💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › may-picqueray-the-makhnovist-movement.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:48:17. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: The Makhnovist Movement Author: May Picqueray Date: 1967 Language: en Topics: Makhnovists, Russian revolution, Ukraine, Nestor Makhno, letter Source: Retrieved on 10th September 2021 from https://forgottenanarchism.wordpress.com/2015/03/23/the-makhnovist-movement-by-may-picqueray/
Paris, March 14^(th), 1967
Dear Sir,
I have received, over a month ago now, your letter, and I wished I could
have answered it sooner. A stupid incident, a fall, a broken kneecap,
and annoying care are the causes of this delay.
You will find attached an excerpt of Nestor Makhno’s life. Pardon me if
I let myself give some details in some places, but if I hadn’t stopped
myself I would have given you even more details, as passionate as I am
about Makhno’s life. Please excuse me, and I remain at your disposal if
you need any precision.
I am too glad to have been able to please you, I pray you to accept,
Sir, my best wishes.
May Picqueray
---
Nestor Makhno
Nestor Makhno was born on October 27^(th), 1889, in Goulai-Pole, a
district of Alexandrovsk, in the Ukraine, in a poor peasant family.
He was about 1m65 high; when I met him, in 1923, he weighed no more than
60 kilos. In good health, he must have weighed more, because he had
large shoulders and must have been stocky. His hair was brown, his eyes
light, clear, deep set in their sockets; precocious lines marked his
face, as well as the scar from a bullet which had entered the back of
his neck and had exited through his cheek. He had many injuries all over
his body, sabre wounds, bullet wounds, one of which had shattered his
ankle, which gave him a slight limp.
He was 10 months old when his father died and left him with his 4
brothers in the care of his mother. At the age of 7, he worked as a
shepherd in his village. At 8 he went to school, but only during the
winters. In the summer, he had to look after sheep. At 12, he left
school to work as farmhand for German kulaks who owned many rich farms
in the Ukraine. Already at that time he professed his hatred for
exploiters. He then worked as a foundry worker in a factory in his
village. He had no political creed at this time. It was the 1905
revolution which made him leave the circle of peasants and workers of
his village. He met political organisations and joined the ranks of the
anarchists where he became a tireless militant.
In 1906, he fell into the hands of the tsarist authorities which
condemned him to hang; because of his young age, his sentence was
commuted into life in prison. In the prison of Boutirki, where he did
his time, in Moscow, he learnt grammar, literature, mathematics, and
political economy. To tell the truth, prison was the school where Makhno
gained the historical and political knowledge which helped him greatly
in his revolutionary work. But it is also in prison that Makhno
compromised his health. As he couldn’t stand the crushing of his
personality which all forced labour convicts were subjected to, he
rebelled against the penitentiary authorities and was perpetually in
isolation, where, because of the cold and damp, he contracted
tuberculosis. During 9 years in detention, he was always in irons
because of bad behaviour. He was freed in 1917, like all the other
political prisoners, by the insurrection of the Moscow proletariat on
March 1^(st).
He went back to his village, gathered the peasants, founded a farmhands’
trade union, organised a free commune and a local peasants’ soviet. When
the Austro-Germans occupied the Ukraine, he formed battalions of workers
and peasants to fight against the invaders. The local bourgeoisie put a
price on his head and he had to hide for a while. German and Ukrainian
military authorities burnt his mother’s house and shot his older
brother, a war invalid.
Then there was the fight against Petliura, in September and October 1918
(the Petliurovschina was a movement of the Ukrainian bourgeoisie), the
peasants were enrolled by force, and often deserted to join Makhno.
Petliura was very hostile to the organisation of free communes,
federalist soviets, and, as he hadn’t been able to convince Makhno of
his “error”, he engaged in armed struggle against him, but he was faced
with a very strong army and his troops were soon killed.
The statists fear a free people, the mortal enemy, the “authority” soon
manifested itself, and from both sides at once. From the South-West,
Denikin’s army was moving up, and from the North, the communist state
army was coming down. Denikin arrived first. He was not expecting such
resistance and his troops were soon defeated.
Statists fear a free people, and its mortal enemy, the “authority” soon
showed up, and from two sides at once. From the South-West, Denikin’s
army was marching up, from the North, the communist state army was
marching down. Denikin arrived first. He was not expecting such
resistance and had to retreat towards the Don and the Azov sea, where
his army established a 100 km front. For 6 months, the battle raged; the
hatred of Denikin’s officers took awful proportions, they burned and
massacred everything on their path. Denikin was offering half a million
roubles for Makhno’s head. In January 1919, Makhno seized a convoy of
100 wagons of wheat belonging to the Denikin’s supporters, he decided to
deliver them to the workers in Moscow and Petrograd; a delegation of
Makhnovists accompanied it and were warmly welcomed by the Moscow
soviet.
Bolsheviks appeared in the territories of the Makhnovtchina in March
1919, under a benevolent guise; an ideological struggle then started;
Makhno saw in them a great danger for the freedom of the region, and
thought it was mainly necessary to concentrate all forces to fight the
common enemy; it is for that purpose that the junction of the Makhnovist
and Red armies was made. But the bolsheviks wanted to install their
authoritarian regime, by arresting thse who refused to submit to it.
They tried to assassinate Makhno several times. A campaign of slanders
was launched and led by Trotsky himself at a time when the White danger
was becoming huge, as Denikin was receiving reinforcements in the
Makhnovist sector thanks to the massive arrival of Caucasians. Trotsky
wanted to let Denikin crush the Makhnovists and push him back
afterwards; he made a cruel mistake and underestimated Denikin’s forces.
Bolsheviks opened the front in front of Denikin, and Makhno saw himself
be bypassed by Denikin’s armies. The situation was tragic, because even
though Makhno received many volunteers, he had nothing to arm them with,
since the bolsheviks had cut all supplies and sabotaged the region’s
defences. The peasants defended their region with axes, piques, old
hunting rifles; almost all of them were massacred. The bolsheviks
abandoned the Ukraine, and Makhno had to face Denikin’s hordes on his
own. A few Red regiments joined Makhno’s cause along with their
equipment. Red regiments from Crimea also joined with him. An
uninterrupted battle lasted for over two months, with advances,
setbacks, lack of ammunition, encircling movements, lightning advances
of the Makhnovists, and the annihilation of Denikin’s counter-revolution
by Makhno’s forced in the Autumn of 1919. Bolsheviks then came back to
the Ukraine and Makhno received Trotsky’s order to leave for the Polish
front with his troops. He refused. Makhno and his fighters were declared
outlaws. For 9 months there was a ruthless struggle. Over 200 000
peasants and workers were shot by Trotsky; as many were taken prisoners
or deported to Siberia. A monstrous campaign of slanders against Makhno
was led by the soviet authorities. On top of this, a typhoid epidemic
hit the Ukraine. Wrangel showed up in the Spring of 1920, and Makhno’s
troops then marched and fought for several months until the final defeat
of Wrangel in November 1920.
Makhno came back to his village and started his work of education and
organisation, but all this creative drive was broken by a new and sudden
attack from the bolsheviks, furious at Makhno’s success in this domain,
as well as at his military success.
On November 26^(th), 1920, Goulai-Pole was encircled, Makhno was there
with 240 horsemen. Makhno was only just recovering from an illness and
was suffering from his crushed ankle; they launched an attack and
knocked over the red cavalry regiment, escaping the enemy’s grasp. He
regrouped his troops (around 2000 men) who fought like devils, on the
left, on the right, to break the encirclement by four army corps: two
cavalry and two infantry, launched after him and his men (over 150 000
men). He rushed like a Titan of the legends, towards the North, where
workers warned him that a military roadblock was waiting for him, then
towards the West, taking fantastic paths of which he alone knew the
secret. Hundreds of miles, through fields and plateaus covered with snow
and ice. This unequal fight lasted several months, with unceasing
battles day and night. In Kiev, in a rocky and hilly country, in full
frost, the Makhnovists had to give up their artillery, food and
ammunition. Two cavalry divisions of the Red Cosacks Divisions joined
the mass of armies launched by the bolsheviks against Makhno. They
couldn’t escape. No one hoped to get out of it alive. But no one thought
of fleeing in shame. They all decided to die together. Makhno escaped
this trial with honour. He advanced to the borders of Galicia, crossed
the Dniepr again, went up to Koursk, found himself outside of the
enemy’s circle: the attempt to capture his army had failed. But the
unequal duel still did not end. The red divisions in all of the Ukraine
marched to find and block Makhno. The vice tightens again, and the fight
to the death resumed. Highs and lows, attacks, victories, setbacks, at
the cry of “live free or die fighting”. Makhno was shot through his
thigh, another through his crotch; carried in a horse cart he regained
consciousness and was bandaged: he was losing a lot of blood. He
continued to give orders, to sign them; small detachments went here or
there. On March 16^(th), only a small unit was left near Makhno. Enemy
cavalry forces charged them, the fighting was fierce. Makhno could not
ride, lying on the horse cart, he had to witness this massacre. Five
machine gunners from his village told him: “Batko, your life is useful
to our cause, this cause which is dear to us, we are going to die soon,
you must live, if you see our parents again, give them our farewell.”
They took him in their arms and carried them in a peasants’ car which
was passing through, they kissed him and went back to their machine guns
which started to fire to prevent the bolsheviks from crossing. The car
drove across the fording of a river, Makhno was saved. He started riding
again despite everything and renewed contact with his troops in Poltava.
He grouped around 2000 men; they decided to march on Kharkov: once
again, battles, advances, setbacks against an important army, during the
whole Summer of 1921.
In early August 1921, it was decided that because of the severity of his
injuries, he would leave the country with a few companions in order to
receive a serious treatment. On August 17, he was once again injured 6
times; on the 19^(th), a new battle with the 17^(th) red cavalry
division which camped along the Ingouletz river. Makhno was trapped like
a rat; he fought like a lion and lost 17 of his companions. A new
injury: bullet went into the back of his neck and came out through his
cheek. Once more lying on a cart on august 22^(nd), on the 26^(th), a
new battle, new loss of old comrades in-arms. On August 28^(th), Makhno
crossed the Dniepr; he never saw his country again; the Ukraine was
occupied by the Red Army who imprisoned and killed without mercy.
Makhno arrived in Romania, he was interned with his comrades. He escaped
and got to Poland. Arrested, put on trial, he was acquitted. He came to
Danzig where he was once more put in jail, escaped with the help of his
comrades and settled definitely in Paris.
From time to time, he tried the hint of an action. He mainly used his
leisure to write the history of his struggles and of the Ukraine
revolution, but he could not finish it. It ends in late 1918. Three
volumes were published, the first in Russian and in French; the second
and third only in Russian, after his death. He worked in a factory for a
while, but, very seriously ill, suffering from his many injuries, not
knowing the language of this country and adapting badly to a different
atmosphere than what he had known, he lived in Paris a very painful
existence, materially and morally. His life abroad was but a long and
pitiful agony against which he was unable to fight. His friends helped
him to carry the burden of these sad years of decline.
His health was worsening quickly. Admitted in the Tenon hospital, he
died there in July 1935. He was cremated at the Père-Lachaise
Crematorium, where the urn containing his ashes can be seen.
As an anarcho-syndicalist militant, I had constituted a sort of mutual
aid service for foreign comrades: I welcomed them, put them up at mine
or with comrades who could do it, I received their mail, they found at
my place shelter, meals, in the measure of my limited means, but also
comfort. I received Makhno when he first arrived in Paris, along with
his wife and daughter, who was then 4. I directed them to some friends
in the countryside where they stayed a couple of days, then we found
them a small flat in Paris. I then founded with my friend, Louis Lecoin,
a Makhno committee, I appealed to comrades in Paris, in the rest of
France, internationally, in the US especially, and I could ensure him a
daily allowance, not very important, but enough to ensure material
needs. And this, until he died. His wife and his daughter opened a small
grocery store in Vincennes; during the war, they disappeared. We believe
they were arrested by the Gestapo and deported. We never heard from them
again.
Among Makhno’s companions, I have known Volin very well, who fought
alongside Makhno in the Ukraine, was arrested by the bolsheviks and was
freed by an anarcho-syndicalist delegation in 1922. He lived in Paris
with his family and died in 1945. He rests next to Makhno at the
Père-Lachaise. I also knew Arshinov, but I saw him less, we didn’t
always agree on anarchist principles. He went back to Russia, not only
because he was home sick, but because he rallied himself to bolshevik
ideas, which was quite surprising for a former Makhnovist companion.
Makhno had violent discussions with him on this subject. On the other
hand, he got along well with Volin. Arshinov did not drink.
Makhno was not involved in Petliura’s death, but it was another
Ukrainian, Schwartzbart, who killed him. We were having lunch in a
Russian restaurant on the street of the School of Medecine in Paris,
with Schwartzbart, Alexander Berkman, Mollie and Senya Elechine, when
Petliura got in the restaurant and was recognized by Schwartzbart.
Livid, he made no comment, but he came back alone the next day and
killed him. He was acquitted by the Assize Court in paris.
About Trotsky, the “superman” as his accomplices now call him in France
and beyond, he was excessively proud and nasty, a good polemicist and
orator, he became thanks to the confusion of the revolution an
“infallible” military dictator, he was not liked by Makhno and with
reason: this man could not stand a people being free in his vicinity,
organised along Proudhonian and Kropotkinian principles, in perfect
disagreement with K. Marx’s principles. And because of this, he did not
hesitate to have hundreds of thousands Ukrainians killed, men, women,
and children, using the most perfidious weapons to lose Makhno in the
eyes of the people and soldiers, branding him a bandit, an antisemite,
etc. Lenin was in perfect agreement with Trotsky on this issue.
I knew Trotsky personally, in Paris, before the revolution, at the café
La Rtonde, where revolutionary students such as myself met. I considered
him as someone bright but machiavellian, ready to do anything to reach
his goals. I saw him again in 1923, at the 2^(nd) syndicalist congress
in Moscow, where I was a delegate with a mandate of opposition to
joining the 3^(rd) International. I had contacted, in Berlin, A. Berkman
and E. Goldman, who had come back from Russia and gave me many addresses
of comrades who had gone underground. I managed to contact some of them,
others were in prison. Among those, Mollie Steimer and her partner,
Senya Fleshin, interend in the camp of Archangelsk, and condemned to
life deportation on the Solovietsky islands. I decided to take advantage
of my mandate as a delegate to ask an audience from Trotsjy and obtained
it after 8 days. I went to meet him at his Kremlin office with a comrade
who wouldn’t let me go alone, since the result of the last delegation:
our friends Lepetit, Vergeat and R. Lefebvre had disappeared. We later
learned that they had drowned while trying to reach France, in rather
mysterious circumstances. Trotsky received me with much warmth, he
walked towards me smiling, and holding out his hand, but I ostensibly
put my hand in my pocket. He asked me why and I couldn’t help myself and
told him that I could not shake hands with the person who had Makhno’s
troops massacred, and who was also responsible for the events in
Kronstadt. To my surprise he did not get angry, or at least he did not
show it. It was not very diplomatic of me, since I came to ask the
liberation of Mollie and Senya, but my impetuous character at that time
made me act this way. I exposed my objectives to him, asked for the
liberation of my friends, the right to visit them in Archangelsk, and
told him I was firmly decided not to leave Russia until they were freed.
I was granted all of my demands, I had the joy to see my friends free
and welcomed them to Paris not long afterwards. He didn’t do this by
kindness, because he was a hard, even a ferocious man, but the
Lepetit-Vergeat affair had made a lot of noise in the syndicalist and
anarchist milieus, and Trotsky did not wish for a new campaign to be led
among the workers at that time.
May Picqueray