The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPeter Lee Archive
Ukraine Is Chockablock with Fascist Formations; Better Deal with It
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The Guardian published an adulatory feature on “The Women Fighting on the Frontline in Ukraine”.

One of the women profiled was “Anaconda”, fighting in the Aidar Battalion bankrolled by Igor Kolomoisky:

Anaconda was given her nickname by a unit commander, in a joking reference to her stature and power. The baby-faced 19-year-old says that her mother is very worried about her and phones several times a day, sometimes even during combat. She says it is better to always answer, as her mother will not stop calling until she picks up.

“In the very beginning my mother kept saying that the war is not for girls,” Anaconda says. “But now she has to put up with my choice. My dad would have come to the front himself, but his health does not allow him to move. He is proud of me now.”…

Anaconda was photographed in combat dress resolutely holding an assault rifle in front of a rather decrepit van.

The caption read:

“Anaconda says she is being treated well by the men in her battalion, but is hoping that the war will end soon.”

As reported by the gadfly site OffGuardian, several readers posted critical observations on the van’s insignia in the comments section of the piece. One, “bananasandsocks”, wrote:

“We learn from Wikipedia that the image on the door is the “semi-official” insignia of the 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS…” and also pointed out the neo-Nazi significance of the number “1488”.

“bananasandsocks” seemingly temperate comment was removed by the Guardian for violating its community standards, as were several others, apparently as examples of “persistent misrepresentation of the Guardian and our journalists”.

But then the Guardian thought better of it. While not reinstating the critical comments, it quietly deleted the original caption to the photo of Anaconda and replaced it with:

Anaconda alongside a van displaying the neo-Nazi symbol 1488. The volunteer brigade is known for its far-right links.

Problem solved? Maybe not. Maybe it’s more like “Problem dodged”. Specifically, the problem of the pervasive participation of “ultra-right” paramilitary elements in Kyiv military operations, which even intrudes upon the Guardian’s efforts to put a liberal-friendly feminist sheen on the debacle of the recent ATO in eastern Ukraine.

As to “1488”, I’ll reproduce the Wikipedia entry:

The Fourteen Words is a phrase used predominantly by white nationalists. It most commonly refers to a 14-word slogan: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.” It can also refer to another 14-word slogan: “Because the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the earth.”

Both slogans were coined by David Lane, convicted terrorist and member of the white separatist organization The Order. The first slogan was inspired by a statement, 88 words in length, from Volume 1, Chapter 8 of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf:

Neo-Nazis often combine the number 14 with 88, as in “14/88” or “1488”. The 8s stand for the eighth letter of the alphabet (H), with “HH” standing for “Heil Hitler”.

Lane died in prison in 2007 while serving a 190 year sentence for, among other things, the murder of Denver radio talk show host Alan Berg. David Lane has considerable stature within global white nationalist/neo-Nazi/fascist circles as one of the American Aryan movement’s premier badasses (in addition involvement in to the Berg murder—in which he denied involvement—and a string of bank robberies to finance the movement—also denied, Lane achieved a certain martyr’s stature for enduring almost two decades in Federal detention, frequently in the notorious Communications Management Units).

And David Lane was a big deal for the “ultra-right” & fascists in Ukraine,according to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

Lane’s death touched off paeans from racists around the country and abroad. June 30 was designated a “Global Day of Remembrance,” with demonstrations held in at least five U.S. cities as well as England, Germany, Russia and the Ukraine.

Judging by this video, the march/memorial on the first anniversary of his death, in 2008, organized by the Ukrainian National Socialist Party in Kyiv, was well enough attended to merit a police presence of several dozen officers. The sountrack to the clip, by the way, is an elegy to David Lane performed by Ukraine’s premier white nationalist metal band at the time, Sokyra Peruna.

There is a photograph of a shield inscribed “1488” at Maidan.

More significantly, perhaps, the name of the armed wing of the Svoboda Party, C14, apparently invokes Lane’s “14 words” .

It should be said that Lane’s views, including those that inspired the 1488 tag, are esoteric even within the fascist/Neo-Nazi/white supremacist world he inhabited.

In a letter from prison, Lane wrote:

You know that the three greatest movements of the last 2,000 years have been Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Judaism allowed Jews to conquer and rule the world. I believe only a religious fervor can save our kind now. The 14 Words must be a divine command of Nature’s God whom we call Wotan Allfather.…

As the 666 man, and the Joseph Smith of Wotanism my rewards will be zero. Death in prison, scorn from those with no vision, and hate from the stupid goyim and their kosher masters. But sometimes a man is condemned to a higher cause. And cheerfulness in adversity is still a virtue. Take care. 14 – 88

Lane composed his “88 Precepts” to instruct believers in the ways of white nationalism. While apparently riffing off the 88 word Mein Kampf passage and “88=HH=Heil Hitler”, it also refers to Lane’s numerological/messianic preoccupations.

Ukrainian fascists’ admiration for Lane is a reflection of the pervasiveness of indigenous Ukrainian fascism, which looks for models and partners internationally while drawing plenty of strength and inspiration from its own profoundly deep historical and ideological local roots.

As I wrote in a piece for CounterPunch, Ukrainian fascism seems almost inevitable:

Ukrainian fascism is more durable and vital than most. It was forged in the most adverse conditions imaginable, in the furnace of Stalinism, under the reign of Hitler, and amid Poland’s effort to destroy Ukrainian nationality.

Ukrainian nationalism was under ferocious attack between the two world wars. The USSR occupied the eastern half of Ukraine, subjected it to collectivization under Stalin, and committed repression and enabled a famine that killed millions. At first, the Soviets sought to co-opt Ukrainian nationalism by supporting Ukrainian cultural expression while repressing Ukrainian political aspirations; USSR nationalities policies were “nationalist in expression and socialist in essence”. Then, in 1937 Stalin obliterated the native Ukrainian cultural and communist apparatus in a thoroughgoing purge and implemented Russified central control through his bespoke instrument, Nikita Khrushchev.

Meanwhile, the western part of the Ukraine was under the thumb of the Polish Republic, which was trying to entrench its rule before either the Germans or the Russians got around to destroying it again. This translated into a concerted Polish political, security, cultural, and demographic push into Ukrainian Galicia. The Polish government displaced Ukrainian intellectuals and farmers, attacked their culture and religion (including seizure of Orthodox churches and conversion into Roman Catholic edifices), marginalized the Ukrainians in their own homeland, and suppressed Ukrainian independence activists (like Bandera, who spent the years 1933 to 1939 in Poland’s Wronki Prison after trying to assassinate Poland’s Minister of the Interior).

Ukrainian nationalists, therefore, were unable to ride communism or bourgeois democracy into power. Communism was a tool of Soviet expansionism, not class empowerment, and Polish democracy offered no protection for Ukrainian minority rights or political expression, let alone a Ukrainian state.

Ukrainian nationalists turned largely toward fascism, specifically toward a concept of “integral nationalism” that, in the absence of an acceptable national government, manifested itself in a national will residing in the spirit of its adherents, not expressed by the state or restrained by its laws, but embodied by a charismatic leader and exercised through his organization, whose legitimacy supersedes that of the state and whose commitment to violence makes it a law unto itself.

It’s not just a matter of historical sentiment or inclination. Ukraine’s contemporary fascists share a direct bloodline with the fascists of the Soviet era, especially in the matter of Roman Shukhevych, the commander of Ukrainian nationalist forces fighting with the Nazis during World War II and also responsible for horrific atrocities while attempting to cleanse Galicia of Poles in the service of Ukrainian independence. From my CounterPunch article:

In February 2014, the New York Times’ Andrew Higgins penned a rather embarrassing passage that valorized the occupation of Lviv—the Galician city at the heart of Ukrainian fascism, the old stomping grounds of Roman Shukhevych and the Nachtigall battlaion, and also Simon Wiesnthal’s home town—by anti-Yanyukovich forces in January 2014:

Some of the president’s longtime opponents here have taken an increasingly radical line.

Offering inspiration and advice has been Yuriy Shukhevych, a blind veteran nationalist who spent 31 years in Soviet prisons and labor camps and whose father, Roman, led the Ukrainian Insurgent Army against Polish and then Soviet rule.

Mr. Shukhevych, 80, who lost his sight during his time in the Soviet gulag, helped guide the formation of Right Sector, an unruly organization whose fighters now man barricades around Independence Square, the epicenter of the protest movement in Kiev.

Yuriy Shukhevych’s role in modern Ukrainian fascism is not simply that of an inspirational figurehead and reminder of his father’s anti-Soviet heroics for proud Ukrainian nationalists. He is a core figure in the emergence of the key Ukrainian fascist formation, Pravy Sektor and its paramilitary.

And Pravy Sektor’s paramilitary, the UNA-UNSO, is not an “unruly” collection of weekend-warrior-wannabes, as Mr. Higgins might believe.

UNA-UNSO was formed during the turmoil of the early 1990s, largely by ethnic Ukrainian veterans of the Soviet Union’s bitter war in Afghanistan. From the first, the UNA-UNSO has shown a taste for foreign adventures, sending detachments to Moscow in 1990 to oppose the Communist coup against Yeltsin, and to Lithuania in 1991. With apparently very good reason, the Russians have also accused UNA-UNSO fighters of participating on the anti-Russian side in Georgia and Chechnya.

After formal Ukrainian independence, the militia elected Yuriy Shukhevych—the son of OUN-B commander Roman Shukhevych– as its leader and set up a political arm, which later became Pravy Sektor.

There’s plenty of indigenous fascism to go around. Interviews with Ukrainian ultra-rights reveal a welter of views befitting the country’s fraught and contested status in central Europe, ranging from “autonomous nationalists” (whose demeanour and tactics mirror on the right mirror those of European anarchists on the left); ultras who emerged from the football club wars; and determinedly theoretical scientific fascists. The common thread of the diverse and syncretic Ukrainian fascist movement is the conviction that the survival of the Ukrainian people is under threat from a multitude of forces and mechanisms (Russians, Jews, the EU, democracy, capitalism, communism etc.), and can only be assured by autonomous armed force under charismatic leadership; and yes, apparently a shared belief that Adolf Hitler showed how it could and should be done.

Rooting fascism out of Ukraine’s cultural, social, and political matrix is going to take a lot of work. Unfortunately, the opposite is going on right now.

The leading Ukrainian observer of Ukrainian ultrarights, Anton Shekhovstov, did not deny the presence of ultraright formations at Maidan, but tried to square the circle philosophically by characterizing the Ukrainian conflict as an anti-imperialist/anti-colonial struggle that might elicit and safely incorporate fascist activism. Then, when the Russian threat had been dealt with, Ukrainian civil society could neutralize the fascist factor. In January 2014, when Maidan was white-hot, Shekhovstov wrote:

Thus, a fight against fascism in Ukraine should always be synonymous with the fight against the attempts to colonise the country. Those who separate these two issues or crack down on the Ukrainian far right without recognising the urgent need for national independence will never be successful in their attempts to neutralise the far right. Moreover, they can make the situation worse.

However, Ukrainian fascists have not been disempowered and marginalized by the circus of defeat and dysfunction that is the current Kyiv government. In fact, “ultra-right” is trending upward in Ukraine governance, as Shekhovtsov glumly observed in a recent post discussing the emergence of yet another powerful ultra-right formation:

[T]he electoral failure of Svoboda and the Right Sector [in the recent parliamentary as well as presidential elections] did not mark “the end of history” of the Ukrainian far right…

… The recent developments in Ukraine marked by the rise of the previously obscure neo-Nazi organisation “The Patriot of Ukraine” (PU) led by Andriy Bilets’ky…

… the PU formed a core of the Azov battalion, a volunteer detachment governed by the Ministry of Interior headed by Arsen Avakov. From the very beginning, the Azov battalion employed imagery such as Wolfsangel and Schwarze Sonne that in post-war Europe is associated with neo-Nazi movements…

The political perspective raises troubling questions: Why did Ukrainians elect a neo-Nazi into the parliament? Why did the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior promote the leaders of the neo-Nazi organisation?…

Shekhovtstov finds an explanation for Avakov’s footsie with the PU in the cronyism (and demand for extra-legal street muscle) that permeates Ukraine business and politics. His conclusion is not a particularly happy one:

Conclusion

Avakov may consider the PU-led Azov battalion as his “private army”, but not everybody in the PU and Azov see the current cooperation with the Ministry of Interior as a goal in and of itself. The PU may benefit from this cooperation, but it still has its own political agenda that goes beyond this cooperation. The PU has also started advertising employment in the Security Service of Ukraine on their webpages. [emphasis added]

Further infiltration of the far right into the Ukrainian law enforcement and other institutions of the state will most likely lead to the following developments. First, the coalescence of the police and the far right who were engaged, inter alia, in the illegal activities will necessarily increase the corruption risks. Second, the growth of the far right within the law enforcement will lead to the gradual liberation of the PU from the personal patronage of Avakov that will likely result in the PU’s independent action.

While Svoboda and the Right Sector have failed in the 2014 parliamentary elections, the infiltration of some other far right organisations in the law enforcement is possibly a more advanced long-term strategy in their fight against not particularly well established liberal democracy in Ukraine.

One of the awkward facts of Ukrainian politics is that Ukraine’s fascists have the ambition if not yet the demonstrated capability of opportunistically using the current regime’s need—and factions’ desires–for effective armed formations to catapult the extreme-right into power.

And it seems that the West has zero strategy for dealing with this problem. In fact, if disorder and discontent escalate in western Ukraine as a result of the US insistence on confronting Russia and the ethnic Russian opposition in the West, I expect the fascist problem will get worse before it gets better.

And it isn’t going to be solved by ignoring, downplaying, wishing away, or dismissing Ukrianian fascism as an irrelevant historical and political anachronism…or by discretely recaptioning some of its embarrassingly blatant manifestations.

It’s not just amusing or disturbing that the Guardian appears determined to graft a misleading liberal, Europe-loving image onto the fascist friendly Ukraine adventure; it’s downright dangerous.

I’m trying to avoid the TL;DR trap so I abridged my original piece to supply the excerpt posted above. But I try to err on the side of inclusiveness and context whenever I can–especially since sources vanish off the web and the Google algorithm sometimes gets dodgy–so I’ve included the complete original piece below the fold for readers who wish to go deeper.

 

 

Ukraine is Chockablock with Fascists…Better Deal With It

To paraphrase Rodgers and Hammerstein, How Do You Solve a Problem Like Anaconda?…and the appearance of the motto of America’s premier white nationalist, David Lane, in a puff piece on the Ukrainian paramilitaries?

The Guardian published an adulatory feature on “The Women Fighting on the Frontline in Ukraine”.

One of the women profiled was “Anaconda”, fighting in the Aidar Battalion bankrolled by Igor Kolomoisky:

Anaconda was given her nickname by a unit commander, in a joking reference to her stature and power. The baby-faced 19-year-old says that her mother is very worried about her and phones several times a day, sometimes even during combat. She says it is better to always answer, as her mother will not stop calling until she picks up.

“In the very beginning my mother kept saying that the war is not for girls,” Anaconda says. “But now she has to put up with my choice. My dad would have come to the front himself, but his health does not allow him to move. He is proud of me now.”

She used to serve near Debaltseve but decided to move to the Aidar volunteer battalion to join some of her friends.

“I used to work in Kiev’s military hospital as a nurse,” Anaconda says. “I understood that I could not keep watching our men dying and sit on the fence anymore. That was it. This is my country and my people. It hurts to see how fighters and civilians die on both sides of the conflict. I want this war to end faster,” she says.

There are not many women in the corps, but the men treat her well. “People are good,” she said. “The only problem is to find a room to change.”

Anaconda was photographed in combat dress resolutely holding an assault rifle in front of a rather decrepit van.

The caption read:

“Anaconda says she is being treated well by the men in her battalion, but is hoping that the war will end soon.”

As reported by the gadfly site OffGuardian, several readers posted critical observations on the van’s insignia in the comments section of the piece. One, “bananasandsocks”, wrote:

We learn from Wikipedia that the image on the door is the “semi-official” insignia of the 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS…” and also pointed out the neo-Nazi significance of the number “1488” by citing Wikipedia.

“bananasandsocks” seemingly temperate comment was removed by the Guardian for violating its community standards, as were several others, apparently as examples of “persistent misrepresentation of the Guardian and our journalists”.

But then the Guardian thought better of it. While not reinstating the critical comments, it quietly deleted the original caption to the photo of Anaconda and replaced it with:

“Anaconda alongside a van displaying the neo-Nazi symbol 1488. The volunteer brigade is known for its far-right links.”

Problem solved? Maybe not. Maybe it’s more like “Problem dodged”. Specifically, the problem of the pervasive participation of “ultra-right” paramilitary elements in Kyiv military operations, which even intrudes upon the Guardian’s efforts to put a liberal-friendly feminist sheen on the debacle of the recent ATO in eastern Ukraine.

As to “1488”, I’ll reproduce the Wikipedia entry:

The Fourteen Words is a phrase used predominantly by white nationalists. It most commonly refers to a 14-word slogan: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.” It can also refer to another 14-word slogan: “Because the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the earth.”

Both slogans were coined by David Lane, convicted terrorist and member of the white separatist organization The Order. The first slogan was inspired by a statement, 88 words in length, from Volume 1, Chapter 8 of Adolf Hitler’sMein Kampf…

Neo-Nazis often combine the number 14 with 88, as in “14/88” or “1488”. The 8s stand for the eighth letter of the alphabet (H), with “HH” standing for “Heil Hitler”.

Lane died in prison in 2007 while serving a 190 year sentence for, among other things, the murder of Denver radio talk show host Alan Berg. David Lane has considerable stature within global white nationalist/neo-Nazi/fascist circles as one of the American Aryan movement’s premier badasses (in addition involvement in to the Berg murder—in which he denied involvement—and a string of bank robberies to finance the movement—also denied, Lane achieved a certain martyr’s stature for enduring almost two decades in Federal detention, frequently in the notorious Communications Management Units).

And David Lane was a big deal for the “ultra-right” & fascists in Ukraine,according to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

Lane’s death touched off paeans from racists around the country and abroad. June 30 was designated a “Global Day of Remembrance,” with demonstrations held in at least five U.S. cities as well as England, Germany, Russia and the Ukraine.

Judging by this video, the march/memorial on the first anniversary of his death, in 2008, organized by the Ukrainian National Socialist Party in Kyiv, was well enough attended to merit a police presence of several dozen officers. The sountrack to the clip, by the way, is an elegy to David Lane performed by Ukraine’s premier white nationalist metal band at the time, Sokyra Peruna.

There is a photograph of a shield inscribed “1488” at Maidan.

More significantly, perhaps, the name of the armed wing of the Svoboda Party, C14, apparently invokes Lane’s “14 words”.*

It should be said that Lane’s views, including those that inspired the 1488 tag, are esoteric even within the fascist/Neo-Nazi/white supremacist world he inhabited.

In a letter from prison, Lane wrote:

Well here we are locked down again, or I should say as usual. Probably for a looong time this time. They still punish 800 innocent for what a few do. The American way I guess.

Before I forget, the 19th book to contain David is the 38th book overall, Zechariah. There are 1938 words in the 1st five chapters and word # 1938 is base as base of a pyramid. In chapter 6 verse 12 is the capitalized word BRANCH. Zechariah has 14 chapters.

9

1 8
7 3 5
5 2 1 4
3 2 9 1 3
3 9 2 7 3 9
3 9 9 2 5 7 2
2 1 8 1 1 4 3 8

B R A N C H

You know in this new Wotanism, by the formula of the Adepts, I am analogous to Joseph Smith and you are like Brigham Young. Damn, Smith died in jail and Brigham had dozens of wives. 🙂 🙁

You know that the three greatest movements of the last 2,000 years have been Islam, Christianity and Judaism. Judaism allowed Jews to conquer and rule the world. I believe only a religious fervor can save our kind now. The 14 Words must be a divine command of Nature’s God whom we call Wotan Allfather.

It is an awesome responsibility you have undertaken. You might want to print up something of your own writing on the vital necessity of our Wotanism teachings. Also that Carl Gustav Jung said that Wotan was a dormant psychic force within the Aryan subconscious that might awaken when needed.

As the 666 man, and the Joseph Smith of Wotanism my rewards will be zero. Death in prison, scorn from those with no vision, and hate from the stupid goyim and their kosher masters. But sometimes a man is condemned to a higher cause. And cheerfulness in adversity is still a virtue. Take care. 14 – 88

David

Lane composed his “88 Precepts” to instruct believers in the ways of white nationalism. While apparently riffing off the 88 word Mein Kampf passage and “88=HH=Heil Hitler”, it also refers to Lane’s numerological/messianic preoccupations.

Ukrainian fascists’ admiration for Lane is a reflection of the pervasiveness of indigenous Ukrainian fascism, which looks for models and partners internationally while drawing plenty of strength and inspiration from its own profoundly deep historical and ideological local roots.

As I wrote in a piece for CounterPunch, Ukrainian fascism seems almost inevitable:

Ukrainian fascism is more durable and vital than most. It was forged in the most adverse conditions imaginable, in the furnace of Stalinism, under the reign of Hitler, and amid Poland’s effort to destroy Ukrainian nationality.

Ukrainian nationalism was under ferocious attack between the two world wars. The USSR occupied the eastern half of Ukraine, subjected it to collectivization under Stalin, and committed repression and enabled a famine that killed millions. At first, the Soviets sought to co-opt Ukrainian nationalism by supporting Ukrainian cultural expression while repressing Ukrainian political aspirations; USSR nationalities policies were “nationalist in expression and socialist in essence”. Then, in 1937 Stalin obliterated the native Ukrainian cultural and communist apparatus in a thoroughgoing purge and implemented Russified central control through his bespoke instrument, Nikita Khrushchev.

Meanwhile, the western part of the Ukraine was under the thumb of the Polish Republic, which was trying to entrench its rule before either the Germans or the Russians got around to destroying it again. This translated into a concerted Polish political, security, cultural, and demographic push into Ukrainian Galicia. The Polish government displaced Ukrainian intellectuals and farmers, attacked their culture and religion (including seizure of Orthodox churches and conversion into Roman Catholic edifices), marginalized the Ukrainians in their own homeland, and suppressed Ukrainian independence activists (like Bandera, who spent the years 1933 to 1939 in Poland’s Wronki Prison after trying to assassinate Poland’s Minister of the Interior).

Ukrainian nationalists, therefore, were unable to ride communism or bourgeois democracy into power. Communism was a tool of Soviet expansionism, not class empowerment, and Polish democracy offered no protection for Ukrainian minority rights or political expression, let alone a Ukrainian state.

Ukrainian nationalists turned largely toward fascism, specifically toward a concept of “integral nationalism” that, in the absence of an acceptable national government, manifested itself in a national will residing in the spirit of its adherents, not expressed by the state or restrained by its laws, but embodied by a charismatic leader and exercised through his organization, whose legitimacy supersedes that of the state and whose commitment to violence makes it a law unto itself.

It’s not just a matter of historical sentiment or inclination. Ukraine’s contemporary fascists share a direct bloodline with the fascists of the Soviet era, especially in the matter of Roman Shukhevych, the commander of Ukrainian nationalist forces fighting with the Nazis during World War II and also responsible for horrific atrocities while attempting to cleanse Galicia of Poles in the service of Ukrainian independence. From my CounterPunch article:

In February 2014, the New York Times’ Andrew Higgins penned a rather embarrassing passage that valorized the occupation of Lviv—the Galician city at the heart of Ukrainian fascism, the old stomping grounds of Roman Shukhevych and the Nachtigall battlaian, and also Simon Wiesnthal’s home town—by anti-Yanyukovich forces in January 2014:

Some of the president’s longtime opponents here have taken an increasingly radical line.

Offering inspiration and advice has been Yuriy Shukhevych, a blind veteran nationalist who spent 31 years in Soviet prisons and labor camps and whose father, Roman, led the Ukrainian Insurgent Army against Polish and then Soviet rule.

Mr. Shukhevych, 80, who lost his sight during his time in the Soviet gulag, helped guide the formation of Right Sector, an unruly organization whose fighters now man barricades around Independence Square, the epicenter of the protest movement in Kiev.

Yuriy Shukhevych’s role in modern Ukrainian fascism is not simply that of an inspirational figurehead and reminder of his father’s anti-Soviet heroics for proud Ukrainian nationalists. He is a core figure in the emergence of the key Ukrainian fascist formation, Pravy Sektor and its paramilitary.

And Pravy Sektor’s paramilitary, the UNA-UNSO, is not an “unruly” collection of weekend-warrior-wannabes, as Mr. Higgins might believe.

UNA-UNSO was formed during the turmoil of the early 1990s, largely by ethnic Ukrainian veterans of the Soviet Union’s bitter war in Afghanistan. From the first, the UNA-UNSO has shown a taste for foreign adventures, sending detachments to Moscow in 1990 to oppose the Communist coup against Yeltsin, and to Lithuania in 1991. With apparently very good reason, the Russians have also accused UNA-UNSO fighters of participating on the anti-Russian side in Georgia and Chechnya.

After formal Ukrainian independence, the militia elected Yuriy Shukhevych—the son of OUN-B commander Roman Shukhevych– as its leader and set up a political arm, which later became Pravy Sektor.

There’s plenty of indigenous fascism to go around. Interviews with Ukrainian ultra-rights reveal a welter of views befitting the country’s fraught and contested status in central Europe, ranging from “autonomous nationalists” (whose demeanour and tactics mirror on the right mirror those of European anarchists on the left); ultras who emerged from the football club wars; and determinedly theoretical scientific fascists. The common thread of the diverse and syncretic Ukrainian fascist movement is the conviction that the survival of the Ukrainian people is under threat from a multitude of forces and mechanisms (Russians, Jews, the EU, democracy, capitalism, communism etc.), and can only be assured by autonomous armed force under charismatic leadership; and yes, apparently a shared belief that Adolf Hitler showed how it could and should be done.

The main Ukrainian ideologue for Ukraine’s academic/historical/cultural/theoretical variant of fascism, Yuri Michalchyshyn was a stalwart of Oleg Tyanbok’s Svoboda Party, which itself grew out of the Social Nationalist Party which organized the David Lane observance in Kyiv and spawned the C14 armed formation.

Michalchyshyn established an institute whose first name, the Joseph Goebbels Political Research Center, unsurprisingly attracted a lot of unfavorable attention. He renamed it and, in October 2014, resigned from the Svoboda Party. This might be considered a reassuring harbinger of the mainstreaming of Svoboda which, after all is a key leg of the political troika supporting the US-backed regime…except for the fact that Michalchyshyn was resigning to take the position as head of the propaganda and analysis department of the Ukraine Public Security Bureau or SBU.

Rooting fascism out of Ukraine’s cultural, social, and political matrix is going to take a lot of work. Unfortunately, the opposite is going on right now.

The leading Ukrainian observer of Ukrainian ultrarights, Anton Shekhovstov, did not deny the presence of ultraright formations at Maidan, but tried to square the circle philosophically by characterizing the Ukrainian conflict as an anti-imperialist/anti-colonial struggle that might elicit and safely incorporate fascist activism. Then, when the Russian threat had been dealt with, Ukrainian civil society could neutralize the fascist factor. In January 2014, when Maidan was white-hot, Shekhovstov wrote:

Thus, a fight against fascism in Ukraine should always be synonymous with the fight against the attempts to colonise the country. Those who separate these two issues or crack down on the Ukrainian far right without recognising the urgent need for national independence will never be successful in their attempts to neutralise the far right. Moreover, they can make the situation worse.

However, Ukrainian fascists have not been disempowered and marginalized by the circus of defeat and dysfunction that is the current Kyiv government. In fact, “ultra-right” is trending upward in Ukraine governance, as Shekhovtsov glumly observed in a recent post discussing the emergence of yet another powerful ultra-right formation:

[T]he electoral failure of Svoboda and the Right Sector [in the recent parliamentary as well as presidential elections] did not mark “the end of history” of the Ukrainian far right…

… The recent developments in Ukraine marked by the rise of the previously obscure neo-Nazi organisation “The Patriot of Ukraine” (PU) led by Andriy Bilets’ky…

… Like some other leaders of the PU, Bilets’ky did not take part in the 2014 revolution, as he had been in jail since the end of 2011: he was charged with attempted murder. Bilets’ky and his associates were released only after the ouster of Yanukovych as “political prisoners”, and later the PU formed a core of the Azov battalion, a volunteer detachment governed by the Ministry of Interior headed by Arsen Avakov. From the very beginning, the Azov battalion employed imagery such as Wolfsangel and Schwarze Sonne that in post-war Europe is associated with neo-Nazi movements…

… Avakov and his advisor Anton Gerashchenko, still supported Bilets’ky unofficially, and he was elected into the parliament in a single-member district in Kyiv. After the elections, Avakov appointed Vadym Troyan, deputy commander of the Azov battalion and a top member of the PU, as head of the Kyiv region police.

The political perspective raises troubling questions: Why did Ukrainians elect a neo-Nazi into the parliament? Why did the Ukrainian Ministry of Interior promote the leaders of the neo-Nazi organisation?…

Shekhovtstov finds an explanation in the cronyism (and demand for extra-legal street muscle) that permeates Ukraine business and politics. His conclusion is not a particularly happy one:

Today’s involvement of the PU leaders in Ukrainian police seems to be driven by Avakov’s trust in the organisation that he worked with in the past. Avakov also seems to believe in the personal loyalty of the PU-led Azov battalion and may use them as his “private army” to protect his business and political interests.

The problematic relationship between the Ministry of Inferior and the neo-Nazis is undermining the credibility of the newly formed Ukrainian government both internationally and domestically. It was most likely Avakov who suggested to Poroshenko to grant Ukrainian citizenship to Belarusian fighter of the Azov battalion Sergey Korotkikh who had been involved in the neo-Nazi movements in Belarus and Russia since the late 1990s. Furthermore, under Avakov, the police in Kyiv have already proved unable or unwilling to investigate a number of hate crimes. …There is no ground to believe that the infiltration of the far right into the police will contribute to the efficiency of its investigations in general and of the hate crimes in particular.

Conclusion

Avakov may consider the PU-led Azov battalion as his “private army”, but not everybody in the PU and Azov see the current cooperation with the Ministry of Interior as a goal in and of itself. The PU may benefit from this cooperation, but it still has its own political agenda that goes beyond this cooperation. The PU has also started advertising employment in the Security Service of Ukraine on their webpages. [emphasis added]

Further infiltration of the far right into the Ukrainian law enforcement and other institutions of the state will most likely lead to the following developments. First, the coalescence of the police and the far right who were engaged, inter alia, in the illegal activities will necessarily increase the corruption risks. Second, the growth of the far right within the law enforcement will lead to the gradual liberation of the PU from the personal patronage of Avakov that will likely result in the PU’s independent action.

While Svoboda and the Right Sector have failed in the 2014 parliamentary elections, the infiltration of some other far right organisations in the law enforcement is possibly a more advanced long-term strategy in their fight against not particularly well established liberal democracy in Ukraine.

The current Ukrainian government is unlikely to serve as a focus of loyalty for the ultra-rightists given the undercurrent of anti-Semitism that informs much of the fascist worldview (but remains submerged in focus on the Russian threat and due to the fact, indeed, that in many cases Jewish oligarchs are bankrolling the far-right paramilitaries).

The president, Peter Poroshenko is sometimes accused of being a crypto-Jew whose real name is Walzman; the most active oligarch mobilizing money and muscle to roll back the pro-Russian presence in eastern Ukraine (and the financial force behind the Azov Battalion) is an oligarch of Jewish descent, Igor Kolomoisky; Victoria Nuland, the alleged Maestra of Maidan (the coup, anyway) is Jewish; and so on.

There is also virtually no fit between the Ukrainian ultra-right and the Maidan dream of European integration that excites and motivates Kyiv’s backers in the West.

A Spiegel interview with Dmitry Yarosh, the leader of Pravy Sektor, conducted in March 2014 gives an idea of the intractable political and security problem posed by the ultra-rights:

When Yarosh spoke on the Maidan, he was received with more cheers than his rival Yulia Tymoshenko, partly because his men impressed Ukrainians with their discipline and stamina during the uprising. Even a classified document from Russian security authorities notes, not without admiration, that the Right Sector is “the only organized power” and that it attracts “like a magnet” both extremists and the general populace.

For years, Yarosh has been fighting for the “de-Russification” of Ukraine and has produced manifestos calling for the “spread of the nationalist ideology across the entire territory of our state.” Today, Yarosh denies that anti-Semitism is part of that ideology. But in a book, he has written: “I wonder how it came to pass that most of the billionaires in Ukraine are Jews?”

He believes that “anti-Christian” powers are afoot in the European Union and that Brussels forces people into lifestyles such as gay marriage. It is, he says, “a variety of totalitarianism.” He doesn’t see Europe or NATO as a potential partner and believes the US is also part of an “anti-Ukrainian front.” Yarosh studied linguistics, and he is almost eloquent as he explains that a Kalashnikov can be a Ukrainian’s only reliable ally.

One of the awkward facts of Ukrainian politics is that Ukraine’s fascists have the ambition if not yet the demonstrated capability of opportunistically using the current regime’s need—and factions’ desires–for effective armed formations to catapult the extreme-right into power.

And it seems that the West has zero strategy for dealing with this problem. In fact, if disorder and discontent escalate in western Ukraine as a result of the US insistence on confronting Russia and the ethnic Russian opposition in the West, I expect the fascist problem will get worse before it gets better.

And it isn’t going to be solved by ignoring, downplaying, wishing away, or dismissing Ukrianian fascism as an irrelevant historical and political anachronism…or by discretely recaptioning some of its embarrassingly blatant manifestations.

It’s not just amusing or disturbing that the Guardian appears determined to graft a misleading liberal, Europe-loving image onto the fascist friendly Ukraine adventure; it’s downright dangerous.

*Some versions of the name’s origins emphasize that “c14” looks a lot like the Cyrillic letters spelling out “Sich” —the name of a force of Ukrainian nationalist riflemen that served in the Austro-Hungarian in World War I. “Sich” itself was the name for an independent Cossack encampment, one of which excited the admiration of 19th century Ukrainian nationalists because it resisted Russian penetration into Ukraine before it was destroyed in 1775. One could also add in the popularity of “C18”, the British white supremacist armed formation, which calls on, again, numerology: 18=A & H = Adolf Hitler. I’d guess it’s a combination of reasons as befits the syncretic character of Ukrainian fascism, but with the David Lane factor predominant.

(Republished from China Matters by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 125 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. And it seems that the West has zero strategy for dealing with this problem

    That’s because behind the curtain in the corridors of power, it’s not really considered a problem:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/04/23/sociopaths-democracy/

    Peter Lee’s article examines the symptoms in one of the more festering sores but misses the underlying western geopolitical power pathology

  2. I’ll worry about Ukrainian fascists the day Moscow Patriarchate firsters worry about Putin’s repeated lamentations over the death of the Soviet Union and Putin’s support for the neo-Stalinists in Donetsek.

    For a founding stock WASP like me the Soviet sickle and hammer is a greater sign of menace than any “semi-official SS insignia.” If only some of the newer arrivals to this land shared that sensibility.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  3. iffen says:

    Mr. Lee,

    I like your reporting.

    What do you want them to do? Sit on their hands while their country is being destroyed and their people are being killed all because idiots are in control of the US foreign policy in this case.

    Please inform yourself about the SPLC before you continue to rely upon that group.

  4. Bill P says:

    And David Lane was a big deal for the “ultra-right” & fascists in Ukraine,according to the Southern Poverty Law Center:

    I’d like to echo the previous commenter in asking you to please reconsider citing the SPLC. This organization has unfairly maligned honest men like Steve Sailer to push a hostile political agenda, motivated by both profit and spite.

    It discredits an otherwise informative post.

  5. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website

    Any gentile white group who wants to maintain it’s identify is always labelled ‘white-supremacist’ by the likes of Marxist dilettante Peter Lee and the usual enemies of free speech, aka: supremacist Jews. They continually & conveniently forget the ‘supremacism’ within black, brown, & yellow advocacy groups.

    As more and more people are realizing the ‘6M & gas chambers’ are impossible frauds, those like Peter Lee are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

    The SS divisions were good for Ukrainians, but not so good for communists, and there is Peter Lee’s real issue.
    Conditioning and propaganda fall hard for the blind.

    see the impossible ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:
    http://www.codoh.com

    Thanks.

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  6. J Yan says:

    Sailer’s dittoheads are the scourge of this site.

    • Replies: @iffen
  7. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Any chance the western part of Ukraine could gain it’s independence since apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles? Would a small state like that be viable? If they want self-rule then perhaps they should get it; after all they’ve been fighting for a long time for it. If that becomes the case then whatever system they want for themselves is of no importance to anyone else as long as it’s not imposed on other neighboring people.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    , @AP
  8. […] March 12 According to this site, the Guardian has done another of its Orwellian revisionism in this article. The above pic of the […]

  9. @Wally

    “As more and more people are realizing the ’6M & gas chambers’ are impossible frauds…”

    Really? You’ve been at this for how long, exactly? If I had to venture a guess, I’d say at least since the 1980s, maybe earlier. Faurisson hit big in the 1970s, Leuchter in the 1980s, and Irving in the 1990s into the early 2000s. Exactly how much headway has each of them made? What’s the big revelation that we’re supposed to have gotten?

    I know, I know, I know. The Internet. Here, take a bite of the clue cookie: It’s been around for twenty years, and the most you people have managed to accomplish a bigger audience of crazy people. But no impact. Ever wonder why not? I’ll tell you.

    Because you can barely contain your hatred for Jews long enough to make a coherent point. Every single one of you people is a knuckle-dragging Nazi who is only sad because he never had the opportunity to join the Einsatzgruppen and kill himself some Jews.

    But by all means, do continue…

    • Replies: @Joe Walker
  10. Bill P says:

    Sailer’s dittoheads are the scourge of this site.

    As opposed to you, who are its main draw, right?

  11. jay says:

    Women fighting on the frontline= left-wing.

  12. rod1963 says:

    Radicalism is a typical response by people screwed over by their government and the Ukrainian people have been repeatedly bent over by their so-called representatives who used their position to enrich themselves at the cost of the people.

    Maidan didn’t change anything, it just let a different band of crooks run the shop.

    The radicalism will not abate until there is some form of honest government in Kiev that represents the people instead of a bunch of oligarchs who live outside of the the Ukraine.

    But that won’t happen as long as the U.S. and EU continue to back a bunch of sociopathic stooges doing our dirty work.

  13. Well thank heaven Russia remains a paradise of civil liberties where there’s no danger of trying to whitewash the history of the gulag..

    http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/03/05/3630428/russia-gulag-museum/

    And isn’t it great that there’s no drive to rehabilitate Stalin?

    http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1426121879

    • Replies: @annamaria
  14. eah says:

    the fascist/Neo-Nazi/white supremacist world

    You know you’re dealing with at best an alarmist, at worst a hack, when White Nationalism is equated with ‘white supremacism’.

    Yes, much better to continue with the cultural-cidal governments of the West, like in the UK, where they put people in jail for twitter postings, have surveillance cameras everywhere, and allow their young girls to be sexually brutalized by foreign scum because they’re afraid to be called names. Not to mention the nation-destroying levels of immigration generally. Oh, and I almost forgot: where sovereign nations with their own currency are forced to borrow money into existence, and then pass the debt onto their children. No, no ‘extremism’ in any of that.

    If it takes ‘fascism’ to get rid of all that, maybe it’s worth a(nother) try.

    • Replies: @Epaminondas
  15. map says:

    The Ukrainians were massacred by the Nazis. Where does this idea that they were somehow allies come from?

    I think it was to the tune of 3 million.

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
  16. A lot of the analysis of the Ukraine seems to start with the assumption that the Ukraine was an okay country which has now been turned into a mess by American and or Russian meddling. However, the Ukraine has been a noticeable economic mess ever since it gained independence over 20 years ago.

    Ultimately the best solution is probably the most painful one – allow the country to divide itself into pro-European and pro-Russian spheres, even in that means more bloodshed and banditry in the short-term to medium term. Russia seems to be preparing for this eventuality (by securing the bits that tie in with its strategic interests) but the West still seems to think the best solution (either for idealistic or self-interested reasons) is to keep this chronically dysfunctional state together.

  17. fnn says:

    …the most active oligarch mobilizing money and muscle to roll back the pro-Russian presence in eastern Ukraine (and the financial force behind the Azov Battalion) is an oligarch of Jewish descent, Igor Kolomoisky; Victoria Nuland, the alleged Maestra of Maidan (the coup, anyway) is Jewish; and so on.

    It’s pretty obvious who’s being used and who is in control. Ukraine has a Jewish problem, not a nazi problem.

  18. @anonymous

    “…apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles?”

    If this people in Western Ukraine do not want anything to do with the ethnic Russians in the Donbass, why don’t they just accept the independence of that region? Why send in the military to terrorize the people there?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Joe Walker
  19. iffen says:
    @J Yan

    ” dittoheads”

    Isn’t this a trademarked item?

  20. Hunsdon says:
    @Sam Haysom

    Good thing the Soviet hammer and sickle is gone, then, isn’t it? Say, what makes you think the Donbass rebels/separatists/terrorists are neo-Stalinist?

    • Replies: @fnn
  21. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    If this people in Western Ukraine do not want anything to do with the ethnic Russians in the Donbass, why don’t they just accept the independence of that region? Why send in the military to terrorize the people there?

    Good question. I assume it falls into the pattern of one group exploiting another group under false pretenses. The Germans used some of these people as cannon-fodder whilst letting them think they were earning a place for themselves later on. In reality there was to be no future for them in the proposed new world order. Similarly the Americans used Islamic zealots in Afghanistan to help fight the Russians. Again, they were just mere cannon-fodder; the Americans did not care a bit about them or how many got themselves killed, only that they served as a tool against the Russians. Of course that morphed into something else but at the time it seemed like a clever idea.
    This is the way things are done, one group using another for it’s own ends. In the majority of wars in the modern world the actual soldiers get nothing out of it except perhaps a free prosthesis.

  22. annamaria says:
    @Cliff Arroyo

    It is really unfortunate that the western policies fell so low that the thought of Russia being a “paradise of civil liberties” has entered the discourse. GULAG is a terrible heritage, actually a wound, for the former Soviet Union. It was the WWII that united the nation in a fight for survival. The Soviet Union suffered horrific destruction and loss of human lives in the millions. That was a just war and that was a hard-won victory.
    What kind of moral perverts have conceived the idea of installing neo-Nazi “deciders” in the Kiev government and using the neo-Nazi death squads against the federalists in east Ukraine? How come that the rise of the neo-Nazis in Ukraine has been financed and approved by the leading Zionists in the US and UK governments? Moreover, Israel is quite content with the neo-Nazi development, considering the the main financier if the death squads is Israeli citizen oligarch Kolomoisky.

    • Replies: @AP
  23. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @anonymous

    Any chance the western part of Ukraine could gain it’s independence since apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles? Would a small state like that be viable?

    Recent events have shown that Ukraine’s West and Center are fairly strongly united, and the South is coming along also. The idea of separating western Ukraine from the rest of the country, in order to contain anti-Russian nationalism, was a good one (from a pro-Russian perspective) a few decades ago, and may have even worked in 1990, but it’s much too late for that now. Note that most of these modern far right Ukrainian nationalists such as Yarosh are not even from western Ukraine.

    Had western Ukraine become its own country in 1990 it would have had a population of about 10 million, a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000), gas deposits sufficient to cover all domestic use, and would have been quite viable. But it didn’t want this, as its ideology wasn’t local but national.

    • Replies: @Glossy
    , @Glossy
  24. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @annamaria

    What kind of moral perverts have conceived the idea of installing neo-Nazi “deciders” in the Kiev government and using the neo-Nazi death squads against the federalists in east Ukraine?

    The fictional kind.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  25. annamaria says:
    @AP

    “The fictional kind.” – Only for those who live in asylum:

    Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine? Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine:
    http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/us-backing-neo-nazis-ukraine

    How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: http://www.alternet.org/world/how-israel-lobby-protected-ukrainian-neo-nazis

    NYT Whites Out Ukraine’s Brown Shirts: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/11/nyt-whites-out-ukraines-brown-shirts/

    Zionists and Anti-Semites in Ukraine: A Strange Union: http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/04/17/zionists-and-anti-semites-in-ukraine-a-strange-union.html

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  26. fnn says:

    Let some common sense intrude:

    http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/03/semiotics-swastikas-and-shadowplay/

    Perhaps the best example is the famous hissing noise that the various opponents of Tottenham Hotspur, a North London club traditionally supported by Jews, make in imitation of the gas chambers that were supposedly used to gas Jews. Assuming on this basis that each and every member of these crowds was an actual Nazi is of course an absurdity, otherwise a real Nazi, like Colin Jordan, would have been elected Prime Minister of Britain sometime in the 1970s, when such hooligan jests were at their peak.

    Among elements of the Ukrainian military, especially among volunteers like the Azov Battalion, there is a similar element of offensive posturing, but it is also backed up by the totemic needs of the Männerbund – the basic unit of the army in the same way that the family is the basic unit of society. Among primitives, totems are always taken from powerful or agile animals with which the tribesmen wish to associate themselves in an attempt to acquire some of their power and virility…For Ukrainians, Nazi symbolism does not in any way represent a positive assertion of Nazi beliefs and ideals. How could it? Ukrainians are after all Slavs, a despised race according to the ideology of Hitlerian National Socialism. But Nazism was of course more than a mere ideology. In its historical manifestation it also existed as a potent force uniting diverse elements of European civilization and even non-European civilization in a grand struggle against Stalinist Imperialism.

    While Nazism and its symbols have meant many things to many people – occasionally even including actual Nazism – for the Ukrainian nationalists Nazi imagery is almost always simply code for being extremely anti-Russian, the “extreme” part a reflection of the asymmetry of power that Ukrainians have long felt towards their giant neighbor and former master…

    • Replies: @Matra
  27. @map

    It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930’s.

    • Replies: @map
    , @Philip Owen
  28. Tomi says:

    I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine. Far-right groups and individuals always thrive in war. National conflicts promote nationalism. Nothing unusual about that. There was a lot of fascist symbols in Yugoslav Wars and none of those countries became totalitarian and Nazi. They are being slowly integrated in EU in the same way Ukraine will be. Compared with that conflict, there aren’t any large-scale war crimes or ethnic cleansing in Ukraine.

    Ukrainian elections don’t even show any significant far-right sympathies. There’s probably more fascists in Hungary today than in Ukraine. Of course, all those concerned “anti-fascists” won’t comment much on Hungary because neofascist and antisemitic Jobbik is financially supported by Russian government, same as many other far-right and anti-EU parties in European Union.

    • Replies: @jimbojones
    , @annamaria
  29. Anonym says:

    Politics makes strange bedfellows.

    • Replies: @Giuseppe
  30. @Tomi

    “I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine.”
    It’s called WWII.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    , @Tom
  31. annamaria says:
    @Tomi

    Perhaps if Holocaust were not so profitably cooped by the powerful Zionist organizations in the US and UK, the silence of these organizations with regard to the rise of neo-Nazism in Ukraine would be less conspicuous. The Israel-firsters need to make a choice between the respect for memory of the victims of the WWII and the immediate profit from the cooperation with the heirs of Nazism in Europe. Otherwise, the Holocaust Museums stand as part of Shoa business.
    Representation of far-right in the current government in Kiev:
    “We are not dealing with a transitional government in which Neo-Nazi elements integrate the fringe of the coalition, formally led by the Fatherland party. The Cabinet is not only integrated the Svoboda and Right Sector (not to mention former members of defunct fascist UNA-UNSO), the two main Neo-Nazi entities have been entrusted with key positions which grant them de facto control over the Armed Forces, Police, Justice and National Security.
    While Yatsenuyk’s Fatherland Party controls the majority of portfolios and Svoboda Neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a major cabinet post (apparently at the request of assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland), members of Svoboda and the Right Sector occupy key positions in the areas of Defense, Law Enforcement, Education and Economic Affairs.
    Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) was appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU)… He is referred to by the Western media as the “kommandant” of the EuroMaidan movement. Andriy Parubiy together with party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is a follower of Ukrainian Nazi Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews and Poles during World War II.
    Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in the parliament, has been appointed Parubiy’s deputy Secretary of the RNBOU. Yarosh was the leader of the Brown Shirt Neo-Nazi paramilitary during the EuroMaidan “protest” movement. The Neo Nazi party also controls the judicial process with the appointment of Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party to the position of prosecutor-general of Ukraine. ”
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554

    • Replies: @AP
  32. Michael says:

    why would we want to rid the Ukraine of fascism even if it were our biusiness

  33. One can see this rapidly devolving like the battle against Bashar al-Assad. The military equipment going to the so called moderate rebels is suddenly being sported by the ISIS. The analog, if the McCain crazies get there wish to arm the Ukraine how much of it will end up in the neofascists battalions. As one my favorite anti-neocon quotes goes.

    “The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules. It is a philosophy, and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous.”
    —Jean-Luc Picard

  34. MarkinLA says:
    @jimbojones

    Did fascism really have anything to do with WWII. Spain stayed out. I think it had more to do with the leaders of Germany, Italy, Japan, and the USSR than any political system. As Goering is supposed to have said the leaders can get the populace to demand war any time the government wants them too.

  35. Good piece Peter – thanks. Surprised you didn’t mention Kolomoisky – ‘governor’ of Dnepr’osk and chief financier of the fascist battalions, though domiciled in Switzerland. Jewish, major contributor to New York Chabad. Zionists have their own ‘aryan’ myth, something that cross-pollinates with Nazism, much to the unease of Sephardis, who are obviously a Semite people, like much of the M. E.

    Check out this link. Interestingly the term ‘khagan’ refers to ‘lord’ or ‘king’ ..see any connection with latter-day bearers of the name?

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalization_eu12.htm

  36. fnn says:
    @Hunsdon

    Portrait of Stalin appears in Russian-occupied Crimea:

    http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1403486965

    You can find lots of info about the revival of the Stalin cult in Russia. Of course that doesn’t necessarily mean that the anti-Kiev forces are trying revive the Stalinist USSR any more than the Kiev forces want to bring back the Third Reich. Just like almost nobody who displays the Confederate battle flag in the US wants to reinstate slavery-despite what the NYT or NPR will tell you.

    • Replies: @Hunsdon
  37. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @annamaria

    You forgot to mention aliens, a resurrected Elvis, and the exiles from Atlantis alongside the Zionists and others in on the neo-Nazi conspiracy.

    Meanwhile in the real world, there are several hundred, perhaps even a thousand or two, neo-Nazis out of the tens of thousands fighting in eastern Ukraine against pro-Russian forces that include their own neo-Nazis. One can hope the pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian neo-Nazis harm each other and leave others alone.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  38. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @annamaria

    You cited globalreaearch.ca, which is infamous for publishing nonsense. Here is globalresearch.ca defending Stalinist North Korea:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/understanding-north-korea/3818

    [MORE]

    It’s clear why Che Guevara, and other revolutionaries, considered north Korea of the 60’s, 70’s and even early 80’s, to be an inspiration. Emerging from the womb of the guerilla wars of the 30s, the north had fought two imperialisms. It had won against the Japanese and held the US to a standstill. It was building, in the face of unremitting US hostility, a socialist society that was progressing toward communism. The country offered free health care, free education, virtually free housing, radical land reform and equal rights for women, and its industry was steaming ahead of that of the south. By contrast, the neo-colony Washington had hived off for itself below the 38th parallel was a vast warren of sweatshops reminiscent of England’s industrial revolution. People lived harsh, miserable, uncertain lives, in incessant struggle with a military dictatorship backed by the US, bearing an uncomfortable resemblance to Europe’s pre-war fascist regimes.

    Would Che be inspired by the north Korea of today, an impoverished country that struggles with food scarcity? Probably. What have changed are the circumstances, not the reasons to be inspired. The projects north Korea has set for itself – sovereignty, equality, socialism – have become vastly more difficult, more painful, more daunting to achieve in the face of the void left by the counter-revolution that swept the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and China’s breakneck sprint down the capitalist road. Would Che have soured on north Korea, because the adversity it faces has grown tenfold? I doubt it. A revolutionary, it’s said, recognizes it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees. North Korea has never lived on its knees. I think Che would have liked that.

  39. Joe Walker says: • Website

    Rooting fascism out of Ukraine’s cultural, social, and political matrix is going to take a lot of work.

    If the indigenous people of the Ukraine want to be fascists, let them. It is their country and if non-Ukrainians don’t like it then they should stay out of the Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  40. Joe Walker says: • Website
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    Maybe the reason why so many people hate the Jews has to do with Jewish behavior?

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  41. Joe Walker says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries? It is not as if Russia is exactly over crowded.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  42. Matra says:
    @fnn

    Thanks. That’s an excellent article from Colin Liddell.

  43. Akira says: • Website

    Meanwhile Alexander Dugin has been put on the under sanctions for “extremism”:

    http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl9993.aspx

  44. Hunsdon says:
    @fnn

    That doesn’t necessarily surprise me—and I agree with your take. A lot of older people in the FSU look back to the good times (the relatively good times) after the war and compare them favorably with the Yeltsin-era tumults. It doesn’t mean they’re planning on going all Uncle Joe on the citizenry, though. (I think.)

  45. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Walker

    Well the Ukrainians are asking for money, arms, and help from non-Ukrainians. They shouldn’t beg for help from other people if they don’t want any input or influence from other people.

    • Replies: @Joe Walker
  46. Tomi says:

    If Jews aren’t concerned about Ukrainian fascists then I don’t know why should we be. Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side. For example, among fighters on separatist side there are veterans of Bosnian War, Russians and Serbs, who worked with Ratko Mladić who is currently on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Then there are all kind of Russian mobsters, nostalgic Stalinists and members of Russian far-right and nationalist organizations. But of course, they are not fascists so there is no mention of them in Russian antifascist media.

    Also, to make things more comedic, Russian government supports all kinds of far right and neofascist parties in European Union, such as Hungarian Jobbik or Bulgarian Attack. Some of them openly – they were guests of Russian government officials etc. – others were revealed to secretly receive financial support by Wikileaks documents. I suppose that they receive support only because they are anti-EU, and Russia is trying to weaken European Union in order to reoccupy eastern countries – but it is unbelievably hypocritical and cynical to constantly criticize Ukraine and the West for doing something that Russia is already doing for years. Sure, Russia will save us from fascism…

    Considering how many Eastern Europeans and Germans were murdered, raped and robbed by Russian antifascists in the last century I don’t really see in which way is this Russian type of antifascism better than fascism itself. If some Ukrainians want to wave flags with Black Suns and Wolfsangels that’s their business. If they commit war crimes they should be punished, but I don’t understand all this paranoia. Ukraine is not becoming totalitarian or Nazi, this political extremism is completely minor, and I don’t really see anything significant happening there.

    • Replies: @jimbojones
  47. @Joe Walker

    Well, gee, maybe it does. But then I guess you’d have to ask yourself whether the behavior is “Jewish.” Drawing a conclusion about whole groups of people based on the actions of some is a little bit, well, idiotic.

    • Replies: @Joe Walker
  48. Glossy says:
    @AP

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting. If I remember correctly, about 3 million Ukrainians served in WWII, a large majority of them on the Soviet side. After 4 mobilization campaigns in which the junta was free to conscript men against their will, Kiev could only field 60k to 70k troops in the war zone.

    The junta calls the Donbass War a new Patriotic War, drawing a parallel with WWII. 3 million and 70 thousand – that’s the difference between that rhetoric and reality. Enormous masses of people, including my grandfather and several of my grandparents’ siblings, wanted to defend the USSR in the 1940s. Why do so few want to defend a united Ukraine? I have my answers to that question, but I’m curious to see yours. The junta says that the Ukraine is being devoured by an Evil Empire. Yet it could only force 70k men to risk their lives to save it.

    As for Western Ukraine’s potential, you’re delusional. You’re blinded by patriotism. As are most humans. And in some ways that’s healthy. But there’s also this thing out there called objective reality. And some people are even interested in it.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background. There were no West Ukrainian Gogols, Chekhovs or Korolyovs. Forget world-famous: almost none of the intellectual and artistic figures famous in the Russosphere are of West Ukrainian background either. Yes, I’m aware of Okean Elzy. It’s boring, whiney, tackily-sentimental pop music.

    I can’t stop following this war, partly because it’s the first war of my lifetime to occur in a place that doesn’t seem exotic to me. It’s both tragedy and history, and I would really, really like to know how all of this will end. And I read stuff produced by both sides, because you have to do that if you want to understand the conflict. It’s typical of the East-West difference in the Ukraine that there’s nothing interesting being written about the war in Ukrainian. I’ve looked. Everything of any interest or originality on the pro-Kiev side is of course written in Russian.

    There is a stereotype in the Ukraine and in the Russosphere in general that Carpathian natives are more likely than others to bring in their extended families when they get to any kind of power. There is a well-known trade-off between family solidarity and societal solidarity.

    Would a state composed entirely of that kind of people be viable? Sure. Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, etc. are muddling through. It would just be far less successful than most European states.

    In opinion polls Western Ukraine is the most anti-Russian part of the Ukraine and Galicia is the most anti-Russian part of Western Ukriane. But of course (and who would have doubted it?) Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians. This was admitted by the junta itself in the person of an adviser to Poroshenko named Yuriy Biriukov. The junta has to fight Russian-speaking separatism with Russian-speaking troops. Because Ukrainian-speakers aren’t altruistic enough to want risk their lives for the Ukraine or for anything larger than their families.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist. Russophobia is concentrated in the third-worldish parts of the Ukriane. Altruism and competence are concentrated in the less Russophobic parts. This goes a long way to explain the 70k figure with which I started this comment.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @AP
  49. matt says:

    Judging from some of the comments lately, I think the white nationalist internet neckbeards are beginning to move from being pro-Russia and anti-Israel to anti-Russia and pro-Israel. Interesting.

  50. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000)”

    Lots of organizations rank universities. I don’t have time today to look at all the worldwide ranking systems, but this is the first one that I found that does neat summaries by country:

    http://www.webometrics.info/en/Europe/Ukraine

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman’ and Chernovtsy.

    Kiev has the advantage of being the capital, but Kharkov doesn’t, and you’re still safely behind it, even if the difference in the two cities’ populations is taken into account.

    • Replies: @Glossy
    , @Glossy
    , @AP
  51. Glossy says:
    @Glossy

    Another piece of info: the top university in Lvov is, according to that ranking, the 1,934th best university in the world.

    • Replies: @AP
  52. map says:
    @Seamus Padraig

    “It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930′s.”

    What sort of reasoning is this? How would you define “Bulgarian”, “Pole”, “Lithuanian”, “Chechen”, “Georgian”, etc.? Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.

    Furthermore, large numbers of Russians lived in these areas as well. Does that mean that wherever a Russian is Russia? I suppose the US should just kick back and allow Cuba to annex South Florida because a lot of Cubans live there.

    And Texas was only made part of America in the 1840’s. So what?

    Russians stayed in Ukraine because they liked plundering it, not because it is some native soil of theirs.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  53. Glossy says:
    @Glossy

    The number of scientific publications per 10k people in the Ukraine by region:

    Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa and Sumy (surprise to me) are on top. The southeast does better than the rest of the country except for Kiev. Of the 6 lowest-ranked regions 5 are in western Ukraine, 1 is in central Ukraine, 0 are in the southeastern half of the Ukraine.

    • Replies: @AP
  54. @Tomi

    “Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side.”
    Really? What’s your definition of a “Russian propagandist website”? Wait, I know – any website that does not agree with your chauvinist views.
    Who needs Russian propaganda, when we have a reputable English-language magazine like Counterpunch? You can check Counterpunch’s background and their cred, and then go and read all about the Ukrainian Nazi psychos.

    More than that, many people are intelligent enough to connect the dots. Ukraine used to have a democratically elected president. He was corrupt, but hey – they chose him! Then there was an armed coup, and democracy in Ukraine died.
    Then the junta decided to ban Russian, which was the language that people in “Eastern Ukraine” have spoken for many centuries. Those people’s grandfathers paid dearly in blood and sweat to destroy the Nazi beast. Their reaction was predictable.
    People who tried to pay careful attention also noticed that Putin was preoccupied with his Olympic Games at Sochi while the Ukraine crisis unfolded a year ago. The entire affair caught him off-guard. Accusations of Russian grand-designs regarding the events in Kiev are laughable.
    None of this requires “Russian propaganda” to be understood.

    With friends like the ones it has, Ukraine hardly needs any enemies. Since NATO pushed forward the Nazi coup last year, Ukraine’s economy has collapsed, its territorial integrity has been violated, its army has been routed, and its population has been totally demoralized. Russia has hardly done anything to damage its western neighbor – it merely requested its due payments for its gas; accepted Crimea back into the fold (in consequence of a referendum as legitimate as the one in Kosovo); and watched as the rebel militias smashed their enemy (likely with the help of at least military intelligence). From a realistic political viewpoint, the Kremlin has hardly had any choice in any of these matters.
    There will be another revolution in Ukraine soon – the population is reaching its breaking point. As they say, for every revolution there is a counter-revolution. Yats the Rat and Pornoshenko know that, and are making their getaway plans. Here’s hoping that democracy, peace, and development return to Ukraine, and this time of lunacy ends soon.

    • Replies: @fnn
  55. Jake says:

    It has been widely known for some time that the SPLC is a corrupt and deceptive organization.

  56. Glossy says:
    @map

    “Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.”

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian. The Russian and Ukrainian languages are about a million times closer to each other than Japanese and Korean are to each other. The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch. The same goes for non-linguistic aspects of culture.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans. The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive only appeared in Little Russian intellectual circles in the 19th century. It only spread among ordinary Ukrainians in the 20th century. And the primary instrument of that spread was Soviet propaganda.

    In contrast, Japanese and Korean identities have been mutually exclusive since records have been kept, i.e. for considerably more than 1000 years.

    • Replies: @Glossy
    , @AP
  57. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Glossy

    Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians

    Maybe that’s because they don’t care to fight on behalf of kleptocratic oligarchs who don’t have their best interests at heart. Give them credit for realizing that. They wouldn’t be fighting on behalf of their country but as puppet troops of the regime who seems to be carrying out the schemes of the US. Shooting at other citizens of Ukraine may not be something they care to do. In a case like this it’s more patriotic not to go.

  58. Glossy says:
    @Glossy

    “The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive…”

    This should read “The idea that Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Russian ideantities are mutually exclusive…”

    Until the 20th century the Little Russian and Great Russian identities were considered by most of their bearers to be two subsets of the Russian identity.

  59. annamaria says:
    @AP

    Since when the unholy union (well documented) of the Zionist Nuland with neo-Nazis in Kiev government has entered the plane of mythical aliens and Atlantis? If you are irritated by the mention of this union, should not your irritation be rather directed toward the Zionist scoundrels that have been defacing the memory of victims of Nazism in Ukraine? Take a quick look at the information on Babi Yar:
    “large ravine on the northern edge of the city of Kiev in Ukraine, the site of a mass grave of victims, mostly Jews, whom Nazi German SS squads killed between 1941 and 1943. After the initial massacre of Jews, Babi Yar remained in use as an execution site for Soviet prisoners of war and for Roma (Gypsies) as well as for Jews. Soviet accounts after the war speak of 100,000 dead. The true number may never be known.”
    or the Nikolaev massacre: “The Nikolaev Massacre was a massacre which resulted in the deaths of 35,782 Soviet citizens, most of whom were Jews, during World War II, on September 16–30, 1941. It took place in and around the city of Nikolaev and the neighboring city of Kherson in the southern Ukraine.”
    These and other atrocities have become the ground for the famous “Never Again” that is a symbol of the numerous Holocaust Museums worldwide.
    Mr. Kolomoisky, the financier of neo-Nazis is Ukraine is not “a resurrected Elvis” and “exile from Atlantis.” He is an Israeli citizen. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan, her war-mongering husband Robert Kagan and such are quite adept at squealing about anti-Semitism, yet they have been fantastically effective in resurrecting Nazism in Europe. And don’t even try to accuse the critics of Kolomoisky and Kagans of anti-Semitism, since the Zionism has become the main tool of destroying the noble traditions of Judaism.
    Hillel: “That which is hateful to you, do not unto another: This is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary — [and now] go study.”

  60. annamarina, I hope you’re being well paid for your spamming this thread with tired Putinoid propaganda.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  61. Agent76 says:

    Mar 13, 2015 Ukraine: Coup, Corruption and Catastrophe

    Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange org joins us to discuss the devastation of Ukraine that has been wrought by decades of corruption, colour revolution, debt slavery and war. We talk about how Ukraine arrived at this spot and the possible way forward.

  62. annamaria says:
    @Cliff Arroyo

    It looks as if you perceive any disagreement with your idealogical standing as propaganda. Do you have any facts to refute my posts? Their main theme is the tragic dissonance between “never again” and the indecency of the US support for neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine. The moral problems of Zionism go beyond Ukrainian borders:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/13/israel-against-the-jews/

  63. Giuseppe says:
    @Anonym

    Yes, who would have thought, heavily Jewish neoconservative support of their client Ukraine, even though strong neofascist elements were evident at the Maidan. My how the incovenient truths get swept away. And no, Victoria Nuland, I am not a Russian troll.

  64. @Joe Walker

    “Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries?”

    You need to educate yourself, dude. The ethnic Russians in the Donbass are most certainly not occupying somebody else’s country. They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.

    The reason these places are in this artificial country called Ukraine is because, administratively, they were part of the Ukrainian SSR, which was simply an administrative division within the Soviet Union.

    • Replies: @Joe Walker
    , @Philip Owen
  65. annamaria says:

    STRATFOR’s George Friedman talks for the Chicago Council of Global Affairs.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaL5wCY99l8&feature=youtu.be
    Some of the main points re the Lee paper: The imperial plans and actions are directed to maintaining control of the seas and air. The US has been directly involved in the military actions in Ukraine. For the Russians, NATO in Ukraine represents an existential threat; they want at least a neutral Ukraine.

  66. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.

    It’s more like 45% vs. 45%. I don’t have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.

    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn’t the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.

    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    • Replies: @Glossy
    , @Glossy
    , @Glossy
  67. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman’ and Chernovtsy.

    So according to your ranking Lviv with 2 universities in the top 20, is the third most educated area in Ukraine, after Kiev and Kharkiv. It beats Odessa, Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk despite those cities having larger populations.

    Here is more data that supports the observation above:

    http://pollotenchegg.livejournal.com/39945.html

    % of population with university-level education. Kiev city (39.1%), Sevastopol City (lots of naval officers?) 32%, Kharkiv oblast (29.1%), and Lviv oblast (23.3%). Odessa is not far behind Lviv, with 23%.

    Note: the least educated region in Ukraine is Chernivtsi, with only 14.4% It is in western Ukraine. But it is not Galicia, but the region of Bukovyna.

    I suspect you are confusing non-Galician regions of Ukraine with Galicia, and attributing characteristics of those regions to Galicia. Yet, the highly educated population of Lviv is the most nationalistic one in western Ukraine also.

  68. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    photo of 2 ukrainian deputies, from Svoboda

  69. fnn says:
    @jimbojones

    Russia is definitely the lesser of the evils:

    http://blog.jim.com/war/nazis-are-commies-and-commies-are-progressives/#comment-933563

    The Russian Orthodox opposes homosexuality, opposes mass illegal immigration of colored people. The Russian Orthodox Church declares feminism a mortal sin. Can one imagine any Christian Church in America daring to say that? The Russian Orthodox Church opposes abortion and single motherhood. Christian Churches in the west can only oppose abortion by valorizing single motherhood as good and heroic. The proposition that women with children must submit to and obey the father of those children is unthinkable and unspeakable in Western Christianity…The Russian Orthodox Church in the US and Europe is mighty quiet on gays, fatherless children, etc.

    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-orthodox-church-and-russian-politics

    … the passage of a 1997 national law, restricting certain religious organizations from carrying out missionary work in the Russian Federation, was considered a political victory for the Orthodox Church, whose leadership lobbied the government heavily for the legislation. Additionally, according to Papkova, “the presence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous” starting in 1995. The speaker cited images of Orthodox priests blessing new buildings, military installations, and construction sites throughout Russia as examples of the Church’s presence in everyday life. The Patriarch also conferred his blessing on each new president, further highlighting the growing public presence of the Church.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/395624/coming-clash-civilizations-andrew-stuttaford

    In his fire-breathing speech to the Duma in March when he announced Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Putin included not just venerable KGB classics like warnings about the Western Fifth Column and “national traitors,” but also paeans to explicit Russian ethnic nationalism buttressed by Orthodox mysticism, with citations of saints from millennia past. This was the culmination of years of increasingly unsubtle hints from Putin and his inner circle that what ideologically motivates this Kremlin is the KGB cult unified with Russian Orthodoxy. Behind the Chekist sword and shield lurks the Third Rome, forming a potent and, to many Russians, plausible worldview. That this take on the planet and its politics is intensely anti-Western needs to be stated clearly…

    • Replies: @AP
    , @annamaria
  70. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting

    .

    Not necessarily. They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.” There are many stories about Ukrainian officers giving away plans to the pro-Russians, getting Ukrainian soldiers killed. Under such circumstances it is understandable for many people to avoid being placed under such command.

    Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. Obviously that’s not true. Thus, something other patriotism or lack of it explains the difficulty in mobilization.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background.

    Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. As for cultural or scientific figures, there is this guy, my relative:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B9,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    Opera singer Solomiya Krushelnytska, who saved Madame Butterfly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomiya_Krushelnytska

    Two chess grandmasters are from Galicia.

    Vassily Ivanchuk, ranked as high as #2 in the world

    Anna Muzychuk, female chess grandmaster, ranked #4 in the world

    The writer Leopold Sacher-Masoch was half-Galician.

    Ruslana who won Eurovision is Galician.

    Ivasiuk was well-known in the USSR. He was from neighboring Chernivtsi. Andy Warhol was a Carpatho-Rusyn.

    Historically Galicia’s wealth surpassed that of both the Balkans and of Russia. It was, actually, similar to that of Slovakia. A comparison of per capita incomes in 1890:

    Britain $6,228
    Austria $3,005
    Bohemia $2,513
    Transylvania $1,956
    Galicia $1,947.
    Eastern Hungary (Slovakia) $1,824

    Balkans:

    Bulgaria $1,670
    Greece $1,550
    Serbia $1,295

    Russia’s, btw, was $1,550. Significantly lower than Galicia’s.

    I don’t know about altruism, but Galicia’s crime rate is the lowest in Ukraine, it’s life expectancy is the highest. This is true of urban Lviv (which is larger than several non-Galician cities such as Luhansk) as well as of rural areas.

    As an educational center Lviv is in third place in Ukraine, with two universities in the top 20, one in the top 10. It is also the oblast with the third highest % of university-educated people in Ukraine.

    Eastern Ukraine is richer because it has export commodities such as coal. If that equals intelligence, than west Africans and Venezualans must be quite intelligent.

    Genetically Ukrainians are closest to Belarussians, and then to Slovaks. They are actually closer to Slovaks than they are to Russians.

    Essentially, your claim that Galicia has Balkan-level IQ is just silly and based on ignorant but common stereotypes by Russians.

    Given populations, histories, historical incomes, an independent Galicia would have resembled Slovakia more than any Balkan nation.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist.

    Nope. As we have seen, Lviv oblast is one the most educated regions of Ukraine. And it is the most nationalistic.

    • Replies: @Glossy
    , @Glossy
  71. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    That’s just international reputations, and most people in the world simply don’t know about Ukraine.

    Where is MGU in the ranking and what American universities are ranked higher? Do you believe that?

    • Replies: @AP
  72. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @fnn

    This would all be very impressive if Russia didn’t have the world’s highest abortion rate, highest murder rate among white people, and churchgoing rates equal to that of Sweden.

    In terms of actual behaviors such as abortion, going to church, not getting divorced, etc. Europe’s leader is probably Poland.

    Guess which country is an enemy of Russia?

    • Replies: @fnn
  73. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @AP

    I answered my question. MGU is ranked #129. Phystek is ranked #861! Bauman #1340!

    University of Kentucky is ranked #110.

    University of alabama is #364.

    Cleveland State University is # 770.

    So that puts Lviv’s ranking in perspective.

    If Lviv is so bad, then MGU and Phystek are worse than the University of Kentucky and Alabama and Cleveland State University are better Phystek.

    Meanwhile Lviv University students came in 13th place in a programming competition, tied with Carnegie Mellon and beating MIT:

    http://www.abtosoftware.com/news/lviv-national-ivan-franko-university-ranked-13th-at-the-international-collegiate-programming-contest

    • Replies: @Glossy
  74. Glossy says:
    @AP

    During the Soviet period an honest ranking of Moscow State University, for example something based on the faculty’s contributions to hard science, would have been very high, probably in the top ten worldwide. Unfortunately science was defunded throughout the former USSR in the 1990s, the amount of scientific work decreased enormously and a lot of the top talent fled to the West. So an honest ranking of MSU must have come down substantially. All the way to #129? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t really have a good feel for that.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  75. Tomi says:

    I’ve always found this map somewhat interesting:

    I guess it illustrates this Russian moral and intellectual superiority that everyone is talking about, and it is some sort of indicator of what a great Christian nation Novorussia will be. They will certainly crush all those decadent pro-gay Zionist capitalist Nazi extremists from Western Ukraine.

  76. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. “

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians. Altruism is related to trust in strangers, non-relatives. In many cultures people are only able to trust their relatives. Large organizations like armies and government bureaucracies are ineffective in such cultures. East Ukrainians have Russian levels of altruism and trust in strangers. Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    This hunch of mine is supported by the existence of a stereotype of far west Ukrainians as being more nepotistic when in power than other types of Ukrainians.

    “Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. ”

    I was making a comparison between western and eastern Ukraine.

    • Replies: @AP
  77. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.”

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.

    • Replies: @AP
  78. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Russkiy (Russian) is simply an adjective from Rus’. Until 19th-century Ukrainian nationalists redefined things in an ahistorical way, no one would have see any difference between “Russians” and “Rus people”. Moskals was a Little Russian nickname for Great Russians.

    A representative example of a pre-modern definition of Russia and Russians is contained in Von Herberstein’s Notes on Moscovite Affairs. As quoted in the Wikipedia:

    “К отличительным особенностям русских (потомков Яфета) он относил славянское наречие и христианство греческого обряда. Собственно Россией он называл территорию между Сарматскими горами, рекой Ра и Северным морем. Россией владеют три царя: московский, литовский и польский. “

    “He held the distinguishing characteristics of Russians (descendants of Yaphet) to be Slavic speech and Greek-rite Christianity. He called Russia proper the territory between the Sarmatian mountains, the river Ra and the Northern Sea. Russia is owned by three czars: the Moscovite, Lithuanian and Polish ones.”

    The Sarmatian mountains are the Carpathians, the Ra is the Volga and the Northern Sea is the Arctic Ocean. Von Herberstein was an ethnically German Catholic from what is now Slovenia. He visited Russia as a diplomat for the Holy Roman Emperor in 1517 and 1526.

    At that time and for a long time afterwards both the Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland claimed to be the rightful rulers of all Rus’. Rus’ was seen as the lands of the original, medieval Rus’ state plus any lands to which the people of that state spread after it split up. The Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland considered themelves to be the lawful heirs of that entire legacy and each other temporary, illegal usurpers of parts of it. In today’s terms they were both for a united Rus’, just under their own, not their rival’s leadership. The parts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that are now in Belarus and the Ukraine were called Russia and the local language Russian by Polish officialdom. The locals called themselves and their language Russian.

    • Replies: @AP
    , @AP
  79. Glossy says:
    @AP

    From 1366 to 1772 Lvov was a part of an administrative unit called województwo ruskie in Polish and palatinatus russiae in Latin. Literally the Russian province.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenian_Voivodeship

    The wiki on Francisk Scarina, a native of Polotsk in modern Belarus reproduces the title page of his Bible translation:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francysk_Skaryna

    The first words are “Biblia Ruska”, “The Russian Bible”.

    Here’s a wiki on the “Ruska Tryitsa” (the Russian Triad) established by a group of Galician poets in the 1830s:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_literature#The_.22Ruska_Triytsia.22_and_Western_Ukrainian_national_revival

    There’s lots and lots of that sort of stuff.

    • Replies: @AP
  80. fnn says:
    @AP

    For some reason, Russia seems to have always been dysfunctional. The latest of many who have commented on this:

    http://romaninukraine.com/russia-the-white-people-who-failed/

    Why is it, that throughout their history, at every opportunity, Russians consistently make the wrong decision? What is it that Russians incorrectly intuit about the world? Why do they have the lowest trust most corrupt nation of all the white peoples? Why is it that Russians are the one white people who have failed.

    If any people was ever incapable of self government, it’s Russians. If any people was less capable of governing others. It’s the Russians. What is it about the Russian character that causes them to consistently fail? What metaphysical assumption about the nature of man and his relationship to the world is so flawed that unless tightly bound to europe they contribute nothing to legacy of white people? Why is it that western peoples have dragged the entire world out of ignorance mysticism sickness and poverty, while russians try consistently to reverse the trend by dragging those white people near them into their failed civilization?

    Why is it that Russians have nothing to offer the world other than corruption, violence, fear and poverty?

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Curt Doolittle
    Kiev

    Forget moral equivalency. Go with the facts. Russians have the market on corruption, brutality, oppression, and have destroyed every white nation that they have touched with their corruption. And murdered more of their own people than any white people in history. Russians have nothing constructive to offer the world, and everything they do causes suffering.

    Russians yet again had the opportunity to act as the military and resource wing of the european peoples. To expand their influence across the top one third of the globe. But rather than join the western miracle, and correct it’s weakness, Russians choose to yet again double down on corruption, violence, predation, and the spread of their corrupt culture.

    The only moral objective for white people is to remove Russians from self determination, and the conquest and oppression of others, the same way we forcibly civilized other nations.

    Russians are the only white people who failed. And they seek to drag other white people into their failure with them.

    Russians abandoned their opportunity at restoring aristocracy, and forming the aristocratic class of white civilization in order to expand their corrupt and predatory failed culture to a few hundred kilometers to the east. Never was a decision was more short sighted, and foolish.

    What is it about Russian genes, culture, values or perceptions that causes them to make the wrong decisions, always, and everywhere, at every opportunity? Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Never has a people had greater fortune than a weak civilization to it’s west, a collapsing hegemonic empire across the seas, and nearly infinite resource wealth, and geographic space. Not since england mastered the seas, has a numerically small people had the opportunity to expand through commerce and trade, including the trade of military protection, across so much of the earth’s surface. Russia could have led the world through resources, military hegemony, and commerce.

    But they chose to expand corruption and poverty instead.

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

  81. annamaria says:
    @fnn

    1997 national law… That was during the reign of the US darling Yeltsin: “Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin (1 February 1931 – 23 April 2007) was a Russian politician and the first President of the Russian Federation, serving from 1991 to 1999.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin

  82. “for some reason, Russia seems to have always been dysfunctional”

    And part of that dysfunction is the hysterical and firmly held belief that the only reason a country would want to get away from their sphere of influence is because they’ve been taken over by Nazis….

  83. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    So Glossy – no comment on Galicia’s educational achievements and its supposed intelligence? Do you concede that you were wrong there?

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    Why do you believe Galicians have lower levels of altruism?

    Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    Although Galicians have been less likely to join the ex-Soviet army, they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan (although contrary to some pro-Russian narratives a majority of Maidan were local Kiev people, about 30% were Galicians).

    In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. This state had 1/2 the population of modern Donbas, which is not close to mobilizing 100,000 people.

    Modern Galicia has a much more developed civic society and local volunteerism than other parts of Ukraine.

    I think that it’s more about Galician lack of trust for Soviet-inherited national authority, rather than lack of altruism or patriotism.

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians? Go to Lviv, and visit villages outside Lviv, to see for yourself. compare these areas to rural Russian ones, or to similar-size Russian cities.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  84. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    You are confusing Rus with Russia again. It’s like translating Roman into Romanian.

  85. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia. There was a defunct state Rus, out of which emerged Ukraine and Russia. To say that Ukrainians once considered themselves Rus does not mean they once considered themselves to be Russians. No more than the fact that people living Italy once considered themselves to be Romans, means that they had once thought of themselves as Romanians.

    When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation. So Ukrainians had to choose something else. A similar thing happened to Belarussians. They used to call themselves Lytvyns, but Lithuanians claimed that name for themselves first, so they had to choose a new one.

    The silly confusion of Rus and Russia leads to ahistorical claims about Ukraine always being part of “Russia” or being more Russian than it is Western. I imagine that in a parallel universe, if Romania had somehow become a world power capable of conquering all of southern Europe, Romanian nationalists would be making similar arguments about Romans and Italians. Italy was always Romania for 2000 years!

    • Replies: @Glossy
  86. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    Never mind labels. foreign visitors were keenly aware of the differences between people of what is now Ukraine and those of what is now Russia. They saw Ukrainians as fellow-Europeans and Russians are foreign savages:

    A French diplomat, Jean Baluse, whose memoirs are in the National Library in Paris, on Mazepa:

    “At his court he has two German doctors, with whom he converses in their tongue; to the Italian masters of whom there are several in the castle, he speaks in the Italian language. I spoke with the master of Ukraine in the Latin language, inasmuch he assured me that he was not very fluent in French…I do not know if this statement of his concealed a special motive, for I myself saw French and Dutch newspapers in his study.”

    The German Friedrich Weber in 1720 about the son of Hetman Apostol:

    “Although he was never abroad, he speaks fluently Latin, French, Italian, German, Russian and Polish…”

    Danish envoy in Moscow Jul Just, 1709-1712:

    “Although at the present time the Russians in their conduct are trying to emulate in monkey fashion the other nations, and though they don French attire and in their external appearance they appear more civilized, inwardly, however, there sits a cholop”

    “The tsar’s entourage behaved without conscience and shame; they shouted, whistled, belched, spat, berated each other, and even shamelessly spat in the faces of decent people”

    Just described how all of the teachers at the Moscow gymnasium were either Ukrainians or Byelorussians (“Orthodox from Poland”).

    Cultural level of the Russian leaders (contrast this with the descriptions of Mazepa above):

    “Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write. Chancellor Golovkin knew no language but Russian; not a single one of the tsar’s dignitaries could speak Latin, with the exception of Musin-Pushkin, who was fluent in that language. Even Tsar Peter, whose ‘enlightenment’ was widely known, spoke only one Western European language, namely Dutch, and even here the tsar had difficulty in making himself understood.”

    Just contrasts this with Ukraine:

    “The inhabitants of the Chernihiv province, as well as the entire population of kozak Ukraine, are known for their politeness and cleanliness, dressing neatly and keeping their homes immaculately clean.”

    “Korolevets is a big town…the streets are beautiful, such as I never saw in Russia; the buildings are stately, strong and clean and are along the streets as in Denmark…”

    The envoy visited many Ukrainian dignitaries, all of whom he found to be extremely learned and educated. The ordinary monks in the Pecherska Lavra spoke fluently with him in Latin. He was greatly surprised to see the Ukrainian peasants in many villages going to church with prayer books, indicating that they were literate.

    In Podolia, in Nemyriv, “the meanest building was much cleaner than the most sumptuous palace in Moscow”.

    An English author, Joseph Marshall, compared Ukrainian villages to those of England or Flanders. “The race of the Ukraine are civilized people and the best husbandmen in the Russian empire.”

    :::::::::::::::::::

    I think to a certain extent this doesn’t reflect Russian ugliness or something like that, but the fact that these Europeans felt “at home” in Ukraine and in a foreign place in Russia. Before political correctness, this meant praise for other European places and scorn for non-European ones as full of savages.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  87. Glossy says:
    @AP

    I got interested in the original of Von Herberstein’s opus. He wrote it in Latin:

    http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost16/Sigismundus/sig_co01.html

    And here’s an English translation of the passage defining Russia:

    http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtfxtx&fileName=txg/g340002190a//mtfxtxg340002190a.db&recNum=178&itemLink=r%3Fintldl%2Fmtfront%3A%40field%28NUMBER%2B%40od1%28mtfxtx%2Bg340002190a%29%29&linkText=0

    It starts with the words

    “Russia extends near to the Sarmatian mountains, up to a short distance from Cracow.”

    The original Latin: “Caeterum Russia montes Sarmaticos haud longea Cracovia attingit:”

    Not even Ruthenia. Russia. He goes on for a while about geography.

    Later, on page 6 of the English translation:

    “Of the princes who now rule over Russia the first is the Grand Duke of Moscow, who holds the greater part of it; the second is the Grand Duke of Lithuania; the third is the King of Poland, who now is sovereign both of Poland and Lithuania.”

    The original:

    “Principum qui nunc Russiae imperant, primus est, Magnus dux Moscovuiae, qui maiorem eius partem obtinet: secundus, magnus dux Lithvuaniae: tertius est rex Poloniae, qui nunc & Poloniae & Lithvuaniae praeest.”

  88. Glossy says:
    @AP

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.

    “they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    “and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan “

    That’s because they didn’t expect the leaders of the Maidan movement to hire snipers in order to create martyrs.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians?

    I have a negative attitude to everyone whom I blame for starting this war. The neocons, the oligarchs (both heavily Jewish groups, and I’m Jewish myself) and the west Ukrainian nationalists.

    • Replies: @AP
  89. Glossy says:
    @AP

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings. Neither the term Rus nor the term Russia was ever more Great Russian or more Little Russian than the other. The -ia form was for centuries considered more bookish because it originally came from Greek – that was the entire extant of the difference.

    “When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation.”

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms. I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century. You ignored it and just plowed on with your “national identities were invented in the 19th century” line. Your current national identity was indeed invented in the 19th century. Most were not.

    The Greco-Persian wars were all about national identity. I just mentioned the Holy Roman Empire, which was actually called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation (“natio” in Latin) from the 15th century on.

    “They used to call themselves Lytvyns.”

    They also called themselves Russians and White Russians. The official language of the principality of Lithuania was always called Russian.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.

    • Replies: @AP
  90. Glossy says:
    @AP

    So you’ve just cherry-picked some quotes. I’m sure that a lot of the victims of Zaporozhian Cossack raids had negative things to say about them throughout the centuries. I could dredge that up, but that would be boring and stupid.

    • Replies: @AP
  91. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.

    That’s one data point. The ones you ignore are:

    1. Lviv-oblast with third highest % of people with university-level education in Ukraine.
    2. Lviv with 2 of Ukraine’s top 20 universities, making it the country’s #3 university town, behind only Kiev and Kharkiv. And ahead of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Odessa. All ofthese have higher populations than Lviv.
    3. Two chess grandmasters, including a guy who was ranked #2 in the world for awhile.

    Another one I didn’t add, is that Lviv is the country’s #2 IT outsourcing center. #1 per capita (Kiev hax more such jobs, but Lviv has more per population).

    As for your data point, the western Ukrainian oblasts with few per capita publications are not Lviv’s Galicia. They are non-Galician regions and thus irrelevant to this discussion.

    they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    Casualty lists of identified people by origin:

    http://memorybook.org.ua/indexfile/statistic.htm

    More people from Lviv oblast have sacrificed their lives than from any other oblast other than Dnipropetrovsk. And since as we know Galicians are avoiding the regular military, these are volunteers.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    In 1918-1919 Galician troops were able to hold off Poland for about 9 months, without any real outside help. This was the same Poland that fought the Soviets to a draw. They threw the Poles back during the Chortkiv offensive, before literally running out of bullets.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Ukrainian_War

    Galician troops fought bravely in the Brody pocket during World War II:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)#Brody

    And in Austria:

    From 1 April until the end of the war, with a strength of 14,000 combat troops and 8,000 soldiers in a Training and Replacement Regiment, the division fought against the Red Army in the region of Graz in Austria[29] where in early April it seized the castle and village of Gleichenberg from Soviet forces (including elite Soviet airborne troops from the 3rd Guards Airborne Division) during a counterattack and on 15 April repulsed a Soviet counterattack. Due to his performance during the battles surrounding Gleichenberg, Waffen-Obersturmführer Ostap Czuczkewycz was awarded the Iron Cross, 1st class.[31] The Division suffered heavy casualties while in Austria, with an estimated 1,600 killed or wounded.[32]

    You are an intelligent man glossy, but make epic mistakes with respect to Galicia. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  92. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings.

    The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing. You are repeating your fundamental mistake again, confusing labels for the actual people.

    Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus? Even if he was – as in the case of Michal Wisniowiecki – a descendent of Rurik?

    Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. For similar reasons Rusyns are referred to as such (or as Ruthenians) rather than as Russians.

    And we don’t called Romanians Romans in the English language even though in the Romanian language the terms are quite similar.

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms.

    People differentiated themselves by language but nationalism and nations as they are used today are modern inventions. This is the general consensus among modern scholars:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?” From a modern national perspective, was an Orthodox Rurukid nobleman such as Konstanty Ostrogsky a “Pole”? He certainly was in the original use of the term. So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background (what we now call Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian) from the Polish Commonwealth; today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav. Polish nation-builders in the late 18th/early 19th century used the old term for something new.

    I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century.

    Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation.

    There was a region identified as Rus. It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.

    Silly games with words is suggesting that because two different peoples use the same or similar words for themselves, they must be the same people because the self-identification is the same. So Rusyns from Galicia are the same nation as Russky from Moscow, Romani are the same nation as Romans, etc. Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.”

    An even sillier game is to apply the modern meaning of this word to long-gone peoples. So by playing these silly games pre-19th century Galicians become “Russians.” As do 10th century Scandinavian overlords in Kiev. And Julius Caser could be a “Romanian.”

    In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  93. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    I didn’t cherry-pick quotes and my purpose wasn’t to make fun of Russians. I pointed out that Europeans, themselves, who visited these areas that both called themselves something like Rus, saw the areas as completely different. What is now called Ukrainian Rus was European, familiar – what is now called Russia was not.

    Can you find some quotes by foreign people in those times who saw Ukrainians as the same as Russians (not geographically)?

  94. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “Casualty lists of identified people by origin:”

    These seem like official numbers from the Ukrainian government. Unfortunately the real numbers are many times higher. An overall figure of 10 times higher wouldn’t surprise me. I don’t know if the real numbers would break down in the same way that these extremely partial numbers do. I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    • Replies: @AP
  95. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.

    Was the USSR noted for its military competence, historically? It almost got itself conquered by a nation with less than half its population and a fraction of its territory, at an enormous and horrific price. It had trouble with little Finland, fought Poland to a draw (!). It did worse in Afghanistan than the USA did. Russia not long after the USSR struggled with little Chechnya.

    Russia’s military is doing much better now, after it has left the Soviet legacy behind.

  96. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    Sure, but reluctance to join a corrupt Soviet-led force isn’t the same as reluctance to fight. As we see, at least official casualties show Lviv providing much more than its share of people who have died for their country.

  97. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    1. Do you have a source for the map?

    2. Note that 2 of the 3 Galician oblasts are shaded the same as Ukraine other than Kiev, Kharkiv, Odessa and Sumy. The same as Dinpropetrovsk, Donetsk, etc. The one light Galician province actually includes parts of Volynia, so neither of the two pure Galician areas are not least contributors.

    3. I remember that Yanukovich had multiple publications and wonder if factors other than intellectual output may be relevant here.

    4. Remember this is one data point, and it doesn’t even support you that strongly. Recall that Lviv oblast has 3rd highest % of university-educated population, Lviv has 2 of the top 20 universities, surpassing all cities other than Kiev and Kharkiv (despite being smaller than some of the ones it surpasses). Galicia has produced the world’s #2 chess player and #4 female chess player. Lviv is Ukraine’s per capita IT outsourcing leader.

    http://outsourcing-ukraine.org/2012/01/03/regional-structure-ukraines-it-outsourcing-industry/

    So, in summary, you are simply wrong about Galicia.

  98. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”

    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing. Tautology, but it has to be said.

    “Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus?”

    Yes. Both the Moscovite and Polish-Lithuanian claims had basis in the facts-on-the-ground sense and occasionally in the legal sense (descent and inheritance). After the election of Godunov and then Mikhail Romanov as czars Moscow even lost the genealogical basis for its claims. Which ended up not mattering.

    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “

    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared. There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    This is exactly like the race-doesn’t-exist nonsense. In linguistics there’s a similarly false assertion that all languages are equally complex. They aren’t.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?

    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”

    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”

    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes! And then you turn around and criticize others for leftism, the Soviet mindset, etc. People always had ethnic, national identities, and there was always some uncertainty at the margins. The fact that there is no non-arbitrary way to say where yellow ends and green begins doesn’t mean that there are no colors or that it’s wrong to think in terms of colors.

    “Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation.”

    The wiki on Von Herberstein’s book mentioned that he defined Russians as the people speaking a Slavic tongue and practicing Greek-rite Christianity. He then defined Russia geographically. Since he didn’t know any genetics, what else could you possibly expect him to have said on this topic?

    Yes, Bulgarians and Serbs speak Slavic tongues and practice Greek-rite Christianity. But they never lived where he paced Russia, so he obviously did not mean them.

    “There was a region identified as Rus. “

    Von Herberstein used the word Russia. Letter for letter. If I remember correctly, the Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus already wrote Ρωσία (Rosia) in 945 AD. Are you assuming that the -ia ending is modern, that 10th, 11th, 12th, century Russians didn’t use it? If so, you’re wrong. There was a gradual increase in the use of the -ia form over the centuries, but both were always used.

    “It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.”

    There was never any clean break, no matter what revisionary 19th and 20th century Ukrainian nationalists wanted to think.

    “Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.””

    If the newness of your national identity displeases you, blame 19th century Ukrainian nationalists. The Russian identity which they rejected was a thousand years old.

    “an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves)”

    This is actually true. See, you CAN occasionally get in touch with reality. Just not about your own identity’s founding myths.

    “In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.”

    First, they were dishonest. I described how above. Second, the transfer of the Rus label from Scandinavian tribute-takers to Slavic tribute-payers is pretty easy to understand. At some point around 1000 AD the flow of Scandinavian raiders stopped. Not just in eastern Europe, but everywhere. For an unknown internal reason they just stopped raiding abroad. The Viking Age came to an end. After that point the Scandinavians left behind in Rus’ assimilated into the local population through intermarriage. Their language disappeared. But the political entity which they founded endured. And the mass of the people living within that political entity gradually adopted the entity’s name – Rus’.

    • Replies: @AP
  99. “Ukraine Is Chockablock with Fascist Formations; Better Deal with It”

    Not terribly dissimilar to Washington DC then.

  100. Joe Walker says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    But aren’t the Ukrainians looking for help from outsiders because of what the Russians are doing?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  101. Joe Walker says: • Website
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    I guess it all depends on what you mean by “some”. What you see as “some” may look like a lot to others. Personally, I think the Jews would be a lot better off looking at their own behavior rather than blaming everything on evil gentiles.

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  102. Joe Walker says: • Website
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Are you also denying that the Ukrainians exist or just their country?

  103. @Joe Walker

    Really. How nice for you. I think you would be a lot better off removing the phrase “the Jews” in the sense you’re using it from your vocabulary. Just sayin’.

    • Replies: @Tom
  104. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”
    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing.

    The simplest explanation is probably the correct one. Two peoples diverged over the centuries, but in pre-nationalist times they didn’t think about identities and simply used their centuries-old names, despite having developed different languages, histories, even genetics over the centuries (all markers of different “nations.”)

    This is a much more realistic and simple explanation than yours – that because some modern Slav-Finn mestizos from an isolated northeastern corner of Rus still call themselves Russians, everyone else who used that word belongs to the same nation as they do. That an 18th century Galician, or a 10th century Viking chieftain in Kiev, or a 16th century Rus Polish general who devoted his life to fighting Muscovites (Konstanty Ostrogski, google him up), are all Russians.

    This phenomenon btw isn’t limited to Russians and Ukrainians. Consider the Romanians of the Balkans and the Romansh people of Switzerland, or the people of Rome. By your logic all these people would be Romanians – just like a Galician referring to himself as a Rusyn was a Russian.

    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “
    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared.

    Russians are indeed very confused; you are a perfect example. And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. Russia is not Rus, as Romania is not Rome. For purpose of clarity and to avoid silly mistakes and confusion, Russia and Rus ought to be differentiated, just as Romania and Rome are, and are differentiated in the English language and by English-language historians. For ideological reasons Russians seek to blur the distinctions, no reason for others to play their silly game.

    There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.

    Mythology about Mongol non-impact and no clean break. Mongols had no impact on genetics in general, but had a huge impact on the political culture. According to Vernadsky, 15% of Russian elite families had Mongol-Tatar origins. Tatar was the court language. Etc. Etc. Entire Mongol yoke was a period of “natural selection” during which those princes closest to the Mongols were elevated and those who resisted them were destroyed. It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization. The fact that it held onto the old name doesn’t mean it wasn’t a new entity.

    Secondly, whether break was sudden and clean or, gradual and slow, is irrelevant. The break is there.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?
    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    This is the sort of guess that someone believing in the fairytale about a 1000 year old Russian nation would make.

    Nation was Polish, people were Rus. One could be a member of the Polish nation (as this term was originally used) while also being a Rus. Why? Because Rus meant the descendants of the old Rus state; it didn’t mean only Russian.

    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”
    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    Of modern Polish identity constructed in the 18th-19th century, yes. But in the original meaning of the word, of course not. Indeed, as the word was originally used, a Pole could be an Orthodox Rusyn nobleman but would not be a Catholic Polish-speaking peasant. In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude. How odd it would be for a 17th century noble Pole to be told that some peasants on his lands are Poles too because they speak the Polish language and are Catholics!

    Consider Kostyantin Ostrogsky. He was a Rurikid prince, Orthodox patron of churches and monasteries, and fierce Polish (original not modern term) patriot who commanded Polish forces in wars against Moscow. Or Adam Kysl, Orthodox nobleman who represented the Polish state in negotiations with Khmelnytsky. Or Petro Sahaidachny, Orthodox Galician Rus nobleman who slaughtered Muscovites during the Polish campaign in Moscow. Etc. etc. All of these were Orthodox, all were Poles as this word was originally understood. Yet you would laughably call them Russians because Rus. Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. Because Rus, right? Because the word magically confers Russian identity upon all who used it, right?

    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”
    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes!

    These people were not on the margins, they were the pillars of society. Many of them were descendants of Rurik, and as such were much more real Rus than any Russian Slav. And they were from the heartland of the original, real Rus – the Kiev region.

    I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. You are trying to be a revolutionary. Invent a 1000 year history for Russia, like some blacks claiming Egypt. Playing games with language as if doing so will change reality – the strategy of political correctness. Maybe this legacy of reinvention and living in fantasy made Russia susceptible to Bolshevism?
    You know who is on the margins? – Some people descended from a far-off backwater of the old Rus state, Slavic-Finnish mestizos, claiming that everyone who ever used the term Rus is one of their nation – a Russian.

    • Replies: @Glossy
  105. Glossy says:
    @AP

    “…in pre-nationalist times…”

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English, Minin and Pozharsky were Russian nationalists fighting Poles, Themistocles was a Greek nationalist fighting Persians, etc. And most religious conflicts were, as now, ethnic conflicts in disguise.

    “And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. “

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus’ in any of the original Rus’ lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning – as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    “Tatar was the court language. “

    I’ve seen Ivan IV’s letters to Kurbsky. I don’t remember any Turkic words in them. I don’t think there’s a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that – medieval aristocracies weren’t generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    “It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization.”

    In the 12th to the 14th centuries the areas that were close to the steppes became increasingly unsafe because of nomadic raids. Large numbers of people fled them into the northeastern forests. Political power followed the population movements. First Vladimir became important, then Moscow and Tver fought it out for the leadership role of the new center of the Russian population. The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I’m talking about the kind of state that can’t be split among the ruler’s sons, the kind that’s bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family’s finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    The Tatars never created such a real state. In fact they split up into lots of little khan-ships in the usual medieval fashion, which were picked off by a centralized Russia one by one. So this idea that the strong, centralized Russian state was a Tatar legacy is false.

    “In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude.”

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: “According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons – the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east.”

    Couldn’t be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It’s implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I’d look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea. Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    “Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. “

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label – Scandinavian raiders in the east – ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, “Rus” became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state. And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    “I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. “

    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    • Replies: @AP
  106. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Joe Walker

    What do you mean by “the Ukrainians”? Some of “the Ukrainians” are pro-Russian.

  107. joe webb says:

    As a White Nationalist and around similar, I almost never hear the name Mark Lane.

    Cherry picking the convenient, I will not say rotten, cherry with which to taint a whole new bucket of fruit half a world away, this is the argument of a partisan or partizan. Commies and Nazis, Puhleese.

    The election results in Ukraine tell the tale if anything does. Also, soldiers, if volunteers, are the most committed.

    Why cannot we get a simple fact based analysis of who’s who instead of all this history chatter, which while, relevant, does not advance our understanding of the true nature of the various forces, both military and secular, if it does not directly relate …

    Joe Webb

  108. joe webb says:

    excuse me, not Mark Lane but David Lane. show how much I admire the David of the Lanes. Joe Webb

  109. AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy

    “…in pre-nationalist times…”

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English,

    This is too funny. Is there no 18th-19th century nationalist fairytale you won’t believe? Of course Joan of Arc was not a nationalist, she was turned into one by modern French mythmakers. Neither was she a feminist. Or a Marxist class warrior. Those things didn’t exist in her time.

    http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/peasant-girl-to-battlefield-commander

    “Although nationalism later played a large role in conflicts between France and England, at that time it was not much of a factor. The histories of the two countries had been inseparable since 1066 when the Normans conquered England. The rulers of England had been Normans, and French was the language of the English court…. There are other erroneous ideas about Joan: that she was a nationalist, a heroine of the working classes, an early revolutionary toppling the old feudal order.”

    “And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. “

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus’ in any of the original Rus’ lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning – as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    1. The issue isn’t the word but its meaning. There was never a break between usage of Roman in Romania, Switzerland, and the city of Rome from ancient times but that does not mean that the Romanian, Romansh ethnic groups, and people from Rome, are one nation.
    2. You are trying to force modern nationalist myths upon other peoples and other time periods. You are trying to turn people such as Orthodox Rus Polish patriots/bitter enemies of Moscow, 10th century Kiev-based Viking chieftains who slaughtered Slavs who disobeyed them, 18th century Galicians who wouldn’t understand the Russian speech if they heard it, into “Russians” because modern Russians still use the same or similar word to describe themselves. This is ahistorical and absurd.

    “Tatar was the court language. “

    I’ve seen Ivan IV’s letters to Kurbsky. I don’t remember any Turkic words in them. I don’t think there’s a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that – medieval aristocracies weren’t generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    I think Vernadsky is more of an expert om this topic than you or I, and he claimed that Tatar was the court language in the time of Vasyly II. He also claims that many Russian noblemen adopted Tatar surnames (for example, a member of the Veliamanov family adopted the Turkic name “Aksak” and his descendents were the Aksakovs)[10] Many Russian boyar (noble) families traced their descent from the Mongols or Tatars, including Veliaminov-Zernov, Godunov, Arseniev, Bakhmetev, Bulgakov (descendents of Bulgak), and Chaadaev (descendents of Genghis Khan’s son Jagatay). In a survey of Russian noble families of the 17th century, over 15% of the Russian noble families had Tatar or Oriental origins. Russia’s mestnichestvo hierarchy, postal road network (based on Mongolian ortoo system, known in Russian as “yam”, hence the terms yamshchik, Yamskoy Prikaz, etc.), census, fiscal system, and military organization also had Tatar-Mongol model.

    “It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization.”
    The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Don’t minimize. Greater power was directly related to greater loyalty to and collaboration with the Tatar overlords. Those princes who were not as loyal or close to the Tatars, and not as successful in providing tribute to them, lost out to those who were. This “natural selection” resulted in Russia having the most Tatar-centric and efficient rulers possible.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I’m talking about the kind of state that can’t be split among the ruler’s sons, the kind that’s bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family’s finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    *Guffaw* Russia was much closer to Tatars than to the Renaissance. Tatar masters weren’t interested in a centralized state themselves, they wanted efficient servants who could collect tribute for them. Those who were most efficient and loyal were rewarded. This is what inspired centralization – not some Renaissance zeitgeist from far away lands that Russians had little contact with. Those who were more servile, more efficient and more centralized were rewarded at the expense of those who were less so. In this way, ironically, the Tatars fostered the creation of a state unified and efficient enough to eventually overthrow them.

    “In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude.”

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: “According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons – the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east.”

    Couldn’t be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It’s implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I’d look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea.

    Did medieval Poles refer to them themselves as Poles or as Lechs? Because old Arabic and Rus sources describe them as Lechs or Liakhs, their country as Lechistan. Polans were just one of several Lechitic tribes. Polish Reinaissance cultural figure Jan Kocjhanowski claims Lechs was the original name for Poles.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lechia

    Regarding Poles, There are interesting quotes from primary sources in this article:
    http://www.karam.org.tr/Makaleler/1980138237_shapira.pdf

    Poles believed that they were descended from Sarmatians. We now know Sarmatians were Indo-European, but at that time (16ht century) it was assumed they were Turkic people. Accordingly, 16th century Poles believed they were descended from Turks, while their serfs were Slavs and that Slavs were an inherently servile and backward people. Rus from those lands, like other Poles (in the 16th century understanding of that term) had the same assumptions. The Polish Rus believed that like other Poles, they too were descended from Turks – either Khazars, or that the word Rus was derived from the Alanic tribe of Roxolans. In this way Rus Poles asserted their equality with other Poles. Here is a direct quote from Pylyp Orlyks’s Constitution “the valiant and ancient Cossack people, formerly called Khazar, was at first exalted by immortal glory … so much so that the Eastern Emperor … joined his son in matrimony to the daughter of the Khagan, that is to say, the Cossack prince”; “… the Orthodox faith of the Eastern confession, with which the valiant Cossack people was enlightened under the rule of Khazar princes by the Apostolic See of Constantinople …”; “whereas the people formerly known as the Khazars and later called Cossacks trace their genealogical origin to the powerful and invincible Goths … and join together that Cossack people by the deepest ties of affectionate affinity to the Crimean state …”

    Note that despite this Turkic romanticism the Cossack constitution was written in Latin, the language of all educated Poles, including Rus Poles such as the Cossacks. The Moscow rulers despite their Byzantine pretensions were the ones actually using Tatar as a court language (though this was well before the 16th century).

    Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    Why your obsession with lefty historians? The fact that nationalism is a modern phenomenon is stated by Toynbee – hardly a leftist – and John Lukacs – also, hardly a lefty. Among others. It’s just the mainstream consensus.

    “Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. “

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label – Scandinavian raiders in the east – ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, “Rus” became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state.

    Good, There is a glimmer of hope. So you will describe Helga, the Scandinavian queen in Kiev who slaughtered the Slavic Drevlian tribe for killing her Scandinavian husband Ingvar when he was trying to force tribute from them, not as a Russian, but a Rus? What about their 100% Scandinavian son, called Sviatoslav, who was tutored by the Varangian Asmud? And his 100% Scandinavian son Vladimir, who lived in his historical Scandinavian homeland for awhile before seizing the Novgorod throne with Swedish and Norwegian troops he gathered while living with his relatives there? Was he a Russian? How about Jarizleifr (Yaroslav the Wise), about whom much is written in Scandinavian sagas, the son of Scandinavian Vladimir and vladimir’s Scandinavian wife Ragnhild, who like his father seized the throne with Varangian mercenaries. Jarizleifer married Ingegerd Olofsdottor, Swedish princes. Guess what language they spoke at home? Was he a Russian, according to you?

    Are you starting to get an idea of how silly 19th century nationalist mythology can be? Ukrianians and Russians arguing over Kieven Rus is as silly as Afro-Cubans and Guatemalan Indians arguing over who is a Conquistador. Even more silly, because the Afro-Cubans and central American Indians at least speak Spanish. Neither Ukrainians nor Russians even speak Norse.

    And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    The “state” was a loosely run trading monopoly of Vikings that controlled various Slavic and Finnic (in what is now Russia) tribes. These Vikings assimilated with the locals at most 100 years before the state fell apart. Vladimir Monomakh was the first Rus ruler who wasn’t a full-blooded Scandinavian. He was also the second-last ruler of unified Rus. The various local tribes adopted the name Rus but diverged, while keeping the old name. I’ve given you a taste of what the Rus of Poland were like. You really think those people were Russians – that is, the same nation as the Slav-Finn mestizos of Moscow – because they all referred to themselves with a word deriving from Rus?

    “I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. “
    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    When it stoops to the level of Russian nationalist history by, for example, claiming that Kieven Rus was Ukrainian as Russian mythmakers pretend it is Russian – I agree. There was a lot of revisionism going around in the 19th century.

  110. Tom says:

    First, this article is confusingly formatted. Pictures and text are printed twice. Moreover, I lose track of when we are reading Lee, The Guardian, or someone else. Editors need to give this article their attention.

    In response to the text that I could make sense of, until it gets completely muddled, I have only this to say:

    If fascism is the only ideology working for the interests of Ukrainians and their cultural survival, and if other PC politics such as democracy fail them over and over again or otherwise leave them vulnerable to hostile enemies, then why is fascism a problem? It isn’t explained why fascism is a de facto enemy. If minorities are scared, then they can retreat to their homelands where many of them can enjoy proto-fascist governments of their own. I don’t buy into the assumption of a shared morality that dictates that fascism is a problem.

  111. Tom says:
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    How about this: “No one gives a s$#%^ about your sensibilities over the use of “the Jews”.

    I’ll make a deal with you:

    We’ll collectively stop using the phrase “the Jews” in the sense that it offends you (when it means “bad Jews”!) and will only use it in the sense that you undoubtedly approve (namely “good Jews”!) when prominent, mainstream media Jews stop commonly using the term “White privilege” or even “White people” except when they mean “good White people!”.

    Fair?

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  112. Tom says:
    @jimbojones

    Can you even lucidly explain why WWII occurred? You have no right to your consternation over fascists if you can’t well-explain the reasoning behind it. Pro-tip: Nazis bad! Jews good! …won’t cut it. Also, your reasoning falls apart if you merely invoke the Holocaust. Why? Because you are essentially telling us that murder is the reason why fascists are a cause for consternation. If that is the case, then every warring government on the planet, to include the USA, the USSR, and Israel would be on exactly the same footing as the Nazis. It goes beyond… and the only two believable reasons left are Jew fetishism and/or leftism. Neither is going to win you many arguments on this side of the political spectrum

  113. @Tom

    So… Jews aren’t white people?

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  114. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    “So… Jews aren’t white people?”

    There are whites and non-whites(blacks, Asians, etc).

    Jews are anti-whites.

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  115. @Priss Factor

    Boy, I guess someone failed intro to logic, didn’t they?

    According to your first statement, there are two kinds of people: white people and non-white people. This would require that Jews fall into one of these two kinds, being people as they are. Since you state that non-whites are “blacks, Asians, etc.,” one would logically conclude that Jews are white — with the exception of the very small minority of Jews who happen to be black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falash_Mura).

    Except then you introduce the idea of Jews being “anti-white.” This must mean they are either self-hating whites (according to you) or that they, in fact, not what at all. So which is it?

  116. […] March 12 According to this site, the Guardian has done another of its Orwellian “silent revisions” with this article. […]

  117. @Seamus Padraig

    They were however Little Russian. Ukraine is a moderate part of the Little Russian dialect area.

  118. @Jonathan Revusky

    “They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.”

    No. They arrived in the 1870’s to work for John Hughes, a Welsh ironmaster, except for a few around Lughansk who were recruited a few years earlier by a Scottish ironmaster.

    The surrounding countryside was thinly inhabitated until the early 19th Century due to a lack of surface water for draught animals. Little Russian speaking “Cossacks” were the main inhabitants.

  119. @Glossy

    Speaking as someone who evaluated technology transfer opportunities for the Russian Academy of Sciences I have to say that the scientific and technical attainment was very poor.

  120. […] and                                            http://www.unz.com/plee/ukraine-is-chockablock-with-fascist-formations-better-deal-with-it/                                                                  […]

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Peter Lee Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?