Who are the whites and the reds in civilian clothes? Reds (Bolsheviks)

CIVIL WAR.

1. Prerequisites and causes of the civil war.

2. Periodization.

3. Main driving forces.

Prerequisites for the civil war:

· General systemic crisis of the Russian Empire.

· Acute social contradictions, lack of civil unity and harmony in society.

· Increasing radicalism of the masses, inciting class hatred, cruelty, terror (P. Sorokin: “In years of upheaval, not only the beast, but also the fool awakens in a person”).

Causes of the Civil War:

· The October armed coup was not supported not a single political party, did not initially enjoy the support of the people (by October there were 240 thousand Bolsheviks, 1 million Socialist Revolutionaries)

· 1st Congress of Soviets, at which the All-Russian Central Executive Committee was created, headed by Chkheidze, did not support the Bolsheviks. The executive committee of peasant deputies and the railway workers' trade union (VIKZhel) did not support the decisions of the 2nd Congress. They demanded that a government be created from representatives of all parties. The SNK (Bolshevik government) was temporary.

Anti-democratic actions of the Bolsheviks . February Revolution was perceived as a triumph of democracy. After October 27, the Council of People's Commissars adopted the decree “On the Press”, bourgeois and Menshevik newspapers were closed (150 newspapers were closed in 2 months). On November 28, the Bolsheviks banned the cadet party and arrests began. At the beginning of December 1917, the Cheka was created. In the spring of 1918, elections were held to local Soviets, which included representatives of the Bolshevik, Menshevik and Socialist Revolutionary parties. On June 14, the Bolsheviks decided to expel the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries from the Soviets.

· Dispersal of the Constituent Assembly. It opened on January 5, 1918, and on January 6 it was closed because... the majority in it was received by the right Socialist Revolutionaries (42%), led by Chernov.

· Acute political confrontation, sharp polarization of forces in the country. In March 1918, the underground “Union for the Revival of Russia” arose with the participation of the Socialist Revolutionaries, the cadets created the “Nine” (9 people), the “National Center”, the branches of which were in many cities. Since the end of 1917, a volunteer army led by Alekseev and Kornilov has been forming on the Don. The formation of Don Cossack troops begins, led by Kaledin and later Krasnov.

· Collapse of the state. In 1917, Finland declared independence, in 1918 – Poland, Baltic republics. The Caucasus did not accept Soviet power. The Moldavian Republic announced its accession to Romania. Donbass was occupied by the Germans, etc..

The idea of ​​statehood has been lost. A civil war is a war for an idea, for choosing a different path.

· Conclusion of the Brest-Litovsk Peace (March 1918)

· Agrarian policy of the Bolsheviks. A military dictatorship was introduced. They sent food detachments and carried out a new redistribution of land, taking it away from the kulaks. Not a single party supported the Bolshevik agrarian policy.

Periodization of the Civil War:

Stage I(new approach): October 1917 – spring 1918 Stage of the democratic revolution:

- the formation of the Don Army, the uprising of Kaledin, Krasnov, the capture of Orenburg by Dutov, the Entente landings in Murmansk and Arkhangelsk; - food dictatorship, dispersal of the constituent assembly, conclusion of the Brest-Litovsk peace

In May, the rebellion of the White Czechs begins with the capture of Chelyabinsk and other cities

Stage II: May 1918 – November 1918 Bolsheviks create the Eastern Front (commanders-in-chief Kamenev and Vatsetis)

In November 1918, Germany made peace with the Entente.

Stage III: November 1918 – winter 1920 Entente intervention, fight against Kolchak, Yudenich, Denikin.

Stage IV: spring - autumn 1920. Soviet-Polish war, defeat of Wrangel in Crimea.

Stage V(new approach): 1921 - 1922 Mass peasant uprisings in Ukraine, the Volga region, Siberia, Antonovshchina in Voronezh and Tambov. End of the war in Central Asia.

Main forces in Civil War:

Reds (Bolsheviks).

Installed a new one political system. A homogeneous government was formed. There is a centralization of power. The policy of “war communism” is being pursued. Dictatorship.

White movement.

The formation of the “white” forces began in February 1918. The Volunteer Army was created in the south, its founders Alekseev and Kornilov. On the Don is Krasnov’s army, in the east is Kolchak’s army.

Social composition: mainly the officer corps (the corps of the tsarist army is 250-300 thousand, of which 100 thousand are on the white side, 75 thousand are on the red side, the rest are emigrants), officials, soldiers. The army was not of the nobility: only 20% were hereditary nobles.

Political Views are not clear: some for the monarchy, others for constituent assembly, third behind military dictatorship. For many, a policy of “undecidedness” is characteristic.

Monarchists: Shulgin, Purishkevich.

Liberal intelligentsia: Miliukov, Lvov, Rodzianko and others advocated constitutional monarchy or a republic.

Denikin program:

1. Overthrow of the Bolsheviks, establishment of order.

2. United and indivisible Russia.

3. Convening a constituent assembly on the basis of universal suffrage.

4. Providing regional autonomy and local self-government.

5. Civil rights and freedoms.

6. Agrarian reform: restoration of landownership, allotment of land to peasants for money.

7. Labor legislation.

Whites did not want to provide autonomy for the Cossacks, which later deprived them of the support of the Cossacks.

Causes of defeat:

1. Whites failed to become a unifying force. There is no national idea.

2. Failed to establish strong contact with the liberal intelligentsia

3. It was not possible to create a unified army; there is no single leader.

4. Lack of a unified program. Certain points of existing programs led to the restoration of the old order.

5. Just like the Reds, they carried out brutal terror.

Reds turned out to be stronger militarily, economically and politically. The outcome of the war was decided by the peasantry, in 1919 the Bolsheviks put forward the slogan “Union with the middle peasants.”

Green:

peasantry - 3rd force. Leaders: Makhno, Grigoriev, Antonov, Kolesnikov, Sapozhkov and others. Mainly anarchist and Socialist Revolutionary programs.

Cossacks. In 1917 - 13 associations (4.5 million people)

Where did the terms "red" and "white" come from? The Civil War also saw the “Greens”, “Cadets”, “Socialist Revolutionaries” and other formations. What is their fundamental difference?

In this article, we will answer not only these questions, but also briefly get acquainted with the history of its formation in the country. Let's talk about the confrontation between the White Guard and the Red Army.

Origin of the terms "red" and "white"

Today, the history of the Fatherland is of less and less concern to young people. According to surveys, many have no idea, let alone Patriotic War 1812...

However, such words and phrases as “red” and “white”, “Civil War” and “October Revolution” are still heard. Most people, however, do not know the details, but they have heard the terms.

Let's take a closer look at this issue. We should start with where the two opposing camps came from - “white” and “red” in the Civil War. In principle, it was simply an ideological move by Soviet propagandists and nothing more. Now you will figure out this riddle yourself.

If you turn to textbooks and reference books of the Soviet Union, they explain that the “whites” are the White Guards, supporters of the Tsar and enemies of the “reds”, the Bolsheviks.

It seems that everything was so. But in fact, this is another enemy that the Soviets fought against.

The country has lived for seventy years in confrontation with fictitious opponents. These were the “whites,” the kulaks, the decaying West, the capitalists. Very often, such a vague definition of the enemy served as the foundation for slander and terror.

Next we will discuss the causes of the Civil War. “Whites,” according to Bolshevik ideology, were monarchists. But here’s the catch: there were practically no monarchists in the war. They had no one to fight for, and their honor did not suffer from this. Nicholas II abdicated the throne, and his brother did not accept the crown. Thus, all tsarist officers were free from the oath.

Where then did this “color” difference come from? If the Bolsheviks really had a red flag, then their opponents never had a white one. The answer lies in the history of a century and a half ago.

The Great French Revolution gave the world two opposing camps. The royal troops carried a white banner, the symbol of the dynasty of French rulers. Their opponents, after seizing power, hung a red canvas in the window of the city hall as a sign of the introduction of wartime. On such days, any gatherings of people were dispersed by soldiers.

The Bolsheviks were opposed not by monarchists, but by supporters of the convening of the Constituent Assembly (constitutional democrats, cadets), anarchists (Makhnovists), “green army men” (fought against the “red”, “white”, interventionists) and those who wanted the separation of their territory into a free state .

Thus, the term "white" was cleverly used by ideologues to define a common enemy. His winning position was that any Red Army soldier could explain in a nutshell what he was fighting for, unlike all the other rebels. This attracted ordinary people to the side of the Bolsheviks and made it possible for the latter to win the Civil War.

Prerequisites for the war

When studying the Civil War in class, a table is essential for a good understanding of the material. Below are the stages of this military conflict, which will help you better navigate not only the article, but also this period in the history of the Fatherland.

Now that we have decided who the “reds” and “whites” are, the Civil War, or rather its stages, will be more understandable. You can begin to study them in more depth. It's worth starting with the premises.

So, the main reason for such intense passions, which later resulted in a five-year Civil War, was the accumulated contradictions and problems.

First, the Russian Empire's involvement in World War I destroyed the economy and depleted the country's resources. The bulk of the male population was in the army, they fell into decline Agriculture and urban industry. The soldiers were tired of fighting for other people's ideals when there were hungry families at home.

The second reason was agricultural and industrial issues. There were too many peasants and workers who lived below the poverty line. The Bolsheviks took full advantage of this.

In order to turn participation in the world war into an inter-class struggle, certain steps were taken.

First, the first wave of nationalization of enterprises, banks, and lands took place. Then the Brest-Litovsk Treaty was signed, which plunged Russia into the abyss of complete ruin. Against the backdrop of general devastation, the Red Army men carried out terror in order to stay in power.

To justify their behavior, they built an ideology of struggle against the White Guards and interventionists.

Background

Let's take a closer look at why the Civil War began. The table we provided earlier illustrates the stages of the conflict. But we will start with the events that occurred before the Great October Revolution.

Weakened by its participation in the First World War, the Russian Empire declines. Nicholas II abdicates the throne. More importantly, he does not have a successor. In light of such events, two new forces are being formed simultaneously - the Provisional Government and the Council of Workers' Deputies.

The former are beginning to deal with the social and political spheres of the crisis, while the Bolsheviks concentrated on increasing their influence in the army. This path subsequently led them to the opportunity to become the only ruling force in the country.
It was the confusion in government that led to the formation of “reds” and “whites”. The civil war was only the apotheosis of their differences. Which is to be expected.

October Revolution

In fact, the tragedy of the Civil War begins with the October Revolution. The Bolsheviks were gaining strength and moving more confidently to power. In mid-October 1917, a very tense situation began to develop in Petrograd.

October 25 Alexander Kerensky, head of the Provisional Government, leaves Petrograd for Pskov for help. He personally assesses the events in the city as an uprising.

In Pskov, he asks for help with troops. Kerensky seems to be receiving support from the Cossacks, but suddenly the cadets leave the regular army. Now constitutional democrats refuse to support the head of government.

Not finding adequate support in Pskov, Alexander Fedorovich goes to the city of Ostrov, where he meets with General Krasnov. At the same time, the Winter Palace was stormed in Petrograd. In Soviet history, this event is presented as key. But in fact it happened without resistance from the deputies.

After a blank shot from the cruiser Aurora, sailors, soldiers and workers approached the palace and arrested all members of the Provisional Government present there. In addition, it took place where a number of major declarations were adopted and executions at the front were abolished.

In view of the coup, Krasnov decides to provide assistance to Alexander Kerensky. On October 26, a cavalry detachment of seven hundred people leaves towards Petrograd. It was assumed that in the city itself they would be supported by an uprising by the cadets. But it was suppressed by the Bolsheviks.

In the current situation, it became clear that the Provisional Government no longer had power. Kerensky fled, General Krasnov negotiated with the Bolsheviks the opportunity to return to Ostrov with his detachment without hindrance.

Meanwhile, the Socialist Revolutionaries begin a radical struggle against the Bolsheviks, who, in their opinion, have acquired greater power. The response to the murders of some “red” leaders was terror by the Bolsheviks, and the Civil War (1917-1922) began. Let us now consider further events.

Establishment of "red" power

As we said above, the tragedy of the Civil War began long before the October Revolution. The common people, soldiers, workers and peasants were dissatisfied with the current situation. If in the central regions many paramilitary detachments were under the close control of Headquarters, then in the eastern detachments a completely different mood reigned.

It is the presence large quantity reserve troops and their reluctance to enter into a war with Germany helped the Bolsheviks quickly and bloodlessly gain the support of almost two-thirds of the army. Only 15 large cities resisted the “red” authorities, while 84 passed into their hands on their own initiative.

An unexpected surprise for the Bolsheviks in the form of stunning support from confused and tired soldiers was declared by the “Reds” as a “triumphant procession of the Soviets.”

The civil war (1917-1922) only worsened after the signing of a devastating treaty for Russia, the former empire lost more than a million square kilometers of territory. These included: the Baltic states, Belarus, Ukraine, the Caucasus, Romania, Don territories. In addition, they had to pay Germany six billion marks of indemnity.

This decision caused protest both within the country and from the Entente. Simultaneously with the intensification of various local conflicts, military intervention begins Western states to the territory of Russia.

The entry of Entente troops in Siberia was reinforced by the revolt of the Kuban Cossacks under the leadership of General Krasnov. The defeated detachments of the White Guards and some interventionists went to Central Asia and continued the struggle against Soviet power for many years.

Second period of the Civil War

It was at this stage that the White Guard Heroes of the Civil War were most active. History has preserved such surnames as Kolchak, Yudenich, Denikin, Yuzefovich, Miller and others.

Each of these commanders had his own vision of the future for the state. Some tried to interact with the Entente troops in order to overthrow the Bolshevik government and still convene the Constituent Assembly. Others wanted to become local princelings. This includes people like Makhno, Grigoriev and others.

The difficulty of this period is that as soon as the First World War, German troops were supposed to leave Russian territory only after the arrival of the Entente. But according to a secret agreement, they left earlier, handing over the cities to the Bolsheviks.

As history shows us, it is after this turn of events that the Civil War enters a phase of particular cruelty and bloodshed. The failure of commanders oriented towards Western governments was further aggravated by the fact that they had a catastrophic shortage of qualified officers. Thus, the armies of Miller, Yudenich and some other formations disintegrated only because, with a lack of mid-level commanders, the main influx of forces came from captured Red Army soldiers.

Messages in newspapers of this period are characterized by headlines of this type: “Two thousand military personnel with three guns went over to the side of the Red Army.”

The final stage

Historians tend to associate the beginning of the last period of the war of 1917-1922 with the Polish War. With the help of his western neighbors, Piłsudski wanted to create a confederation with territory from the Baltic to the Black Sea. But his aspirations were not destined to come true. The armies of the Civil War, led by Egorov and Tukhachevsky, fought their way deep into Western Ukraine and reached the Polish border.

Victory over this enemy was supposed to rouse the workers in Europe to fight. But all the plans of the Red Army leaders failed after a crushing defeat in the battle, which was preserved under the name “Miracle on the Vistula.”

After the conclusion of a peace treaty between the Soviets and Poland, disagreements begin in the Entente camp. As a result, funding for the “white” movement decreased, and the Civil War in Russia began to decline.

In the early 1920s, similar changes in the foreign policy of Western states led to Soviet Union recognized by most countries.

The heroes of the Civil War of the final period fought against Wrangel in Ukraine, the interventionists in the Caucasus and Central Asia, in Siberia. Among the particularly distinguished commanders, Tukhachevsky, Blucher, Frunze and some others should be noted.

Thus, as a result of five years of bloody battles, a new state was formed on the territory of the Russian Empire. Subsequently, it became the second superpower, whose only rival was the United States.

Reasons for victory

Let's figure out why the “whites” were defeated in the Civil War. We will compare the assessments of the opposing camps and try to come to a common conclusion.

Soviet historians saw the main reason for their victory in the fact that there was massive support from the oppressed sections of society. Particular emphasis was placed on those who suffered as a result of the 1905 revolution. Because they unconditionally went over to the side of the Bolsheviks.

“Whites,” on the contrary, complained about the lack of human and material resources. In occupied territories with a population of millions, they could not carry out even the minimum mobilization to replenish their ranks.

Particularly interesting are the statistics provided by the Civil War. “Reds” and “Whites” (the table below) especially suffered from desertion. Unbearable living conditions, as well as the lack of clear goals, made themselves felt. The data concerns only the Bolshevik forces, since the White Guard records did not preserve clear figures.

The main point that modern historians note was the conflict.

The White Guards, firstly, had no centralized command and minimal cooperation between units. They fought locally, each for their own interests. The second feature was the absence of political workers and a clear program. These aspects were often assigned to officers who only knew how to fight, but not how to conduct diplomatic negotiations.

The Red Army soldiers created a powerful ideological network. A clear system of concepts was developed that was drummed into the heads of workers and soldiers. The slogans made it possible for even the most downtrodden peasant to understand what he was going to fight for.

It was this policy that allowed the Bolsheviks to receive maximum support from the population.

Consequences

The victory of the “Reds” in the Civil War was very costly for the state. The economy was completely destroyed. The country lost territories with a population of more than 135 million people.

Agriculture and productivity, food production decreased by 40-50 percent. The surplus appropriation system and the “red-white” terror in different regions led to the death of a huge number of people from starvation, torture and execution.

Industry, according to experts, has slipped to the level of the Russian Empire during the reign of Peter the Great. Researchers say production levels have fallen to 20 percent of 1913 levels, and in some areas to 4 percent.

As a result, a massive outflow of workers from cities to villages began. Since there was at least some hope of not dying of hunger.

“Whites” in the Civil War reflected the desire of the nobility and higher ranks to return to their previous living conditions. But their isolation from the real sentiments that reigned among the common people led to the total defeat of the old order.

Reflection in culture

Civil War leaders were immortalized in thousands of different works - from cinema to paintings, from stories to sculptures and songs.

For example, such productions as “Days of the Turbins”, “Running”, “Optimistic Tragedy” immersed people in the tense wartime environment.

The films “Chapaev”, “Little Red Devils”, “We are from Kronstadt” showed the efforts that the “Reds” made in the Civil War to win their ideals.

The literary work of Babel, Bulgakov, Gaidar, Pasternak, Ostrovsky illustrates the life of representatives of different strata of society in those difficult days.

One can give examples almost endlessly, because the social catastrophe that resulted in the Civil War found a powerful response in the hearts of hundreds of artists.

Thus, today we learned not only the origin of the concepts “white” and “red,” but also briefly became acquainted with the course of events of the Civil War.

Remember that any crisis contains the seeds of future changes for the better.

At the first stage of the Civil War of 1917 - 1922/23, two powerful opposing forces took shape - “red” and “white”. The first represented the Bolshevik camp, whose goal was a radical change in the existing system and the construction of a socialist regime, the second - the anti-Bolshevik camp, striving for a return to the order of the pre-revolutionary period.

The period between February and October revolutions– the time of formation and development of the Bolshevik regime, the stage of accumulation of forces. The main tasks of the Bolsheviks before the outbreak of hostilities in the Civil War: the formation of a social support, transformations in the country that would allow them to gain a foothold at the top of power in the country, and the defense of the achievements of the February Revolution.

The Bolsheviks' methods in strengthening power were effective. First of all, this concerns propaganda among the population - the slogans of the Bolsheviks were relevant and helped to quickly form the social support of the “Reds”.

The first armed detachments of the “Reds” began to appear during the preparatory stage - from March to October 1917. The main driving force of such detachments were workers from industrial regions - this was the main force of the Bolsheviks, which helped them come to power during the October Revolution. At the time of the revolutionary events, the detachment numbered about 200,000 people.

The stage of the establishment of Bolshevik power required the protection of what was achieved during the revolution - for this, at the end of December 1917, the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission was created, headed by F. Dzerzhinsky. On January 15, 1918, the Cheka adopted a Decree on the creation of the Workers' and Peasants' Red Army, and on January 29, the Red Fleet was created.

Analyzing the actions of the Bolsheviks, historians do not come to a consensus about their goals and motivation:

The most common opinion is that the “Reds” initially planned a large-scale Civil War, which would be a logical continuation of the revolution. Fighting, whose goal was to promote the ideas of revolution, would consolidate the power of the Bolsheviks and spread socialism throughout the world. During the war, the Bolsheviks planned to destroy the bourgeoisie as a class. Thus, based on this, the ultimate goal of the “reds” is world revolution.

V. Galin is considered one of the fans of the second concept. This version is radically different from the first - according to historians, the Bolsheviks had no intention of turning the revolution into a Civil War. The goal of the Bolsheviks was to seize power, which they succeeded in during the revolution. But continuation of hostilities was not included in the plans. Arguments of fans of this concept: the transformations that the “Reds” planned demanded peace in the country; at the first stage of the struggle, the “Reds” were tolerant of other political forces. A turning point regarding political opponents occurred when in 1918 there was a threat of losing power in the state. By 1918, the “Reds” had a strong, professionally trained enemy - the White Army. Its backbone was the military of the Russian Empire. By 1918, the fight against this enemy became purposeful, the army of the “Reds” acquired a pronounced structure.

At the first stage of the war, the actions of the Red Army were not successful. Why?

Recruitment into the army was carried out on a voluntary basis, which led to decentralization and disunity. The army was created spontaneously, without a specific structure - this led to low level discipline, problems in managing large numbers of volunteers. The chaotic army was characterized by high level combat effectiveness. Only in 1918, when Bolshevik power was under threat, did the “Reds” decide to recruit troops according to the mobilization principle. From June 1918, they began to mobilize the military of the tsarist army.

The second reason is closely related to the first - the chaotic, unprofessional army of the “Reds” was opposed by organized, professional military men who, at the time of the Civil War, participated in more than one battle. The “Whites”, with a high level of patriotism, were united not only by professionalism, but also by an idea - the White movement stood for a united and indivisible Russia, for order in the state.

Most characteristic The Red Army is homogeneous. First of all, this concerns class origin. Unlike the “whites,” whose army included professional soldiers, workers, and peasants, the “reds” accepted only proletarians and peasants into their ranks. The bourgeoisie was subject to destruction, so an important task was to prevent hostile elements from joining the Red Army.

In parallel with military operations, the Bolsheviks implemented a political and economic program. The Bolsheviks pursued a policy of “red terror” against hostile social classes. In the economic sphere, “war communism” was introduced - a set of measures in the internal policy of the Bolsheviks throughout the Civil War.

The Reds' biggest wins:

• 1918 – 1919 – establishment of Bolshevik power in the territory of Ukraine, Belarus, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia.
• Beginning of 1919 - The Red Army launches a counteroffensive, defeating Krasnov’s “white” army.
• Spring-summer 1919 - Kolchak’s troops fell under the attacks of the “Reds”.
• Beginning of 1920 - the “Reds” ousted the “Whites” from the northern cities of Russia.
• February-March 1920 - defeat of the remaining forces of Denikin’s Volunteer Army.
• November 1920 - the “Reds” ousted the “Whites” from Crimea.
• By the end of 1920, the “Reds” were opposed by disparate groups of the White Army. The civil war ended with the victory of the Bolsheviks.

By the beginning of the Civil War, the whites were superior to the reds in almost everything - it seemed that the Bolsheviks were doomed. However, it was the Reds who were destined to emerge victorious from this confrontation. Among the entire huge complex of reasons that led to this, three key ones stand out clearly.

Under the rule of chaos

"...I will immediately point out three reasons for the failure of the white movement:
1) insufficient and untimely,
aid from the allies, guided by narrow selfish considerations,
2) gradual strengthening of reactionary elements within the movement and
3) as a consequence of the second, the disappointment of the masses in the white movement...

P. Milyukov. Report on the white movement.
Newspaper " Last news"(Paris), August 6, 1924

To begin with, it is worth stipulating that the definitions of “red” and “white” are largely arbitrary, as is always the case when describing civil unrest. War is chaos, and civil war is chaos raised to an infinite degree. Even now, almost a century later, the question “so who was right?” remains open and difficult to resolve.

At the same time, everything that was happening was perceived as a real end of the world, a time of complete unpredictability and uncertainty. The color of the banners, the declared beliefs - all this existed only “here and now” and in any case did not guarantee anything. Sides and beliefs changed with amazing ease, and this was not considered something abnormal or unnatural. Revolutionaries with many years of experience in the struggle - for example, the Socialist Revolutionaries - became ministers of new governments and were branded by their opponents as counter-revolutionaries. And the Bolsheviks were helped to create an army and counterintelligence by proven personnel of the tsarist regime - including nobles, guards officers, and graduates of the General Staff Academy. People, trying to somehow survive, were thrown from one extreme to another. Or the “extremes” themselves came to them - in the form of an immortal phrase: “The whites came and robbed, the reds came and robbed, so where should the poor peasant go?” Both individuals and entire military units regularly changed sides.

In the best traditions of the 18th century, prisoners could be released on parole, killed in the most savage ways, or placed in their own system. An orderly, harmonious division “these are red, these are white, those over there are green, and these are morally unstable and undecided” took shape only years later.

Therefore, it should always be remembered that when we talk about any side of a civil conflict, we are not talking about the strict ranks of regular formations, but rather “centers of power.” Points of attraction for many groups that were in constant movement and the ongoing conflicts of everyone with everyone.

But why did the center of power, which we collectively call “red”, win? Why did the “gentlemen” lose to the “comrades”?

Question about the "Red Terror"

"Red Terror" is often used as ultima ratio, a description of the main tool of the Bolsheviks, which allegedly threw a frightened country at their feet. This is wrong. Terror has always gone hand in hand with civil unrest, because it is derived from the extreme ferocity of this kind of conflict, in which the opponents have nowhere to run and nothing to lose. Moreover, opponents could not, in principle, avoid organized terror as a means.

It was said earlier that initially the opponents were small groups surrounded by a sea of ​​anarchist freemen and apolitical peasant masses. White general Mikhail Drozdovsky brought about two thousand people from Romania. Mikhail Alekseev and Lavr Kornilov initially had approximately the same number of volunteers. But the majority simply did not want to fight, including a very significant part of the officers. In Kyiv, officers happened to work as waiters, wearing uniforms and all the awards - “they serve more this way, sir.”

Second Drozdovsky Cavalry Regiment
rusk.ru

In order to win and realize their vision of the future, all participants needed an army (that is, conscripts) and bread. Bread for the city (military production and transport), for the army and for rations for valuable specialists and commanders.

People and bread could only be obtained in the village, from the peasant, who was not going to give either one or the other “for nothing”, and had nothing to pay with. Hence the requisitions and mobilizations, which both the Whites and the Reds (and before them, the Provisional Government) had to resort to with equal zeal. The result is unrest in the village, opposition, and the need to suppress disturbances using the most brutal methods.

Therefore, the notorious and terrible “Red Terror” was not a decisive argument or something that stood out sharply against the general background of the atrocities of the Civil War. Everyone was involved in terrorism and it was not he who brought victory to the Bolsheviks.

1. Unity of command.
2. Organization.
3. Ideology.

Let's consider these points sequentially.

1. Unity of command, or “When there is no agreement among the masters...”.

It should be noted that the Bolsheviks (or, more broadly, “socialist-revolutionaries” in general) initially had very good experience working in conditions of instability and chaos. A situation where there are enemies all around, in our own ranks there are secret police agents and in general" trust no one"- was an ordinary production process for them. With the beginning of the Civil War, the Bolsheviks, in general, continued what they had been doing before, only under more favorable conditions, because now they themselves became one of the main players. They knew how maneuver in conditions of complete confusion and everyday betrayal. But their opponents used the skill “attract an ally and betray him in time before he betrays you” much worse. Therefore, at the peak of the conflict, many white groups fought against the relatively unified (by the presence of one leader) Red camp, and each waged its own war according to its own plans and understandings.

Actually, this discord and the slowness of the overall strategy deprived White of victory back in 1918. The Entente desperately needed a Russian front against the Germans and was ready to do a lot just to maintain at least the appearance of it, pulling German troops away from the western front. The Bolsheviks were extremely weak and disorganized, and help could have been demanded at least for partial deliveries of military orders already paid for by the tsarism. But... the Whites preferred to take shells from the Germans through Krasnov for the war against the Reds - thereby creating a corresponding reputation in the eyes of the Entente. The Germans, having lost the war in the West, disappeared. The Bolsheviks steadily created an organized army instead of semi-partisan detachments and tried to establish a military industry. And in 1919, the Entente had already won its war and did not want, and could not, bear large, and most importantly, expenses that did not provide any visible benefit in a distant country. The interventionist forces left the fronts of the Civil War one after another.

White was unable to come to an agreement with any limitrophe - as a result, their rear (almost all) hung in the air. And, as if this were not enough, each white leader had his own “chieftain” in the rear, poisoning life with all his might. Kolchak has Semenov, Denikin has the Kuban Rada with Kalabukhov and Mamontov, Wrangel has the Oryol war in Crimea, Yudenich has Bermondt-Avalov.

White movement propaganda poster
statehistory.ru

So, although outwardly the Bolsheviks seemed surrounded by enemies and a doomed camp, they were able to concentrate on selected areas, transferring at least some resources along internal transport lines - despite the collapse of the transport system. Each individual white general could beat the enemy as harshly as he liked on the battlefield - and the reds admitted these defeats - but these pogroms did not add up to a single boxing combination that would knock out the fighter in the red corner of the ring. The Bolsheviks withstood each individual attack, accumulated strength and struck back.

The year is 1918: Kornilov goes to Yekaterinodar, but other white detachments have already left there. Then the Volunteer Army gets bogged down in battles in the North Caucasus, and at the same time Krasnov’s Cossacks go to Tsaritsyn, where they get theirs from the Reds. In 1919, thanks to foreign assistance (more on this below), Donbass fell, Tsaritsyn was finally taken - but Kolchak in Siberia was already defeated. In the fall, Yudenich marches on Petrograd, having excellent chances to take it - and Denikin in the south of Russia is defeated and retreats. Wrangel, having excellent aviation and tanks, left the Crimea in 1920, the battles were initially successful for the Whites, but the Poles were already making peace with the Reds. And so on. Khachaturian - “Sabre Dance”, only much scarier.

The Whites were fully aware of the seriousness of this problem and even tried to solve it by choosing a single leader (Kolchak) and trying to coordinate actions. But by then it was already too late. Moreover, there was in fact no real coordination as a class.

“The white movement did not end in victory because the white dictatorship did not emerge. And what prevented it from taking shape were centrifugal forces, inflated by the revolution, and all the elements associated with the revolution and not breaking with it... Against the red dictatorship, a white “concentration of power...” was needed.

N. Lvov. "White Movement", 1924.

2. Organization - “the war is won on the home front”

As again mentioned above, for a long time whites had clear superiority on the battlefield. It was so tangible that to this day it is a source of pride for supporters of the white movement. Accordingly, all sorts of conspiracy theories are invented to explain why everything ended this way and where did the victories go?.. Hence the legends about the monstrous and unparalleled “Red Terror”.

And the solution is actually simple and, alas, graceless - the Whites won tactically, in battle, but lost the main battle - in their own rear.

“Not one of the [anti-Bolshevik] governments... was able to create a flexible and strong apparatus of power that could quickly and quickly overtake, coerce, act and force others to act. The Bolsheviks also did not capture the people’s soul, they also did not become a national phenomenon, but they were infinitely ahead of us in the pace of their actions, in energy, mobility and ability to coerce. We, with our old techniques, old psychology, old vices of the military and civil bureaucracy, with Peter’s table of ranks, could not keep up with them ... "

In the spring of 1919, the commander of Denikin’s artillery had only two hundred shells a day... For a single gun? No, for the entire army.

England, France and other powers, despite the later curses of the whites against them, provided considerable or even enormous assistance. In the same year, 1919, the British supplied Denikin alone with 74 tanks, one and a half hundred aircraft, hundreds of cars and dozens of tractors, more than five hundred guns, including 6-8-inch howitzers, thousands of machine guns, more than two hundred thousand rifles, hundreds of millions of cartridges and two million shells... These are very decent numbers even on the scale of the just died down Great War, it would not be a shame to bring them in the context of, say, the battle of Ypres or the Somme, describing the situation on a separate section of the front. And for a civil war, forcedly poor and ragged, this is a fabulous amount. Such an armada, concentrated in several “fists,” could by itself tear apart the Red Front like a rotten rag.

A detachment of tanks from the Shock Fire Brigade before being sent to the front
velikoe-sorokoletie.diary.ru

However, this wealth was not united into compact, crushing groups. Moreover, the overwhelming majority did not reach the front at all. Because the logistics supply organization was completely failed. And cargo (ammunition, food, uniforms, equipment...) was either stolen or filled up remote warehouses.

New British howitzers were damaged by untrained white crews within three weeks, which repeatedly dismayed the British advisers. 1920 - Wrangel, according to the Reds, fired no more than 20 shells per gun on the day of the battle. Some of the batteries had to be moved to the rear.

On all fronts, ragged soldiers and no less ragged officers of the white armies, without food or ammunition, desperately fought Bolshevism. And in the rear...

“Looking at these hosts of scoundrels, at these dressed up ladies with diamonds, at these polished young men, I felt only one thing: I prayed: “Lord, send the Bolsheviks here, at least for a week, so that at least in the midst of the horrors of the Emergency, these animals understand that they do."

Ivan Nazhivin, Russian writer and emigrant

Lack of coordination of actions and the inability to organize, in modern terms, logistics and rear discipline, led to the fact that the purely military victories of the White movement dissolved in smoke. White was chronically unable to put the squeeze on the enemy, while slowly and irreversibly losing his fighting qualities. The White armies at the beginning and end of the Civil War differed fundamentally only in the degree of raggedness and mental breakdown - and not for the better by the end. But the red ones changed...

“Yesterday there was a public lecture by Colonel Kotomin, who fled the Red Army; those present did not understand the bitterness of the lecturer, who pointed out that in the commissar army there is much more order and discipline than ours, and they created a huge scandal, with an attempt to beat the lecturer, one of the most ideological workers of our national Center; They were especially offended when K. noted that in the Red Army a drunken officer is impossible, because any commissar or communist would immediately shoot him.”

Baron Budberg

Budberg somewhat idealized the picture, but appreciated the essence correctly. And not only him. There was an evolution in the nascent Red Army, the Reds fell, received painful blows, but rose and moved on, drawing conclusions from the defeats. And even in tactics, more than once or twice the efforts of the Whites were defeated by the stubborn defense of the Reds - from Ekaterinodar to the Yakut villages. On the contrary, the Whites fail and the front collapses for hundreds of kilometers, often forever.

1918, summer - Taman campaign, for prefabricated Red detachments of 27,000 bayonets and 3,500 sabers - 15 guns, at best from 5 to 10 rounds of ammunition per soldier. There is no food, fodder, convoys or kitchens.

Red Army in 1918.
Drawing by Boris Efimov
http://www.ageod-forum.com

1920, autumn - The shock fire brigade on Kakhovka has a battery of six-inch howitzers, two light batteries, two detachments of armored cars (another detachment of tanks, but it did not have time to take part in battles), more than 180 machine guns for 5.5 thousand people, a flamethrower team, the fighters are dressed to the nines and impress even the enemy with their training; the commanders received leather uniforms.

Red Army in 1921.
Drawing by Boris Efimov
http://www.ageod-forum.com

The red cavalry of Dumenko and Budyonny forced even the enemy to study their tactics. While White most often “shone” with a frontal infantry attack in full height and outflanking the cavalry. When the White army under Wrangel, thanks to the supply of equipment, began to resemble a modern one, it was already too late.

The Reds have a place for career officers - like Kamenev and Vatsetis, and for those making a successful career “from the bottom” of the army - Dumenko and Budyonny, and for nuggets - Frunze.

And among the whites, with all the wealth of choice, one of Kolchak’s armies is commanded by... a former paramedic. Denikin’s decisive attack on Moscow is led by Mai-Maevsky, who stands out for his drinking bouts even against the general background. Grishin-Almazov, a major general, “works” as a courier between Kolchak and Denikin, where he dies. Contempt for others flourishes in almost every part.

3. Ideology - “Vote with your rifle!”

What was the Civil War like for the average citizen, the average person? To paraphrase one of the modern researchers, in essence these turned out to be grandiose democratic elections stretched over several years under the slogan “vote with a rifle!” The man could not choose the time and place where he happened to witness amazing and terrible events of historical significance. However, he could - albeit limitedly - choose his place in the present. Or, at worst, your attitude towards him.

Let us remember what was already mentioned above - the opponents were in dire need of armed force and food. People and food could be obtained by force, but not always and not everywhere, multiplying enemies and haters. Ultimately, the winner was not determined by how brutal he was or how many individual battles he could win. And what he can offer to the huge apolitical masses, insanely tired of the hopeless and protracted end of the world. Will it be able to attract new supporters, maintain the loyalty of the former, make neutrals hesitate, and undermine the morale of enemies.

The Bolsheviks succeeded. But their opponents do not.

“What did the Reds want when they went to war? They wanted to defeat the whites and, strengthened by this victory, create from it the foundation for the solid construction of their communist statehood.

What did the whites want? They wanted to defeat the Reds. And then? Then - nothing, because only state babies could not understand that the forces that supported the building of the old statehood were destroyed to the ground, and that there were no opportunities to restore these forces.

Victory for the Reds was a means, for Whites it was a goal, and, moreover, the only one.”

Von Raupach. "Reasons for the failure of the white movement"

Ideology is a tool that is difficult to calculate mathematically, but it also has its weight. In a country where the majority of the population could barely read, it was extremely important to be able to clearly explain why it was proposed to fight and die. The Reds did it. The Whites were unable to even decide among themselves what they were fighting for. On the contrary, they considered it right to postpone ideology “for later.” » , conscious non-predetermination. Even among the whites themselves, the alliance between the "owning classes" » , officers, Cossacks and “revolutionary democracy” » They called it unnatural - how could they convince the hesitant?

« ...We have created a huge blood-sucking bank for sick Russia... The transfer of power from Soviet hands to ours would not have saved Russia. Something new is needed, something hitherto unconscious - then we can hope for a slow revival. But neither the Bolsheviks nor we will be in power, and that’s even better!”

A. Lampe. From the Diary. 1920

A Tale of Losers

In essence, our forcedly brief note became a story about the weaknesses of the Whites and, to a much lesser extent, about the Reds. This is no coincidence. In any civil war, all sides demonstrate an unimaginable, prohibitive level of chaos and disorganization. Naturally, the Bolsheviks and their fellow travelers were no exception. But the whites set an absolute record for what would now be called “gracelessness.”

In essence, it was not the Reds who won the war, they, in general, did what they had done before - fought for power and solved problems that blocked the path to their future.

It was the whites who lost the confrontation, they lost at all levels - from political declarations to tactics and organization of supplies for the active army.

The irony of fate is that the majority of whites did not defend the tsarist regime, or even took an active part in its overthrow. They knew very well and criticized all the ills of tsarism. However, at the same time, they scrupulously repeated all the main mistakes of the previous government, which led to its collapse. Only in a more explicit, even caricatured form.

Finally, I would like to cite words that were originally written in relation to the Civil War in England, but are also perfectly suitable for those terrible and great events that shook Russia almost a hundred years ago...

“They say that these people were caught in a whirlwind of events, but the matter is different. No one was dragging them anywhere, and there were no inexplicable forces or invisible hands. It’s just that every time they were faced with a choice, they made the right decisions, from their point of view, but in the end a chain of individually correct intentions led them into a dark forest... All that remained was to get lost in the evil thickets until, finally, the survivors came to light , looking in horror at the road with corpses left behind. Many have gone through this, but blessed are those who understood their enemy and then did not curse him.”

A. V. Tomsinov “The Blind Children of Kronos”.

Literature:

1. Budberg A. Diary of a White Guard. - Mn.: Harvest, M.: AST, 2001
2. Gul R.B. Ice March (with Kornilov). http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/gul_rb/index.html
3. Drozdovsky M. G. Diary. - Berlin: Otto Kirchner and Ko, 1923.
4. Zaitsov A. A. 1918. Essays on the history of the Russian Civil War. Paris, 1934.
5. Kakurin N. E., Vatsetis I. I. Civil war. 1918–1921. - St. Petersburg: Polygon, 2002.
6. Kakurin N. E. How the revolution fought. 1917–1918. M., Politizdat, 1990.
7. Kovtyukh E.I. “Iron Stream” in a military presentation. Moscow: Gosvoenizdat, 1935
8. Kornatovsky N. A. The struggle for Red Petrograd. - M: ACT, 2004.
9. Essays by E. I. Dostovalov.
10. http://feb-web.ru/feb/rosarc/ra6/ra6–637-.htm
11. Reden. Through the hell of the Russian revolution. Memoirs of a midshipman. 1914–1919. M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2007.
12. Wilmson Huddleston. Farewell to Don. The Russian Civil War in the diaries of a British officer. M.: Tsentrpoligraf, 2007.
13. Evgenia Durneva's LJ http://eugend.livejournal.com - it contains various educational materials, incl. Some issues of red and white terror are considered in relation to the Tambov region and Siberia.

During the Civil War in Russia of 1918-1920, two opposing forces came to the forefront of the political struggle, which went down in history as “red” and “white”. The choice of such a color palette was far from accidental, since it has deep historical roots.

White

According to historian Sergei Melgunov, the term “white guard” in relation to opponents of revolutionary changes in Russia was first used in October 1917, when a detachment of anti-Bolshevik-minded youth with white armbands took to the streets of Moscow.

Doctor of Historical Sciences, David Feldman, believed that the term “white” was coined to show the continuity between the Great French and Great October Revolutions. The ideologists of the Great French Revolution, who established a new order in the country and destroyed the monarchy, called their political opponents “white,” since supporters of the preservation of royal power acted under the traditional dynastic banner of the Bourbons - a white flag with the image of a lily. By calling their ideological enemies “Whites,” the Bolsheviks sought to connect their image in the popular consciousness with the conservative monarchists pulling the country back, although there were not so many advocates for the return of autocracy among the opponents of the “Reds.”

The historian, Vasily Tsvetkov, noted that this movement consisted of representatives of different political leanings, acting on the basis of the general principle of “Great, United and Indivisible Russia.” Socialists, democrats, patriotic military personnel who made up the backbone of the “whites” fought not for the return of Russia to the status of an empire, not for the abdicated emperor, but for the restoration of the work of the Constituent Assembly. However, propagandists deliberately omitted this fact, turning heterogeneous opponents who wanted Russia to develop along a democratic path into a generalized flawed enemy who did not want change. Those who fought against Soviet power The agitators called the nobles, representatives of the bourgeoisie, officers, kulaks and landowners ideological enemies, and the peasants and Cossacks who fought on their side as confused and deceived victims.

The “Large Linguistic and Regional Studies Dictionary,” edited by Yuri Prokhorov, notes that the term “White Guard” first appears when describing the bourgeois militia formed in 1906 in Finland to confront revolutionary forces. To better identify each other, they wore white armbands. By the way, the forces opposing them called themselves the “Red Guard.”

Vasily Tsvetkov states that the terms “white guard” and “white movement” appeared as universal concepts after the end of the Civil War, when the losers who found themselves in exile began to call themselves “white” in order to indicate their position in relation to Soviet power.

"Reds"

When the term “Red Guard” was introduced into the text of the resolution of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (b) “On the Provisional Government”, published on March 26, 1917, it became obvious that representatives of the revolutionary movement completely associated themselves with the followers of the ideas of the Great French Revolution of the late 18th century. David Feldman wrote about this, analyzing the history of the emergence of the color symbol of the communists in the article “Red White: Soviet Political Terms in a Historical and Cultural Context.”

It is known for certain that when in 1789 the king of France Louis XVI gave power into the hands of the Republican revolutionaries, but at the same time was proclaimed the guarantor of their conquests, he issued the “Martial Law Law.” According to his articles, the Parisian municipality, in emergency situations that could result in an uprising against the revolutionary government, was obliged to hang a red signal banner at the town hall and on the streets.

But when desperate radicals settled in the city government, wanting the complete overthrow of the monarchy, they began to call their supporters to rallies with red flags. Thus, a simple warning sign turned into a symbol of the fight against royal power and became the reason for the emergence of an irreconcilable “red/white” opposition.

Since then, the color red has increasingly become associated with radical revolutionary forces: in 1834, the workers who organized the Lyon uprising chose it as their amulet; in 1848, residents of Germany took it to demonstrations; in 1850-1864, it was used in China during Taiping rebellion. The final endowment of the color red with the status of a symbol of the international revolutionary movement of workers occurred during the days of the Paris Commune of 1871, which Marxists called the first true example of the dictatorship of the proletariat in history. By the way, the Soviet Bolsheviks openly called themselves the heirs of the French communards, and that is why they were called communists.

Red and white Poles

The Poles made their contribution to the popularization of red-white antagonism in 1861, who, speaking against the common enemy of the Russian Empire, divided into two opposing camps. The patriotic demonstrations in the Kingdom of Poland that marked the beginning of the Polish uprising of 1863-1864 became the birthplace of the “white” and “red” revolutionary wings, which adhered to different methods of achieving a common goal. Historian Ivan Kovkel notes that the “Whites,” which included large landowners and the bourgeoisie, believed that it was necessary to achieve Polish independence from the Russian Empire and restore it within the borders of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1772, counting on the support of Western countries. The “Reds,” consisting of small gentry, intelligentsia, urban lower classes, students and part of the peasantry, advocated not only a more radical solution to the issue of sovereignty, but also advocated for social transformations in the country, primarily for the abolition of serfdom. The “Reds” acted with the help of revolutionary terror, the political victims of which were 5,000 people. Red and white colors Since May 3, 1792, they have been the national colors of Poland, which is reflected on their national flag.

And there were also “greens”

Along with the “reds” and “whites”, a few “green” detachments took part in the Civil War, the basis of which consisted of anarchists, bandits and nationalists who joined them, fighting for the independence of a particular region. Openly robbing the population, they did not have a clearly formulated political program, and simply rampaged through the occupied territory.