to his imprisonment.
lutionary Insurgent Army.22 Widespread opposition to the Austro- Until August 1917, Makhno’s compliance with local and district au-
Hungarian and German occupation of Ukraine under the auspices thorities as an elected peasant representative to impose taxes can
of the Central Rada and the Hetmanate had galvanised the peas- even be considered a contradiction to anarchist ideals against the
antry in south-east Ukraine to support Makhno’s army in no small state.10
part due to the political and economic activities undertaken by an- The receptiveness of the peasantry to Makhno’s ideals and poli-
archists in Gulyai-Polye and Alexandrovsk in 1917 and early 1918. cies in Gulyai-Polye and its surrounding rural areas can perhaps
The Makhnovist attempt to implement anarchist ideals on a wide be explained by earlier resistance to the Stolypin reforms in Eka-
scale in south-east Ukraine through the establishment of ‘free so- terinoslav province from 1905-06 in defence of the obshchina com-
viets’ comprising peasants and workers necessitated the formation munal system.11 The expropriative policies enacted by the Peasant
of the Revolutionary Insurgent Army to defend the gains made Union under Makhno’s leadership proved to be successful, yield-
in and around Gulyai-Polye.23 The creation of an official military ing greater harvests by peasants who wanted to work the land they
branch of the Makhnovist movement also encouraged Makhno and owned and controlled and not for someone else.12 However, whilst
his comrades to go on the offensive in late 1918 and spread their an- the platform and policies of Makhno and the Peasant Union in 1917
archist ideals beyond their Gulyai-Polye stronghold. The Makhno- can be described as being influenced by anarchist-communist ide-
vist military strength reached its peak in late 1919 with 83,000 als, the political and economic conditions of expropriating land to
infantry, 20,135 cavalry, 1,435 machine guns, 118 artillery guns, peasants cannot be considered an anarchist society as it did not
seven armoured trains and several armoured cars and tachankas.24 yet call for the overthrow of state and capital. Furthermore, it has
20
Makhno, The Struggle Against the State, 6-7.
21 8
Paul Robert Magocsi, A History of Ukraine (University of Toronto Press: Edward R. Kantowicz, The Rage of Nations (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing:
Toronto, 1996), 499. Michigan, 1991), 173.
22 9
Orest Subtelny, Ukraine: A History (University of Toronto Press: Toronto, V. Danilov and T. Shanin (eds.), Nestor Makhno, Krest’yanskoe dvizhenie
1988), 360. na Ukraine. 1918–1921. Dokumenty i materialy (ROSSPEN: Moscow, 2006), 38.
23 10
Alexandre Skirda, Nestor Makhno: Anarchy’s Cossack (AK Press: Edin- Danilov and Shanin, Nestor Makhno, Krest’yanskoe dvizhenie, 38-39.
11
burgh, 2004), 86. S. Kobytov, V. A. Kozlov and B. G. Litvak, Russkoe krest’yanstvo. Etapy
24
A. V. Belash and V. F. Belash, Dorogi Nestora Makhno: istoricheskoe dukhovnogo osvobozhdeniya (Moscow, 1988), 74.
12
povestvovanie (Proza: Kiev, 1993), 340. Narodne zhittya, 17 September 1917.

10 7
been argued by Michael Palij that ‘it would be a mistake to assume sue anarchist goals through peaceful means such as land reform,
that the peasants in the region of the Makhno movement were Marusya’s anarchism of violent class struggle against the Provi-
anarchists; in reality, they knew and cared very little about anar- sional Government and local capitalists proved to have an ener-
chism or Marxism’.13 For this reason, Makhno’s and the Makhno- gising effect on the workers and peasants in Gulyai-Polye. The es-
vist movement’s activities in and around Gulyai-Polye between tablishment of the Alexandrovsk Anarchist Federation by Marusya
1917-18 should be considered as a peasant movement inspired by in August 1917 is of particular interest due to its accusation that
anarchism to enact land reform, rather than anarchist-communism Makhno and the Gulyai-Polye anarchists were attempting to form
in practice. The popular land reforms by the Peasant Union under a political party to seize power in the soviet and criticising their
Makhno’s leadership in Gulyai-Polye, whilst not necessarily anar- lack of direct class struggle.17 Anarchist-turned-Bolshevik writer
chist, were indicative of what Peter Arshinov considered the ori- Victor Serge argued that the origins of the Makhnovist movement’s
gins of the Makhnovist ‘mass movement’ in the volnaya territoriya armed wing, the Revolutionary Insurgent Army of the Ukraine,
(‘free territory’).14 These activities of agitation would serve as a pre- emerged from the Black Guard detachment in Gulyai-Polye, albeit
cursor to the development of the Makhnovist movement as a politi- much larger and more organised.18 One could argue, therefore, that
cal, economic and military organisation and Makhno’s assumption it was Marusya’s return to south-east Ukraine and role in establish-
of military leadership from the summer of 1918 to 1921. ing armed Black Guard units during 1917 that prompted Makhno
The origins of the Makhnovist movement’s ‘militarisation’ can and the Makhnovist movement in Gulyai-Polye to adopt a more
be found in the Chjornaya Gvardiya (Black Guards) established radical and class struggle approach to implementing anarchist ide-
by fellow anarchist revolutionary Maria ‘Marusya’ Nikiforova, als.
who returned to her native Alexandrovsk in the summer of 1917 The October Revolution and the Bolshevik-dominated Petrograd
from Petrograd.15 By all appearances, Marusya was more radical Soviet’s seizure of power from the Provisional Government re-
than Makhno in pursuing anarchist goals; the former using terror ceived tactic and vocal support from many anarchists throughout
against the bourgeoisie and inciting an armed Black Guard unit re- Ukraine and Russia, including Makhno and the Gulyai-Polye So-
cruited from Gulyai-Polye to successfully attack the Preobrazhen- viet due to the rallying calls for ‘all power to the soviets’.19 How-
skii regiment at Orekhov in September, much to the latter’s disap- ever, Makhnovist support for the October Revolution soon faded
proval.16 Whereas Makhno at this period of time preferred to pur- in 1918 due to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk signed by the indepen-
13 dent Ukrainian National Republic on 9 February and the Bolshevik
Michael Palij, The Anarchism of Nestor Makhno, 1918-1921 (University of
Washington Press: Seattle, 1976), 57. regime on 3 March that ceded large parts of Ukraine to Austro-
14
Arshinov,History of the Makhnovist Movement, 136.
15
V. Savchenko, Avantyuristy grazhdanskoi voiny (Izd-vo Folio/AST:
17
Kharkov/Moscow, 2000), 71. Malcolm Archibald, Atamansha: The Story of Maria Nikiforova, the Anar-
16
Alexandr Shubin, ‘The Makhnovist Movement and the National Question chist Joan of Arc (Black Cat Press: Dublin, 2007), 6-7.
18
in the Ukraine, 1917–1921’, in Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Post- Victor Serge, Year One of the Russian Revolution (Holt, Rinehart and Win-
colonial World, 1870-1940: The Praxis of National Liberation, Internationalism, and ston: Chicago, 1970), 158.
19
Social Revolution, Steven Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds.) (BRILL: Leiden, Nestor Makhno, The Struggle Against the State and Other Essays, Alexandre
2010), 156. Skirda (ed.) and Paul Sharkey (trans.) (AK Press: Edinburgh, 1996), 3-4.

8 9