💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › autonomous-workers-union-about-historical-tradition.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:47:57. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: About historical tradition Author: Autonomous Workers Union Date: 7 January 2018 Language: en Topics: nationalism, Ukraine, history Source: Retrieved on 20th February 2022 from https://www.nihilist.li/2018/01/07/historical-tradition-anarchism-nationalism/ Notes: Translated by Nihilist.li.
We have been confronted with the fact that some individuals who have
aligned themselves to the anarchist movement are trying to consider
certain emancipatory traditions of certain members to be the
Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists and Ukrainian Insurgent Army
(OUN, UPA).
We understand the reasons of such ideological mutations. They provide an
opportunity to build alliances with those representatives of Ukrainian
nationalists who are trying to invent another and more decent
ideological pedigree. Let’s recall the past of the organized nationalism
of the «Bandera trend», focusing on the events of the 40’s. After all,
the events of this period are often falsified.
At the beginning of the war, «The First Commandant of the Ukrainian
National Revolutionary Army» Ivan Klymiv (Legenda) personally had a hand
in the creation and organization of Jewish pogroms. After breaking the
relationship with the German Nazis, this figure led the OUN’s military
referendum. Therefore, he had a direct connection to the creation of
military structures, of which UPA has appeared over time. However, not
just one but all Ukrainian militia in the first months of the war
actively helped the Nazis to realize «the final solution to the Jewish
question». And the OUN (revolutionary) distributed pro -hitler
declarations.
Roman Shukhevich and UPA commanders are directly responsible for the
Volyn disparity of 1943. If Shukhevich originally did not supported
large-scale actions of terror against Polish and political
opponents-Ukrainians, then with time he became convinced of the
political expediency of such practice.
The socialist and democratic rhetoric that the Bandera’s OUN have lent
them to since 1943 is not a sign of rot, but an attempt to adjust to the
mood of the population of Central and Eastern Ukraine. This version is
confirmed by the theoretical works of Peter Fedun (Poltava), in which he
explains his attitude to the future system in Ukraine.
We can note that he revises the position of prewar nationalism and
instead of a totalitarian regime, he proposes to build a system based on
multi-party system and formal representative democracy. However, in
Fedun’s «democracy» it acquires enough authoritarian features. Rights
and freedoms are irrelevant and marked by «bad words» anarchism or
liberalism. Fedun wasn’t against trade unions, but wanted them to be
apolitical. It supports multi-party system to channel class protest
through election procedures.
Only these few well-known facts are enough to draw conclusions about
this trend. It is completely contrary to anarchism and socialism. Of
course, among the nationalist formations, it is possible to distinguish
Ivan Mitrynga and his followers who stood in a socialist position during
the war, and after the war they became either exotic American
Trotskyists or Social-Democrats. And this also has little relation to
anarchism.
The desire to speculate on the «insanity» of such rather dubious
characters is unclear. We have our own Ukrainian libertarian tradition,
which is part of the world’s. These are Nabat organization,
Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine and the Southern Russian
Society of Anarcho-Syndicalists. These are the individuals of the true
internationalists and class fighters from the anarchist-rebel Nestor
Makhno to the revolutionary syndicalist Aaron Baron. This is a beautiful
and tragic story. So, we do not see the meaning in cooperation with
people justifying racist killers and adherents of authoritarianism.