Fascists during the RCW

[The Cheshire Cat]

Hello everyone,

Where were the fascists during the Russian Civil War?
There were lot's of soldiers and ex-soldiers, and these are normally the sources of fasiscm according to history. So why did fascism not rise amongst the soldiers? There was a crisis, there were weapons, there was fear and there were tens of thousands bloodthirsty men without a job. How did this not turn out as fascism? Were they just tired of fighting?

And to whom did most of the soldiers turn?

Thank you!

EDIT:
To make my question more clear, these 'fascists' did not necessarily have to identify themselves as such to answer my question. Proto-fascist like people or groups count too.

[fug]

Because the Military which had fought for three years already was mostly pro-Bolshevik, in any case it was for peace and democratic government.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Was the White Army fascist? But a lot of soldiers supported the Bolsheviks who offered peace, land, and bread.

[The Cheshire Cat]

I don't believe there were fascists in the White army, since they would not have been able to get along with the SR's and the social-democrats and the like.

[fug]

There were "quasi-fascists" ( the Black Hundreds and the like ), and it's true that various White "warlords" often killed SR's and others. It was a very chaotic period.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Though they didn't label themselves as fascists, most of the leaders of the White Army were from amongst the military's general staff and prescribed to an autocratic rule with aims to crush the Soviets and Bolsheviks. The White Army wasn't simply about restoring the Tsar as people such as Anton Denikin ignored cries to let Grand Duke Nicholas take control of the movement in order to retain control himself and he was active in organising jewish pogroms and other instances of White Terror.

Then you have batshit insane people like Baron Roman Nikolai Maximilian von Ungern-Sternberg who thought he was the god of war and wanted to restore the Genghis Khan's empire. :rolleyes:

[The Cheshire Cat]

and he was active in organising jewish pogroms and other instances of White Terror.

This does not necessarily have to be fascist ofcourse, but autocratic people terrorizing and mass murdering minorities could be fascist. But still, if they were real fascists, would they have cooperated with the other mensheviks? I think there would have been more internal struggle in that case.


Then you have batshit insane people like Baron Roman Nikolai Maximilian von Ungern-Sternberg who thought he was the god of war and wanted to restore the Genghis Khan's empire. http://www.revleft.com/vb/fascists-during-rcw-t174816/revleft/smilies/001_rolleyes.gif

I had to wiki him because I did not know him, but he certainly made me laugh. What a guy!

[Blake's Baby]

Fascism developed in Italy in the 1920s. Why would there be Italians from the future in the Russia Civil War?

[Bronco]

I don't believe there were fascists in the White army, since they would not have been able to get along with the SR's and the social-democrats and the like.

They didn't get along, the Whites were a motley bunch at the best of times with little real organisation, they were simply loosely united under an anti-Bolshevik banner. You shouldn't think that SR's and Mensheviks had any real, significant presence in the White Army either, most the major leaders were either ex-Tsarist and Monarchists or former provisional government men

[The Cheshire Cat]

Fascism developed in Italy in the 1920s. Why would there be Italians from the future in the Russia Civil War?

Fascism originated from the end of WW1, so from about 1918 . It could easily have spread to Russia before the RCW ended, about 1921, thus creating fascist groups joining the RCW.
Besides, one could argue fascism already existed before it was 'invented', embodied as highly nationalist countries with a strong state that used lots of violence to opress it's citizens as result of a crisis. These countries have existed for quite a time before the fasci di combattimenti rose in 1919 in Italy.

Ofcourse I did not expect the Italians to travel back in time and take part in the RCW.

[The Cheshire Cat]

They didn't get along, the Whites were a motley bunch at the best of times with little real organisation, they were simply loosely united under an anti-Bolshevik banner. You shouldn't think that SR's and Mensheviks had any real, significant presence in the White Army either, most the major leaders were either ex-Tsarist and Monarchists or former provisional government men

Were there also these internal struggles as seen as with the Bolsheviks or was it 'less bad'?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Fascism originated from the end of WW1, so from about 1918 . It could easily have spread to Russia before the RCW ended, about 1921, thus creating fascist groups joining the RCW.
Besides, one could argue fascism already existed before it was 'invented', embodied as highly nationalist countries with a strong state that used lots of violence to opress it's citizens as result of a crisis. These countries have existed for quite a time before the fasci di combattimenti rose in 1919 in Italy.

Ofcourse I did not expect the Italians to travel back in time and take part in the RCW.

Not what fascism is...

[Rafiq]

I'm not sure if Fascism was something that, ideologically, was fully developed. Though, there were organizations that were equally reactionary.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

I'm not sure if Fascism was something that, ideologically, was fully developed.

How so?

[Ocean Seal]

How so?
Its mostly just some thoughts about the totality of the nation slapped onto a right wing populist movement, rather than something that can be categorized as a historically recurring phenomenon. In other words it was just what they called three particular movements in Europe during the early 20th century and I'm not sure if it has any relevance outside of that.

[The Cheshire Cat]

Not what fascism is...

Fascism is the reaction of capitalism to a crisis. It reaults in ultra-nationalism, extreme violence, corporatism, opressing minorities, etc. Fascism however is nout really bound to strict rules and will differ in different time periods and area's. Right?

Also, it would be more helpful if you also explained how i am wrong, instead of just saying: you're wrong.

[Robespierres Neck]

There was Nikolay Vasilyevich Ustryalov and the Smenovekhovtsi, anti-communists that wanted to modify Bolshevism into having a more nationalistic stance. They are coined as the creators of National Bolshevism.

[Raúl Duke]

I'm not sure if Fascism was something that, ideologically, was fully developed. Though, there were organizations that were equally reactionary.


How so? How about the German Freikorps which played a role in crushing the worker's upheavel occurring in Germany near the end of WWI?

Wikipedia mentions an anti-semetic labor union in Germany from 1893 to 1933 (although anti-semetism isn't a necessary part of fascism but more a "nationalist socialist" one).

There's also the "nationalist-syndicalist" movement (Enrico Corradini)

At best, one can speak of "proto-fascism" but fascism itself didn't became ideologically existent 'till some Italian and his friends thought up some ideas and tried to invade Fiume/Rijeka.

Of course, the argument can be had that elements among the reactionary white army may have been proto-fascist rather than simple reactionaries and monarchists.

From the Trotsky view (if I remember correctly) however, which I think focuses mostly on the function defining what fascism is, fascism would be any movement as a counter-response to the working class that arises during a period of perceived ('by the elites') highly elevated class struggle/class consciousness from the working class. So, in a sense, you can argue that the white armies and the freikorps did follow the function that the later fascists also executed but they were not yet as ideologically set as the later fascists/nazis/falange.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Fascism is the reaction of capitalism to a crisis. It reaults in ultra-nationalism, extreme violence, corporatism, opressing minorities, etc. Fascism however is nout really bound to strict rules and will differ in different time periods and area's. Right?

Partly but it is not set in stone. Fascism is a reaction but it involves more than simple ultra-nationalism and scapegoating (these seem more of a side effect than a primary goal in itself) as it involves the bourgeoisie "'resorting to civil war' and 'utilizing the petty-bourgeoisie as a battering ram, which after' finance capital 'gathers into its hands… all the organs and institutions of sovereignty , the executive, and administrative powers of the state.' Along with the army, schools, universities, press, trade unions and cooperatives- all worker organizations are destroyed thus rendering the proletariat defenseless. Such is fascism in a nutshell. It is a solution to the class conflict that the bourgeoisie only go to when desperation has reached a crescendo.

In Trotsky’s own words the cycle which lead to fascism is, “…the gravest crisis of capitalist society; the growth of the radicalization of the working class; the growth of sympathy toward the working class, and a yearning for change on the part of the rural and urban petty bourgeoisie; the extreme confusion of the big bourgeoisie; its cowardly and treacherous maneuvers aimed at avoiding the revolutionary climax; the exhaustion of the proletariat; growing confusion and indifference; the aggravation of the social crisis; the despair of the petty bourgeoisie, its yearning for change; the collective neurosis of the petty bourgeoisie, its readiness to believe in miracles, its readiness for violent measures; the growth of hostility towards the proletariat, which has deceived its expectations. These are the premises for a swift formation of a fascist party and its victory.

Because at the time of the RCW there were hardly enough economic conditions to constitute a real bourgeoisie, and the majority of the participants in the White Army were Tsar loyalists, not fascist supporters, one cannot say that ideological fascism was present in the epoch of the RCW.

As others here have said: though the elements in the White Army may have been as reactionary as what would be later called fascists, they were not fascist in themselves (as I previously said I do not believe that the economic conditions were present).

[Crux]

I think there is an argument that the White movement as such was proto-fascist. And there was indeed internal struggle among the whites, where the white generals tended to imprison their erstwhile liberal and menshevik friends in the areas they controlled. This happend on the eastern front and in the ukraine.

But if you're looking for the most out and out reactionary fascist group I suggest looking into the Black Hundreds.

[Blake's Baby]

Fascism originated from the end of WW1, so from about 1918 . It could easily have spread to Russia before the RCW ended, about 1921, thus creating fascist groups joining the RCW...

Not really. It's not so likely that Italian Fascists would have gone to Russia and begun to recruit people to their ideology. Seems like a bizarre notion to me.




... one could argue fascism already existed before it was 'invented', embodied as highly nationalist countries with a strong state that used lots of violence to opress it's citizens as result of a crisis...

Right. So you don't mean 'fascists' you mean 'miltaristic nationalists' or something. Well, there were plenty of them, from Kornilov onwards. You could argue that the White generals were pretty much all militaristic nationalists. I'm sure that the Whites did recruit from the same layers of the population that traditionally have been fertile ground for fascism.

And no, there's little reason why they would have much to do with the Mensheviks and SRs, but as the freikorps have been mentioned, it was of course the Social-democratic Party in Germany that unleashed the Freikorps on the berlin workers, so it's possible I suppose. Only, I get the feeling that the SPD were much more in control in Germany than the Mensheviks ever were in Russia.

[theblackmask]

Fascism relies heavily on tricking the working class into thinking that they are working in their own interests. The Bolsheviks did enough tricking of the working class to deny any populist right wing movement room to grow.

[The Cheshire Cat]

Not really. It's not so likely that Italian Fascists would have gone to Russia and begun to recruit people to their ideology. Seems like a bizarre notion to me.

Idea's do not have to spread by individuals travelling the world and preaching on the street, setting up recruiting stations etc. Idea's spread by word too. In a couple of years time, rumors of fascism, papers about fascism, and what not could have reached some Russian general or a group of Russians. They could have picked up the idea, which would probably change a little bit of Italian fascism because it was spread by word. And maybe the general would have thought, hey, this might work for me. And thus creating a fascist group in Russia.


Right. So you don't mean 'fascists' you mean 'miltaristic nationalists' or something. Well, there were plenty of them, from Kornilov onwards. You could argue that the White generals were pretty much all militaristic nationalists. I'm sure that the Whites did recruit from the same layers of the population that traditionally have been fertile ground for fascism.

They don't necessarily had to call themselves fascist for my question, no. And their ideology might have differed a little bit of Italian fascism.

Kornilov was not exactly what I meant, at least, I don't think so from what I have read so far. I have only read the wikipedia page about him and there is little that hints to fascist-like idea's. The Black Hundreds, Maletoth and fug pointed me at them, is closer to what I meant.


And no, there's little reason why they would have much to do with the Mensheviks and SRs, but as the freikorps have been mentioned, it was of course the Social-democratic Party in Germany that unleashed the Freikorps on the berlin workers, so it's possible I suppose

I guess you are right here, maybe they were able to get along despite their different ideologies.


Only, I get the feeling that the SPD were much more in control in Germany than the Mensheviks ever were in Russia.

I don't think Russia was a country in that time that could be fully controlled. It was too large. Germany was smaller, and had less different cultures.

[Blake's Baby]

The thing about fascism is that it is militant nationalism based on mythologies of 'renewal' and a 'corporate state'. It's entirely possible that such a mix could have developed in Russia. Any general claiming he's on a mission to 'save' Russia and 'cleanse' the evil influence of the Jewish (or 'German') revolutionaries, could be perhaps be regarded as 'proto-fascist'. Kornilov's call to Russians to 'save their dying land' sounds like a typical Fascist position.

But withhout some better information on whether he had any real political policies it's difficult to say that it really was a form of fascism.