During the Civil War, white and red by any means sought to achieve power and the complete destruction of the enemy. The confrontation was not only on the fronts, but also in many other aspects, including in the economic sector. Before analyzing the economic policies of white and red during the Civil War, it is necessary to study the main differences between the two ideologies, the confrontation of which led to a fratricidal war.
Key Aspects of the Red Economy
The Reds did not recognize private property, defended the conviction that all people should be equal in both legal and social terms. For the Reds, the king was not an authority, they despised wealth and intelligentsia, and the working class, in their opinion, was to become the leading structure of the state. Religion reds considered opium for the people. Churches collapsed, believers mercilessly destroyed, atheists were held in high esteem.
White beliefs
For white, the sovereign priest, of course, had authority, imperial power - the foundation of law and order in the state. They not only recognized private property, but also considered it the main milestone of the country's welfare. Intelligentsia, science and education were held in high esteem.
White did not imagine Russia without faith. Orthodoxy is the basis of the foundations. It was on this basis that the culture, self-awareness and prosperity of the nation were based.
A clear comparison of ideologies
The polar policy of the red and white could not but lead to confrontation. The table clearly demonstrates the main differences:
| Whites | Reds |
| "Glory to the king! Glory to the sovereign!" | "Down with the Tsar! All Power to the Soviets" |
| God-fearing revere clergy | "Religion - Opium for the People" |
| Russia is one and indivisible | The proclamation of internationalism |
| Right to private property | "Land - to peasants, factories - to workers" |
The social, cultural and economic policies of white and red had their supporters and ardent enemies. The country is divided. Half supported the Reds, the other White.
White politics during the Civil War
Denikin dreamed of the day when Russia would again become great and indivisible. The general believed that the Bolsheviks should be fought to the end and, as a result, completely destroyed. Under him, a “Declaration” was adopted, which retained the right to land for the owners, and also provided for the interests of the working people. Denikin canceled the decree of the Provisional Government on the grain monopoly, and also developed a plan for the "Land Law", according to which the peasant could buy the land from the landowner.
A priority in Kolchak's economic policy was the allocation of land to low-land peasants and those peasants who have no land at all. Kolchak believed that the seizure of property by the Reds was arbitrariness and looting. All the loot must be returned to the owners - manufacturers, landowners.
Wrangel created a political reform according to which large landowner holdings were limited, land allotments for middle peasants were increased, and provision was also made for the provision of peasants with industrial goods.
And Denikin, and Wrangel, and Kolchak abolished the Bolshevik Decree on the Earth, but, as history shows, they could not come up with a worthy alternative. The viability of the economic reforms of the white regimes was the fragility of these governments. If not for the economic and military assistance of the Entente, the white regimes would have fallen much earlier.
The politics of the Reds during the Civil War
During the Civil War, the Reds adopted the “Land Decree”, which abolished the right of private ownership of land, which, to put it mildly, did not please the landowners, but became a joyful news for the common people. Naturally, for landless peasants and workers, neither the reform of Denikin, nor the innovations of Wrangel and Kolchak were as desirable and promising as the decree of the Bolsheviks.
The Bolsheviks actively pursued a policy of "war communism", according to which the Soviet government took a course towards the complete nationalization of the economy. Nationalization represents the transition of the economy from private to state. A monopoly on foreign trade was also introduced . The fleet was nationalized. Partnerships, large entrepreneurs lost their property overnight. The Bolsheviks sought to centralize the management of the national economy of Russia.
Many innovations did not appeal to ordinary people. One of such unpleasant innovations was the forced introduction of labor service, according to which the unauthorized transition to a new job was prohibited, as well as absenteeism. “Subbotniks” and “Sundays” were introduced — a system of unpaid labor that is mandatory for all.
The food dictatorship of the Bolsheviks
The Bolsheviks brought to life the monopoly on bread, which at one time was proposed by the Provisional Government. Control was introduced by the Soviet government over the village bourgeoisie, which was harboring grain stocks. Many historians emphasize that this was a forced temporary measure, since after the revolution the country was in ruins, and such a redistribution could help to survive in the hungry years. However, serious excesses on the ground caused the mass expropriation of all food supplies in the village, which led to severe hunger and extremely high mortality.
Thus, the economic policies of white and red had serious contradictions. A comparison of the main aspects is given in the table:
| Whites | Reds |
| Denikin's "Land Law" provided for the allotment of land to the small-land and landless peasantry | Land Decree Abolishes Private Ownership of Land |
| return of property to landlords, manufacturers | full nationalization, the policy of "war communism" |
| Wrangel reforms defended the interests of the predominantly middle class | social protection of the poor |
| abolition of the bread monopoly of the Bolsheviks | food dictatorship |
As can be seen from the table, the economic policies of the whites and reds were exactly the opposite.
Cons of both directions
The politics of white and red in the Civil War was radically different. However, none of them was 100% effective. Each strategic direction had its drawbacks.
“War communism” was criticized even by the communists themselves. After the adoption of this policy, the Bolsheviks expected an unprecedented economic growth, but in reality everything turned out differently. All decisions were economically illiterate, as a result , labor productivity decreased , people went hungry, and many peasants did not see an incentive to process. The output of industrial products decreased, there was a decline in agriculture. Hyperinflation was created in the financial sector, which was not even under the tsar and the Provisional Government. People were mowed by hunger.
A big minus of the white regimes was their inability to pursue an intelligible land policy. Neither Wrangel, nor Denikin, nor Kolchak worked out a law that would be supported by the masses in the person of workers and peasants. In addition, the fragility of white power did not allow them to fully realize their plans for the development of the state economy.