Politics of the Greens in the Civil War. Documents for the analysis of the position of the Greens in the Civil War

In addition to the "Reds" and "Whites", the "Greens" also took part in the Civil War in Russia. Historians have mixed opinions about this category of those who fought, some consider them bandits, while others speak of them as defenders of their lands and freedom.

According to the historian Ruslan Gagkuev, the Civil War in Russia led to the destruction of the foundations that had developed over the centuries, as a result of which there were no losers in those battles, only those who were destroyed. The inhabitants of the villages tried to protect their lands as much as possible. This was the reason for the appearance in 1917 of rebel groups, which were called "green".

These groups of people formed armed formations and hid in the forests, trying to avoid mobilization.

There is another version of the origin of the name of these units. According to General A. Denikin, these insurgent detachments got their name after Zeleny, one of the atamans from the Poltava province, who fought with both the Whites and the Reds.

Members of the green detachments did not wear uniforms, their clothes consisted of ordinary peasant shirts and trousers, and on their heads they put on woolen caps or sheepskin caps with a green cross sewn on them. Their flag was also green.

It should be noted that the rural population was distinguished by good combat skills even before the war and were always ready to stand up for themselves with pitchforks and axes. Even before the revolution, the newspapers now and then appeared articles about the widespread clashes between the villages.
When the First World War ended, a large number of rural residents who took part in hostilities took rifles with them from the front, and some even machine guns. It was dangerous for strangers to enter such villages.

Even army troops had to ask village elders for permission to pass through such settlements. Not always the decision of the elders was positive. In 1919, the influence of the Red Army became stronger, and many peasants hid in the forests, hiding from the mobilization.

One of the most famous representatives of the "greens" was Nestor Makhno, who made a kind of career from a political prisoner to the commander of the green army, which included 55 thousand people. Makhno fought on the side of the Red Army, and for the capture of Mariupol he received the Order of the Red Banner.

However, the main activity of the greens from the detachment of Nestor Makhno was the robbery of wealthy people and landowners. At the same time, neither the Makhnovists often killed prisoners.

In the early years of the Civil War, the Greens remained neutral, then fought on the side of the Red Army, but after 1920 they began to oppose everyone.

Another of the brightest representatives of the Green Army was A. Antonov, who was also a member of the Left Social Revolutionaries, known as the leader of the Tambov Uprising of 1921-22. All members of his detachment were “comrades”, and they carried out their activities under the slogan “For Justice”. At the same time, not all participants in the green movement were confident in their victory, which can be confirmed in the rebel songs.

• Whites in the Civil War

• Reds in the Civil War

• Greens in the Civil War

• Causes of victories and defeats of the main participants in the war

Whites in the Civil War

The goal of the White movement was proclaimed - after the liquidation of Soviet power, the end of the civil war and the onset of peace and stability in the country - to determine the future political structure and form of government in Russia through the convening of the National Constituent Assembly. For the duration of the Civil War, the White governments set themselves the task of overthrowing the Soviet regime and establishing a military dictatorship in the territories they held. At the same time, the legislation that was in force in the Russian Empire before the revolution was re-introduced, adjusted to take into account the legislative norms of the Provisional Government acceptable to the White movement and the laws of the new “state formations” on the territory of the former Empire after October 1917.

Political program of the White movement

Organizational structure of the white movement

The four most combat-ready groups:

Documents for the analysis of the position of whites in the Civil War.

A.I. Denikin. From the order to the Special Conference:

“I order the Special Conference to adopt the following provisions as the basis for its activities:

United, great, indivisible Russia. Faith defense. Establishing order...

The fight against Bolshevism to the end.

Military dictatorship ... Any opposition - right and left - to punish. The question of the form of government is a matter for the future. The Russian people will elect the supreme power without pressure and without imposition...

Foreign policy - only nationally Russian ... For help - not an inch of Russian land.

To continue the development of an agrarian and labor law...

Improve the health of the front and military rear - the work of specially appointed generals with great powers, the composition of the field court and the use of extreme repression.

Document questions:

• Select the facts that represent and concretize the political program of the whites. What are its main provisions?

• Draw conclusions about the strength and weakness of the white movement.

• What are the reasons for White's defeat?

Reds:

Features:

1)Customized

leader - Lenin.

2) a movement in which

had a clear structure

management. Traffic

had a pronounced

political character.

Slogans:

"The proletariat of all

countries - unite!",

"War on palaces!"

Creation of the Red Army

On January 28, 1918, a decree was issued on the creation of the Workers 'and Peasants' Red Army, and on February 11 - the Workers' and Peasants' Red Fleet on a voluntary basis. The definition of "workers' and peasants'" emphasized its class character - the army of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the fact that it should be completed only from the working people of the city and countryside. The "Red Army" said that it was a revolutionary army.

Documents for the analysis of the position of the Reds in the Civil War.

• From the Program of the RCP (b). Adopted by the 8th Party Congress in March 1919:

"October Revolution October 25 (November 7) 1917 In Russia, it implemented the dictatorship of the proletariat, which, with the support of the poorest peasantry or semi-proletariat, began to build the foundations of communist society .... The era of the world proletarian revolution, the communist revolution, began. Only a proletarian, communist revolution can lead humanity out of the impasse created by imperialism and imperialist wars...

IN THE AREA OF GENERAL POLITICAL. The task of the party of the proletariat is, while steadily suppressing the resistance of the exploiters and ideologically combating ... prejudices about the unconditional nature of bourgeois rights and freedoms, to explain ... that the deprivation of political rights and any restrictions on freedom whatever are necessary exclusively as temporary measures to combat exploiters' attempts to defend or restore their privileges.

IN THE FIELD OF ECONOMIC .... The maximum unification of all economic activities of the country according to one nationwide plan; the greatest centralization of production in the sense of uniting it into separate branches and groups of branches ... The total mobilization of the entire able-bodied population by the Soviet government ... must be applied incomparably wider and more systematically than it has been done so far ... "

Document questions:

• Select the facts that represent and concretize the political program of the Reds. What are its main provisions?

• Based on the sources, tell us about the struggle of the Reds.

• Draw conclusions about the strength and weakness of the Reds

Greens:

The "Greens" were peasant rebels who fought against surplus appropriation in the territories controlled by the Soviet government, and against the return of landowners' land ownership and requisitions in the territories of the white governments. The movement of the "greens" was at the same time a reflection of the mass protest of the peasants against the forced mobilizations. The peasants, after the division of the landowners' lands, desired class peace, looked for an opportunity to do without a struggle, but were drawn into it by the active actions of the Whites and Reds.

The green movement was not institutionalized. It proceeded quite spontaneously. It acquired its most massive character in the spring and summer of 1919, when the Bolsheviks tightened the food dictatorship, and Kolchak and Denikin restored the old order. Peasants prevailed among the rebels, and the Russian-speaking population prevailed in the national regions. Thus, in the spring of 1919, the uprisings swept the Bryansk, Samara, Simbirsk, Yaroslavl, Pskov, Smolensk, Kostroma, Vyatka, Novgorod, Penza, Tver and other provinces. At the same time, in Ukraine, the uprising was led by the former staff captain of the tsarist army, N.A. Grigoriev, who fought against the world bourgeoisie, the Directory, the Cadets, the British, Germans and French. For some time, Grigoriev with his detachments even entered the Red Army (6th Ukrainian Soviet division), but then opposed the Bolsheviks under the slogan "For the Soviets, but without the Communists." The ideas and practices of the Greens manifested themselves especially brightly in the Makhnovist movement, which engulfed a significant region of southern Ukraine. It is characteristic that Makhno and other green leaders did not have a clear program. SR-anarchist views prevailed, the movement was not politically organized.

Documents for the analysis of the position of the Greens in the Civil War.

From the resolution of the congress of representatives from 72 volosts of Alexandrovsky, Mariupol, Berdyansk, Bakhmutovsky and Pavlograd counties and from front-line units. April 10, 1918, the village of Gulyai-Pole, Aleksandrovsky district :

“Taking into account ... the current situation in Ukraine and Great Russia of the power of the political party “Communist-Bolsheviks”, which does not stop at any measures to convince and consolidate state power ... the congress decided:

• ..We, the gathered peasants, workers and rebels. Once again, we ardently protest against such violence... And we are always ready to defend our people's rights....

• In the hands of the Bolshevik authorities, the emergency commissions, intended to fight real counter-revolution and banditry, have become a weapon for suppressing the will of the working people ... We demand that all these well-armed real forces be sent to the front ...

Document questions:

• Based on the sources, determine the requirements of the greens, their place in the alignment of political forces during the Civil War.

• Why was this party, whose demands are closest to those of the peasantry, unable to lead the "Small Civil War"?

• Draw conclusions about the strength and weakness of the Greens' position.

Reasons for the defeat of the white movement:

• The whites did not have a long-term and understandable program for the population to solve the pressing problems of Russia;

• Personal rivalry between leaders who poorly coordinated their actions;

• The Whites were supported by the Entente countries, but these countries did not have a single, coordinated position regarding Soviet Russia.

Reasons for the Reds to win:

• The Bolsheviks were able to mobilize all the resources, show unity and solidarity, which were supported not only ideologically, but also by force, dictatorial methods.

• The Bolshevik program turned out to be understandable and more attractive, the workers and peasants believed that Soviet power was their power.

• The peasantry came out on the side of the Red Army, at first its poorest strata, and then the middle peasants; this meant the opportunity to create a mass army, to ensure the strength of the Soviet rear and the support of the partisan detachments that fought behind the White lines.

Russian Civil War - the Reds, the Blacks, the Greens

The Reds themselves were quite heterogeneous, especially in the early years of the Civil War. In 1917-1918, the Red Army was a collection of revolutionary factions, which included the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks, Left Socialist Revolutionaries (SRs), Right Socialist Revolutionaries, the Jewish Bund, anarchists, as well as various small agrarian-peasant and social democratic parties , and even groups known as "greens". Whites noted little or no difference between these elements, calling the whole bunch "Reds".

In fact, only the Bolsheviks considered themselves "real" Reds. It was for this reason that, step by step, they began to oust those factions that did not fully support the Bolshevik point of view, and this process was completed in 1922. Unlike the Whites, who were distinguished by their honor and inflexibility, the leadership of the Bolsheviks did not experience prejudice when forming temporary alliances against a common enemy, after the destruction of which it was the turn of a temporary ally.

In fact, the term "Bolshevik" meant belonging to the majority, while "Menshevik" meant belonging to the minority. Until 1903, both the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks belonged to the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP). Both movements believed that leadership should be carried out by the core - an elite of professional revolutionaries, but the Mensheviks supported both greater participation of party members in the work, and cooperation with the current government. The Bolsheviks advocated limiting party membership as well as confronting the government from outside.

Insurmountable differences continued until the final split in 1912, after which the Bolsheviks retained the name RSDLP only for themselves. After being used for personal gain during the civil war, the Mensheviks were outlawed by the Bolsheviks in 1921.

Another thing is the social revolutionaries (SRs). Russia was predominantly an agrarian country, and the Social Revolutionaries created a platform that appealed to the needs of the peasants, in contrast to the platform of the Bolsheviks, who supported the industrial proletariat. The Bolsheviks believed that it was he who should lead the world revolution. The point of contention was the distribution of land. While the Social Revolutionaries advocated the socialization of the land (its division among the working peasants), the Bolsheviks insisted on its nationalization. This concept eventually led to the creation of collective farms - collective farms.

Being incredibly popular among the peasantry, by 1917 the Social Revolutionaries had formed the largest political bloc. During the preliminary elections for the Constituent Assembly, which took place on November 12, 1917, delegates were chosen to participate in the assembly scheduled for January 1918; The Social Revolutionaries, judging by the polls, scored 40 percent and took first place, the Bolsheviks were in second with 24 percent. However, the Socialist-Revolutionaries were scattered throughout the country. Beginning in the summer of 1917, the (Left) Socialist-Revolutionaries often supported the Bolsheviks, especially on the removal of the Provisional Government and the immediate confiscation and redistribution of landed estates among the peasants.

Lenin himself decided to cancel the results of the preliminary elections to the Constituent Assembly that took place in November, an election which he lost. When the delegates at the official meeting of the Constituent Assembly were about to take their seats in the Tauride Palace in Petrograd on January 19, 1918, they were blockaded and expelled by the armed forces of the Bolsheviks. On the same day, Lenin announced the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly.

The mainstream of the Socialist-Revolutionaries, known outside the party as the "Right Socialist-Revolutionaries", now had to choose between the Whites and the Reds, or seek, in the words of the party's leader, Viktor Chernov, a "third way." Right-wing Socialist-Revolutionary leaders traveled towards Samara along the Volga in June, where they formed the Committee of Members of the Constituent Assembly, or Komuch. They immediately set about creating an anti-Bolshevik armed force, which nevertheless raised a red flag. As a result, the most conservative politicians and soldiers in Siberia and the Volga mistook them for the Reds.

The Left SRs also found themselves in opposition to the Bolsheviks after Lenin and Trotsky signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in March 1918 to remove Russia from participation in World War I, an agreement that resulted in Russia losing a large part of its land. and received penalties. Subsequently, many Left SRs decided to cooperate with the Allies and form an eastern front against the central government.

Coordinating the uprising with Allied intelligence agents, in order to support the warring parties, 25 Allied landings were landed in Siberia and Northern Russia in the spring and summer of 1918, in July the Left SRs raised an uprising against the Bolsheviks in Moscow and Yaroslavl. After several days of street fighting, the uprising was crushed by the forces of the Cheka and the elite Latvian riflemen. The surviving members of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, who could not join the Bolshevik Party, were sentenced to death in 1922 by the end of the civil war.

There were also many anarchists in the ranks of the Reds, who often described themselves and their enemies as the "Black Guard": black denoted denial, the desire to destroy state power. The anarchist movement was truly a mass movement that believed in local self-government and freely elected "councils", and therefore the bureaucracy and centralization of power in the hands of the Bolsheviks irritated the anarchists. They advocated a revolutionary seizure of land and its redistribution among those who cultivate it, but they were against communal property, collective farms, which would be controlled by the state, led by the Bolsheviks.

Some anarchists nevertheless decided to cooperate with the Bolsheviks, hoping for a softening of their policies, and they managed to maintain their cohesion until the end of the civil war. Others, such as Nestor Makhno, formed alliances against the Bolsheviks and fought them on the battlefield. Many anarchists were destroyed during and after the destruction of anarchist centers in Moscow in April 1918, after the Kronstadt uprising in March 1921, and during the destruction of the Makhno movement by the Bolsheviks in the same year.

The Greens belonged to other groups that allied with the Bolsheviks when it suited their goals and fought against them when their goals differed. The composition of the greens was very uneven: from nationalists who were looking for independence for a particular region, to outcast socialist-revolutionaries and anarchists, bandits. Some of the Greens broadly supported political platforms related to land ownership and local self-government, such as the Antonov Uprising in 1920-1922, while the rest simply evaded conscription, whether Red or White.

Some of the greens called themselves "forest brothers", lived in deep forests or in the taiga, leading a completely pirate lifestyle and submitting to robber honor. Judging by the estimates of Soviet historians, out of about a hundred or more thousand Red partisans who fought against the Kolchak-Siberian White movement in 1919-1920, more than half were "green" in their beliefs. It is noteworthy that the Red Army forced the Greens to submit to itself by the end of the civil war, but the remnants of those who did not submit managed to resist the Reds in Siberia and Central Asia until the end of the 1920s.

The Red Army, meanwhile, was a coalition of factions to fight the Whites, and later between factions when the Whites were no longer a threat. As the civil war continued, the Red Army became more homogeneous, Bolshevik in nature.

From the start of the revolution, the Bolsheviks enjoyed several key advantages over their opponents. Consolidation of revolutionary forces cannot be easy, which is why most revolutions throughout history have been unsuccessful. Outstanding leadership is very important, the kind of leadership that includes a lot of intelligence, a clear eye, the ability to change ideology, at least temporarily, to a more pragmatic, even less conscientious one, and an iron willingness to sacrifice, provoking sacrifice, in order to achieve the ultimate goal.

These qualities are predominantly middle-class, and every professional revolutionary in the Bolshevik leadership possessed them. Undividedly devoted to the idea of ​​destroying one world in order to build another in its place, they had an almost unsurpassed arrogance: to create something that had never been created before. After all, the world they wanted to build existed only in theory, speculatively formulated on paper, feverishly created in the heads of the leaders during the flight from the tsarist secret police.

Equally important is the fact that during the first three years they received the support of three key military forces, which allowed them to gain superiority over any opponent at this time in this place. These were the armed sailors of the Baltic Fleet, the elite Latvian Rifle Division and dedicated "proletarian" workers who made up the majority in the paramilitary Red Guard.

In addition, the Bolsheviks were well-established in Moscow, Petrograd and central Russia, where numerous arms factories and ammunition depots were located that supported the country's military campaigns during the First World War. Moreover, central Russia was quite rich in railroads. These conditions allowed the Bolsheviks to arm their military forces and deploy them wherever needed.

The Bolsheviks joined the ranks of the Red Army during the Civil War. Sailors, given their excellent technical skills, had experienced personnel for artillery troops, armored vehicles and armored trains. Conscription made it possible to increase the number of Russian peasants, who, together with the Red Army, formed the backbone of the infantry. As for the cavalry, the Bolsheviks mainly used « out-of-town" who lived on the lands of the Cossacks and were well acquainted with the art of handling horses, but were not Cossacks themselves. The Reds, like the Whites, used uniform symbols to represent their movement.

For centuries, red suggested revolution, but it was also the favorite color of kings. Starting from the red color of St. Basil's Cathedral in Moscow, ending with Red Square itself, the word "red", fortunately for the Bolsheviks, had a double meaning: "red color" and "beautiful". The Bolsheviks were able to "capture" the red color for their own personal purposes.

The soldiers of the Red Army wore red armbands with black letters that indicated a specific military unit; red metal stars adorned caps, while cloth stars appeared on uniforms in 1919-1922. Red stars on military equipment or political posters suggested a new future, especially when the red or gold beams of dawn converged. The golden sickle and hammer, placed on red flags and posters, were associated with a new movement for progressive change on behalf of the proletariat and peasants.

The general slogan of the Bolsheviks, directly or subconsciously, was simple and understandable to the majority of illiterate Russian people: peace, land, bread. The slogan "All power to the Soviets": the Soviets were supposed to be a "democratic" assembly in which the workers or peasants received representative power and legitimacy. Thus, the slogan appealed to those who did not yet understand that Bolshevism and the new soviets were one and the same. This and other slogans were drawn on promising collages, and instructive, almost comic book scenes, in a new art style known as the avant-garde. This art grew out of urban posters in the Red Central regions and spread on the sides of special propaganda trains and riverboats.

Symbols were designed to replace political power in people's minds. Images of Lenin appeared everywhere, especially in those places where there used to be images of the king. Then it was still difficult to understand the essence of Bolshevism, only if we assume that this is a new figure of power, a new Red Tsar.

The green movement is a social movement whose primary interest is in environmental issues. It has broad support and is engaged in environmental pollution, wildlife conservation, traditional countryside, and development control. In addition, it is a strong political wing, which was a powerful lobby during the 1980s. The Green Party was most prominent in West Germany and Holland in the late 80s. with the renaming of the Ecology Party became prominent in the UK. However, many supporters of the movement do not support traditionally political, but practical problems, in the solution of which both buyers and nature lovers can participate. Perelet R. A. Global aspects of international environmental cooperation // Protection of nature and reproduction of natural resources. T. 24. M., 2005. - P. 98

The term "green" has been appropriated by politicians and marketers, and is even used as a verb, such as "this party or its candidate has gone green." Usually such green parties do not support the Green parties in all aspects, but are movements or factions of existing or only organized political parties (Yabloko can be an example of a green party in Russia).

The Green Parties are part of, but not necessarily representatives of, a larger political movement (commonly referred to as the Green Movement) for the reform of human government, which would better fit within the constraints of the biosphere to stand apart from the electoral parties.

In some countries, notably France and the US, there have been or are now several parties with different platforms calling themselves the Greens. In Russia, the first officially registered "Green Party" appeared in Leningrad in April 1990. To date, not a single Green Party in Russia has been re-registered. No new Green Party was registered either. Many people also confuse the Green Parties with Greenpeace, a worldwide non-governmental organization highly visible in the environmental movement, which, like the Green Political Movement, was founded in the 1970s and shares some green goals and values, but works in different ways and is not organized politically. party.

A distinction is often made between "Green Parties" (usually spelled with a small letter) in a general sense emphasizing environmentalism, and specifically organized political parties called "Green Parties" (with a capital letter), which grow out of principles called the "Four Pillars of and the consensus process built on these principles. The main difference between the Green Party and the Green Party is that the former, in addition to environmentalism, also emphasizes the goals of social justice and world peace.

The organized Green parties themselves may sometimes disagree with the division into "green" and "Green" parties, as many greens argue that without peace, respect for nature is impossible, and achieving peace without prosperous ecoregions is unrealistic, thus seeing "green" principles as part of a new coherent system of political values.

The “Four Pillars” or “Four Principles” of the Green Parties are: Perelet R. A. Global aspects of international environmental cooperation // Nature Protection and Reproduction of Natural Resources. T. 24. M., 2005. - P. 99

· Ecology -- environmental sustainability

Fairness -- social responsibility

Democracy -- Appropriate decision-making process

The world is non-violence

In March 1972, the very first green party in the world (the United Tasmanian Group) was formed at a public meeting in Hobart (Australia). Around the same time, on the Atlantic coast of Canada, the "Small Party" was formed with about the same goals. In May 1972, a meeting at Queen Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand, created the Values ​​Party, the world's first national green party. The term "green" (German grün) was first coined by the German Greens when they took part in the first national elections in 1980. The values ​​of these early movements were gradually consolidated in the way they are shared by all of today's Green parties around the world.

As Green Parties gradually grew from the bottom up, from neighborhood levels to municipal and then (eco)regional and national levels, and were often driven by consensus decision-making, strong local coalitions became a precondition for electoral victories. Growth was usually driven by a single issue through which the Greens could bridge the gap between politics and the concerns of ordinary people.

The first such breakthrough was the German Green Party, known for its opposition to nuclear energy as an expression of the anti-centralist and pacifist values ​​traditional to the Greens. They were founded in 1980 and, after being in coalition governments at the state level for several years, found themselves in the federal government along with the Social Democratic Party of Germany in the so-called Red-Green Alliance since 1998. In 2001, they reached an agreement to phase out nuclear power in Germany and agreed to remain in the coalition and support the German government of Chancellor Gerhard Schröder over the 2001 war in Afghanistan. This complicated their dealings with Greens around the world, but demonstrated that they were capable of complex political deals and concessions.

Other Green parties that have entered governments at the national level include the Finnish Green Party, Agalev (now "Groen!") and Ecolo in Belgium, as well as the French Green Party.

Green parties participate in a legislatively defined electoral process and try to influence the development and implementation of laws in every country in which they are organized. Accordingly, the Green Parties do not call for the end of all laws or laws that involve (or potentially lead to) violence, although they prefer peaceful approaches to law enforcement, including de-escalation and harm reduction.

The Green parties are often confused with "leftist" political parties that call for centralized control of capital, but they (the Greens) generally advocate a clear separation between the public good (on land and on water) and private enterprise, with little cooperation between both - - it is assumed that higher prices for energy and materials create efficient and environmentally friendly markets. Green parties rarely support corporate subsidies -- sometimes with the exception of research grants for more efficient or cleaner industrial technologies.

Many right-wing Greens follow a more geo-libertarian outlook that emphasizes natural capitalism -- and tax shifting from value created by labor or services to people's consumption of the wealth created by the natural world. Thus, Greens can view the processes in which living things compete for mating partners, housing, food, and view ecology, cognitive science, and political science in very different ways. These differences tend to lead to debates about ethics, policy making, and public opinion about these differences during party leadership contests. So there is no single Green Ethic.

Indigenous (or "First Nations") values ​​and, to a lesser extent, the ethics of Mohandas Gandhi, Spinoza, and Crick, and the rise of environmental consciousness, had a very strong influence on the Greens - most evident in their advocacy of long-term ("seven-generation") planning. and foresight and in the personal responsibility of each individual for this or that moral choice. These ideas have been compiled into the "Ten Core Values" prepared by the US Green Party, which include a reformulation of the "Four Pillars" used by the European Greens. At the global level, the Global Green Charter proposes six key principles. Pisarev VD Ecologization of international relations // USA - economics, politics, ideology. 2006. - S. 34

Critics sometimes argue that the universal and all-encompassing nature of ecology, as well as the need to use it to some extent for the benefit of humanity, pushes the movement within the Green Party agenda towards authoritarian and forced politics, in particular with regard to the means of production, since it is they who support human life. These critics often see the Greens' agenda as just a form of socialism or fascism - although many Greens refute these theories as referring more to Gaia theorists or non-parliamentary groups within the green movement but less committed to democracy.

Others criticize that the Green parties have the most support among well-educated citizens of developed countries, while their policies may appear to be against the interests of the poor in rich countries and around the world. For example, strong support by the Greens for indirect taxation of goods that are associated with pollution inevitably results in the poorer segments of the population bearing a larger share of the tax burden. On a global level, the Greens' opposition to heavy industry is seen by critics as acting against rapidly industrializing poor countries such as China or Thailand. The involvement of the Greens in the anti-globalization movement and the leading role of the Green parties (in countries such as the US) in opposition to free trade agreements also lead critics to argue that the Greens are against opening rich country markets to goods from developing countries, although many Greens claim that they act in the name of fair trade.

And finally, critics argue that the Greens have a Luddite view of technology, that they are opposed to technologies such as genetic engineering (which critics themselves view in a positive way). Greens often play a leading role in raising public health topics such as overweight, which critics see as a modern form of moral alarmism. And while a technophobic perspective can be traced in the early green movement and Green parties, the Greens today reject Luddism's arguments, countering them with their policies of sustainable growth and the promotion of "clean" technological innovations such as solar energy and pollution control technologies.

Green platforms draw their terminology from the science of ecology, and their political ideas from feminism, left-wing liberalism, libertarian socialism, social democracy (social ecology) and sometimes a few others.

It is extremely rare for the Green platform to propose lower prices for fossil fuels, not label genetically modified organisms, liberalize taxes, trade and tariffs in order to remove the protection of ecoregions or communities of people.

Some issues affect most green parties around the world and can often contribute to global cooperation between them. Some of them affect the structure of parties, some - their politics: French H. Global Partnership to Save the Earth // USA - Economics, Politics, Ideology. 2006. - p.71

Fundamentalism versus realism

· Eco-regional democracy

Reform of the electoral system

Land reform

· Safe trading

Indigenous peoples

The extermination of primates

Destruction of storm forests

Biosecurity

health care

natural capitalism

On issues of ecology, species extinction, biosecurity, safe trade, and public health, Greens tend to agree to some degree (often expressed in joint agreements or declarations), usually based on (scientific) consensus using a consensus process.

There are very definite differences between and within the Green parties in every country and culture, and there is an ongoing debate about the balance of natural ecology interests and individual human needs.

Among the variety of terms that we use when talking about the world around us, there is one that was born during the years of the Civil War and has survived to this day, but has received a completely different meaning. This is the green movement. In ancient times, this was the name given to the insurrectionary actions of peasants who defended their rights with weapons in their hands. Today, this is the name given to communities of people who protect the rights of the nature around us.

Russian peasantry in the post-revolutionary years

The "green" movement during the years of the Civil War is the mass demonstrations of the peasants, directed against the main contenders for seizing power in the country - the Bolsheviks, the White Guards and foreign interventionists. As a rule, they saw free Soviets as the governing bodies of the state, formed as a result of the independent expression of the will of all citizens and alien to any form of appointment from above.

The "green" movement was of great importance during the war, already because its main force - the peasants - made up the majority of the country's population. The course of the Civil War as a whole often depended on which of the warring parties they would support. This was well understood by all the participants in the hostilities and, to the best of their ability, they tried to win over the many millions of peasant masses to their side. However, this was not always successful, and then the confrontation took extreme forms.

The negative attitude of the villagers towards the Bolsheviks and the Whites

Thus, for example, in the Central part of Russia the attitude of the peasants towards the Bolsheviks was ambivalent. On the one hand, they supported them after the well-known decree on land, which secured the landowners' land for the peasants, on the other hand, the wealthy peasants and most of the middle peasants opposed the food policy of the Bolsheviks and the forced seizure of agricultural products. This duality was reflected in the course of the Civil War.

Socially alien to the peasants, the White Guard movement also rarely found support from them. Despite the fact that many villagers served in the ranks, most of them were recruited by force. This is evidenced by numerous memoirs of participants in those events. In addition, the White Guards often forced the peasants to perform various household duties, without compensating for the time and effort expended. This also caused resentment.

Peasant uprisings caused by the surplus appraisal

The "green" movement in the Civil War, directed against the Bolsheviks, as already mentioned, was mainly caused by dissatisfaction with the policy of the surplus appraisal, which doomed thousands of peasant families to starvation. It is no coincidence that the main heat of passions fell on the year 1919-1920, when the forced seizure of agricultural products took on the widest scale.

Among the most active actions directed against the Bolsheviks, one can name the "green" movement in Stavropol, which began in April 1918, and the mass uprising of peasants in the Volga region that followed a year later. According to some reports, up to 180,000 people took part in it. In general, in the first half of 1019, there were 340 armed uprisings, covering more than twenty provinces.

Social Revolutionaries and their Third Way program

During the years of the Civil War, representatives of the Mensheviks also tried to use the "Green" movement for their political purposes. They worked out a joint tactic of struggle aimed at two fronts. They declared their opponents both the Bolsheviks and A. V. Kolchak and A. I. Denikin. This program was called "Third Way" and was, they say, a struggle against reaction from the left and right. However, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, far from the peasant masses, were unable to unite significant forces around themselves.

Peasant army of Nestor Makhno

The slogan proclaiming the "third way" gained the greatest popularity in Ukraine, where the peasant rebel army under the command of N. I. Makhno fought for a long time. It is noted that its main backbone was made up of wealthy peasants who were successfully engaged in agriculture and traded in bread.

They were actively involved in the redistribution of the landlords' land and had high hopes for it. As a result, it was their farms that became the objects of numerous requisitions carried out alternately by the Bolsheviks, the White Guards and the interventionists. The "green" movement that spontaneously arose in Ukraine was a reaction to such lawlessness.

The special character of Makhno's army was given by anarchism, the adherents of which were both the commander-in-chief himself and most of his commanders. In this idea, the most attractive was the theory of "social" revolution, which destroys all state power and thus eliminates the main instrument of violence against the individual. The main tenet of Makhno's program was popular self-government and the rejection of any form of diktat.

Popular movement under the leadership of A. S. Antonov

No less powerful and large-scale movement of the "greens" was observed in the Tambov province and in the Volga region. By the name of its leader, it received the name "Antonovshchina". As early as September 1917, the peasants in these areas took control of the landowners' lands and began to actively develop them. Accordingly, their standard of living rose, and a favorable prospect opened up ahead. When, in 1919, a large-scale surplus appropriation began, and the fruits of their labor began to be taken away from people, this caused the sharpest reaction and forced the peasants to take up arms. They had something to protect.

The struggle took on a special intensity in 1920, when a severe drought occurred in the Tambov region, which destroyed most of the crop. In these difficult conditions, what nevertheless managed to be collected was seized in favor of the Red Army and the townspeople. As a result of such actions of the authorities, a popular uprising broke out that engulfed several counties. About 4,000 armed peasants and more than 10,000 people with pitchforks and scythes took part in it. The leader and inspirer was a member of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party A.

The defeat of Antonovshchina

He, like other leaders of the "green" movement, put forward clear and simple slogans, understandable to every villager. Chief among them was the call to fight the communists in order to build a free peasant republic. We should pay tribute to his commanding abilities and the ability to conduct a flexible guerrilla war.

As a result, the uprising soon spread to other areas and took on an even larger scale. It cost the Bolshevik government great efforts to suppress it in 1921. For this purpose, units removed from the Denikin Front, led by M.N. Tukhachevsky and G.I. Kotovsky, were sent to the Tambov region.

Modern social movement "Green"

The battles of the Civil War died down, and the events described above are a thing of the past. Much of that era has sunk into oblivion forever, but an amazing thing is that the term “Green Movement” has been preserved in our everyday life, although it has acquired a completely different meaning. If at the beginning of the last century this phrase meant a struggle for the interests of those who cultivated the land, then today the participants in the movement are fighting for the preservation of the land itself with all its natural wealth.

"Green" - the ecological movement of our time, which opposes the harmful effects of the negative factors of technological progress on the environment. In our country, they appeared in the mid-eighties of the last century and have gone through several stages of development in their history. According to data published at the end of last year, the number of environmental groups included in the all-Russian movement reaches thirty thousand.

Leading NGO

Among the most famous are the movement "Green Russia", "Motherland", "Green Patrol" and a number of other organizations. Each of them has its own characteristics, but all of them are united by a common task and the mass enthusiasm that is inherent in their members. In general, this sector of society exists in the form of a non-governmental organization. It is a kind of third sector, not related to either government agencies or private business.

The political platform of representatives of modern "green" movements is based on a constructive approach to the restructuring of the state's economic policy in order to harmoniously combine the interests of people and their natural environment. There can be no compromises in such issues, since not only the material well-being of people, but also their health and life depends on their solution.