Onyx
Gold Member
- Dec 17, 2015
- 7,887
- 499
- 155
After the RIAU collapsed in Ukraine, insurrectionist leader Nestor Makhno spent his remaining days in France as a member of the Group of Russian Anarchists Abroad, where him and his colleagues worked to publish the Organizational Platform of the General Union of Anarchists.
Nestor Makhno believed that while anarchism had always been the most philosophically pure ideology, anarchists had failed to provide the working class with a legitimate means for anarchism to prevail over the contemporary political ideologies of the time.
During the Russian Revolution, Nestor Makhno and other influential peasants called for the people of their region to rise up and form free brigades to challenge the foreign and white armies. Commanders were elected by assemblies of soldiers and civilians. Overtime, the challenges of the brigades became too great to fight without greater organization, so an assembly of commanders was created.
This new anarchist army came to be known as the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine.
The RIAU, also commonly known as the black army, quickly earned great renown during its plight against the Europeans, White Army, and eventually the Soviet Union. They fought against insurmountable odds, and won tremendous victories.
Black army Calvary is often considered to have been the best of the entire Russian revolution, with horseman charging down the mountains carrying banners with slogans such as, "Liberty or death!" (sound familiar?)
Eventually though, Nestor Makhno and much of the black army leadership were routed out of Ukraine, with their loss attributed to a lack of armaments and manufacturing .
Anyways, Nestor Makhno lost the battle, but he continued to advocate for a platformist based revolution in order to provide a realistic means to achieve and sustain anarchism. This drew criticism from other anarchists of the time, primarily Errico Malatesta, that questioned the hierarchical nature and sustainability of the platform.
Nestor Makhno's ideas are still very popular today, but also just as controversial as they were back then. I am going to defend them though.
As for sustainability, that is an easy one, because history proves that egalitarian military organization can last very long periods of time. We have ancient and medieval countries that lived free of established law and rulers, yet were able to organize quickly during invasions, mostly because they had customs and traditions for organizing in the face of inner or outer aggression.
As to whether the militant platform is hierarchical, we only need to look at how the RIAU was organized and operated. Anarchists offer two positions on violence.
1. Violence should never be used
2. Violence should only be used in self defense
The usage of violence is an important question for anarchists, because what defines the ruler and the state is the usage of institutionalized violence.
The RIAU only operated in self defense. They fought to protect their land and their communities. They never held any prisoners , there was no punishment for desertion, there was no conscription, and there were no laws or mandates instituted on the communities of the free territory.
With that in mind, we can safely conclude that the RIAU were not rulers and the free territory was not a state. This also shows that the RIAU upheld Nestor Makhno's concept of collective responsibility, which is the idea that every individual is responsible for the successes and failures of the revolution.
Hopefully that puts the major objections to anarchist revolutionary platformism to rest, since Nestor Makhno proved with his own actions that an anarchist platform could exist without being hierarchical and unsustainable.
Nestor Makhno believed that while anarchism had always been the most philosophically pure ideology, anarchists had failed to provide the working class with a legitimate means for anarchism to prevail over the contemporary political ideologies of the time.
During the Russian Revolution, Nestor Makhno and other influential peasants called for the people of their region to rise up and form free brigades to challenge the foreign and white armies. Commanders were elected by assemblies of soldiers and civilians. Overtime, the challenges of the brigades became too great to fight without greater organization, so an assembly of commanders was created.
This new anarchist army came to be known as the Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine.
The RIAU, also commonly known as the black army, quickly earned great renown during its plight against the Europeans, White Army, and eventually the Soviet Union. They fought against insurmountable odds, and won tremendous victories.
Black army Calvary is often considered to have been the best of the entire Russian revolution, with horseman charging down the mountains carrying banners with slogans such as, "Liberty or death!" (sound familiar?)
Eventually though, Nestor Makhno and much of the black army leadership were routed out of Ukraine, with their loss attributed to a lack of armaments and manufacturing .
Anyways, Nestor Makhno lost the battle, but he continued to advocate for a platformist based revolution in order to provide a realistic means to achieve and sustain anarchism. This drew criticism from other anarchists of the time, primarily Errico Malatesta, that questioned the hierarchical nature and sustainability of the platform.
Nestor Makhno's ideas are still very popular today, but also just as controversial as they were back then. I am going to defend them though.
As for sustainability, that is an easy one, because history proves that egalitarian military organization can last very long periods of time. We have ancient and medieval countries that lived free of established law and rulers, yet were able to organize quickly during invasions, mostly because they had customs and traditions for organizing in the face of inner or outer aggression.
As to whether the militant platform is hierarchical, we only need to look at how the RIAU was organized and operated. Anarchists offer two positions on violence.
1. Violence should never be used
2. Violence should only be used in self defense
The usage of violence is an important question for anarchists, because what defines the ruler and the state is the usage of institutionalized violence.
The RIAU only operated in self defense. They fought to protect their land and their communities. They never held any prisoners , there was no punishment for desertion, there was no conscription, and there were no laws or mandates instituted on the communities of the free territory.
With that in mind, we can safely conclude that the RIAU were not rulers and the free territory was not a state. This also shows that the RIAU upheld Nestor Makhno's concept of collective responsibility, which is the idea that every individual is responsible for the successes and failures of the revolution.
Hopefully that puts the major objections to anarchist revolutionary platformism to rest, since Nestor Makhno proved with his own actions that an anarchist platform could exist without being hierarchical and unsustainable.
Last edited:
