Ukrainian Black Army

thats the flag of the serbian nationalists not the free terretory

Real answer. Their politics were suited for the country side of Ukraine. Makhno had no economic policy that could appeal to the workers of the big cities. His economy was some Ron Paul level shit were on the backside of bills there was a message that everyone had the right to print this money. That shit works in villages and shit, but if you want to supply cities with food you need a more complicated system of exchange. They were geographically isolated, no possibility to get support from abroad. They didn't manage to link up with other peasant uprisings in Russia.

The main thing is they kept trusting the Bolsheviks, they were stabbed in the back 2-3 times, after saving the revolution at least twice. Makhno stopped white armies that were driving towards Moscow. He saved the revolution. Quite disgusting how they were treated.

They were excellent fighters. Best cavalry in the Russian civil war. They deserved better

From the porky.

Should've robbed those trains harder if he wanted to save the revolution.

On hindsight, stealing supplies from the Red Army was a bad idea.

General Denikin could have waltzed into Moscow in December 1919 if not for a heroic counter attack from the black army

Heroic saviors of revolution who did nothing wrong. MLs should read some history before spouting their propaganda.

Makhno did literally nothing wrong, bolsheviks deserved worse

You need to make up your mind, Leon

It seems really hard to find information on how the Free Territory was actually organized. The money stuff sounds pretty funny.

The Free Territory is one of those niche areas of history where primary sources are scarce and the only people interested in writing about it then and now are people who have strong opinions on the matter one way or the other.

Basically the primary sources come down to one of three possibilities:
Even the more detailed accounts are still too broad-stroke to really capture the daily lives of people living there at the time or the inner workings of their system.

Too many cooks in the kitchen. They could've negotiated for an anarchist faction among the bolsheviks.

Authoritarians have to have ideological hegemony.

The anarchist movement in Russia at the time was large but incredibly disorganized, even people like Kropotkin and Makhno recognized this. Many of the Russian anarchists, especially ones who did not find themselves in areas that would find themselves with connections/outlets to the Black Army, had already joined the Reds.
In that sense, there already was an anarchist faction among the Bolsheviks; it just didn't matter though. The nature of the vanguard meant that such "factions" would not actually have any sway in the development of the emerging revolutionary society, and indeed most of the anarchists who had fought for the revolution were subsequently suppressed upon the revolution's victory and many further purged once Stalin came around.

Yeah. These supposed anarchists, instead of attempting to set up an organised alternative among themselves, decided to betray all their principles.
With anarchists like these, it is no wonder our movement does not advance. It divides into either people who are anti-organisation, and people who are pro-organisation, but aren't actually willing to do any organising. The antis remain, and the pros leave and become marxists. In this way, as long as the anarchists keep being such disorganised and disloyal fuckheads, we pretty much guarantee the superiority of marxism, and doom the next revolution to an end similar to the Russian one.

...