Makhno and Anti-semitism

[Forward Union]

A contemporary Jewish historian of the time, M Tchernikover, wrote of the makhnovists this

“It is undeniable that, of all the armies, including the Red Army, the Makhnovists behaved best with regard to the civilian population in general and the Jewish population in particular.”

Firstly, a little personal background to Nestor Makhno himself. Makhnos father died, one year after his sons birth. Nestors mother, looked after him in conjunction with a Jewish family, the Vitchinskys, with whom he continued to correspond even in the millitary campaings of his later life.

In prison, he worked closely with the Jewish Anarchist, Iossip Ader of Kovno with whom he wrote highly, and when makhno escaped prison to set up the organisation that would later become the Revolutionary Insurgent Army of Ukraine, one of the first and most prominant volonters was the Jew, Chmerka Kchiva. From Nestors Home Villiage.

The Cultural Department of the Makhnovists, was mopstly Jewish, with three out of five memebrs being jewish. Teper, editor of "The Voice of the Makhnovist worker" in Kharkov, was also Jewish. Many of the Makhnovist millitary command were also Jewish including Taranovsky and Charovsky.

Most notably there was a Jewish artillery battery of Gulyai Polie (makhnos home town), led by Abraham Schneider, who makhno praised as extremely brave fighters for the Makhnovists. Makhno’s life was actually saved in 1918 by Moise Kogan, a Gulyai Polie Jew. Who was later ellected as head of the local workers council. When Makhno was in exile in paris, he worked closely with Jewish anarchists Mett and Valetsky to dispell the Leninist slander of makhnos antisemitism.

But where did it come from? Well, it wasn't entirely fabricated. There was an instance in which several individuals, who were members of makhnos army took part in violent attacks against a Jewish community in Novo-Uspenovka. They were not acting under orders and recieved the death penalty. Several of them were also Bolsheviks.

Makhno said on the matter

"Every attempted pogrom or looting from our side was nipped in the bud. All found guilty of such acts were invariably shot out of hand for their misdeeds. This was the case for instance in May 1919, when some peasant insurgents from Novo-Uspenovka, on leaving the front line for some rest in the rear, came upon two decomposed corpses near a Jewish settlement: assuming these to be the corpses of insurgents murdered by members of the Jewish colony, they vented their spleen on the colony and slaughtered around thirty of its inhabitants. That same day, my Staff dispatched a commission of inquiry to the colony. It discovered the tracks of the perpetrators of the butchery. I immediately sent a special detachment to their village to place them under arrest. Those responsible for the attack on the Jewish colony, namely six individuals, one of them the Bolshevik district commissar, were all shot on 13 May 1919. " Struggles against the state and other essays (http://www.spunk.org/texts/writers/makhno/sp001781/chap6.html)

There were also accounts at the time from contemporary Jewish historians that The bolsheviks could be attributed to nearly 600 Jewish deaths, the White army, thousands, but hardly any were applicable to the Makhnovists.

Makhnos 'antisemitism' is a mixture of wartime Bolshevik propaganda, and the ideologically driven paranoia of a Parisian political club, who created a fabricated story based on half truths and outright bullshit, whilst ignoring tons of facts. Interestingly they refused to let Makhno speak at their meetings.

I will end, again on a quote by makhno.

"Perhaps my enemies will make capital of this "

[Random Precision]

Has anyone recently said that he was, in fact, anti-Semitic?

For the record, I agree. There's quite enough to say against Makhno without throwing in discredited lies.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 09:02 pm
Has anyone recently said that he was, in fact, anti-Semitic?

For the record, I agree. There's quite enough to say against Makhno without throwing in discredited lies.

Soviet Pants for one believes that makhno was an anti-semite. Tragic Clown accused the Makhnovists of planning genocide :lol: I know there are other nutters out there.

As for your other criticisms, fair enough, I look forward to debating them in future. But it's hard to have a productive debate about Makhno and the Ukranian anarchist movement, if certain Leninists still cling to rediculous accusations of anti-semitism.

[bezdomni]

Interesting.

I didn't know that Makhno shot anti-semites. That's news to me.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Nestor Makhno's army would sometimes target Mennonites because they thought of them as Kulaks and better off than regular Ukrainian peasants. Hundreds of Mennonites were murdered during this period, and villages around Chortitza, Zagradovka and Nikolaipol destroyed.

Those damn authoritarian Mennonites! Burn all of their fucking churches down and rape and brutalize their women and children! We will not stop until every last person with a bookmark in a Bible is tracked down and shot down for the dogs they are!

While the Bolsheviks had, admitingly, committed far more atrocities in regard to civilian casualties, it was concentrated in an a given area, under certain circumstances, and with a level of careful precision. It was not directed in accordance to some irrational doctrine mandated by a drunk maniac, but with a critical understanding that it was an act of war, rather than an act of prejudice. This fetishization of Makhno by anarchists makes me weary, considering that many wrote that he was an "anarcho-stalinist" whose actions were contrary to that of any school of anarchist thought itself. It was Makhno that informed railway workers that demanded wages that "We are not like the Bolsheviks to feed you, we don’t need the railways; if you need money, take the bread from those who need your railways and telegraphs." It is a claim that he was arguing for worker's control over the rail-way, but in reality, his peasant guerillas had no interest in the railroads of the urban centers. He also told the workers of Briansk that "because youdo not want to support Makhno’s movement and demand pay for the repairs of the armored car, I will take this armored car for free and pay nothing." With the lack of price controls, and the complete scrapping of currency, it meant that the workers who were dependent on a wage to eat were at risk. His utopian projects, at best, were defunct by the constant conflict in the region, and his policies actually lead to the further destabilization of the transportation of the grain supply from that region to the cities.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 04:20 am

Nestor Makhno's army would sometimes target Mennonites because they thought of them as Kulaks and better off than regular Ukrainian peasants. Hundreds of Mennonites were murdered during this period, and villages around Chortitza, Zagradovka and Nikolaipol destroyed.

Those damn authoritarian Mennonites! Burn all of their fucking churches down and rape and brutalize their women and children! We will not stop until every last person with a bookmark in a Bible is tracked down and shot down for the dogs they are!
I don't have time to respond to your entire post, but I intend to later. Basically I need to source and reference sites, but they're blocked at work. So You'll have to wait, however;


This fetishization of Makhno by anarchists makes me weary, considering that many wrote that he was an "anarcho-stalinist" whose actions were contrary to that of any school of anarchist thought itself.

False. Makhnos actions were contrary to liberalism, anti-organisationalism (individualism), and pacifism. All of which have infected the anarchist movement, but do not define it. Makhno later solidified his political practices and theories into a discussion document called "The platform" which is a material of much contention within the anarchist movement, but regardless, platformism and it's candid predesesor, makhnovism are both Anarchist ideas. Even Durruti and Kim Jawa Jin (The Korean Makhno) were supporters of Makhnos ideas.


It was Makhno that informed railway workers that demanded wages that "We are not like the Bolsheviks to feed you, we don’t need the railways; if you need money, take the bread from those who need your railways and telegraphs." It is a claim that he was arguing for worker's control over the rail-way, but in reality, his peasant guerillas had no interest in the railroads of the urban centers.

Good!
You have failed to grasp the fundemental nature of Anarchism. I mean, it genuinely wasn't in the Pesants immediate interests, that the railroads worked, and unlike Bolshevism, a single administrative body/party does not have to take the interests of the entire people upon itself, it is upto the workers of those respective areas to govern themselves. Which is what happened in Ukraine. The Makhnovists had no administrative power over the workers free soviets, and could only act in accordance with their mandates. Which more often than not, included defending them tooth and nail.

[Forward Union]

Also, on the topic of the railway workers in Ukraine, I reccomend you watch this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1aYxFTOkZQ) to conclude exactly how that issue was resolved. By 1919 even the urban centres of ukraine were part of the system of free soviets.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 04:20 am
Those damn authoritarian Mennonites! Burn all of their fucking churches down and rape and brutalize their women and children! We will not stop until every last person with a bookmark in a Bible is tracked down and shot down for the dogs they are!

Well, correct me if I am wrong but unpunished acts of rape, vandalism, banditry and looting are typical in times of social unheaval?

Churches were taken from "The church" and given to the communties themselves. As the 2nd point in the aims and principals of the makhnovists declares;


2. The land of the gentry, the church and other enemies of the toilers with all its livestock and equipment must be transferred to the peasants, who will live on it only by their own labour. The transfer will take place in an organized manner, according to the decisions of peasant assemblies, which must take into acount not only their own local interests but also the common interests of the whole oppressed labouring peasantry.

That sounds perfectly acceptable to me. If the property owners fought back, then forgive me if I turn a blind eye to their execution.

The needless masacre, looting and banditry of the Menonite communities is however contrary to the politics of the Mahnovists. Within point 7 of the aims and principals we find the following; "Nor must they [the peoples self defence militias] allow the emergence of banditry or looting. Anyone convicted of counter-revolutionary acts or of banditry will be shot on the spot."

and also point 6


6. Freedom of speech, press, assembly, trade unions, and the like is an inalienable right of every worker, and any limitation of this right represents a counter-revolutionary act.

[Labor Shall Rule]

The peasantry is incapable of leading a socialist revolution, much less constructing a socialist society. In a mixture of a few small cities and towns, and an even larger line of villages, it is obvious that one social stratum would come out in a stronger position than the other, which was, in their given case, the peasants. This means that, even if there was an existence of collective farms, it would of ran flat up against the long-term demands of the urban working class, which found itself in a compromising nightmare through Makhno's theory of "allowing them to go off and govern their own areas."

Paul Avrich put it like this.


The Makhnovshchina reached its crest in the months following the victory at Peregonovka. During October and November, Makhno occupied Ekaterinoslav and Aleksandrovsk for several weeks and thus obtained his first chance to apply the concepts of anarchism to city life. Makhno's aim was to throw off domination of every type and to encourage economic and social self-determination. Thus, when the railroad workers of Aleksandrovsk complained that they had not been paid for many weeks, he advised them to take control of the railway lines and charge the passengers and freight shippers what seemed a fari price for their services. Such utopian projects, however, failed to win over more than a small minority of workingmen, for, unlike the farmers and artisans of the village, who were independent producers accustomed to managing their own affairs, factory workers and miners operated as interdependent parts of a complicated industrial machine and were lost without the guidance of supervisors and technical specialists. Furthermore, the peasants and artisans could barter the products of their labour, whereas the urban workers depended on regular wages for their survival. Makhno, mnoreover, compunded the confusion when he recognized all paper money issued by his predecessors - Ukrainian nationalists, Whites, and Bolsheviks alike. He never understood the complexities of an urban economy, not did he care to understand them. He detested the "poison" of the cities and cherished the natural simplicity of the peasant environment into which he had been born."

Besides, the part of Ukraine that was most vulnerable to imperialist intervention was the gap controlled by Makhno. They so commonly make magic out of his figure, and claim that he was able to fight any army that was thrown at him, when, in reality, it was the Red Army doing the whole crust of fighting. The entire region was also a plot of vast agricultural resources, witch was vital to control in order to feed the cities without any disruptions at a time in which they were starving.

It might be contrary to what the Makhnovists claimed, but why didn't they execute officers for the wholesale slaughter of Mennonite communities? Maybe I am just ignorant though, I encourage you to find me some sort of source that would prove me wrong. It is considered by their church to be worse than the later oppression by the Soviets (who legalized religion as a private affair).

[catch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 07:28 pm
The peasantry is incapable of leading a socialist revolution, much less constructing a socialist society. In a mixture of a few small cities and towns, and an even larger line of villages, it is obvious that one social stratum would come out in a stronger position than the other, which was, in their given case, the peasants. This means that, even if there was an existence of collective farms, it would of ran flat up against the long-term demands of the urban working class, which found itself in a compromising nightmare through Makhno's theory of "allowing them to go off and govern their own areas."

You need to provide some kind of basis for statement like this, this is just an assertion.

A massive of the workers in Petrograd from 1914-1918 were first generation peasant migrants, only a small core of 'hereditary proletarians' there. The Red Army was also full of peasants (less so the navy) - so contrasting the Makhnovschina with some kind of monolithic proletarian Russian army is a dead end.



Besides, the part of Ukraine that was most vulnerable to imperialist intervention was the gap controlled by Makhno. They so commonly make magic out of his figure, and claim that he was able to fight any army that was thrown at him, when, in reality, it was the Red Army doing the whole crust of fighting.
This is an absolute lie. Have you read Skirda's book on Makhno - it details much of the military history of the period, and there were many occasions that the Red Army retreated from the Whites and left Makhno to it, out on a limb.



The entire region was also a plot of vast agricultural resources, witch was vital to control in order to feed the cities without any disruptions at a time in which they were starving.
Sounds like good old Russian imperialism to me. Dicatorship of the industrial proletariat didn't mean "dictatorship of the proletariat over the peasantry and rural working class". The Bolsheviks' agrarian policies reduced agricultural production by forcing many poor peasants into producing the minimum possible for subsistence.


I encourage you to find me some sort of source that would prove me wrong. It is considered by their church to be worse than the later oppression by the Soviets (who legalized religion as a private affair).
You could start with Arshinov, then Skirda (I don't like Skirda's prose style, but the research is solid). There's also a lot of online articles here: http://libcom.org/tags/makhnovists

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 09:13 pm
This is an absolute lie. Have you read Skirda's book on Makhno - it details much of the military history of the period, and there were many occasions that the Red Army retreated from the Whites and left Makhno to it, out on a limb.

Furthermore the Makhnovists helped save petrograd from certain recaputre then the counter revolutionary white army went for the attack.

[black magick hustla]

demonization of the makhnovchina from the leninists is just part of a heavy ideological luggage inherited through generations. It is so irrational that you get from time to time people like TC arguing that makhno was planning genocide.

[Intelligitimate]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politic...2c5c355c3d587f9 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.socialism.trotsky/browse_thread/thread/69da311d9dbca7ce/22c5c355c3d587f9?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=Makhno+pogroms&rnum=3#22c5c355c3d587f9)


ubject: Pogroms by Makhno's troops
From: [email protected] (JOHN DEWEY HOLMES)
Date: 1996/04/12
Message-Id: <4km5hl&#036;[email protected]>
Organization: San Francisco State University
Newsgroups: alt.politics.socialism.trotsky

About a week ago, I was challenged to produce the evidence I have
that Makhno&#39;s troops carried out pogroms against Jews. Well, here
it is.

My computer and front-end system are not talented at cross-posting,
and this posting will only go to alt.politics.socialism.trotsky.
I think it would be appropriate if this material is cross-posted to
talk.politics.soviet, where the challenge originated from, as
well as anarchist newsgroups, which one would think would want to
see it.

The origin of this material is as follows:

Five years ago, during the Gulf War, I participated in anti-war
demonstrations together with Perry Matlock, an anarchist and
Makhno supporter in the Bay Area. I challenged him on Makhno&#39;s
pogroms. He took a very serious attitude to the issue, and had
a friend who had knowledge of Russian and Yiddish. He traveled
to New York, xeroxed the file on Makhno in the Tcherikover Archive
at YIVO, (Voline&#39;s book on Makhno quotes from an interview Voline
had with Tcherikover, in which Tcherikover, compiler of a famous
archive on the Ukrainian pogroms, asserts that Makhno&#39;s record
is clean), and mailed it to me, together with some translations.

I translated the remaining Yiddish and French materials. There
are also some Russian and Hebrew materials which remain untrans-
lated. The complete file, together with a series of lengthy
letters between Matlock and myself, was xeroxed for the
Prometheus Research Library in New York, which is open to
qualified scholars upon appointment. According to the PRL
brochure, "researchers are required to send written requests about
specific projects and for appointments," to:

Prometheus Research Library
Box 185, Canal Street Station
New York, NY 10013
(212) 966-1866

So anyone in who wants to read the complete file, and doesn&#39;t
read Yiddish, doesn&#39;t have to go to YIVO. PRL has it all, in
English.

Here are two documents I translated from the "Makhno file" for
Perry Matlock, interspersed with occasional comments by me,
usually identified with JH, my initials:

Elias Tcherikower Archives, YIVO, File #29, folios 2623-2681

...
2652, 2653, 2654, 2655, 2656, 2657, 2658, 2659

(The below translation is preliminary. The original copy here is
particularly tough to translate, because
Jewish alphabet typewriters, unfortunately, produce many
consonants that are only distinguished from each other by
little squiggles that almost disappear if the copy is blurry.
And also, there&#39;s always typos ... actual printed material is
much easier.-JH-)

The Pogrom Activity of the Makhnovites
/A report pulled together on the basis of documents which
(find themselves?) at the disposal of the "editorial collec-
tive to publish materials about the pogroms in the Ukraine and
White Russia./

The objective of this report is to give a specific
overview of the pogrom activity of the Makhnovites. Thereby it
must already initially be considered that on the basis of the
incomplete materials which exist about the question and find
themselves at the disposal of the editorial collective, it
isn&#39;t always possible to be certain if the different bands
which in one or another spot committed pogroms against Jews
thereby (verb) or by the population become called "Makh-
novites", really are Makhnovites, are under his oversight or
were a (noun) with Makhno. Even less often is it possible to
be certain if Makhno himself really was part of these pogrom
stories or even took part in the robberies.
According to the chronological dates the documents of the
editorial collective paint the following picture of the
pogroms of the Makhnovites, committed in the following towns:

Yekaterinoslav
At the end of December and the beginning of January 1919
the insurgent detachments of Makhno fought around and in
Yekaterinoslav with the Petliuraites. The fighting in the city
itself and the neighboring suburbs went on for seven days. The
city was badly shot up by artillery. The Makhnovites looted
and burned the "Azyorne" marketplace. Also the entire commer-
cial region was looted. The result when the battle was ended
was that 83 Jewish victims were brought to the cemetery for
burial, from which only a lesser number were caused by
accidental bullets and shells. The remainder were savagely
slain by the Makhnovites. The excesses took a purely anti-
Semitic character (footnote in original: [1. Materials from
&#96;Yekapo&#39;, report by M. Aspiz, written 24 August 1922.]).

Roseve (Kiev gub.)
(gub. is abbreviation for gubernia i.e. province-JH-)
In February 1919 the Petliuraite detachments from
Mirgorod were continually plundering and looting Roseve. On
February 16, a group of soldiers that called themselves
"Makhnovites" showed up in Roseve, and began dragging bags of
sugar, meal and other products from Jewish houses, later also
different household goods[2. Materials from &#96;Kope&#39; report from
authorized (word) testimony by Moshe Zarachansky]. During
these attacks a Jew, Riabchinsky, was raped and murdered. The
soldiers said "we have to put fear into Jewish hearts." The
victims maintain that the soldiers had (held toasts to? not
sure) "batko Makhno".

Novo-Poltava colony (Kherson gub.)
In August 1919 a detachment of 30 Makhnovites attacked
the colony and began to plunder. The Jewish self-defense,
however, drove them out. The second day, a Makhnovite train
and two (somethings) went through looting and murdering
nonstop. The self-defense was destroyed, the "ik"o" farm was
ruined. All told, there were 84 murdered Jews. 800 houses were
plundered.[3. Report by D. Traibman, who in the name of the
"gubaufravak" gubernia evacuation administration investigated
the Jewish colony of (Kherson-something?).] Other sources
mention another number of Jewish murder victims, namely
122.[4. "Jewish Thought", #19, September 11, 1919, Odessa.]
According to the latter information, the pogrom was done by
the Makhnovites and (something, something) by the colony.

Novy-Bug. colony/Khers. gub.
At the same time, the Makhnovites made a pogrom in Novy-
Bug. There the (plural noun) had a permanent character over
the period of two months, there were 22 killed.[5. Report of
D. Breitman, see above remarks.]

Romanovka/Khers.gub.
The Makhnovites showed up at this time in several
locations in the Kherson gubernia. A band arrived in Romanovka
and demanded of the Jews that they should round up 20,000
rubles in contributions in 20 minutes. All the Jewish women
would be taken as guarantees. The contribution is already
almost gathered, but seeing that the (illegible) are ap-
proaching, the Makhnovites left everything behind and fled.[6.
"Jewish Thought" #23, 11 October 1919, Odessa.]

Bratskeye/Khers. Gub.
At the end of August a band of Makhnovites showed up in
Bratskeye, near Elisavetgrad. It was Friday morning. In a
period of about 4 hours, all the Jewish families, about 120,
were looted out by the band. Also, murdered was a (75-year old
man? not sure), a (glazer?), who stood against the cut-throats
who wanted to rape his daughter-in-law. (something, something)
3 girls.[7. Information from Wilf-Aaron Dubkin, submitted to
Odessa kehilah (Jewish community organization) 9/27/1919.]

Melitopol
The date of the Melitopol pogrom is not established, but
it was around about the same time. The (something) information
indicates that in the first days that the Makhnovites arrived
in the city, they committed a pogrom, and only afterwards,
when the Jews had paid them 15 million in contributions, did
they stop the pogrom. At the train terminal Jewish victims lay
about.[9. "Our Word" #10, 21 October 1919, Odessa.] The same
(illegible) in general another source also.[10. "Jewish
Thought" #29, Odessa.]

Chudnov
The Chudnov pogrom (illegible) 1919 by a regular Makhnov-
ite military unit -- "L". In the city a 1,000 men (showed up?)
with the slogan "beat the Jews, save Russia." They (something)
on the Jewish houses and in one night slaughtered all of 22
Jews. The also raped a number of Jewish women and, in ad-
dition, looted the entire shtetl ... For 12 days on end
Chudnov lay in the hands of the wild band. The Chudnow
population did (out of something) survive the horrible affair
and put up with the horrible tribute of gold, other products,
gold (something) things.[11. Materials from "Kope", report by
H. Frolkim.]

Yekaterinoslav
The Makhnovite pogroms in October 1919 were mostly
committed by their military units. Yekaterinoslav was in the
month of October (several?) weeks a battleground between the
Makhnovites and the Denikinites. Both sides had (illegible).
There wasn&#39;t one day when (illegible). All told, there were
(during?) this period 180 Jews killed, out of whom 66 were
(verb). (From accidental slaughter?) 37 people fell, and the
others were murdered by Denikin&#39;s and Makhno&#39;s soldiers.[12.
Materials from "Yekapo" report by M. Aspiz 8/24 1920.] The
Makhnovites alone were in Yekaterinoslav from 28 October to 6
November. Officially there was even an order from the revolu-
tionary insurgents&#39; committee against looting, for free trade
and for (receiving?) "rat&#39;n-gelt" (Soviet money? a revolution-
ary tax?-not sure). The poor got the "rat&#39;n-gelt", the Jews
unwillingly. The Jewish shops were closed, and (something) the
6th of November they were forced to reopen. The Makhnovites
themselves looted very little, but they released the criminals
from the jails, who committed assaults, but not specifically
against Jews. This is when the organ of the (something) was
published, the "Nabat". The insurgents issued an order, which
came out for organized expropriations, but against looting.
This time, Makhno indubitably was present. He led negotiations
with the city council and the professional organizations about
organizing government, but they fell through.[13. Materials
from the editorial collective, testimony by student, Yehuda
Barishansky.] There are also witnesses, who saw Makhno himself
in the city, (assisting? standing in the way? not sure) while
a (comrade?) from the insurgents looted a Jewish shop.[14.
"Forward" (Forverts) #8133, 17 January 1920, New York.
Testimony of Frida Greenfeld, written down by H. Nagel. (Note:
unlike most of the references here, this is checkable. Com-
plete microfilm records of the Forverts are held in many
places, among others UCLA and the N.Y. Public Library.-JH-)

Kazatin
In October 1919 a Petliuraite unit took Kazatin. A
(something) train, which looted and murdered the local Jews.
Together with the Petliuaites were added "Makhnovites" who had
arrived from Chudnov, around 300 men. They committed atroci-
ties in Kazatin. They murdered the Jews Kodel and Belilovsky.
40 women were raped. The Makhnovites were there for 12 days.
The claims on the Jews reached a level of 5 million rubles.
The attacks on non-Jews took an episodic character. The
Makhnovites made an accord with the Petliuraites on the issue
of struggle against the Denikinites. On their path, the
Makhnovites committed pogroms in Chudnov-Wolinski, Wa(??)ovka,
Skvire, Ruzshin, Gelopolye and other points. If these were,
sincerely, Makhnovites is not known a section from them had
certainly belonged to the 4th soviet people&#39;s (something) and
the 6th people&#39;s and other bolshevik units. They (something)
said that they had split from the bolsheviks and begun an
uprising against soviet power under the slogan "Down with the
Jews and the (Whites?-not sure).[15. Materials from "Poale-
Zion". Testimony by the secretary of the Kazatin Poale-Zion
organization, Goldfein.]
...

In the possession of the editorial collective is an
official document (here Makhno&#39;s May 1919 proclamation against
pogroms is summarized-JH).
assembled by I. Klinov
(something in Yiddish script) 1922

(Here I&#39;m inserting an excerpt from a lengthy letter from me
to Perry Matlock, commenting on the above document.-JH-)

"The document entitled The Pogrom Activity of the
Makhnovites, folios 2652 through 2659, by I. Klinov for the
"editorial committee to publish materials about the pogroms in
the Ukraine and White Russia," has dates and locations many of
which are checkable. In chronological order:
Yekaterinoslav: Arthur Adams&#39; *Bolsheviks in the Ukraine*
(p. 94) precisely confirms the time period in which Klinov
alleges that the Makhnovites, led in this case personally by
Makhno, fought over the city with the Petliuraites...
Novo-Poltava, Novy-Bug, Romanovka, Bratskeye, Melitopol:
These pogroms all took place in the month of August, im-
mediately after the famous "congress of the partisans of the
Tauride region, Kherson and Yekaterinoslav" at which Makhno
shot Grigoriev and merged Grigoriev&#39;s former forces into his.
They all took place in Kherson gubernia, which was Grigoriev&#39;s
base area, and were presumably committed by Grigorievites now
accepted by Makhno as Makhnovites. So much for the notion,
which even Trotsky shared to a certain extent, that Makhno&#39;s
shooting of Grigoriev was some sort of service to the revolu-
tion in general and Jews in particular&#33; Obviously, shooting
Grigoriev was merely a grandstand ploy which doubled Makhno&#39;s
fighting forces (see Adams&#39; comments). Voline says that
"Grigoriev&#39;s young peasants, of whom the overwhelming majority
were, in spite of everything, imbued with a revolutionary
spirit that had been abused by their chief, could enter the
Makhnovist Insurrectionary Army if they wished. But nearly all
of these recruits had to be dismissed later on ... the
Makhnovist combatants ... thought that in time they could have
educated them, but in the existing conditions they could not
concern themselves with such matters, and so, in order not to
prejudice the good name of the Insurrectionary Army, they
discharged them." In the inflamed conditions of the Ukrainian
civil war, it was hardly possible to treat every insurrecting
band of peasant partisans whose hands were not spotless as
pogromist counter-revolutionaries. That&#39;s why the Bolsheviks
were willing to enlist Makhno, and even Grigoriev (although,
as Adams documents, there were serious questions about this
particular decision of Ukrainian Red Army commander Antonov-
Ovseenko among the Ukrainian Bolsheviks). But to simply enlist
Grigoriev&#39;s fighters after killing their commander, fresh from
the mass murder of Jews in Yelizavetgrad, and then to just
discharge them from the ranks without punishment as they
continued their murderous ways, means effectively that Makhno
did have a lot of Jewish blood on his hands...
Yekaterinoslav: The Makhnovites behavior in Yekaterinos-
lav does seem to have been better the second time around,
although it is hard to tell for sure, as this was the least
legible and hardest to translate section of the manuscript.
Yekaterinoslav (now Dnepropetrovsk) was a large industrial
city and an important Bolshevik base (the so-called "right
wing" of the Ukrainian CP, who advocated concentrating on
organizing the mostly Russian-speaking proletariat of the
Kharkov-Donbas heavy industry region and mostly ignoring the
Ukrainian peasantry, were nicknamed, according to Adams, the
"Yekaterinoslavs"). Probably Makhno seized the city from
Denikin in tacit cooperation with Bolshevik trade unionists.
As Trotsky&#39;s military writings show, Bolshevik policy towards
Makhno had become more favorable after the Grigoriev affair.
Kazatin: Makhno&#39;s main force retreated into the no man&#39;s
land between Denikin and Petliura in September. The text seems
to indicate that Kazatin (and Chudnov) were towns in this
area. The pogromists here seem to be Red Army soldiers that
had gone over to Makhno but had not participated in Makhno&#39;s
move behind Denikin&#39;s lines into the Yekaterinoslav area. So
apparently according to Tcherikover&#39;s bookkeeping this goes
down as a "Red Army pogrom"&#33; Klinov&#39;s claim that the Makhnov-
ites "made an accord with the Petliuraites on the issue of the
struggle against the Denikinites" ... is confirmed by General
Denikin himself, who on this particular issue obviously has no
reason to lie. So if dubious semi-followers of Makhno&#39;s
imitate the pogrom habits of Makhno&#39;s temporary ally, Makhno
can hardly be excused from blame, especially given that Makhno
had the alternative option of an alliance with the much more
powerful Red Army, whose commander, Trotsky, had a semi-
favorable attitude towards him at this moment.
2660

(There is a date in Yiddish script at the head of this
document. It is unfortunate that the newspaper this article
was copied out of cannot be determined from the copy, since
the author of this article is identical to the previous one.
The translation below is hasty, and probably overly idiomatic,
but I think captures the spirit pretty well-JH):

I. Klinov
What would happen, if we had a Jewish trial for Makhno?

Makhno, the well-known hero Makhno, has unconditionally
"ferglussed" (not in my dictionary) himself to argue things
out with the Jewish people. Nobody suggested it, nobody
demanded it, but in the days of general interest in Schwartz-
bard&#39;s fate and the role of the "Petliuraites", Makhno has
gotten a bit uncomfortable, in that everyone&#39;s completely
forgot about him. And he&#39;s sent out an open letter to the
press with a special demand "to the Jewish people" to prove
that he was a pogromchik.
I don&#39;t know if some sort of institution of ours would
have an urge to get mixed up with Makhno&#39;s little paper. From
the side of Makhno and his comrades this is, in any case, not
the first try at rehabilitating him. One should have the
apprehension that in different periods and circumstances,
Makhno&#39;s name has been attached to ideological movements. Not
considering that his military units also became reknowned as
pogrom-(makers?), over no such pogrom hero has such a sharp
(something) been carried out over the columns of the world
press about the basic nature of their action, as has been seen
over the "makhnovshchina". Articles "for" and "against",
various testimony, statements of condemnation and hymns of
praise -- have all already been heard numberless times about
the rebellious Russian phenomenon who has appeared to struggle
against the Hetman and Petliura and Denikin and the Bolsheviks
-- against everything and everyone...
People have already forgot a bit about Makhno, but a
couple years back, on the eve of his treason trial in Poland,
a world, whose headquarters at that time was in a certain
sense Berlin, turned around Makhno, which had begun to lead a
counter-attack, a defense struggle for the good name of "batko
Makhno", before the trial was even begun. And the most
remarkable thing in the whole affair was then that Makhno&#39;s
friends and advocates brought out a few Jews, firstly the
famous anarchist intellectual Voline, whose Jewish name is
Eichenbaum. What this Eichenbaum and other of his comrades
maintained is very interesting. Because, if someone sincerely
should be found, who should handle the clarification of
Makhno&#39;s guilt or innocence. It would be the same charges and
the lawyers would surely be the same young Jewish anarchist
types ... Voline was the one who was (connected?) with the
"makhnovschchina" during the battles on Russian territory. The
attempt to bind up the elemental forces with anarchism was
already begun in the year 1918, mainly through a group of
returned American anarchists. Cultural work in Makhno&#39;s army
was carried out at that time by a Jewish-American woman,
Yelena Keller, and Jews were sincerely found continually
around Makhno.
But who was Makhno himself? In Berlin, in the Russian-
language "Anarkhistichesky Vyestnik", was printed Makhno&#39;s
memoirs. And from them, if you accept them as honest, is to be
seen that the whole legend that Makhno was a popular educator,
is lies; the "batko" himself maintains everywhere that his
lineage is completely kosher, he is a poor man&#39;s son, was a
shepherd, a worker. From sixteen years old a revolutionary,
later condemned to hard labor and first in the year 1918 a
mass leader.
Also at that time appeared in Berlin M. Arshinov&#39;s book,
"The History of the &#96;Makhnovshchina&#39;". The fellow who wrote
this book is a man with a serious past. From time to time, he
has committed terrorist deeds, in 1906 blew up a police(sta-
tion?) in Amid near Yekaterinoslav, was condemned to death,
escaped, participated in the "makhnovshchina", and if Makhno
must resort to depending on means of defense, he will doubt-
less get assistance from Arshinov&#39;s book, whose obvious goal
is to immortalize Makhno. If the "makhnovshchina" did not
appear, according to Arshinov, the hetman would be sitting
upon the Ukraine to this day and the Dekinites would be
(something) and the Bolsheviks wouldn&#39;t be able to do any-
thing.
And Arshinov gives much space (from national considera-
tions?) in the "makhnovshchina" (public school?) to make up a
list of Jews, who were vice chairman in Makhno&#39;s revolutionary
council in Gulyai-Polye, commandants in Makhno&#39;s cavalry
regiments, leaders of the agitational activity. Then he
relates how the Jewish colonies in Mariupol, Meriusker(?) and
Aleksandrovsk districts unanimously supported Makhno, ad-
ditionally participating with all working people in Makhno&#39;s
conventions, and saw in him their protection against reaction.
Arshinov even claims that in February 1919 Makhno allowed the
Jewish colonies to organize self-defense and supplied them
with weapons. And stories are told about Jewish fighters in
the ranks of the Makhnovites. Thus truly heroic feats were
performed by a tailor, who commanded an artillery battery.
Makhno himself has to thank his very survival to Jews. A
resident of Gulyai-Polye, a Jew, rescued him, when he fell in
the hands of the Germans in July with a suitcase full of
anarchist literature; the Jew bought him free, paid a ransom
for him.
Makhno&#39;s comrades in Berlin, naturally, understood in
their time, that they would hardly succeed with a system of
"something" (in quotes. Hebrew word probably). Claiming
vociferously that Makhno&#39;s army is innocent in the face of
God, has not a drop of Jewish blood on its hands, is laugh-
able, as in the different pogrom archives lie many a record of
Makhno&#39;s pogroms. What then? The intercessors come forward and
mostly condemn in the pogroms the Grigorievites and other
accidental bandits, which got into Makhno&#39;s military. The
headquarters however, the leading power, would have been clean
of anti-Semitism.
When Makhno once went through the "Verkhny Tokmak" train
station, he saw a poster with the slogan "Kill the Jews, save
the revolution, long live Makhno&#33;"
He went and sought out which of his men had put up the
poster and shot the poor bastard on the spot.
In the Gorkaye shtetl, Aleksandrovsk district, Makhnov-
ites killed 20 Jewish families, and Makhno put 7 guilty
soldiers up against the wall.
But the special service of Makhno was that he shot down
the butcher Grigoriev with his own hands.
Arshinov describes this in detail. When Grigoriev began
his uprising against the Bolsheviks, he sent out his famous
"Universal", in which it is stated, that "with the Ukraine&#39;s
(honest men washed in the blood of the Lamb?)" Makhno answered
with a call, in which he wrote and warned:
"Don&#39;t you hear in Grigoriev&#39;s words a dark call for
Jewish pogroms?"
And as it happened July 27, 1919, in the village of
Sentovo, near Aleksandria, the conference with the participa-
tion of both Makhno and Grigoriev, Makhno made Grigoriev pay
the price for his Jewish pogrom in Yelisavetgrad and shot him
down on the spot, shouting, "such unworthy men as Grigoriev
are a shame for all (povstantses-Ukrainian word probably-JH)&#33;"
What does all this prove? That Makhno is a tsaddik
(Hasidic saint), that he is entirely (zchai-Hebrew probably)
with respect to the Jews?
Yekaterinoslav Jews are in a position to put against this
episode ten times as many episodes, which testify to bloody
deeds of Makhno with his bands. The Jewish comrades of the
former ataman -- the ideological anarchists -- will fashion a
legend about the "makhnovshchina". In truth, the matter is
much simpler. There were many moments in which Makhno, led by
a group of intellectuals, also including Jews, behaved
decently, and one could even think that Makhno was a protector
of the poor Jewish population; these moments do not atone for
the excesses that the Jews suffered from the Makhnovites, as
from the other bands in the years of affliction.
And I think that just now the Jewish comrades of Makhno,
who can raise him so well in the divine reckoning, would have
done better to restrain their hero from this tactless publi-
city stunt, from (stirring up?) and chutzpah-ish reminders of
himself, from demanding a tribunal.

...
(end of material from "Makhno file")

The above material is not the only relevant material from
the file. The most grisly single document in the file is a
piece entitled "24 hours with the Makhnovites," which is
quite stomach-turning. Also there is a very interesting article
from a Jewish orthodox journal. And a whole slew of articles
from Yiddish, French and Russian anarchist journals defending
Makhno, none of which include any facts not found in Voline
or Arshinov&#39;s books. (One French anarchist article, with an
anti-Semitic tone, is unintentionally revealing). So, for
further information, I recommend contacting the PRL.

I visited YIVO myself in 1992, and asked Marek Webb, the main
archivist, what was the explanation for the evident contradiction
between the material in Tcherikover&#39;s "Makhno file" and
Tcherikover&#39;s statement to Voline that Makhno was innocent
of pogromism. Webb expressed the opinion that Tcherikover,
who stayed in Kiev, a center of Jewish safety and even cultural
revival, during the worst of the pogroms, had relied too
much on second-hand information vis-a-vis Makhno. He told me
that the archives now available since the collapse of the Soviet
Union all confirm overwhelmingly that Makhno&#39;s troops committed
pogroms. However, in the new Ukrainian Republic, Makhno, like
Petliura, is considered a great Ukrainian national hero, and
discussion of pogroms by Ukrainian national heros is discouraged.

The material I am posting is all from I. Klinov, an individual
I have no familiarity with.

Perhaps Tcherikover considered Klinov, who apparently was trying
to create a Ukrainian pogrom archive that would be a rival to
his own, to be unreliable for some reason. In any case, as Marek
Webb pointed out, the weight of evidence is unequivocable at this
point.

[email protected]

[Labor Shall Rule]

I would recommend this one ISR article about Makhno, it tears him to shreds.

It&#39;s an &#39;assertion&#39;? For all we know, the claims of the success of his projects in the urban centers are ignorant, considering that his memoirs didn&#39;t rarely recorded it; while his forces would go from city to city, emptying whole prisons, arbitrarily handing out all food and money, all during a time of complete economic and societal breakdown during war-time. His economic policies would of been damaging if he implemented them, and he did, so it is not an &#39;assertion&#39;, it&#39;s an educated conclusion. The entire price system collapsed, currency had no value due to his raids, and you all admitted it yourself, he denied the fact that they needed to reorganize production because "the workers of those respective areas should govern themselves," which shows that you do not understand the peasantry, let alone what must be done to reach socialism. A villager once recorded a raid,


"Food supply was primitive, on the traditional insurgent pattern: the bratishki—the Makhnovists’ name for each other—would scatter to the peasant huts on entering a village, and eat what God sent; there was thus no shortage, although plundering and thoughtless damage to peasant stock did occur; I saw them shoot peasant cattle for fun more than once, amid the howls of women and children."

The &#39;success&#39; of his projects are often exaggerated. Arshinov even admitted that the peasants involved in his communes were "only a minority of the population—especially those who did not have well-established farmlands." The area that he had control over constituted as less than 0.1% of the entire region of the Ukraine. It was their refusal of recognizing the material needs of modern production that lead to their disastrous policies, and their apathy to the living standards of the workers themselves. And though his own detachments elected officers, Makhno had &#39;veto&#39; power. He also established two secret police agencies that served the purpose of spreading their terror.

As for the military situation, you are lying. At its height, the Bolsheviks had "five million troops in sixteen armies, fought along a 5,000-mile front, and produced all their own weaponry." While Makhno’s army "peaked at 30,000 troops, never fought outside the Ukraine, and relied on others for their weapons." Not only that, but Denikin broke through Makhno&#39;s thin line once, forcing the Red Army to retreat since a large gap was opened that gave them a better vantage point for a later offensive.

Those workers were &#39;proletarianized&#39; by the way.

As for "good old Russian imperialism," you are ignoring that there were Bolsheviks across Ukraine too, and as a matter of fact, the All-Ukraine Congress of Soviets held control over all local decisions, and provided most of the regiments that fought in the area against Denikin.

[syndicat]

in regard to Int&#39;s long set of translations, you have to keep in mind the following. when Makhno&#39;s army held a common camp with the army of Grigoriev, one of the things that Grigoriev was denounced for to the assembled soldiers, was that he had authorized anti-Jewish pogroms, and, according to Arshinov&#39;s account, Grigoriev then went for his pistol and was shot. Quite a large part of Grigoriev&#39;s army was absorbed into Makhno&#39;s army at that point. But subsequently what happened is that the Makhnovists discovered that the ex-Grigoriev units were engaging in pogroms. This forced the Makhnovists to forcibly disarm and demobilize these units, i.e. send them home without their weapons.

So, it is in fact quite possible that many of these alleged anti-jewish pogroms carried out ostensibly by units claiming to be allied with Makhno...taking these reports at face value...were in fact ex-Grigoriev units, the very units that the Makhnovists later demoblizied for engaging in anti-Jewish pogroms. Because Tcherikover tabulated pogrom casualties from the actions of the Grigoriev army separately, it is very likely that Tcherikover gave a clean bill to Makhno because he counted these pogroms as initiated by the Grigoriev units, which were eventually disbanded by the Makhnovists, when it was uncovered that this is what they were doing.

in fact if you read down thru the translated file, this explanation is in fact mentioned.
of course this would work only for those pogroms that occured after the absorption of Grigoriev&#39;s troops.

[YKTMX]

I think the point RedDali made is the most important one.

Whether one thinks that Makhno, or rather the Makhnovshchina, were "anti-semitic" is relatively unimportant. I happen to think that he perhaps wasn&#39;t but that the rump of his "army" were. Unfortunately for him, the social basis of his movement, the Ukranian peasantry, had a long and not so distinguished history of anti-semitism and to suggest that they didn&#39;t carry that through to the civil war would be naive.

As I said, the most important point is that the places they controlled were a complete disaster, their fighting was undisciplined and fragmentary (they wasted too much time killing Reds and creating "anarchy") and their economic and war policies, had they been implented nationally, would have made General Kornilov President and heralded a wave of fascistic genocide that would have made Hitler seem like a boy scout.

[catch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 03:59 am
It&#39;s an &#39;assertion&#39;? For all we know, the claims of the success of his projects in the urban centers are ignorant, considering that his memoirs didn&#39;t rarely recorded it; while his forces would go from city to city, emptying whole prisons, arbitrarily handing out all food and money, all during a time of complete economic and societal breakdown during war-time. His economic policies would of been damaging if he implemented them, and he did, so it is not an &#39;assertion&#39;, it&#39;s an educated conclusion.

No, you generalised Makhno&#39;s failure (which it was, although not on as great a scale as that of the Bolsheviks) to every possible peasant under the sun, and have still not backed this up even a little bit.


The entire price system collapsed, currency had no value due to his raids
The economy across Russia collapsed, there was complete chaos. Currency collapsed in Spain &#39;36 in some areas - but on purpose. I don&#39;t think this is much of a criticism unless you think capitalist social relations will have to continue indefinitely.


he denied the fact that they needed to reorganize production because "the workers of those respective areas should govern themselves," which shows that you do not understand the peasantry, let alone what must be done to reach socialism. A villager once recorded a raid
Self-organisation of production is the reorganisation of production. It didn&#39;t get very far in either Russia or the Ukraine, although attempts were made in both. Makhno may not have had a great conception of it, but at least he didn&#39;t actively put it down as the Bolsheviks did via the unions during 1917 and the state after October.


"Food supply was primitive, on the traditional insurgent pattern: the bratishki—the Makhnovists’ name for each other—would scatter to the peasant huts on entering a village, and eat what God sent; there was thus no shortage, although plundering and thoughtless damage to peasant stock did occur; I saw them shoot peasant cattle for fun more than once, amid the howls of women and children."

Could you cite this please?


apathy to the living standards of the workers themselves.
As opposed to calling for &#39;wage discipline&#39; and other such measures of course.



As for the military situation, you are lying. At its height, the Bolsheviks had "five million troops in sixteen armies, fought along a 5,000-mile front, and produced all their own weaponry." While Makhno’s army "peaked at 30,000 troops, never fought outside the Ukraine, and relied on others for their weapons." Not only that, but Denikin broke through Makhno&#39;s thin line once, forcing the Red Army to retreat since a large gap was opened that gave them a better vantage point for a later offensive.
Number of troops &#33;= military prowess. The Kronstadt uprising inflicted a massive casualty rate on (mainly Turkmen partially under a Turkish general) Red Army troops in 1921 despite much, much smaller numbers. You&#39;d need to show that the Red Army did more fighting in the Ukraine than Makhno&#39;s as you implied. This you have not done.



Those workers were &#39;proletarianized&#39; by the way.
No research has shown that a vast number of peasant workers in Petrograd and Moscow couldn&#39;t be described as &#39;proletarianised&#39; in the sense of leaving the countryside behind, urban habits, not returning to the land later on etc.


As for "good old Russian imperialism," you are ignoring that there were Bolsheviks across Ukraine too, and as a matter of fact, the All-Ukraine Congress of Soviets held control over all local decisions, and provided most of the regiments that fought in the area against Denikin.
Keeping class struggle down in the Ukraine to ensure the removal of food to Petrograd and Moscow has nothing to do with whether there were Bolsheviks in the Ukraine. There were Bolsheviks in Finland too, but they were sacrificed by Lenin and Trotsky at Brest Litovsk.

[catch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 12:23 pm
their economic and war policies, had they been implented nationally, would have made General Kornilov President and heralded a wave of fascistic genocide that would have made Hitler seem like a boy scout.
Not unlike Stalin then.

Nobody on here is defending Makhno uncritically - the anarchists in both the Ukraine and Russia failed dismally (the man himself said as much). However counterposing him against the Bolsheviks in such a binary fashion, and repeating the slanders of Trotsky verbatim do not aid an understanding of the events.

[Random Precision]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 06:25 pm

"Food supply was primitive, on the traditional insurgent pattern: the bratishki—the Makhnovists’ name for each other—would scatter to the peasant huts on entering a village, and eat what God sent; there was thus no shortage, although plundering and thoughtless damage to peasant stock did occur; I saw them shoot peasant cattle for fun more than once, amid the howls of women and children."

Could you cite this please?
That&#39;s a witness account from Michael Malet&#39;s Nestor Makhno in the Russian Civil War, quoted in this article (http://www.isreview.org/issues/53/makhno.shtml) that RedDali has referred to. The citation is at the bottom.

[Labor Shall Rule]

No, you generalised Makhno&#39;s failure (which it was, although not on as great a scale as that of the Bolsheviks) to every possible peasant under the sun, and have still not backed this up even a little bit.

Once again, if you go into cities, throwing food and money around freely, destroying vital equipment, as well as failing to recognize that industrial production needed to be reorganized, which would necessitate technicians and specialists to guide the entire process, then you are likely to have an economic failure. As for the &#39;economic failure of the Bolsheviks&#39;, I guess it doesn&#39;t matter that industrial output declined by 12.4%, that most of the rail system along with half of all trains were off the track, that productivity slipped by 22%, and that the entire workforce declined by half during this time. They had to reconstruct a broken economic superstructure, and considering that the productive forces had to be developed in order to make their goal reachable in the first place, they had no choice but to make the decisions they did.


The economy across Russia collapsed, there was complete chaos. Currency collapsed in Spain &#39;36 in some areas - but on purpose. I don&#39;t think this is much of a criticism unless you think capitalist social relations will have to continue indefinitely.

Sure, but arbitrarily distributing cash without a plan makes things worse.


Self-organisation of production is the reorganisation of production. It didn&#39;t get very far in either Russia or the Ukraine, although attempts were made in both. Makhno may not have had a great conception of it, but at least he didn&#39;t actively put it down as the Bolsheviks did via the unions during 1917 and the state after October.

No, it wasn&#39;t.

It was not a detailed, national-plan; it was centered on the localities, rather than in the interests of the entire population, and as so, other sectors of the country not only did not benefit, but the local self-managing enterprise lacked certain material prerequisites that entails modern production in the first place.


Could you cite this please?

Nestor Makhno and the Russian Civil War by Michael Malet.


As opposed to calling for &#39;wage discipline&#39; and other such measures of course.

Of course, considering that I would have better living conditions? I would rather have food in my stomach and live, then starve to death. After the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd, the city was down to less than four days of food, and a typhoid outbreak was widespread also. Of course, the railroads and factories were also down, if you could take that into consideration. You even admitted there was &#39;chaos&#39;, so don&#39;t act like such measures were unwarranted.


Number of troops &#33;= military prowess. The Kronstadt uprising inflicted a massive casualty rate on (mainly Turkmen partially under a Turkish general) Red Army troops in 1921 despite much, much smaller numbers. You&#39;d need to show that the Red Army did more fighting in the Ukraine than Makhno&#39;s as you implied. This you have not done.

Well, first off, yes I did.

He did most of the fighting in his territory, which was only 0.1% of the entire region.


No research has shown that a vast number of peasant workers in Petrograd and Moscow couldn&#39;t be described as &#39;proletarianised&#39; in the sense of leaving the countryside behind, urban habits, not returning to the land later on etc.

They were proletarians.

Enough said.

[catch]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 07:55 pm

No, you generalised Makhno&#39;s failure (which it was, although not on as great a scale as that of the Bolsheviks) to every possible peasant under the sun, and have still not backed this up even a little bit.

Once again, if you go into cities, throwing food and money around freely, destroying vital equipment, as well as failing to recognize that industrial production needed to be reorganized, which would necessitate technicians and specialists to guide the entire process, then you are likely to have an economic failure. As for the &#39;economic failure of the Bolsheviks&#39;, I guess it doesn&#39;t matter that industrial output declined by 12.4%, that most of the rail system along with half of all trains were off the track, that productivity slipped by 22%, and that the entire workforce declined by half during this time. They had to reconstruct a broken economic superstructure, and considering that the productive forces had to be developed in order to make their goal reachable in the first place, they had no choice but to make the decisions they did.

One man management, taylorism, militarisation of labour - the reorganisation of labour after October was the development of capitalism, nothing more than this.


Sure, but arbitrarily distributing cash without a plan makes things worse.
You seem very concerned about currency during revolutionary situations.




Could you cite this please?

Nestor Makhno and the Russian Civil War by Michael Malet.
I&#39;ll keep an eye out for it.



Of course, considering that I would have better living conditions? I would rather have food in my stomach and live, then starve to death. After the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd, the city was down to less than four days of food, and a typhoid outbreak was widespread also. Of course, the railroads and factories were also down, if you could take that into consideration. You even admitted there was &#39;chaos&#39;, so don&#39;t act like such measures were unwarranted.
The factory committees were taking measures to obtain fuel, co-ordinate production nationally, all kinds of co-ordination from below. This was quoshed with the setting up of VSNKh. Now, I think the Russian Revolution would have failed regardless and the committees weren&#39;t organised enough to resist usurpation, but you have to recognise the Bolsheviks&#39; active role in it&#39;s failure. Simply saying "it would&#39;ve gone wrong anyway" isn&#39;t good enough.


Number of troops &#33;= military prowess. The Kronstadt uprising inflicted a massive casualty rate on (mainly Turkmen partially under a Turkish general) Red Army troops in 1921 despite much, much smaller numbers. You&#39;d need to show that the Red Army did more fighting in the Ukraine than Makhno&#39;s as you implied. This you have not done.





They were proletarians.

Enough said.
Not enough for many workers at the time - who&#39;d often try to get &#39;peasant&#39; workers sacked first when there were redundancies. And certainly not enough as Bolshevik rule progressed and all kinds of crazy sociological categorisations and racialisation of the peasantry occurred.

Also if you could explain how peasants who went directly into the Red Army were proletarian that&#39;d be great. Thanks.

And please explain this 0.1% figure you keep throwing about. The largest reach of Makhno&#39;s control at any one time was about the size of the Netherlands. Ukraine isn&#39;t 1000 times the size of the Netherlands so you might want to check your facts a bit closer. That ISR article (which I&#39;m reading now) says the communes were 0.1% of the area Makhno controlled. Not the same thing at all.

[rebelworker]

Im reading the new skidra book on Makhno right now, its got a tonne of new research in it, including declasified Soviet archives.

It regularly documents Makhnovist military superiority to the Red Army ( In the battle of Ekaterinoslav the Red army detachment tasked with guarding the bridge leaing into the city ran at first sight of Whites, half the men even opened fire on some Makhnovists who were now cut off from the main body of their troops, The Black army soon recovered and drove out the whites)in the Ukrain in 1918-20, repudiates the argiments of military incompetence and disorganisation leveled at the Makhnovists in the Bolshevik press and from the Bolshevik burocratic leaders. This is backed up by an indepth report made up by the Red Army souther commander(Antonov-Ovskeenko, a long time Bolshevik militant and revolutionary minded worker) who visited the Makhnovist region in April 1919, was very impressed, called for an end to the slander and demanded immediate shipment of arms to aid the Makhnovists, the reason he saw for any military failures they were having. He was immediately replace by an ex Czarist officer by Trotsky for daring to question his wisdom and suggesting that he was out of touch with the reality of the front from behind his desk in Moscow.

The accusations of anti semitism you provide are dodgy at best, its political bias is clear "he was against everyone and everything", "brutally lined up and shot 7(white)soldiers" ect...

One example of the extreem tact and restraint shown by Makhno: in the early days of the civil war the local jewish defence force, Makhno had helped set up, in the Gulyai-Polye region had joined the whites in a plot (latter regretted by many in that devision) to re take said region. They temporarily succeded, handing over the local anarchist and soviet militants for execution to the whites, before the Makhnovists returned to restore order to the local communes and soviets. At the time Makhno stopped a drive to punish most of those involved fearing it would lead to wide spread anti semetic reprisals...

Also im not sure if at a time of scarcity for the guerillas during a civil war if "looting" shops can be considerd a pogrom.
Your source itself states that Makhno encouraged expropriation by the locals and his forces but strictly ordered no looting.

Were there episodes of anti semitism among troops in the civil war? almost undoubtedly, but it was rare among Makhnovist units, and was punished when it occured. Not to excuse this behavior, but if anything the Makhnovists had a possitive effect in the areas under their defense vis a vi jewish relations.

For the record in 1919, the Makhnovists numbered 30,000, with 70,000 in reserves for want of arms. the Red army numbered 130,000 in the Ukrain at the same time.

The region known as the Makhnovchina was goverened by a revolutionary military council (elected and recallable) as well as communes and local soviets federated togeather. There was full political freedom of the press, even for Bolshevik papers which spread outright lies agains Makhno and left SR&#39;s and independant left tendancies were represented in the soviets and unions( the Bolsheviks had no social bae there but were alowed to organise). Was their political instability? of course the region was a war zone. But food shortages in the Ukrain were more accute in Bolshevik areas due to food being re routed to Russia ( so much for the theory of Anarchist miss managagemnt).

The fact is Trotskyists largely rely on lies to discredit the Makhnovist movement (something admited by independant minded Bolsheviks at the time, much like Kronstadt a short time later).

[Axel1917]

The ISR article looks very interesting, and I hope to read it someday. I have in fact bookmarked it.

It is disgusting to see how the hardcore reactionary, Makhno has fans. It has been well documented that he played a most reactionary role, messed up industry, killed communists, etc. The only thing he was good for was aiding anti-Bolshevik reaction. I will be sure to read that essential article (things to read are really piling up for me, with my hundreds of books, this article, Marxist newspapers, and my subscription of The Economist just arrived.).

His army also seemed pretty pathetic by Trotsky&#39;s accounts, being totally undisciplined and unorganized. They seemed to move around aimlessly at times only to fall apart at attacks from their enemies.

The Makhno movement is a classical example of the utter failure and reactionary policies of anarchism. Anarchism boasts no successes at all. In fact, its track record is in fact one of helping reaction, especially proven in the case of the Spanish Civil War when they deliberately refused to seize power when they could have.

Dear anarchists, your threads will fool no one.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Axel, as catbert836 noted, this is indeed the best recent article on Makhno:

http://www.isreview.org/issues/53/makhno.shtml

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Not unlike Stalin then.

You&#39;re saying the USSR under Stalin was worse than Hitlerite Germany, and that Stalin committed crimes that make those of the Nazi&#39;s pale in comparison?

Insane.

[Nusocialist]

Axel did you even read Rebelworker&#39;s post before rattling off your tired old falsehoods?

He showed how even leading Soviet officials and documents at the time show you are wrong in your absurd slander.

[rebelworker]

Its classic regurgitation politics....


"Here comrade read this analysis, will do comrade..."

"well guys, your sorceing is flawed, and the author your defending dosnt know wht he&#39;s talking about"

"Good articl comrade, would yi like to stick yur head up my ass now for a bit?"
"Sure comrade thanks, glad we have a prophet to fall back on in face of fact and criticism..."

I remember when I was in a Trotskyist group years ago, I had wanted to organise a debate with anarchists to disprove their theory. The leadership was totally against it, they just passed on more "in party" literature.


I dont worship Makhno, I just think its pathetic to the extent Trotsky lies to attack opponents, and how often those lies are repeated ad nausia...

Te book I just read talks about one incident when during the period just before a major expected White offensive, Trotsky was asked by a journalist about the threat of attack against some city along the front. Trotsky was totally taken aback, he brushed off the inquiry oblivious to what was going on (the town was attacked a short while later), focused entierly on Makhno....

[Random Precision]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 10:08 pm
Its classic regurgitation politics....


"Here comrade read this analysis, will do comrade..."

"well guys, your sorceing is flawed, and the author your defending dosnt know wht he&#39;s talking about"

"Good articl comrade, would yi like to stick yur head up my ass now for a bit?"
"Sure comrade thanks, glad we have a prophet to fall back on in face of fact and criticism..."

I remember when I was in a Trotskyist group years ago, I had wanted to organise a debate with anarchists to disprove their theory. The leadership was totally against it, they just passed on more "in party" literature.


I dont worship Makhno, I just think its pathetic to the extent Trotsky lies to attack opponents, and how often those lies are repeated ad nausia...

Te book I just read talks about one incident when during the period just before a major expected White offensive, Trotsky was asked by a journalist about the threat of attack against some city along the front. Trotsky was totally taken aback, he brushed off the inquiry oblivious to what was going on (the town was attacked a short while later), focused entierly on Makhno....
Did you read the article? Are there any issues you have with its claims?

[Axel1917]

Originally posted by catbert836+October 13, 2007 04:55 am--> (catbert836 &#064; October 13, 2007 04:55 am)
[email protected] 11, 2007 10:08 pm
Its classic regurgitation politics....


"Here comrade read this analysis, will do comrade..."

"well guys, your sorceing is flawed, and the author your defending dosnt know wht he&#39;s talking about"

"Good articl comrade, would yi like to stick yur head up my ass now for a bit?"
"Sure comrade thanks, glad we have a prophet to fall back on in face of fact and criticism..."

I remember when I was in a Trotskyist group years ago, I had wanted to organise a debate with anarchists to disprove their theory. The leadership was totally against it, they just passed on more "in party" literature.


I dont worship Makhno, I just think its pathetic to the extent Trotsky lies to attack opponents, and how often those lies are repeated ad nausia...

Te book I just read talks about one incident when during the period just before a major expected White offensive, Trotsky was asked by a journalist about the threat of attack against some city along the front. Trotsky was totally taken aback, he brushed off the inquiry oblivious to what was going on (the town was attacked a short while later), focused entierly on Makhno....
Did you read the article? Are there any issues you have with its claims? [/b]
That article was excellent&#33; It totally demolishes the myth around Makhno, exposing the fact that he raped women in orgies, hypocritically created secret police, laws, conscription had veto power over any decision, destroyed the economy, outlawed public drunkenness, but put himself above the law and was drunk all the time, looted towns and stole from the peasants (not Kulaks), raided Bolshevik supply trains, deserted his post with his troops, made a congress calling for the overthrow of Soviet power, the list goes on. It is a crying shame that the Cheka never got their hands on this reactionary pile of filth. :angry:

The article is a must read and is well documented with resources. It will remain bookmarked on my computer&#33;

[Labor Shall Rule]

The article is excellent. I would recommend it to anyone, whether you agree with the ISR&#39;s politics or not.

[Intelligitimate]

I agree, pretty good stuff, for a Trot. I would also recommend Yaroslavsky&#39;s work.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/ANARCHIST_ARCHI...minrussia5.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/ANARCHIST_ARCHIVES/worldwidemovements/anarchisminrussia5.html)

[Intelligitimate]

I made a post awhile back about the alleged forgery of a document used by Yaroslavsky. This essay has brought up new information regarding Makhno&#39;s sexual activities (which may ultimately go back to Rees anyway), and has brougth the issue back to my mind.





Originally posted by Intelligitimate+October 14, 2007 03:19 am--> (Intelligitimate &#064; October 14, 2007 03:19 am) Something I stumbled on a long time ago. If anyone here can help me get to the bottom of this, I&#39;d be greatly appreciated (though it makes Makhno look terrible).

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archi...minrussia5.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/worldwidemovements/anarchisminrussia5.html)

This is an anti-Makhno document written by Yaroslavsky, head of the Militant Atheist League in the USSR. This document relies on the diary of his "mistress." Here are some entries:


Feb. 23, 1920. Our boys captured some Bolshevik agents, who were then shot.
Feb. 25, 1920. We moved to Mayorovo. Three graincollecting agents were caught and shot.
Mar. 1, 1920. Soon the boys arrived and reported that Fedyukin, a Red Army commander, had been taken prisoner. Makhno sent for him, but the messenger returned with the news that the boys had not been able to mess around with him-he was wounded-and had shot him at his own request.
Mar. 7. In Varvarovka. Makhno got very drunk, began swearing loudly in the street in unprintable language. We arrived in Gulyay-Polye, and something incredible began under Makhno&#39;s drunken orders. The cavalrymen used their whips and the butts of their rifles against all the former Red partisans they met in the streets. They charged like a mad horde into innocent people.... Two had their heads broken and one was driven into the river. . . .
Mar. 11, 1920. Last night the boys took two million rubles and today they all got a thousand apiece.
Mar. 14, 1920. Today we moved to Mikhailovka. One Communist was killed here.


June 5, 1920. At Zaitsevo station Makhno had telephone and telegraph communications cut, the track in front and behind
train No. 423 torn up, the property on the train plundered and all Communists hacked to pieces.
July 16, 1920. Makhno made a raid on Grishino Station, where he stayed three hours. Fourteen officials of Soviet and workers&#39; organizations were shot, telegraph communications destroyed and the railwaymen&#39;s food storehouse looted.
July 26, 1920. Makhno broke into Konstantinograd junction and eighty-four Red Army men were killed in two days.
Aug. 12, 1920. In Zenkovo, Makhno killed two Ukrainian Communists and seven officials of workers&#39; and rural organizations.


Dec. 12, 1920. A raid on Berdyansk. In the course of three hours the Makhno anarchists, led by Makhno himself, killed 83 Communists, including Mikhalevich, one of the best Ukrainian workers, twisting their arms, hacking off legs, ripping up stomachs, bayonetting and hacking them to death.
Dec. 16, 1920. A train was derailed between Sinelnikovo and Alexandrovsk. About fifty workers, Red Army men, and Communists were killed.

The quotes are allegedly taken from a diary account of a woman close to Makhno, who Yaroslavsky calls his mistress, giving no name. Some internet searching revealed a woman in his life named Galina A. Kuzmenko, but she is never described as his mistress, but his wife.

Interestingly enough, the Anarchist FAQ seems to address this issue. Allow me to quote them:


Anarchist FAQ
He [Rees] quotes reports from the Ukrainian Front to blacken the Makhnovists, using them to confirm the picture he extracts from "the diary of Makhno&#39;s wife." These entries, from early 1920, he claims "betray the nature of the movement" (i.e. after, as we shall see, the Bolsheviks had engineered the outlawing of the Makhnovists). [Op. Cit., p. 58] The major problem for Rees&#39; case is the fact that this diary is a fake and has been known to be a fake since Arshinov wrote his classic account of the Makhnovists in 1923:

"After 1920, the Bolsheviks wrote a great deal about the personal defects of Makhno, basing their information on the diary of his so-called wife, a certain Fedora Gaenko .. . . But Makhno&#39;s wife is Galina Andreevna Kuz&#39;menko. She has lived with him since 1918. She never kept, and therefore never lost, a diary. Thus the documentation of the Soviet authorities is based on a fabrication, and the picture these authorities draw from such a diary is an ordinary lie." [Arshinov, History of the Makhnovist Movement, p. 226f]

Of course, this seems to be false, because there is a book in french by an author named Ettore Cinnella which quotes from that diary. An English blurb of the book reads thusly:


Makhno and the Makhnovshchina have been strongly attacked by the
Bolsheviks and, on the contrary, praised to high heaven by anarchists.
But there are few people who can find the happy medium and emphasize
the positive points as much as the contradictions of this vast and
original popular movement which, it should be pointed out, saved the
Bolsheviks from a heavy defeat against the Whites. It is true that the
anarchists, with Makhno at their head, at times had to fight against
the antisemistism, almost traditional, of the Ukrainian peasants who
joined the insurrectionary army.

It is true that Makhno, who spoke almost no Ukrainian, was unable to
accept an alliance with Petliura&#39;s forces and so to unite to fight the
Whites and later against the Reds. Ettore Cinnella&#39;s text is followed
by the diary that Galina A. Kouzmenko, Makhno&#39;s wife, kept from
February to March 1920. It fell into the hands of the Communist police
and remained buried in the archives for seventy years; it was published
for the first time, in Russian translation, on the eve of the fall of
the USSR. This document provides further detail on the epic of the
Makhnovshchina.

Here is a link to the book in question:

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/libertaire/makhno2.html

My search for documentary evidence of Yaroslavsky&#39;s claims turned cold here. If anyone can read French and find the book in question to shed some light on this subject, it would either go a long way to clearing Makno&#39;s name, or either put him in the dustbin of history where he belongs. [/b]

[rebelworker]

I read the article and was slightly supprised to see that long tanding criticism of Makhno made by the Bolshevik leadership have been dropped as undefencable, particularly the attacks of anti semitism...

But all in all the article suffers from the same fate as most Trotskyist criticism of anarchism, so much of it is based on the word of Trotsky and a serrious double standard.

I was suprised about the amount of analytical errors the author made despite the fact that he has written the recent Skirda book on Makhno i have been using in his defence. It seems that much like many of the posters in this thread he is either incapable of reading non Trotskyist sources, or his is a sloppy researcher and had to rely on straw man attacks.

The two major issues of factual error or just plain selective writing of history that I will take issue at in the article are first:
The so called military inability of the makhnovists and the Collapse of the southern front, and second,
The "reactionary and anti soviet" regional soviet general assembly called by the Makhnovists (this point deals with alot of the criticism about, disorganisation, looting, economic distribution problems ect...)

Again as i have stated in other posts, the Skirda book cites recently declasified soviet sources from Bolsheviks members that go a long way to discredit Trotsky&#39;s often delusional accounts of what was going on in much of Russia and the Ukraine (but what is to expected from a tin pot beurocrat).

So to the question of milliatry competance:

There are letters, from top level Bolsheviks that show the Makhnovist forces, who were at the time in an alliance with the Bolsheviks, were being intentionally undersupplied and politically manipulated at the front.

The two major souther defeats at the time were both percipitated, and this is collaborated by both white army documents and first hand accounts from people at the front, by Red army unit defeats that opened up the Makhnovist rear for attack( in one of the cases red postitions were left undermanned despite warning from Makhnovits).

When the Makhnovists where forced back from the southern front (after holding it succesfully for six months) they were lacking arms, artillery, dug in infantry units (the red infantry units had in a leadership blunder been drawn out and destroyed) and this was the first time in the civil war that tanks and armoured vehicles were used by the whites in any serious number.

To make matter worse, Trotsky had recently ordered an arrest warrent for Makhno (despite the fact that they were in a millitary alliance durning a critical time during the civil war). Remember this is the time period that I mentioned above when Trotsky was so consumed by an ideological attack on Makhno (because of his success and growing popularity in the region, even among Bolsheviks) that he was unaware of the tactical situation on the front, as shown by the incident with the journalist I mentioned in an earlier post.

In the light of the situation caused by the Order of arrest of Makhno and the situation at the front (just before the collapse) a congress was called of all revolutionary minded groups in the region to both solve the brewing conflict between the Bolshevik leadership and the insurgent army and to deal with economic and political issues.

Delegates werer to be sent as follows:

One delegate per 3000 workers or peasants,
One delegate per insurgent or Red Army unit,
Two delegates from the central staff of the Makhno Division, & one per bregade staff,
District executive commitees were to send one delegate per faction,
Organisations or parties accepting the basis of the soviet regime were entitled to one delegate per district branch.
Election of all delegates was to take place at general assemblies (all members of each body).

The agenda of the congress was as folows:
"a)Reports from the executive committee of the military revolutionary soviet and from reps of the district executive committees. b) business at hand c) purpose, meaning and tasks of the Gulyai - Polye regional soviet. (d)reorgansation of the regional Military Revolutionary Soviet (e) organisation f military tasks in the region (f)the question of provisions (g) the agrarian issue (h)the financial question (i) the unions of peasant labourers and workers (j)pubic safety (k) the exercise of justice in the region (l) other business"

This was clearly an anrchist grassroots step towards dealing with the issue of military leadership democratically by the workers and peasants themselves, as well as a rank and file solution to the problems of supply problems, renegade justice, economic collapse (which was happening all over Russia and the Ukraine) and distribution of food from the countryside to the cities.
A federated state of workers and peasants democracy, clearly a move towards communism.

Trotsky could not handle this outrage (he was for militrisation of labour and highly centralised and authoritarian leadership in the army and politics) and declared the Congress counter revolutionary (because the anarchists had dared to invite all revolutionaries including rank and file elected bolshevik leadership).

Soon after peasnats were shot withoiut trial just for speaking of this congress, as where members of Makhno&#39;s staff.

Dissatisfaction at the front with this state of affairs was not limited to the insurgents as recorded by an assemble of the "Lenin" red army unit, the soldiers demanded to be put under the leadership of Makhno for "around them they saw naught but traitors of the revolution"(speaking of the Bolshevik leadership in the region).

I could go on more but when one takes a clear look at the situationthe positive revolutionary direction of the makhnovist movemnt becomes obvious.

Where their problems wth centralised leadership of the army and disorganosation in the economy? clearly. But the fact that Makhno supported a democratic grassroots path towards communism cannot be denied. he never put himself ahead of the democratic assemblies of workers and peasants which were the hallmark of the region, and these bodies were clearly (despite the fact that they were under constant military pressure and occupation, unlike central Russia which had some elbow room) moving towards a democratic solution to the problems of the region.

This is the path towards communism we must take, there can be no substitution by the party. We workers must be free to make mistakes and learn from them, there is no other way to build a culture of mass participation nessesary for communism.

In Solidarity,

[rebelworker]

I should also mention that I was a leading member of the International Socialist Tendency for a while and compared to libertarian circles am now active in which tend to be well informed by multiple p[olitical views and tendacies, the IS is characterised by an almost total reliance on "in house" propaghanda and old great leader sloganeering...

PS sadly my roomate has brought it to my attention that Makhno my have indeed been the author of the song "throw the jew down the well" featured in the very educational "Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan "

[Random Precision]

I should also mention that I was a leading member of the International Socialist Tendency for a while and compared to libertarian circles am now active in which tend to be well informed by multiple p[olitical views and tendacies, the IS is characterised by an almost total reliance on "in house" propaghanda and old great leader sloganeering...

Well, we&#39;re not part of the IST anymore, the British SWP engineered a split with us about 6 years ago over our lack of subservience to them, and that our program was so different from theirs.


PS sadly my roomate has brought it to my attention that Makhno my have indeed been the author of the song "throw the jew down the well" featured in the very educational "Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan"

No, I&#39;m pretty sure that Sacha Baron Cohen wrote that himself.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

Nice try Rebelworker, but all your allegations are unsourced, unlike that excellent article you seem to have ignored.

[rebelworker]

Ok when I have a moment Ill go and source them... was just lazy when i made the post...