Denikin's resignation

Denikin's resignation

Wrangel in Sevastopol. 1920


After the loss of the Kuban and the North Caucasus, the remnants of the White Army were concentrated on the Crimean peninsula. Denikin reorganized the remnants of the army. On April 4, 1920, Denikin appointed Wrangel the Commander-in-Chief of the All-Union Socialist League.

Reorganization of the White Army


After the loss of the Kuban and the North Caucasus, the remnants of the White Army were concentrated on the Crimean peninsula. Denikin reorganized the remnants of the All-Union Union of Liberal Democratic Forces. The remaining troops were brought into three corps: Crimean, Volunteer and Don, Consolidated cavalry division and Consolidated Kuban brigade. The remaining excess headquarters, institutions and units gathered on the peninsula from all over the South of Russia disbanded. The remaining personnel was sent to staff the existing troops.

The headquarters was located in Feodosia. The Crimean corps of Slashchev (about 5 thousand fighters) still covered the isthmuses. A consolidated detachment (1,5 thousand people) was deployed in the Kerch region to ensure the peninsula from possible landing from Taman. All other troops were located in reserve, for rest and recovery. Volunteers stood in the region of Simferopol, donts - in Yevpatoriya. In general, Denikin’s army had 35-40 thousand people with 100 guns and about 500 machine guns. The forces were enough to defend the peninsula, but the army was tired physically and mentally, which created the basis for further decomposition. Not enough inventory weapons and equipment. If the volunteers took out their weapons, the Cossacks abandoned it.

The White Army received a respite. The Red Army occupied the northern exits from the Crimean isthmuses. But her forces in the Crimean direction were insignificant, the best units were diverted to the new Polish front. In addition, the offensive impulse of the Reds restrained the activities in the rear of the detachments of Makhno and other rebels. From the side of Taman, no preparation for the landing was observed. The Soviet command rated the North Caucasus operation as decisive and last. It was believed that whites were defeated and the remnants of their forces on the peninsula would be easily finished off. The transfer of significant white forces, their activity, willingness and ability to continue the struggle will come as a surprise to the Reds.

Search for the culprits


Crimea was the center of all kinds of intrigues, where the defeated army, the generals left without troops, and many refugees were now added. They were looking for the perpetrators of the defeat and saviors. The South Russian government of Melnikov, created in March 1920, did not actually begin work. In Crimea, they took him in hostility, criticizing him as being created as a result of an agreement with the autocrats. Denikin, in order to avoid conflict, abolished the South Russian government on March 30. Former members of the government left Sevastopol for Constantinople.

Officers and generals were also looking for the perpetrators of the military catastrophe. The scapegoat was one of the leaders of the Volunteer Army and the All-Union Socialist League, chief of staff of the Denikin army, General Ivan Romanovsky. He was considered the culprit of the defeats of the White Army. Accused of liberalism and Freemasonry. They accused of embezzlement, although he was an honest man and constantly experienced material problems. Rumors and gossip brought down the general. Denikin noted in his memoirs:

“This Barclay de Tolly of the volunteer epic took on all the anger and irritation that accumulated in the atmosphere of fierce struggle. Unfortunately, the character of Ivan Pavlovich contributed to the strengthening of hostile relations. He expressed his views bluntly and sharply, not clothed them in the accepted forms of diplomatic craftiness. "

Denikin was forced to remove the "bravest warrior, knight of duty and honor" Romanovsky from the post of chief of staff of the army. Soon Romanovsky, together with Denikin, would leave Crimea and leave for Constantinople. On April 5, 1920, he was killed in the building of the Russian Embassy in Constantinople, Lieutenant M. Kharuzin, a former employee of the counterintelligence of the White Army. Kharuzin considered Romanovsky a traitor to the White movement.

Meanwhile, they were actively intriguing against Denikin himself. The Don command believed that the volunteers “betrayed the Don” and suggested that the Cossacks leave the peninsula and make their way to their native villages. The command of the white front intrigued in favor of Wrangel. The Duke of Leuchtenberg proposed to revive the monarchy, advocated for Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich. The British proposed "democracy." Left without a destination, the generals Borovsky and Pokrovsky led their game. The new commander-in-chief was the former commander of the Caucasian Army Pokrovsky. The clergy, who led the extreme right, advocated Wrangel. Bishop Benjamin said that “in the name of the salvation of Russia,” General Denikin must be forced to resign and transfer it to General Wrangel. Like, only Wrangel will save the Motherland. Infected with universal bacchanalia, the commander of the Crimean corps, General Slashchev, also tried to play his game. He first contacted Wrangel, then Sidorin, then with the Duke of Leuchtenberg, then with Pokrovsky. Slashchev proposed that a meeting be convened and that Denikin should withdraw from command.


Romanovsky (far right) accompanies Denikin at his meeting with a group of Entente officers

The resignation of the commander


Volunteer Corps of General Kutepov remained the basis of the army and its most combat-ready part. The fate of the commander in chief depended on the mood of the volunteers. Therefore, many conspirators tried to persuade General Kutepov to their side. They all received a general refusal. Kutepov reported on these machinations and suggested that Denikin take urgent measures.

However, Denikin had already decided to leave his post. He convened a military council in Sevastopol to elect a new commander in chief. It included members of the headquarters, commanders of corps, divisions, units of brigades and regiments, commandants of fortresses, navy the command, which was out of work, but popular generals, including Wrangel, Pokrovsky, Yuzefovich, Borovsky, Schilling, etc. Denikin appointed General Dragomirov as chairman of the council. In a letter to Dragomirov, Denikin noted:

“God did not bless the success of the troops I led. And although faith in the vitality of the army and in it historical I have not lost my calling, but the internal connection between the leader and the army is broken. And I can’t lead her anymore. ”

Apparently, Denikin was just tired. Endless war and political intrigue. His authority in the troops fell. A new man was needed in which people would believe. The new leader could give new hope. The Military Council met on April 3, 1920. The meeting was stormy. Representatives of the Volunteer Corps unanimously wanted to ask Denikin to remain in his post and expressed full confidence in him. Volunteers categorically refused the election. When Dragomirov announced that this was the decision of Denikin himself, the volunteers began to insist that Anton Ivanovich himself appoint his successor. They were supported by the Kuban. The Don people announced that they could not point to a successor, believed that their representation was insufficient. Slashchev believed that his corps did not have a sufficient number of representatives at the meeting (under the conditions of a possible offensive by the Reds, part of the corps command remained at the forefront). He also noted that the election of the commander in chief could adversely affect the troops. The naval command advocated Wrangel.

As a result, they didn’t come to anything. Dragomirov sent a telegram to the commander in chief, where he wrote that the council recognized it impossible to resolve the issue of commander in chief. The military council asked Denikin to appoint a successor. At the same time, the fleet supported Wrangel, and the ground forces offered Denikin to keep his post. However, Denikin did not change his position. He replied: "Morally overwhelmed, I cannot stay in power for a single day." He demanded that the Military Council make a decision.

On April 4, Dragomirov shared the council, admitting only senior commanders to it. On the same day Wrangel arrived from Constantinople. He led the ultimatum of the British. England proposed stopping the unequal struggle and, through its mediation, begin negotiations with the Bolsheviks on peace under an amnesty for the population of Crimea and the white troops. In the event of rejection of this proposal, the British relieved themselves of responsibility and ceased any support and help to whites. Obviously, the British in this way supported the candidacy of Wrangel. The meeting itself was delayed again. They discussed the message of Britain for a long time. Slashchev said that he was against the election and went to the front. As a result, the opinion of the military leaders was in favor of Wrangel.

On April 4 (17), 1920, Denikin appointed Lieutenant General Pyotr Wrangel as the Commander-in-Chief of the FJUR. On the same day, Denikin and Romanovsky left the Crimea and went to Constantinople in foreign ships. After the death of Romanovsky, Denikin on a British ship left for England. In exile, Denikin tried to help the Wrangel army. He met with parliamentarians and members of the government, appealed to the ruling circles and the public, spoke in the press. He proved the fallacy of reconciliation with Soviet Russia and the cessation of aid to the White Army. In protest against the desire of London to make peace with Moscow, left England in August 1920 and moved to Belgium, where he devoted himself to historical work. He wrote the history of the Civil War - "Essays on Russian Troubles."


General A.I. Denikin on the day of his voluntary resignation from the post of commander in chief of the Armed forces of the South of Russia
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67 April 2 2020 06: 00 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5
    So, "when there is no agreement in friends" - then you can lose your homeland ...
    1. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 06: 22 New
      • 15
      • 7
      +8
      Quote: svp67
      when there is no agreement in friends
      Actually, whites actually opposed the homeland, and they did not have a “consensus” with Russia as a whole.
      1. svp67 April 2 2020 06: 43 New
        • 11
        • 7
        +4
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Actually, the whites actually opposed the homeland, and they didn’t have “agreement” with Russia as a whole

        I don’t agree at the root. They had their homeland and the same part of the population supported them. You know, the "Reds" with "agreement" with the whole of Russia, the same were BIG problems, especially the "Bolsheviks"
        1. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 07: 19 New
          • 12
          • 4
          +8
          All the same, the white problems with the consent of Russia were many times greater, and the population that supported them was many times smaller, and their internal squabble was already so, in particular.
          1. svp67 April 2 2020 07: 25 New
            • 8
            • 8
            0
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            and the population supporting them is much less

            I again disagree, practice shows that most of the population doesn’t care for anyone, if only he would be a winner ... since the victors write the story, they will write well about the support of the masses
            1. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 07: 30 New
              • 12
              • 4
              +8
              Then how did it happen that the whites were swept out of Russia? And by the way, an indicator that a third of the tsarist officers served in the Red Army, it would seem, with their opponents.
              Quote: svp67
              practice shows that most of the population doesn’t care for anyone, if only he would be a winner
              Especially if the winners, the mass, are the same people as the people, if the winners are not satisfied with robberies and mass flogging and other arts.
              1. svp67 April 2 2020 07: 38 New
                • 7
                • 9
                -2
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                Then how did it happen that the whites were swept out of Russia?

                At that stage, they were weaker precisely because of their disunity.
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                And by the way, an indicator that a third of the tsarist officers served in the Red Army, it would seem, with their opponents.

                Especially if you know by what methods this was achieved, then you should not be very surprised.
                And the indicator that on the white side the regiments formed from workers and former captured Red Army soldiers fought to the end - is this not an indicator?
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                Especially if the winners, in the mass, are the same people as in the people

                ??????? Forgive me, how many workers and peasants, in percentage terms, were in the government of Soviet Russia and what percentage of them was in the whole country. And so of course, they are all “homo sapiens”
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                if the winners do not arrange robberies and mass flogging and other arts.

                Listen, but this could still be told before 1990, but not now. The Reds were not nearly liberal in suppressing disagreement and there were hundreds, if not thousands, of examples.
                1. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 08: 35 New
                  • 12
                  • 5
                  +7
                  Quote: svp67
                  Especially if you know by what methods this was achieved, then you should not be very surprised.
                  Yes, and all the ex-officers were kept in such a way? Are you exaggerating too much? Over the top, so in my opinion.
                  Quote: svp67
                  And the indicator that on the White side the regiments formed from workers and former captured Red Army soldiers fought to the end is not an indicator
                  No, not an indicator. And how many such regiments were there? One and a half? Have you heard about forced mobilization? And about the subsequent desertion from the ranks of the valiant White Army.
                  Quote: svp67
                  Forgive me, how many workers and peasants, in percentage terms, were in the government of Soviet Russia and what percentage of them was in the whole country.
                  This percentage was significant even at the top of the Bolshevik government, let alone the Soviets on the ground. And, haha, it was just that the percentage in the White Government exceeded that, by the way, I don’t remember about the workers' and peasants' deputies, I don’t know about the soldiers' deputies, in the White Government. Maybe enlighten?
                  Quote: svp67
                  if the winners do not arrange robberies and mass flogging and other arts.
                  Listen, but this could still be told before 1990, but not now. The Reds were not nearly liberal in suppressing disagreement and there were hundreds of examples.
                  Robberies, rape is not a suppression of disagreement, their Bolsheviks did not suit, like mass flogging, in contrast. And it is true that before 90, now. But this is your appeal to the year 90 indicator, however.
                  1. svp67 April 2 2020 08: 50 New
                    • 5
                    • 6
                    -1
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Yes, and all the ex-officers were kept in such a way? Are you exaggerating too much? Over the top, so in my opinion.

                    Not all, just as with the whites, not all workers and former Red Army men were held by force.
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    And how many such regiments were there? One and a half?

                    Read at least about the Izhevsk and Votkinsk labor divisions in Kolchak’s army.
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Have you heard about forced mobilization?

                    Bolsheviks? Yes ... you are rushing arguments, not thinking that the opposite side acted the same way ...
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Robberies, rape is not a suppression of disagreement, their Bolsheviks did not suit,

                    Read the "First Horse" Babel, maybe then your "blinkers" will fall ...
                    1. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 10: 10 New
                      • 7
                      • 5
                      +2
                      Quote: svp67
                      Read at least about the Izhevsk and Votkinsk labor divisions in Kolchak’s army.
                      Yes please:
                      Decomposition also began in the army, the backbone of which was workers. If initially the Prikamsky People’s Army was formed as a volunteer, then on August 18, forced mobilization was carried out, which later became common practice. AT during the last violent mobilization, even 16- and 50-year-olds were called.
                      ... Under the influence of external and internal causes in the rebel forces increased fermentation, their individual parts went over to the red side.
                      On November 14, the main parts of the Prikamsk People’s Army crossed the hastily built pontoon bridge across the Kama River [7]. In total, it took about Kama 15 000 fighters of the Votkinsk People’s Army and as many members of their families, as well as about 8000 combat-ready Izhevsk citizens and a certain number of civilians ...
                      ... The rebel forces that retreated behind Kama subsequently fought with the Bolsheviks as part of the Izhevsk and Votkinsk divisions of the Russian army, Admiral A. V. Kolchak. After the capture of Izhevsk and Votkinsk the vast majority of the personnel of the divisions deserted and went home [59] [60]. After the defeat of the whites, the majority of the Izhevsk fighters fighting in their troops settled in Manchuria and the United States. ...
                      These divisions were not workers and they did not “fight to the end”. They raised a foolishness and rebellion from greed, killed the Bolsheviks and sympathizers, and then they had to save the hide. Not an indicator of them.

                      Quote: svp67
                      Have you heard about forced mobilization?

                      Bolsheviks? Yes ... you are rushing arguments, not thinking that the opposite side acted the same way ...
                      Yes, I’m aware of the reciprocity, but it didn’t help the whites, because the Bolsheviks were the masses.
                      Quote: svp67
                      Read the "First Horse" Babel, maybe then your "blinkers" will fall ...
                      Could it be Konarmia? And where is there about the robberies, rape and mass flogging of the Red Army? But no, except for a couple of private episodes and even those ambiguous. And the “blinkers” of you, from the time of the “Ogonykovsky” “revelations” seem to be.
                      1. svp67 April 2 2020 11: 44 New
                        • 5
                        • 5
                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        These divisions were not workers and they did not “fight to the end”. They raised a foolishness and rebellion from greed, killed the Bolsheviks and sympathizers, and then they had to save the hide. Not an indicator of them.

                        They were the most combat-ready in the admiral's army and fought to the end. And your arguments, this is an attempt to discredit their actions
                        And what about the Samursky regiment?
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Could it be Konarmia?

                        Yes
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        But no, except for a couple of private episodes and even those ambiguous.
                        Okay, okay, but let's read this, from the archives ..
                        Summary of the Kiev Commission of the Eurocommittee on the pogroms of the Jewish population by units of the 1st Cavalry Army in the Kiev province. at the beginning of October 1920
                        Not earlier than October 8, 1920 *
                        Pliskov Kievsk [th] province., Lipovets [th] county
                        In October 1920 the town was attacked by the Budennovites. They broke into houses and synagogues and robbed Jews. 5 pax killed in the most brutal way. The slogan of the rioters was "Beat the Jews, save Russia."
                        Wahnovka Kiev [o] province., Lipovets [o] county
                        On October 2 [January] 1920, units of the 6th Cava [Aleri] division made a number of raids on Jewish apartments. The pogrom in the full sense of the word began on October 3 [January]. Soldiers burst into Jewish houses in batches, demanded money, robbed, beat and killed Jews, tearing holy books. Almost all Jewish women were raped, without distinguishing age. In the evening, soldiers set fire to many Jewish houses, preventing the fire from being extinguished. As a result, 28 were killed, 30 were seriously injured, about [olo] 100 were lightly injured, about 20 houses were burned, and a lot of raped people. The police tried to stop the pogrom, but to no avail.
                        Zozovo of the Kiev lips. Lipovec county
                        On the beginning of October, a small detachment of Budennovites entered the town. They began to arouse the soldiers of the 8th division against the Jews and jointly staged a pogrom.
                        From the robberies affected the entire Jewish population. They took away clothes, shoes, food supplies, broke furniture, tore pillows, etc. 9 Jews killed in the most atrocious manner.
                        Jews hid in cellars and gardens, but the soldiers looked for them and, if they found, beaten, wounded or killed.
                        m. Samgorodok of the Kiev province. Berdychiv district
                        In early October 1920, the 6th Division of the 1st Cavalry Army organized a pogrom in the town. The main forces of the division began the pogrom, and on the very first day they robbed a large part of Jewish apartments and shops. In the following days, soldiers raided groups in groups. All Jewish apartments have broken glass, robbed or broken things.
                        In addition to robberies, the Budennovites killed several Jews. About 30 women were raped, and those who resisted were mutilated. (Information [given] was given to the Kiev] Eurocommunity. Comrade Vaysberg).
                        Tarashcha, Kiev province.
                        On October 8, 1920, the Budyonnovsky intelligence entered the city, a total of 12-15 people, who began to rob Jews. The next day, the 6th Cavalry Division passed through the city. Of
                        she stood out a detachment of people in 130, rushed to rob Jews. The slogan of the rioters was: "Beat the Yids and Communists." They brutally killed Jews, threw them into the river, raped women, set fire to houses. The pogrom continued until October 11th. In total, about 50 Jews were killed, 100-110 people were injured, 5 houses were burned and almost the entire Jewish population was robbed. The pogrom stopped due to the approach of a detachment of pro-soldiers.
                        (Information given by Comrade Rakhlis to the Kiev Eurocommittee, and testimony written by the Commissioner of the Kiev Eurocommittee Comrade Gergel.)
                        Spidency of the Kiev lips. Berdychiv district
                        On October 4, 1920, a detachment of about 50 people separated from the Budyonnovsk part, which robbed a large part of the Jewish population, and two Jews were killed.
                        On October 5, robberies continued, with the servants of the convoy of the 47th division joining the robbers. On the same day, a cavalry squadron arrived from Vakhnovka, who cordoned off a place and began to rob, kill and rape Jews. Those who tried to escape from the place, the soldiers caught and killed. There was a case when several women, wanting to avoid violence, rushed into the river. The soldiers pulled them out and raped them. In general, the pogrom was extremely cruel. Children broke their heads on stones, women
                        cut off breasts, etc. Several dozen people were killed, more than 100 women were raped,
                        the population is completely robbed, the houses are destroyed. (Report of Comrade Tub and Karasik to the Kiev European Community and testimony recorded by the Secretary of the Kiev Provincial Assistance to the pogromized Comrade Eppel.)
                        Rossosh (St. Lipovets)
                        The entire Jewish population was robbed by units of the 6th Cavalry Division. There are killed and wounded (report by Comrades Tub and Karasik).
                        Ilyintsy
                        Parts of the 6th division occupied and robbed the place three times. Plundered
                        about 40 houses.
                        Dashev
                        Parts of the 6th Cavalry Division robbed the town (dokl [hell] comrades Tub and
                        Karasik).
                        Makarov
                        Budyonnovtsy entered the town, supposedly to fight with the surrounding gangs,
                        and they themselves robbed the entire population. (The testimony of Rabbi M. Makarov, recorded by the Commissioner of the Kiev Eurocommittee, Comrade Gergel.)
                        d. Nastenki
                        The Budennovites killed 2 Jews and 4 wounded (testimony) recorded by KOPE in Kiev).
                        Monastery
                        At the beginning of October, a detachment of Budennovites entered the town. The soldiers mocked the Jewish population, and at night they robbed a place and killed three Jews. The next day, a large detachment passed through the town, which robbed all Jewish houses and shops (information from the Kiev Eurocommittee).
                        Talnoe
                        In early October 1920, parts of the Budennovites passed through the town,
                        who defeated the police and then robbed the Jewish population and killed
                        6 pax (Information from the Kiev Eurocommittee.)

                        GA of the Russian Federation. F. R-1339. Op. 1. D. 424. L. 119-119 about. Copy.
                      2. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 12: 50 New
                        • 4
                        • 3
                        +1
                        Quote: svp67
                        They were the most combat-ready in the admiral's army and fought to the end. And your arguments, this is an attempt to discredit their actions
                        These are the facts, and your argument is an attempt to present them as knights.
                        Quote: svp67
                        And what about the Samursky regiment?

                        Yes, not really reviews:
                        In 1905, during the then Revolution that broke out in Russia, the regiment's battalions were sent to guard the Rostov-Baku railway, and in the Deshlagar tract, the place of the regiment’s permanent deployment, there were, apart from the headquarters, a non-combatant company and training and music teams, the lower ranks of which are the night of July 17, 1906, organized an uprising in the regiment [1]. .... The rebels captured the Deshlagar fortification, post office, telegraph, armory, guardhouse and barracks. During a scuffle by them, the regiment commander Colonel V.-G., who came out to meet them from his house, was killed. F. Lemkul. Three officers and a regimental priest were killed along with him. ... Non-commissioned officers elected by the rebels, non-commissioned officer Fedot Samoilenko [3] sent telegrams to Vladikavkaz, Baku and Kusary informing them that “the Deshlagar garrison took power into their own hands” [4], after which the rebels began to adhere to expectant tactics [2]. ..
                        ... In June 1918, the Drozdovsky regiment captured many Red Army soldiers in battle. Of those who wished to go over to the side of the Volunteer Army, the 1st regiment soldier was formed, which, having distinguished itself in the battle for the village of Tikhoretskaya, a few days later received the name of the 1st infantry soldier regiment. Later, the banner of the 83rd Samur Infantry Regiment was handed over to the regiment, and it became known as Samur ...
                        Some of the "many Red Army men" the whole battalion scored, and then they caught up to the regiment, it does not attract mass support from the population. Not to mention the pre-revolutionary "popularity" of the tsarist regime in the regiment.
                        Yes, as usual, fans of the Tsarist and the “white knights” make an outline of the horrors of Bolshevism:
                        Quote: svp67
                        Okay, okay, but let's read this, from the archives ..
                        Summary of the Kiev Commission of the Eurocommittee on the pogroms of the Jewish population by units of the 1st Cavalry Army in the Kiev province. at the beginning of October 1920
                        Not earlier than October 8, 1920 *

                        Yes, only on this and everything hangs, but I will add:
                        “I’m informing you that yesterday and today the 6th division of the 1st Cavalry Army passed through the location of the division entrusted to me, which carries out mass looting, murders and pogroms along the way. Over 30 people were killed yesterday, [in m.] Salnitsa killed the chairman of the Revolutionary Committee and his family, in metro Lubar more than 50 people. killed. The command and commissioners are not taking any measures. Now pogrom in Ulanov continues, in which three squadrons of the 2nd brigade of the 6th division of the 1st Konarmia take part. What will be the orders from you: whether to use armed force against the rioters in view of the fact that the commanding staff also takes part in the pogrom; the fight against the rioters will obviously take the form of an armed clash between my Cossacks and Budyonnovtsy. Yesterday I spoke with the 6th chief. Nachdiv informed me that the military commissar of the division and
                        several officers were killed a few days ago by their soldiers for shooting bandits
                        . The masses of soldiers do not listen to their [omandirov] ditches and, according to the nachdiv, they no longer obey him. The 6th division goes to the rear with the slogans “Beat the Yids, Communists, Commissars and Save Russia”, on the lips of the soldiers the name of Makhno as the leader who gave this slogan. ... At the [h] headquarters [b] southwest Petin. Commissar of Jordan. "
                        I order immediately one of the members of the Revolutionary Military Council of the army to go to the location of the 8th Cavalry Division to verify the correctness of the above report; when
                        the credibility of the report immediately put the 6th Cavalry Division in order and, e
                        if it were necessary to use armed force
                        , then lean on the 8th Cavalry Division. To inform about the performance. No. 5764 op.

                        Signed: Pre-Military Council Trotsky, Commander-in-Chief Kamenev and RVSR Member Danishevsky.
                        So it was not the Bolsheviks who organized pogroms and other things, they were just fighting this.
                        Separate pogroms in Ukraine were committed by the Red Army: in Rossava (February 1919), in Uman (May 1919), in Lubar (May 1920), pogroms were staged by the Bogunsky and Tarashchansky regiments of the First Cavalry Army. Particularly brutal pogroms were organized by the First Cavalry Army during the retreat from Poland in late August 1920. As a rule, the Soviet authorities severely punished the rioters, most often shot them. For example, in September 1920, K. Voroshilov, member of the revolutionary military council of the First Horse Army, disbanded the sixth division I. Apanasenko for the pogrom; 153 rioters were shot.

                        https://allin777.livejournal.com/35056.html
                        By the way, from where your link came from, only for some reason you modestly ignored it.
                      3. Nagaibak April 2 2020 13: 21 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        Vladimir_2U "By the way, where did your link come from, but for some reason you modestly ignored it."
                        laughing It happens.))) I think the Cossacks out of habit took part in the pogroms. And on desertion, we can say that in a civil war it is a scourge of armies. And at first they fled from the Reds. And they fled from the whites all the time.
                      4. Vladimir_2U April 2 2020 14: 20 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        Quote: Nagaibak
                        And on desertion we can say that in the civil war it is a scourge of armies
                        Yes, an interesting case, by the way, is always attributed to the art of desertion gangs against the townsfolk in red.
                    2. svp67 April 2 2020 20: 32 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      These are the facts, and your argument is an attempt to present them as knights.

                      Not on your nelly. This is an attempt to show that the conflict in our country was much deeper than what you are trying to show
                      Quote: Vladimir_2U
                      Some of the "many Red Army men" of the whole battalion gained

                      This is the story of only one regiment. And so that the "white", that the "red" did not shun the captives "mobilize"
              2. Stirbjorn April 2 2020 10: 22 New
                • 8
                • 4
                +4
                Quote: svp67
                Read the "First Horse" Babel, maybe then your "blinkers" will fall ...
                Read Sholokhov "Quiet Don". Where the Cossacks were engaged in outright robbery of all the good, including the property of their own Cossack neighbors, who had gone to the Reds, while the Reds requisitioned what was needed for the front — primarily horses.
                1. svp67 April 2 2020 11: 46 New
                  • 4
                  • 3
                  +1
                  Quote: Stirbjorn
                  Where the Cossacks were engaged in outright robbery of all the good, including the property of their own Cossack neighbors, who had gone to the Reds, while the Reds requisitioned what was needed for the front — primarily horses.

                  And somewhere I denied the "atrocities" of the whites? But, I'm sorry I'm not going to make "angels" out of the "red"
                2. vladcub April 2 2020 19: 26 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  In the Civil War there are no whites and fluffy. There may be some more decent, while others are decent.
                3. svp67 April 2 2020 20: 26 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: vladcub
                  There may be some more decent, while others are decent.

                  Or they can do without them at all ...
                4. vladcub April 3 2020 12: 53 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Sergey, the human nature is such that there is: lodar - he will get tired of killing, workaholics - will be like a machine, evil opinion and vice versa
    2. Caretaker April 2 2020 08: 52 New
      • 8
      • 4
      +4
      Quote: svp67
      ... And the indicator is that on the white side the regiments formed from workers fought to the end

      They had nowhere to go.
      A well-known saying: "The war will end, everyone will go home, and the Izhevsk and Votkinsk people will go to the graves." They were perceived as traitors, as “Vlasovites” during the Great Patriotic War.
      PS. Please do not start a discussion of the objectivity of "perception" and the possibility of realizing a threat.
      1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 00 New
        • 6
        • 7
        -1
        Quote: Caretaker
        They had nowhere to go.

        And .... And who brought them to life such that they rebelled against the "red"?
        And Kronstadt? And the Tambovites? Yaroslavl? Something a bit too much "Vlasovites." And in general, the “Vlasovites” are traitors to the Motherland who sided with its mortal enemies. And then there was the CIVIL WAR. Times and circumstances do not confuse
        1. tatra April 2 2020 09: 25 New
          • 7
          • 6
          +1
          That is why the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists must finally HONESTLY admit that it was YOU who unleashed the Civil War with the aim of capturing Russia, and you were collaborator traitors who collaborated with the invaders of your Motherland. But you never admit it, because you never admit guilt for your crimes.
          1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 32 New
            • 5
            • 7
            -2
            Quote: tatra
            That is why the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists

            But what about the enemies of the "Menshevik-Communists"?
            Quote: tatra
            what is it you unleashed a civil war

            Sorry, but the facts say the opposite. The civil war was unleashed by the "Bolsheviks" and those who joined them, having dispersed the Constituent Assembly, where questions of power could be resolved PEACEFULLY
            Quote: tatra
            and were collaborator traitors who collaborated with the invaders of their homeland.

            Excuse me, but how then to evaluate the use of foreign troops on the side of the "red"? What's this?
            Quote: tatra
            because you never admit guilt for your crimes

            Are you ready to do this?
          2. tatra April 2 2020 09: 41 New
            • 9
            • 6
            +3
            I already asked a provocateur the other day — here, the Bolsheviks dismissed the CSS, and WHAT further, how could a large-scale armed Civil War flare up from this? And he couldn’t answer, because all the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists were being punched according to “manuals,” the meaning of which they themselves did not understand, unable to prove and substantiate them. And I will also answer you, just as he did, the justification of those who unleashed the Civil War in Russia after the October Revolution, including the justification of the invaders of the Russian interventionists, is a crime against Russia and its people.
          3. svp67 April 2 2020 11: 23 New
            • 5
            • 6
            -1
            Quote: tatra
            I already asked a provocateur the other day — here, the Bolsheviks dismissed the CSS, and WHAT further, how could a large-scale armed Civil War flare up from this?

            It’s bad that a person who said “A” could not answer you about “B”.
            I’ll tell you ... The abdication of the Emperor’s power was supported by the communication that, according to the old Russian tradition, the further political fate of Russia would be decided at the All-Russian Constituent Assembly.
            Because the government was Provisional, that it worked before it was held.
            Now think about how it happened that, in your words, “the Bolsheviks have the overwhelming support of the population,” they dispersed it ... Yes, simply because they did not have this support. It simply was not, even in the Soviets.
            But they really were very decisive, not only did they disperse the meeting, but they shot several demonstrations in protest of this, in St. Petersburg and Moscow, with these actions they firstly shed blood in a civil confrontation, and secondly they proved to be "illegal" ", both in the eyes of the people and the world community. I can’t say anything good about Mr. Adolf Hitler, but he and his party came to power legally ... they really enjoyed the full support of the population then. These are the tricks of history.
          4. Nikolai Korovin 11 May 2020 16: 08 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            At the beginning of the Civil War, the overwhelming advantage was on the side of the Reds. The “ice campaign” of the volunteer army (February-May 1918) was the only active white action in this period, and this, in fact, a handful of officers was constantly threatened with complete destruction, but constantly knocked down the red barriers, because for them, unlike from the reds, every fight was the last. The volunteer army did not have a solid rear and any significant area for mobilization, whether it was voluntary or forced, and when it broke out of the ring, and of course, the volunteers still could not conduct active offensive operations, and would still be crushed. The Don was troubled, but the Cossacks hesitated - the fate of Ataman Kaledin was still fresh in memory. It should not be forgotten that in accordance with the conditions of the Brest Peace, it was precisely during this period that Germany and Austria-Hungary occupied Ukraine and Belarus almost without resistance, and rounded up the occupation of the Baltic states, but still did not move further. Perhaps William, unlike Hitler, was afraid to bury himself.

            I’m not going to criticize the Brest Peace here - apparently, at that moment there really was no other way out, and this world is not the result of the dispersal of some meeting there, but Order No. 1 of the Provisional Government, which caused almost complete decomposition by October 1917 army. If the Provisional Government did sit still (the situation was rather uncertain), it would be forced to do about the same.

            But the order of Comrade Trotsky’s disarmament of the Czechoslovak corps (May 25), which was peacefully traveling to Vladivostok with heavy weapons, provoked a rebellion of the Czechoslovak corps and Czechoslovak intervention, which was widely accepted by the general population with a bang. The last echelons of the corps at that moment were in Penza. The Japanese, by the way, also already landed in Vladivostok at that moment - to protect the life and property of Japanese citizens, of course. Here, under the cover of Czechoslovakians, the whites consolidated and intensified. Without an order for disarmament, the Chelyabinsk incident could perhaps have been put out. I believe that Comrade Trotsky could not fail to understand that the weak detachments of the Red Guard were not able to disarm the 50th Czechoslovak corps, armed to the teeth. As a result, a front along the Trans-Siberian Railway from Penza to Vladivostok instantly arose, and the socialist Fatherland was in danger. Such a nuance. Whatever the dispersal of the Constituent Assembly.

            We were taught in such a way that the performance of the Czechoslovak corps was something, by the way, and intervention, as it were. Just some kind of rebellion there - "the rebellion cannot be successful, then it is called differently." Well then. Czech brothers. But in fact, this is the first act of intervention on the territory of Russia proper, much more ambitious than everything that happened before, if Ukraine and Belarus are excluded from consideration - against the million Austro-Germans, the Soviet government had absolutely no strength, and for the time being Until the time Ukraine and Belarus were cut off chunks. It was after the speech of the Czechoslovak corps and the Civil War became widespread. Before that, there were separate foci.
        2. Stirbjorn April 2 2020 11: 53 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Quote: svp67
          Sorry, but the facts say the opposite. The civil war was unleashed by the "Bolsheviks" and those who joined them, having dispersed the Constituent Assembly, where questions of power could be resolved PEACEFULLY

          Listen, before the Bolsheviks, the Constituent Assembly tried to disperse General Kornilov ("Kornilov rebellion"), simply unsuccessfully. The Constituent Assembly did not solve any issues, and therefore it was dispersed as unnecessary. Do not hang everything on the Bolsheviks. By the way, Kornilov and his supporters (ataman Kaledin, with whom Kornilov still mutilated at the time of Kerensky) started a civil war, and then it started - Potelkov shot the captive Chernetsov and his detachment on the Don, then Cossacks executed Potelkov, and all 80 of him squad and off we go
        3. svp67 April 2 2020 12: 03 New
          • 6
          • 4
          +2
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          Listen, before the Bolsheviks, the Constituent Assembly tried to disperse General Kornilov ("Kornilov rebellion"), simply unsuccessfully.

          How was it possible to disperse what has not yet been carried out? Where is the logic? It’s possible not to let it pass, although we don’t know what Kornilov wanted. By the way, Kornilov, as a candidate, was not worse than Lenin, even that nobleman, a representative of the exploiting class. But could not. But Lenin could.
        4. Stirbjorn April 2 2020 13: 26 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          How was it possible to disperse what has not yet been carried out? Where is the logic?
          well, a little wrong, confused with the Provisional Government. But where did you get the idea that this is an abstract meeting in many respects, which either decided during the crisis ?!
          Quote: svp67
          By the way, Kornilov, as a candidate, was not worse than Lenin, even that nobleman, a representative of the exploiting class.
          Well, you give - Kornilov, this is a military dictatorship, General. And Lenin is a thinker in the first place, the head of the party, with new ideas. Kornilov could not, because behind him there was nothing but his own ambitions
        5. svp67 April 2 2020 20: 37 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          But where did you get the idea that this is an abstract meeting in many respects, which either decided during the crisis ?!

          History can no longer be rewritten. And I answered the promise of universal popular support. Had it been and it would not have been necessary to disperse this meeting. Just would call the Bolsheviks to power and all
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          Well, you give - Kornilov, this is a military dictatorship, General. And Lenin is a thinker in the first place, the head of the party, with new ideas.

          Excuse me, but Lenin is also a DICTATURE, a dictatorship of the proletariat
      2. Sugar Honeyovich April 2 2020 14: 12 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: svp67
        Kornilov, as a candidate - not nearly worse than Lenin

        In the eyes of the majority, at that time there was nobody better than Lenin, because only his party was in favor of an IMMEDIATE end to the war - the idea that has the greatest demand. The rest supported the continuation of the war, and therefore lost.
      3. vladcub April 2 2020 18: 58 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Here I agree: the Bolsheviks caught what the peasants wanted to hear. At the very beginning, the Bolsheviks conquered the pretty peasants
      4. svp67 April 2 2020 20: 38 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
        only his party was in favor of an IMMEDIATE end to the war - the idea that has the greatest demand. The rest supported the continuation of the war, and therefore lost.

        Not quite right. Then the Bolsheviks supported the Left Social Revolutionaries
    3. vladcub April 2 2020 15: 34 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      In general, L.G. Kornilov was of "vile" origin, and not of the "noble".
      Kornilov, the politician was worse than Kornilov, the soldier
    4. bober1982 April 2 2020 15: 51 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: vladcub
      Kornilov, the politician was worse than Kornilov, the soldier

      Leo, with the head of a ram ...... so called.
  • Sugar Honeyovich April 2 2020 14: 07 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    Especially if you know by what methods this was achieved, then you should not be very surprised.

    So it has long been known. The methods were very different. For instance:
    1. "..then all of ours went to the Don, to Krasnov. And where am I after the shell shock? But then I knew nothing but to fight. And just then they announced recruiting for the Red Army."
    2. "I got related with my soldiers at the front during the war years (1 MV-S.M.). And then they all went to the Reds. Well, where am I from them?"
    3. "... we, your old comrades-in-arms, appeal to your feelings of love and devotion to your homeland and urge you to forget all insults, whoever and wherever inflicted them, and voluntarily go with complete selflessness and hunting to the Red Army and serve there not for fear, but for conscience, so that with our honest service, not sparing our lives, to defend Russia, dear to us at all costs, and prevent its plunder ... "
    And the main factor was played, of course, by the geographical factor. Whoever turned out to be in the “red” territory went to the Reds, whoever went to another ... Whoever sent the summons went to that.
    Quote: svp67
    on the white side to the end fought regiments formed from workers and former captured Red Army soldiers - is this not an indicator?

    Definitely an indicator. Especially in light of the fact that the regiments of Izhevsk and Votkintsy were trying to keep the white command away from each other for fear that they would arrange a mutual civil war of a local scale ... Disunity, disunity ... negative
    1. vladcub April 2 2020 15: 39 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Sakhar Medovich, if I am not mistaken, is from Brusilov?
      1. Sugar Honeyovich April 2 2020 15: 41 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        p. 3 - yes. But not only from Brusilov.
  • Caretaker April 2 2020 07: 47 New
    • 8
    • 2
    +6
    Quote: svp67
    ... practice shows that most of the population doesn’t care for whom, if only he was a winner ...

    Practice what?
    Who is the winner?
    Participants in the confrontation cannot be "anyway."
    In order to be a winner, you must first become one.
    1. svp67 April 2 2020 07: 50 New
      • 4
      • 6
      -2
      Quote: Caretaker
      Practice what?

      Civil strife ...
      Quote: Caretaker
      Who is the winner?

      Your opponents in a civil confrontation
      Quote: Caretaker
      Participants in the confrontation cannot be "anyway."

      To the participants - no, but to the observers, yes ... otherwise they would be transferred to the category of participants
      Quote: Caretaker
      In order to be a winner, you must first become one.

      And in order to become one, one must apply skill, willpower and perseverance in achieving the goal, and often unscrupulousness in choosing methods and allies
  • The comment was deleted.
  • vladcub April 2 2020 14: 55 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I agree. If you look carefully, in the spring of 1920, not all of Russia supported the Bolsheviks: for many Ukrainian villagers Makhno is an idol, in many provinces the Social Revolutionaries were strong
  • vladcub April 2 2020 15: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I agree: most of the peasants were violet whose power in the city. The men in the villages had enough weapons and enough "small-town" chieftains
  • antivirus April 2 2020 12: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    business - "we give land to the peasants, we drive the workers into workshops for work 8 hours a day" - the toad strangled the noble landowners-manufacturers.
    England-USA how did they work? how was the land dispersed?
    REALLY IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE - IT IS POSSIBLE AND NECESSARY !!! - HALF MEASURES FROM DECREE OF THE RCP (B) TO ANNOUNCE?
  • Caretaker April 2 2020 07: 35 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    ... They had their homeland and the same part of the population supported them.

    The smaller part. The farther, the less.
    1. svp67 April 2 2020 07: 41 New
      • 3
      • 7
      -4
      Quote: Caretaker
      The farther, the less.

      Once again, the people are always for those who win ... Especially if the winner is firm and consistent in suppressing disagreement
      1. Caretaker April 2 2020 08: 31 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        Quote: svp67
        ... Once again, the people are always for those who win ... Especially if the winner is firm and consistent in suppressing disagreement

        You confuse cause and effect. In the Civil War, the one for whom the people wins. The winner is the one who offers goals and means of achievement acceptable for the active (passionate) part of the population.
        Quote: svp67
        To the participants - no, but to the observers, yes ... otherwise they would be transferred to the category of participants

        When the vast majority of "observers" moved into the category of "participants", the interventionists / allies finally realized the futility of helping the minority, which reduced the losses and time of the confrontation.
        The white movement, at the final stage of the Civil War, can be compared to a “galvanized" corpse. Without external intervention, it will stop moving and continue to decompose.
        1. svp67 April 2 2020 08: 55 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Quote: Caretaker
          In the Civil War, the one for whom the people wins.

          No ... in the Civil War, the one who has a more militant organization and knows how to use the moment wins. The current Ukraine has shown this excellently.
          Quote: Caretaker
          When the vast majority of "observers" moved into the category of "participants", the interventionists / allies finally realized the futility of helping the minority, which reduced the losses and time of the confrontation.

          The interventionists just saw who was winning ...
          Quote: Caretaker
          The white movement, at the final stage of the Civil War, can be compared with a "galvanized" corpse.

          But this does not mean that it did not enjoy the support of a part of the population, even at that moment and after that ... The White Guard underground operated, and it cannot do this a priori without the support of the population
          1. Caretaker April 2 2020 09: 43 New
            • 2
            • 3
            -1
            Quote: svp67
            But this does not mean that it did not enjoy the support of part of the population, even at that moment

            The vanishingly smaller part, "at that moment."
            Let's start a new one?
            Quote: svp67
            ...and after that...

            Even now finds support on your part.
            Quote: svp67
            ... The White Guard underground operated, but without the support of the population it cannot do this a priori

            He can act without the support of the population, but he cannot win.
            Will we discuss collaborators during the Great Patriotic War?
            1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 52 New
              • 3
              • 4
              -1
              Quote: Caretaker
              The vanishingly smaller part, "at that moment."
              Let's start a new one?

              Want to? Yes Easy
              Quote: Caretaker
              Even now finds support on your part.

              I am just stating a historical fact
              Quote: Caretaker
              He can act without the support of the population, but he cannot win.

              Then, judging by the results and current situation, they always enjoyed this support.
              Quote: Caretaker
              Will we discuss collaborators during the Great Patriotic War?

              And where are they now in the Civil War?
          2. vladcub April 2 2020 18: 51 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            "the interventionists just saw who was winning" Sergey, here I agree with you (almost) by and large the intervention ceased by 1919. This was also on the site. And the Greeks and the French and who else was there. We were forced to reel fishing rods. With the Japanese, a slightly different “music” in
      2. pivnik April 2 2020 08: 33 New
        • 6
        • 3
        +3
        "Once again, the people are always for those who win ... Especially if the winner is firm and consistent in suppressing disagreement"

        stupidity ... the Germans in 41 reached Moscow - my ancestors were not for them, yours may have been - I don’t know ... my grandfather died in Moscow on December 41 near Moscow, the second near Stalingrad ... Great-grandfather 30 April 45th near Berlin ...
        1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 02 New
          • 3
          • 5
          -2
          Quote: pivnik
          stupidity ... the Germans in 41 reached Moscow - my ancestors were not for them,

          Is everything normal with logic? You do not interfere now, the civil conflict between the population of one country and the war on survival with a foreign enemy
          1. pivnik April 2 2020 09: 41 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            Really? Without the support of the Entente countries (let’s call it by its proper name - the invaders), the white movement was unlikely to last so long + they had nothing to give to the masses, there was no ideology - except perhaps the “white terror” (in fairness, let’s say, the Reds have “terror” and was smaller, not by much) ... And now we continue your thought ... - in the Second World War there was also a “fifth column” - according to your logic, we can deduce that “the Germans” simply helped them, but for some reason the people did not support them, although reached Moscow ...
            1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 46 New
              • 3
              • 3
              0
              Quote: pivnik
              And now let's continue your thought ... - in the Second World War there was also a “fifth column” - according to your logic, we can deduce that the “Germans” simply helped them, but for some reason the people did not support them, although they reached Moscow ...

              You have now expressed your thought. I’ll repeat to you once again that the Civil War and the wars between countries are different wars.
              1. pivnik April 2 2020 10: 01 New
                • 3
                • 2
                +1
                In your words, there is only one prejudice and very little objective logic, and therefore I see no reason to continue our debate ... Let's just stay each with our opinion ...
                1. svp67 April 2 2020 10: 15 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  Quote: pivnik
                  There is only prejudice in your words

                  Sorry, but you are talking about yourself. Everything is “white” and “black” for you, but the world is not like that ...
                  Quote: pivnik
                  Let's just stay each with our opinion ...

                  Good. Health and 36,6 per thermometer
                2. pivnik April 2 2020 11: 41 New
                  • 3
                  • 2
                  +1
                  You and your loved ones also do not get sick ... Now - this is probably the most important ...
                3. pivnik April 2 2020 13: 01 New
                  • 3
                  • 2
                  +1
                  But such a curious question. And what would happen if suddenly the white movement won? Where would the country go? It seems to me that it would be worse, in the struggle for power the country would simply be drowned in blood, destroyed ... And the "bloody tyrant" would be against this background - just a childish prank ...
                4. Sugar Honeyovich April 2 2020 14: 22 New
                  • 4
                  • 1
                  +3
                  Quote: pivnik
                  And what would happen if suddenly the white movement won?

                  We can assume the following:
                  1. They would have had to suppress the Kronstadt rebellion, the Tambov, Siberian, Ukrainian, and many other uprisings and rebellions.
                  2. Solve (probably by force of arms) issues of borders with Poland, Finland, Romania, the Baltic countries, the Caucasus, Central Asia, etc.
                  3. To solve the land issue, and in light of the fact that the peasants accepted only ONE version of this decision - I don’t even want to think about what it would result in.
                  This is all just a minimum program.
  • Basil50 April 2 2020 08: 31 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    67
    WHITE TOGETHER with the interventionists waged war against their own people in much the same way as the Nazis later. Gangs, Basmachi and other nationalists also robbed and killed and made political justification for the killings and robberies.
    Most of the * knights of the white movement * served the Nazis, and this speaks of their political physiognomy more than any words.
    Today the situation has not changed, there are frankly racist countries with democratic regimes in Europe under the protectorate of the United States, and our liberal democrats faithfully serve them.
    1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 08 New
      • 4
      • 9
      -5
      Quote: Vasily50
      WHITE TOGETHER with the invaders fought a war against their own people in much the same way as the Nazis later

      You're not right. You mix everything together. The first was the CIVIL CONFLICT as part of one state, where foreign formations fought on the side of the BOTH belligerents. Do you want to argue? But the second is a conflict between two states, even two alliances of states, where "collaborators" and "traitors", from the point of view of some or "fighters for a brighter future" from the point of view of others, took part on the side of BOTH warring parties.
      But these are two different, essentially conflict
    2. rich April 2 2020 13: 24 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Vasily50 (Dmitry):Most of the * knights of the white movement * served the Nazis, and this speaks of their political physiognomy more than any words.

      It only says that you are not competent to put it mildly. yes
      The data of special military records on the number of white armies belonging to the period of the most powerful heyday of the white movement, by May 1919, show that even in this period the number of combat troops of the regular white armies did not exceed 682,0 thousand souls.
      According to K. Alexandrov, approximately 1941 million citizens of the former Republic of Ingushetia and the USSR carried military service on the side of Germany in 1945-1,24. How many of them were those whom you call the “white movement knights”?
      According to the KGB, up to 21 thousand white emigrants and their children fought with weapons in their hands against the USSR. According to the conclusions of the historian Aleksandrov, this represents only 5% of the total number of Russian emigrants in Europe. and 0,017% of the total number of “Russian” collaborators.
      It seems from your post that most of the Russian emigration was on the side of Germany. However, in reality, the majority did not support Hitler’s aggression and refused to cooperate with the Reich. Most of the Russians fighting on the side of the Nazis were not emigrants, but citizens of the USSR, who joined the enemy while in captivity or in the occupied territories.
      1. Basil50 April 2 2020 15: 24 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        . Do not.
        The white movement was heterogeneous, * knights * were considered ONLY the former nobles, the rest - * gray cattle * and others that joined them.
        In total, from the territory of the SOVIET UNION, the Germans scrubbed themselves into policemen and other troops a little less than a million accomplices. This number includes the Baltic states, Westerners from Belarus and Ukraine.
        * The former * who served the Hitlerites as soon as they were captured, at once inscribed themselves either in the Volksdeutsche, then in the Georgian-Armenian-Azeri, but in anyone, just not to aggravate. Moreover, they did not recognize themselves as citizens of the SOVIET UNION.
        About a million * former *, Cossacks, and other offenders served the Chinese and Japanese in the Far East. They began to run away when they realized that they would soon have to be responsible for aiding. By September, about half a million remained, but they had families ......
        1. rich April 2 2020 18: 45 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          Do not.

          No need. Do not - this is not an argument. Minus is much easier than justified to object.
          The total number of emigrants from Russia who immigrated in 1918-1924 as a result of the civil war, according to the Refugee Services of the League of Nations, amounted to 1 million people on November 1926, 2,252:
          According to the American Red Cross estimates, 1 million 194 thousand people were accepted by America, 958,5 thousand according to the League of Nations, Europe accepted: about 200 thousand people - accepted by France; about 200 thousand people - took Germany; about 300 thousand - accepted the Republic of Turkey; there were 76 thousand of them in China, about 40 thousand people in Yugoslavia, Latvia, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and 37 thousand people in Greece. Including here, about 800 thousand inhabitants of the Polish and Baltic provinces that were part of the Russian Empire before the First World War war and then became part of the newly formed sovereign states. ("Data of the League of Nations refugee Service 1926" volume 2. Washington), (Total number of emigrants from Russia who immigrated in 1918-1924 as a result of the civil war according to the League of Nations refugee Service / P. 1437 )
          At the same time, the number of direct participants in the "white movement" and their family members was estimated at 190 thousand people. The rest - nobles, entrepreneurs, intellectuals, Cossacks, clergy, civil servants and unrelated civilians. ("Russia and its regions in the XX century: migration "/ Under the editorship of O. Glezer and P. Polyana. - M.: OGI, 2005. - S. 493-519)

          Most of the * knights of the white movement * served the Nazis, and this speaks of their political physiognomy more than any words.

          Most? belay
          According to the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, out of 100% of male emigrants capable of carrying arms aged 18 to 60 years old, in 1941-45:
          20% sympathized with the war of Germany against the USSR,
          5% openly supported the Nazis or fought against the USSR (21 thousand people.)
          60% chose a non-war strategy
          10% took a stand against the Hitler regime.
          , 5% of emigrants joined the Resistance movement on the side of European Communists. Most often it was Russian youth who grew up in the Balkans and in France, where leftist ideas were always strong.
          In the armed forces of France alone, more than 3000 white emigrants fought.
          About 6 thousand in the Resistance Movement of France, Belgium and Yugoslavia
          In the US armed forces in the battles against Nazism took part 5 thousand Cossacks-white emigrants.
          ("White Emigration in the Second World War" / Edited by L. Reshetnikov. - M.: RISI, 2012)
          In total, from the territory of the SOVIET UNION, the Germans scrubbed themselves into policemen and other troops a little less than a million accomplices.

          1,24 million a little less than a million? belay
          About a million * former *, Cossacks, and other offenders served the Chinese and Japanese in the Far East.

          A million more, a million less - what's the difference belay laughing
          Before the revolution, the number of the Russian colony in Manchuria was at least 200 thousand people, and by November 1926, taking into account 76 thousand "white" emigration - already 288 thousand people (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_emigration :)("Data of the League of Nations refugee Service 1926 "volume 2. Washington), (Total number of emigrants from Russia who immigrated in 1918-1924 as a result of the civil war according to the League of Nations refugee Service / P. 1437)
          The white movement was heterogeneous, * knights * were considered ONLY the former nobles, the rest - * gray cattle * and others that joined them.

          Oh oh But for example, the hero of this article, A. I. Denikin, who was called the “knight of the white movement” was a peasant
          I don’t want to participate in the debate anymore. Useless.
          be healthy
      2. vladcub April 2 2020 18: 35 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        "most did not support Hitler's aggression." It is true: “I don’t speak with traitors of the motherland” (Denikin), and Vicki Obolenskaya, and Kuzmina-Karavaeva. This is who I just remembered
  • Alexey RA April 2 2020 19: 22 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    So, "when there is no agreement in friends" - then you can lose your homeland ...

    And what else to expect from people who united not “for something”, but exclusively “against the Reds”. And at the same time, each group had its own plans for post-war Russia in the event of the victory of the Whites.
    In short, in The Elusive, the “unity” of the White Movement was shown, though grotesquely, but on the whole was true.
  • apro April 2 2020 07: 40 New
    • 8
    • 2
    +6
    It didn’t work out by military methods ... but White didn’t have other methods ... he left.
  • tatra April 2 2020 08: 49 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    That the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists, after the October Revolution unleashed a Civil War with the aim of capturing Russia, that the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists, who captured the USSR, were exactly the same, they all believed and believe that betrayal and collaboration — cooperation with the occupiers of their Motherland — is not a crime . All of them had only a manic passion to take the country away from the Bolshevik Communists and their supporters, but they did not have and DO NOT have ANYTHING and NOTHING useful for their country and people. All of them equally hated and hate both the Bolshevik Communists and their supporters, and each other. And all of them were mediocrity in hostilities.
    1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 48 New
      • 3
      • 6
      -3
      Quote: tatra
      And all of them were mediocrity in hostilities.

      And how gifted were the “Bolshevik-Communists" in upholding what they won with such difficulty and such blood? Where is the USSR country now?
      1. tatra April 2 2020 09: 51 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        That is exactly how the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists cowardly blamed the responsibility for unleashing the Civil War, so the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists cowardly blamed the responsibility for the destruction of the USSR.
        1. svp67 April 2 2020 09: 59 New
          • 3
          • 4
          -1
          Quote: tatra
          That is exactly how the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists cowardly blamed the responsibility for unleashing the Civil War on those

          That is, it was not they who dispersed the Constituent Assembly, of course these are anarchists ... and nothing that they acted in a coalition.
          Quote: tatra
          so the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists cowardly blamed those responsible for the destruction of the USSR.

          That is, you don’t intend to admit your mistakes, someone is always to blame, but not you ... That's why we have such a mess now and do it ... And stop listing yourself as "Bolshevik-Communists", you are an ordinary "opportunist" maybe radish
          1. tatra April 2 2020 10: 06 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            Here it is not necessary to get out cowardly and engage in flood. Neither you, nor any of the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists are able to prove how the Bolsheviks unleashed an armed civil war, and how the Communists are to blame for the fact that YOU, their enemies, captured the USSR, divided it into YOUR anti-Soviet-Russophobic " independence ", imposed the country and the people themselves into power, their system, their own economy, their own ideology - anti-Soviet. For this I take my leave, you have proved that you are not capable of honest discussions about the history of our country.
            1. svp67 April 2 2020 10: 18 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: tatra
              Here it is not necessary to get out cowardly and engage in flood.

              This is your fantasy
              Quote: tatra
              Neither you, nor one of the enemies of the Bolshevik Communists

              No, because I'm not their enemy. I respect those “Bolsheviks" for their courage and pressure, but this does not prevent me from seeing by what methods and how they achieved their goals. But you, the current ones, are not. You are the "big talkers" and that says it all
      2. Aviator_ April 2 2020 10: 42 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        And how gifted were the “Bolshevik-Communists" in upholding what they won with such difficulty and such blood? Where is the USSR country now?

        Clear. The destruction of the USSR in 1991 was to blame for the political figures of 1917-20. Well, it’s impossible to flatter our president so clearly, who announced that Lenin had planted a bomb under the country.
        1. svp67 April 2 2020 11: 05 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Quote: Aviator_
          The destruction of the USSR in 1991 was to blame for the political figures of 1917-20.

          No, then I will say more intelligibly. The Communists of 1917-20, were able to seize power with blood and create a great state, which the "politicians" of the 90s, who, by some strange coincidence, called themselves the same "Communists", blabbed, but didn’t sell them ... So, clearly and understand
          1. Aviator_ April 2 2020 14: 22 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Well, this is another matter, otherwise I was really surprised - usually the arguments were always adequate, but then something went wrong.
        2. tatra April 2 2020 12: 46 New
          • 4
          • 5
          -1
          All 100 years after the October Revolution, only two peoples — Soviet and anti-Soviet — live on the territory of the USSR, regardless of nationalities, which are fundamentally different in everything, including the fact that the Soviet people had nothing to do with what they did since the October Revolution , and he was always proud and proud of it, and the anti-Soviet people were always cowardly “not to blame” for what he had done under the rule of the Soviet people and after having robbed the country of the Soviet people. But at the same time, the anti-Soviet people seriously considered and still thinks that he is more than worthy of the Soviet people to own the country.
          1. vladcub April 2 2020 18: 04 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Actually, Stalin thought differently about this when in 1945 he proclaimed a toast to the RUSSIAN people
            1. tatra April 2 2020 18: 09 New
              • 2
              • 4
              -2
              ONCE AGAIN, the people, including Russian, in the USSR are divided into Soviet and anti-Soviet. Including the fact that the Soviet Russian people defended their country from the united Europe that attacked it, led by Hitler, and the anti-Soviet Russian people ran to act as idiots before Hitler and the Nazis. And do you think Stalin would raise a toast to the Russian anti-Soviet people, to General Vlasov, or did he mean only the Russian Soviet people, at the head of which and with whom he defeated Hitler and the Nazis?
              1. vladcub April 3 2020 14: 39 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Tatra, let's clarify: TRAITORS EXISTED from biblical times (remember Judah). As long as humanity exists there will be so many patriots and traitors.
                He has already cited an example: Kuzmina-Karavaeva, she was an enemy of the Bolsheviks, but she was saving Soviet prisoners of war from a concentration camp, Archbishop Luka had a negative attitude towards the October Revolution, but Stalin was the head of the ambulance train.
                Do you think Stalin had a lot of time in November 1941? I think that ALL THE CPSU Central Committee since 1952 worked less than Stalin in the fall of 1941, but he found time to meet with the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, Metropolitan Sergei. And Sergius appointed Patriarch Tikhon (an enemy of Soviet power) as his successor
                In addition to the traitors: Paulus was considered a traitor by the Nazis (there is evidence that one of the former fascists killed him) and William Peak despised him. In the former GDR and in the current FRG, Staufenberg is honored that Hitler wanted to blow up
          2. svp67 April 2 2020 20: 45 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Quote: tatra
            All 100 years after the October Revolution, only two peoples live on the territory of the USSR

            Sorry, but for us there is NO OTHER PEOPLE
        3. Looking for April 2 2020 14: 27 New
          • 7
          • 3
          +4
          Bolshevik communists did not die long before the destruction of the USSR.
          1. tatra April 2 2020 15: 50 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            There is such a concept inaccessible to the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists as logic. And according to this logic, it would be what you wrote, then long before the "Liberator" of the enemies-Bolshevik-Communists Gorbachev what happened in anti-Soviet Perestroika and later.
        4. vladcub April 2 2020 18: 24 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          "Lenin planted a bomb under the country" formally, but in fact the main culprit is L. D. Trotsky. Stalin and Dzerzhinsky in 1922 proposed a reasonable plan, but V.I. Lenin, already a sick man, yielded to the pressure of Trinity. However, much has already been said about this
          1. tatra April 3 2020 14: 44 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Anti-Soviet propaganda is the justification of CRIMINALS, and this is a crime, including the fact that those who blame the Bolsheviks-Communists for dismembering Russia during the Civil War and the dismemberment of the USSR into evil anti-Soviet-Russophobic "independence" justifies this real criminals are separatists.
            And for such people, crime is not an exception, but the norm.
  • Charlie April 2 2020 13: 55 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Quote: Stirbjorn
    Quote: svp67
    Read the "First Horse" Babel, maybe then your "blinkers" will fall ...
    Read Sholokhov "Quiet Don". Where the Cossacks were engaged in outright robbery of all the good, including the property of their own Cossack neighbors, who had gone to the Reds, while the Reds requisitioned what was needed for the front — primarily horses.

    Would Sholokhov, under the regime at that time, write something bad about the Reds? Not to be published to him never in the USSR.
    1. Sugar Honeyovich April 3 2020 04: 36 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Charlie
      Would Sholokhov, under the regime at that time, write something bad about the Reds? Not to be published to him never in the USSR.

      However, he wrote. And not only Sholokhov.
  • Looking for April 2 2020 14: 15 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    it was not necessary for the Red Army to take prisoners. it was not necessary. !!!!
  • Sertorius April 2 2020 14: 58 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    They were looking for the perpetrators of the defeat and savior.

    This phrase needs an epigraph to the comments. 100 years have passed, and Civil continues on the Internet. The descendants of the workers, peasants and raznochintsy against each other. One side is aware of this, the other for some reason is sure that their ancestors must be someone more significant. At the same time, the great-grandfathers of almost all the arguing fought on one side.

    All these white "patriots" -generals fought not for Great Russia, but for power over it. After all, they were not stupid. They could not understand Hitler's plans. But so many of these white “heroes” worked for the Nazis, if only to regain power.
    "The great Russia was created by the Bolsheviks, and this brings me together with them." These are the words of a patriot. They were written by one of the architects of February Shulgin, who accepted the abdication of Nicholas.

    As for this article, not one of her characters is worth my grandfather’s worn overcoat, in which he honorably passed World War I and Civil.
  • vladcub April 2 2020 17: 54 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "restrained the activities in the rear of Makhno’s detachments" actually then Makhno was considered the "ally" of the Bolsheviks. Around that time, he was awarded the Order of the Red Banner, but how reliable this is is a moot point.
  • vladcub April 2 2020 18: 01 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Seeker
    Bolshevik communists did not die long before the destruction of the USSR.

    I agree with you. I had a front-line neighbor in my childhood and when he drank, he shouted: "The Bolsheviks at the front died, and these are ALL traitors. Give me a machine gun, I will shoot them."
  • vladcub April 2 2020 19: 21 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "England suggested stopping the nervous struggle and, through its mediation, begin negotiations with the Bolsheviks," to be honest I did not know about this.
  • Charlie April 3 2020 11: 02 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
    Quote: Charlie
    Would Sholokhov, under the regime at that time, write something bad about the Reds? Not to be published to him never in the USSR.

    However, he wrote. And not only Sholokhov.

    Where is he not very good about the Reds? Or at least wrote a word about "red terror"? In Raised Virgin Soil? Or in "Quiet Don"? And where does "not only Sholokhov"?
    1. Sugar Honeyovich April 3 2020 17: 49 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Charlie
      Where is he not very good about the Reds?

      It happened that he spoke very badly. In "Quiet Don" and "Virgin Soil Upturned". About red terror and looting. Including scenes worthy of a horror movie.
      Quote: Charlie
      And where does "not only Sholokhov"

      Moreover, "not very good" or even "very bad" not only he wrote about the Reds. And not only in fiction.

      But of the White Guards in their memoirs, NOBODY even mentioned the so-called "tumbling". As if he weren’t at all. Why?
      1. Charlie April 4 2020 00: 00 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Why none of the whites wrote about punitive expeditions against civilians, it would be nice to ask them, not me. Maybe with the help of clairvoyants? Just kidding. And where is there in Silent Don about red terror and looting? With scenes worthy of a horror movie
        1. Sugar Honeyovich April 4 2020 06: 11 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          1. “Without getting into the boots, Ivan Alekseevich dressed, ran to Shtokman.
          - What we sent nona - shot in Veshki! I thought they would give them a prison, but so what ... "

          2. “- You say there are no executions?” And where were seven? - shouted from the back rows.
          “I will not say, comrades, that there are no executions.” "We shot and will shoot the enemies of Soviet power, everyone who decides to impose landowner power on us."

          3. “... they have a commissioner with a detachment, Malkin's surname. Well, what does he, in fairness, treat people? Here I will tell at once. He collects old people from the farms, leads them to brushwood, takes out their souls from them, teles them beforehand and does not order their relatives to bury them. ”

          4. “This grandfather, for sin, has a beard, wonderfully, like a millet broom. And they shot him only because his beard was worn off and at a dashing hour he caught Malkin’s eyes. ”

          Plus, the chopping down with sabers of Chernetsov and other captured officers, the shooting of Kalmykov, Pyotr Melekhov, grandfather Grishaki ...

          Next:

          5 “In the eighteenth year, our detachment had such order and discipline that it would be worse, but nowhere. "Not a detachment of the Red Guard, but a fragment of the Makhnovist gang, honestly!"

          6. “Titok entered the apartment at night, introducing packs into the hut. He shook them and poured eight severed legs onto the floor .... Thawed them on the stove and began to rip off his boots. He will open the seam on the boot with a saber and pull it off. He carried his bare legs, buried them in a stack of straw. "Buried," he says. "

          It can be called: "Not very well responded"?
          1. vladcub April 4 2020 12: 25 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Sahar Medovich, it is clear that Sholokhov is not indifferent to you. He really smoothed a few more.
            It is known that Yezhov (the goose is the same)) Sholokhov said: "Misha, and you kontrik"
            Have you seen the latest edition of Quiet Don? They showed me, but I did not have time to compare the text.
            1. Sugar Honeyovich April 4 2020 14: 01 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              vladcub, I read Sholokhov 25-30 years ago. The latest edition is when?
              1. vladcub April 4 2020 14: 46 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Did you hear that drafts of the Quiet Don were found? They were published in 2017.
                I just looked through the beginning and that's it. It would be nice to compare publications. I know from other people's words that in the draft version, the line: Aksinia-Melekhov turned out worse. I heard on TV that pieces in italics are highlighted, which are not included in subsequent editions. But whether it is so or not, I do not know. Where leafing there did not see italics