CC BY
57
5. Sagdullaev A. The history of Uzbekistan. Part 1. T.: University, 1999. - P.270. Mukhammad Olim Shaykh Azizon. 'Lamakhot'.Transla-tion from Farsi of K. Kattaev and A. Narzullaev. - Samarkand, 2007, - P.86.
6. Narshakhiy. The history of Bukhara. Book series about heritage. Editor - Khurshid Davron. T.: - Kamalak, 1991, - P. 98.
7. State Archive of the Republic of Uzbekistan, 47-fond, 1-handlist, 333a-file, P.76. The journey of Mr. Antony Jenkinson from Moscow to Bukhara in Baktria in 1558, described by himself for London merchants of Moscow company//Readings of historic society in the ancientry of Russian - M.:1884.; See also: history of Uzbekistan in sources. The knowledge of travelers, geographers and scientists of XVI -first half of XIX centuries. Composer B. V. Lunin.
8. Scientist Sheykh Azizon. Lamakhot. Translators - Kataev K.m Narzullaev A. - Samarkand, 2007.
9. Khasankhuja Nisori. Muzakkir al-akhbob. Translators - Ismoil Bekjon.
10. Khafiz Tanish al-Bukhari. Abdullanoma'. (Sharafnamayi shakhi). Vol.1, translator: S.
Mozgovoi Sergej Grigorievitch, Candidate of sociological science, assistant professor Far Eastern Federal University, branch in Arsenyev E-mail: [email protected]
Makhnovism as a historical tradition expression
Abstract: This article represents the judgment of the makhnovsky movement place in the course of the Ukraine social development. Historical development dynamics of the people's movement — "Makhnovism" as expressions of social bottoms requirements is designated.
Keywords: a Makhnovism, anarchism, personal freedom, public self-government, communal equality.
Peasant war in Ukraine in 1918-1921 years under Nestor Iva-novich Makhno (1888-1934) leadership known as makhnovsky movement, or a Makhnovism, arose on demolition of historical eras, was the embodiment of a national protest and became a part of the Civil war in Russia. At the same time, makhnovsky movement wasn't the spontaneous indignation which began only owing to simple confluence of social circumstances at all. A Makhnovism, was historically determined as an expression of a certain historical tradition development of a part of Russia known as Ukraine.
By C. C. Volk words, in the introduction to Nestor Makhno's memoirs: "Makhnovsky movement which is external representing of makhnovets throwings between reaction and revolution, in fact, was an attempt to find the country rate in storms of a civil war when in Ukraine there was a fighting antagonism of several forces hostile each other ...» [1, 10].
The movement phenomenon under the command of N. I. Makhno is rather widely lit in domestic and foreign scientific, publicistic and fiction researches. Exhaustive list of works see [2]. Detailed analysis of sources was also provided by Alexander Skirda [3, 276-295, 300-311].
Historical tradition which generated peasant war under N. Makhno's leadership can be provided as a steady, long-term social reflection which arose owing to a combination of certain internal and external circumstances of the Ukrainian society development. Fundamental signs of this tradition are:
1. A condition of society as environments covered by contradictions:
- between provided for, or prosperous, the villagers/selyanstvo-kmetstvo (classical «middle peasants» and «kulacs» of the 1920th centuries) tied to steady agricultural life — and the mobile social «freebooters» concentrated on the territorial periphery (Za-porizhia Sech, Gulyaypole);
- between peasants and citizens petty bourgeoises (then — urban proletariat), as carriers of the different social ways;
- between it is religious (ideologically) both ethnically homogeneous circle of «Ukrainians»/maloross/Russinians — and different religious and ethnically, or mentally groups: Polish gentry, «kikes», citizens Protestants and, in subsequent, the city intellectuals.
2. A geopolitical condition of the territory, with is rather not as suburb/«ukraine» but is a cross field — space to which several adjacent states pretend [4, 32-34].
Combination of called space conditions qualities, forms reflexive dynamics which cornerstone is aspiration to find a method of designing, identification and society development expression of model, state and external environment. Phenomenon which termed as «Ukraine» is such a method.
Ukraine, therefore, is not quite a subject, but it is rather a method of wider community segment self-determination. This method creates problems social, first of all — a socio-cultural and geopolitical order.
The first problem it is necessary to call determination of a «wide community». Whether it is the European community, or it is a part of the Russian community. Two communities have different identification criteria (Tab. 1).
Table 1. - Criteria of social communities
Criteria of a community Name of a community
European Russian
Cultural Personal freedom Social justice
Political Political democracy Social democracy: public self-government, Soviet power
Economic Market freedom Communal equality
It is necessary to recognize Makhnovsky movement as identification attempt of a «wide community». Defending personal
freedom, Makhno and makhnovets were adherents of a social democracy, in the form of public self-government [5, 94-98]. Other
Makhnovism as a historical tradition expression
criterion — communal equality, assumed barter between the city and the village, ideally — non-market relations, in practice — use of all cash systems extended in Ukraine (an example of such relations adjustment see [6, 58-63], detailed description: [5, 98-101; 3, 138-139]).
Gulyaypole turned into a country lumpen-proletariat movement center, established mutually advantageous interaction with Ukrainian middle peasants and kulacs [3, 4; 7, 22-23]. This center alienated from Donbass urban proletariat [5, 101-108; 8, 134-137] and regularly clashed with Bolshevist ideologists (that didn't prevent to enter into periodic alliances with Bolsheviks) [9, 317-319]. Fundamental principles of makhnovets were: «1) consolidation of all peasantry in general organizations (without excluding also kulacs) for solution of all country questions; 2) non-interference of the city, in this case — the proletariat, in intra rural relations and intra rural class fight» [5, 114-115]. More economic, than political, orientation of makhnovets to the solvent village strata, allows the Soviet researchers to refer makh-novsky movement to the kulak «fifth column» [8, 151].
Whereas lack of obvious ideological and political identity, gives so powerful grounds to call a Makhnovism domestic form of a political gangsterism [8, 194].
Aspiration to defend an original way of development, independent of the external environment, became the second problem. Political reasons for originality was an anarchism [10, 134-141], irreconcilable in relation to liberalism, conservatism, imperialism and nationalism and alternative to Marxism (see [11]). Ukrainian anarchists federation «Nabat» applied for the role of a Makhnovism ideological vanguard, for some time. But, in realities, a Makhnovism developed as the movement which wasn't held down by ideological dogmas. First of all, in that, as for the economic organization of society. Ideological and political views of anarchists on the social organization after 1917 were researched by O. A. Ignatyeva [12, 68-76]. Relations with federation «Nabat» were depicted by V. D. Ermakov (with the reference, first of all, for I. Tepera-Gordeev's work «Makhno») [13, 76-86].
The third problem consists in need of an optimum combination of the development strategy to tactics of «today fight» (the
period of Civil war). Expression of such a combination was original «makhnovsky dictatorship» providing speed, determination and courage [14, 21] during military operations, together with picturesque «freedom of customs» during the period between fights. In the areas occupied with makhnovets, all authorities were dismissed, but political parties and labor unions activity freedom remained. So cultural and educational activity developed [14, 84-86; 15, 23-26; 3, 143-144, 148-149; 15, 62-73, 124-134; 16, 337-340, 376-380, 402-404; 10, 87-88, 101-104, 124-125].
A «Makhnovism» remained in historical memory as an attempt to search not only ideological choice, but also as aspiration to create a new image of Ukraine. Ukraine seems Makhno and makhnovets not politically independent state, but a free society which is rooted in Zaporizhia Sechi and pre-state forms of social relations [10, 22; 8, 63]. In this sense, a «Makhnovism» resembles «conservative utopia» focused, at the same time, on a social ideal of the past and a political ideal of the future (in N. Makhno and his colleagues representation).
Nevertheless, some researchers carry a «makhnovsky ideal» to libertarianism. Understanding it as modernistic «philosophy of personal liberty», but not ideology of libertarizm/ultraliberalism. According to V. M. Volin: «This libertarian orientation of the movement was expressed in deep distrust in relation to unearned or privileged elements, in refusal of any dictatorship over the people and in an idea of free and full workers self-government on the places» [16, 335]. Internal uncertainty concerning the past and the future, the tradition and a modernist style as it is represented, reflects a Makhnovism dialectics. Such dialectics assumes, first, aspiration to develop society, relying on the traditions of freedom and liberty and, secondly, improving search of a social dynamics escalation possibility, but not destroying society. Anyway, «makhnovsky ideal» is a future ideal, not a past one.
In general view the essence of a «Makhnovism» was captured quite precisely by the Program of «A true Soviet socialist system» [17, 253-254].
Pressure of the XX century beginning historical realities has overturned an utopian ideal and has doomed a «Makhnovism» to defeat.
References:
1. Волк С. С. Нестор Махно в дни войны и мира//Махно Н. И. Воспоминания. - М.: Республика, 1992.
2. Назаров И. Ю. Идеология и политическая практика махновского движения. - Диссертация по ВАК 07.00.02. - М.: 2006.
3. Александр Скирда. Нестор Махно. Казак свободы (1888-1934). Гражданская война и Борьба за вольные советы в Украине 1917-1921. - Париж: Громада, 2001.
4. Плешаков К. В. Геополитика в свете глобальных перемен//Международная жизнь. - 1994. - № 10.
5. Кубанин М. Махновщина. Крестьянское движение в степной Украине в годы Гражданской войны. - Л.: «Прибой».
6. Махно Н. И. Воспоминания - Париж: 1936.
7. Дорогой урок//Долой махновщину. Статьи т. т. Раковского (Председателя Совета Народных Комиссаров Украины), Б. Самсонова и др. - Харьков: Изд. Политотдела Югзапфронта, 1920.
8. Волковинский В. Н. Махно и его крах. - М.: Изд. ВЗПИ, 1991.
9. Махно Н. И. Воспоминания... Приложение 1. Гуляйполе в русской революции.
10. Аршинов. История Махновского движения (1918-1921 гг.). - Берлин: Изд. «Группы Русских Анархистов в Германии», 1923. -Электронный ресурс: http://www.makhno.ru/lit/Arshinov/01.php.
11. Коваль Б. И. Этика анархизма//Новая и новейшая история. - 1990. - № 5. Электронный ресурс: http://vivovoco.astronet. ru/VV/PAPERS/ECCE/ANARCHY. HTM.
12. Игнатьева О. А. Взгляды анархистов на проблемы экономического переустройства общества после Октябрьской революции//СОЦИС. - 1991. - № 3.
13. Ермаков В. Д. Махновщина: некоторые социально-бытовые аспекты повстанческого движения крестьян Украины//СОЦИС. -1991. - № 3.
14. Семанов С. Н. Под черным знаменем. Жизнь и смерть Нестора Махно//Роман-газета. - 1993. - № 4.
15. Комин В. В. Нестор Махно: мифы и реальность. - М.: Московский рабочий, 1990.
16. Волин В. М. Неизвестная революция, 1917-1921. - М.: НПЦ «Праксис», 2005.
17. Rossum L. J. Proklamations of the Machno Movement, 1920//International Review of Social Histoty. - 1968. - V. XIII. - Part 2.
Shavlokhova Elena Sergeyevna, Academy of Marketing and Social Technologies — IMSIT
Doctor of History, Professor, Pro-rector for scientific work Krasnodar E-mail: [email protected]
Historical background of completing the joining the North Caucasus to Russia
The publication article has been made with the help of financial support of the Russian Foundation for Humanities, with the framework of the project research "Joining Ossetia to Russia as the process of integration of the peoples of the North Caucasus in the administrative and legal system of Russia" (the end of XVIII — early XIX centuries.), the project is № 16-11-23014
Abstract: Joining North Ossetia to Russia took place in a difficult political environment. In order to consider this issue in detail, it is important to pay attention to the historical background of the merger. This article discusses the historical background data, because this process was mutually beneficial to both parties.
Keywords: North Ossetia, the historical background, affiliation, orientation to the Russian government, defense and commercial relations.
The peoples of the North Caucasus have been connected with Russia and the Russian people by centuries-old ties. For centuries they have maintained trade, cultural and political relations with Russia.
In the XVI-XVIII centuries the peoples of the North Caucasus have focused on Russia, it was a complicated and long process of voluntary entry into the Russian state. The Russian government has taken care, first of all, of the consolidation of the security and power of the state, spreading Russia's political influence on the new territories. Russia didn't tend to subject these nations to its immediate ruling and its orders, but could provide real help and support against attacks by the Shah of Iran, the Ottoman Empire and the Crimean Khanate. On this basis, between the peoples of the Northern Caucasus and the Russian state known affinity, even a relative community of interest was formed, as relations with Russia met the aspirations of the peoples of the North Caucasus to the greater security from external attacks.
The Caucasus connected Europe and Asia, the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea. Through the Volga and Astrakhan trade routes to Iran both by sea and by land were opened — through the Caucasus, along the western shore of the Caspian Sea. Russia has planned for a long time the expansion of trade and for its needs, and mediation prospects in the exchange of goods between Western Europe and East through Dagestan and the Caspian Sea. These extensive plans intensified the interest of Russian landlords and merchants to Dagestan Khanate. The objectives of expanding trade with the East continued to exert great influence on Russian policy in the Eastern Caucasus and in Transcaucasia and later — at the end of the XVIII century and in the XIX century.
Hit-and-run raids of the Iranian and Ottoman conquerors and feudal civil wars for centuries were the reasons of monstrous disasters and looting the Caucasian population, and they also depleted the productive forces of the Caucasian peoples. As Engels wrote, it is not surprising that the struggle against the Shah of Iran and the Sultan of Turkey, standing on a very "low" and "barbaric" stage of development [1, 6], forced the nations and many federal rulers of Caucasus to seek the protection of Russia.
Constant invasion of Ottoman troops and raids of the Crimean Khanate, capture and hijacking enslaved prisoners, the extermina-
tion of local residents, violence and arbitrariness, the lack of basic security in the vast expanses of Pre-Caucasus and North Caucasus for centuries made it impossible to settled agricultural life and the settlement of these vast spaces, the development of the trade and crafts, forming villages and towns. This was one of the reasons that gradually the territory of the Russian state was spreading to the south, the settlement and development of open spaces, despite the aggressive nature of the tsarist policy had great positive significance objectively [2, 36].
It is important to note the necessity to differentiate between different paths and forms of including peoples into Russian population, to distinguish successive stages of the process. Voluntary entry of the North Caucasian peoples into Russia in XVI — XVIII centuries and even in the early XIX did not mean spreading military and administrative authorities and the Russian laws on them. Indigenous peoples and ownership remained feudal fragmentation under control of its princes, khans, feudal and community leaders.
By the end of the XVIII century Russia united with the North Caucasus, it was of great importance — it was the historical prerequisite for completing the merger of the North Caucasus to Russia and its firm establishment in the South Caucasus. All these premises was a complex process, in which intertwined the results of successful wars with the Ottoman Empire, the economic development of the steppe Ciscaucasia, voluntary joining the North Caucasian peoples, and the feudal lords under the protection of Russia.
Development of Pre-Caucasus began in the late XVI century, when the town Terek was founded with surrounding trade and craft villages. Earlier the settlements of Russian Cossacks of the Terek "on the crests," started their history, i. e., on the eastern and northern slopes of the Terek Ridge, hence the nickname "Greben Cossacks." Then the Cossack settlers from the Don, the Volga and Chopra moved to the North Caucasus. It combines a natural settling, and the government's actions for the development of vacant land. A lot of the oppressed people, i. e. farmers, the poor Cossacks, artisans moved to Pre-Caucasian region and Terek from internal and outlying areas of Russia and Ukraine [3, 7]. There they freely farmed the land, raised cattle, fields, orchards and gardens, fished, mined salt, engaged in mountain fishing, all of them became the part of the
