AHC/WI: Black Army Successfully Establishes Anarchist(ish) Ukraine

So in OTL Nestor Makhno and his black army where an anarchist group from the Ukraine who sought to establish an anarchist system in the Ukranian Free Territory, and out of all the anarchists in the Ukraine they where probably the most successful, being defeated by the red army through trickery rather than military force. Your challenge is to instead have them succeed beyond even their own expectations and expand the anarchist free territory to include most of the OTL Ukraine (although anything west of the OTL Vinnytsia and Zhytomyr oblasts is optional).

They don't need to be totally independent and in fact my big idea for how to get this to work out would be a far less successful Red Army that is forced to rely on more localized far left movements for support allowing them to be a system within a system where the Ukraine is a separate anarchist region under nominal soviet suzerainty but full alliance and military support for the Soviets outside their borders. Also you would probably want to butterfly away Stalin given how he would want their autonomy to continue slightly less than he wants rectal cancer. Essentially I think a Soviet Union that lumbers on as an actual union of Soviets rather than a thinly veiled red army dictatorship is necessary and from there it would be possible to have the Ukraine succeed as an anarchist region within that.
 
Really? My experience is that Russian revolution WI's can usually remain civil enough to stay in after 1900.

A. I had thought that this was about the recent developments in Ukraine, Oops. :eek: (Shows how much I know about Eastern European Politics)

B. Though on the other hand, the WI probably could descend into a debate about anarchy and anarcho-communism, though that's because I've seen one or two threads where that sort of thing happened.

But I don't really know, so you're probably going to have to ask a mod to move it to Post-1900.
 
A. I had thought that this was about the recent developments in Ukraine, Oops. :eek: (Shows how much I know about Eastern European Politics)

B. Though on the other hand, the WI probably could descend into a debate about anarchy and anarcho-communism, though that's because I've seen one or two threads where that sort of thing happened.

But I don't really know, so you're probably going to have to ask a mod to move it to Post-1900.

Ah, I've already reported it so hopefully it'll be moved pretty quickly.
 
A more interesting twist would be to butterfly Lenin's death before the Russian Revolution and have Pyotr Kropotkin fill the gap. Who in turn makes the Soviet Union a giant Free Territory governed by the Soviets(trade unions). Makhno could become the nominal leader of the Defensive Forces or of an Internationalist Revolutionary Force that spreads anarcho-communism in Latin America, Africa, and South-East Asia. :D
 
Ha, that's a funny joke.

But seriously, the USA patrolling South America, and the European Power's colonial maintenance assures no Anarcho-Communism "Revolucion".

South America can't be controlled by the USA forever and the harsher it tries the more likelihood for the "Revolucion". Colonialism is doomed in any TL IMHO. Especially with a decentralized Soviet Revolution in Russia. Communism wouldn't get the autocratic stigma Stalin gave it. This bloc would be seen as the more democratic compared to the Western Powers who are more likely to turn to corporatism or fascism.
 
A more interesting twist would be to butterfly Lenin's death before the Russian Revolution and have Pyotr Kropotkin fill the gap. Who in turn makes the Soviet Union a giant Free Territory governed by the Soviets(trade unions). Makhno could become the nominal leader of the Defensive Forces or of an Internationalist Revolutionary Force that spreads anarcho-communism in Latin America, Africa, and South-East Asia. :D

Whatever an early death of Lenin would led to, it would not lead to a take-over by the Anarchists--and especially not under the leadership of Kropotkin, given his position on the war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto_of_the_Sixteen

Much more likely consequences would be either (1) a multiparty socialist government supported by the soviets, or (2) an "October" led by Trotsky without Lenin. I discuss both of these possibilities at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/UtQ7srolKGM/A2uBC_ZPryEJ
 
South America can't be controlled by the USA forever and the harsher it tries the more likelihood for the "Revolucion". Colonialism is doomed in any TL IMHO. Especially with a decentralized Soviet Revolution in Russia. Communism wouldn't get the autocratic stigma Stalin gave it.

On the other hand without the autocratic rule of Stalin there is no forced industrialization and likely a smaller military, which means the Nazis win. And unless you can come up with a plausible POD to stop Hitler rising to power that is what will eventually happen.

This bloc would be seen as the more democratic compared to the Western Powers who are more likely to turn to corporatism or fascism.
Why?
 
My premise is not just an anarcho-communist Ukraine but a Soviet Union of Free Territories similar to the FTU of OTL. The reason more states would become more autocratic is to combat this spreading philosophy. The stronger the Left becomes the stronger the Right would have to become(think tug of war).
 
My premise is not just an anarcho-communist Ukraine but a Soviet Union of Free Territories similar to the FTU of OTL. The reason more states would become more autocratic is to combat this spreading philosophy. The stronger the Left becomes the stronger the Right would have to become(think tug of war).

But, if it's anarchic, what would suggest it'd be in a stronger position than OTL?
 
Whatever an early death of Lenin would led to, it would not lead to a take-over by the Anarchists--and especially not under the leadership of Kropotkin, given his position on the war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifesto_of_the_Sixteen

Much more likely consequences would be either (1) a multiparty socialist government supported by the soviets, or (2) an "October" led by Trotsky without Lenin. I discuss both of these possibilities at https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/UtQ7srolKGM/A2uBC_ZPryEJ

I'm not saying that Lenin's death is directly going to lead to Kropotkin filling the gap. Obviously you would have to adjust the butterflies to allow that to happen. And this is only an opinion of how I would like to see it unfold. As you stated I also believe that it would be a multi-party socialist government supported by the Soviets. But the Soviets lead the country into a more syndicalist course adopting the teachings of Kropotkin.
 
My premise is not just an anarcho-communist Ukraine but a Soviet Union of Free Territories similar to the FTU of OTL. The reason more states would become more autocratic is to combat this spreading philosophy. The stronger the Left becomes the stronger the Right would have to become(think tug of war).

I dunno, I'd say if anything it would lead to much more power for the social democrats in the short term. Long term I could see the fascism is capitalism in crisis thing playing out but Russian implementation would not have nearly the impact say German implementation would have. Russia is too much of a backwater and the Ukraine being added on isn't that big of a difference.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
I can't see any anarcho-communist regime lasting for more than a few months at most, even if it had no enemies to worry about. My guess is that it would fall apart almost immediately.
 
Top