Elusive independence

It’s been two years since mass insanity on the Maidan. Since then this word became recognizable and a household name. It’s maybe infinite or rally, or something happening, whether aggressive theatre of the absurd. It’s burning tires. Anti-Russian slogans and threats turned into reality in Mariupol and Odessa. “Who are not jumping — that is moskal”, “Moskals on knives” scene with burning soldiers of “Berkut”, leafless whole world — all this ideological Ukrainian will explain to you how the required attributes of the struggle for social justice and a European future and the country’s independence. It is not clear why any of the above in the end did not appear. It became evident that the project “Ukraine”, launched about a hundred and fifty years ago is collapsing. From it began to depart the territory and this process obviously will continue. More clearly a blatant lack of independence of the project manifested its controllability and dependence from the United States. And in the end another issue was resolved – that we are the enemy now. This is to the extent that to continue to live in one country is impossible. “We will never be brothers” — these lines were written by believers that “Ukraine is not Russia”, Kiev residents write them to their blood relatives in Moscow, Donetsk and Rostov. They forgot that we have always been one nation. The worst thing is that the funds for the healing of the schism yet. But to understand where it comes from, it can and should be. At the same time it becomes clear why in the hands of Ukrainian nationalists everything turns to dust.

Made in Empire

The paradox is that even the traitors of Russia, who took part in the launch of the February revolution of 1917, had Imperial consciousness. How else to explain that many of the members of the Provisional government, deliberately worked to weaken their country, decided not to recognize the autonomy of Ukraine, enshrined in the first three universals of the Central Rada. And even more so Imperial was the consciousness of the Bolsheviks, who in response to the emergence of the Ukrainian national Republic moved the capital to Kharkov and declared an ultimatum to Hrushevsky and his colleagues – to let the Little Russians liberties in the form of autonomy, no one was going. Even the ancestors of the modern Ukrainian Nazis to encroach on something more serious than autonomy within the Empire did not dare. It turns out that all participants in the process were products of their time, although formally the Russian Empire and the liberals, and socialists and Ukrainian nationalists disapproved, moreover, fought against it. But it was their flesh and blood, in thought and action regardless of whether they wanted it or not.

As a result it turned out that the biased policy of the West (and abroad in varying degrees, was up to the revolutionaries) were obtained from their supervisors the order to destabilize the situation and still could not eradicate the Empire in their “political style”. Many survivors of the White Guards in exile quickly realized this. And during the Great Patriotic war they collaborated with seemingly alien to Soviet intelligence. Just because their country was at war, and no other Russian intelligence was not. Hence the first conclusion is that for Russian people effectively began to work against their country need that they ceased to consider themselves Russian. On the territory of modern Ukraine, this method proved just fine.

Great dream — to destroy Russia

Before the war for independence of Novorossia in Donetsk there were many people with radical Ukrainian sentiments. Someone accepted the opinion because it was easier to build a career. But they were the real ideological characters. I asked one of these nationalists: “Do you understand that Ukraine is needed only as an anti-Russia? What if, God forbid you ever get what you seek, your country will become worthless and it will disassemble for parts by neighbors?” The source said: “Yes, I understand that. But you don’t understand what a great dream — to destroy Russia”. It’s so. But it’s honestly, what I can say.

This explains why more than a year of its existence, the Ukrainian Central Rada failed to do anything constructive. No economy, no army, no real control over them have fallen into the hands of the territory at Hrushevsky, Vynnychenko and other “officials” was not. But there were parades, rallies, endless meetings, and ranting. The same trend was showed later and by Petliura. The same thing, you need to put, waits and modern junta, holed in Kiev. Under these conditions, real independence is just ridiculous. It turns out that Ukraine never had it and never will have it. But this is not surprising, because independence means a constructive program of action, constructive goal desired by the people. And where did all this come from, if the main dream is to have a Russian neighbor’s cow is dead?

Let’s not forget that the first Ukrainian “independence” was nothing more than a German protectorate. And it collapsed immediately after the withdrawal of German troops from the territory. General Hoffmann, who headed the German delegation at the negotiations in Brest-Litovsk, did not hesitate said: “Ukraine is the work of my hands, but not the fruit of conscious will of the Russian people. I have created Ukraine to make peace with at least part of Russia”. The Bolsheviks were forced to sign the Brest peace, but from the very beginning regarded it simply as a temporary assignment. So, the temporary assignment was the “independent Ukraine” too. It is interesting how cyclical history. Recent Minsk agreements signed by the DPR and the LPR, by their terms are very similar to the Brest peace. And they, too, no more than a temporary measure.

Thus, Ukraine emerged as a result of weakening Russia on the international arena. It speaks eloquently about it and the speed with which the “independence” was recognized by Western countries. But to Ukrainian Frankenstein appeared it needed ready concepts. And they were.

Ukraine-Russia: from theory to practice

In the modern world in order to train society to varying thoughts never act directly. It is softly at first, slowly one idea or another is throwing in an entertaining, easy format. For example, when the west there was a need to legalize sodomy in every Hollywood movie were quite nice buggers. And now it is hard to find at least one “masterpiece”, which did not involve same-sex perverts. Some call this the “Overton window”, someone – “escalator of principle”, but the essence remains the same. If you want to break a taboo or to implement a certain idea, proceed gently and systematically. And you’ll get everything.

In the early twentieth century, even the residents of Galicia did not consider themselves Ukrainians. It was self – Rusin, which points directly to the identity of the Russian population. Closer to the East men at all just considered themselves Russian. Neither Austria-Hungary nor Germany, whose task was to create a new concept and the dismemberment of the Russian world, this situation is untenable. But right to declare the same to the inhabitants of Galicia, which is now to be Russian, is impossible, it was impossible. They needed a workaround.

For this purpose were used Hrushevsky desk concepts. It was he who in his multivolume work substantiated and introduced a compromise term “Ukraine-Russia”. As if still not entirely Ukraine, but not Russia. Just it they need. For him even a special Department was opened in Lvov University, so important was the stuffing of the concept “we are not Russia.” Of course, Hrushevsky was not alone. There were other, more radical designs, for example, the developer of Ukrainian integral nationalism Dmytro Dontsov. But the role of Mikhail Gorbachev in undermining Russian identity cannot be underestimated. Acknowledged these achievements and the Tsar’s secret police — in 1914 Hrushevsky was arrested in Kyiv as the Austro-Hungarian agent and sent into exile. However, under the patronage Shakhmatov from Simbirsk him soon enough let go to Kazan and then to Moscow leniency toward political opponents in tsarist Russia met often and to good, as we know, not brought. Well, after the revolution of 1917 Hrushevsky became one of the leaders of the Ukrainian project. Short-lived, but it was not necessary. Had to sow the dragon’s teeth — anti-Russian concept which, as we have seen, continues to bear its bitter fruit to this day.

It is of interest that allegedly hostile to the Bolsheviks “the first President” of the UNR lived quietly in the USSR until 1934 and died in Kislovodsk, having the status of academician. Simply put, not too much was damaged. However, because of the author of the second Ukrainian project belonged to the Bolsheviks, it was implemented in the form of a socialist Republic. Otherwise, the word “Ukraine” would have remained the property of the scientist’s offices. But that’s another story.

Artem OL’HIN