Stories from Oles Busina. The great lies of nationalism

Nobody perishes Ukraine as well as those who professionally love it for money.

Thinking about why Ukraine does not develop since it became independent but slowly fading away, I came to the conclusion that it cannot be the other way. The nationalism became the ideology of the country. And in Ukraine it was built from the very beginning on lie – the past was totally distorted and there was lying about unprecedented prosperity in future. We all live under the power of ideological utopia that destroys even those who believes in it. We have fear to take a look at truth, our citizens can’t swallow the reality adequately. We have got vicious circle: it is myth of the ideal Ukraine that perishes the real Ukraine.

BOGDAN KHMELNITSKY  — THE «ALLY» OF  RUSSIAN TSAR. ANY EVIDENCES?

The fairytale about the «equal right union» of Bogdan Khmelnitsky with Moscow Tsar was launched since the beginning of XXth century. One of its main agitators was the father of the idea of independence Nikolay Mikhnovsky. The main idea of this «canard» was the reasons for separation of Ukraine from the Russian Empire: as if the Tsar violated our rights and now we can go anyway.

But any person who knows even a little bit of history understands that equal right union between autocratic hereditary monarch of a huge country and the leader of Cossack army whom Khmelnitsky was officially is not possible at all. All the documents show that Bogdan asked for the citizenship under the authority of the Tsar. He did not imagine any other relations. Neither Khmelnitsky, nor Vygovsky, Doroshenko, Samoilovich or Mazepa that replaced him were not strong enough for independence. They just were looking for a new suzerain. Doroshenko saw such a supreme sovereign in Turkish sultan .Vygovsky in polish king. Mazepa — either in the Russian Tsar or in the king of Sweden. Vassalage of Bogdan was nothing exceptional in this list. Khmelnitsky together with his troops was placed under the authority of Moscow by the decision District council of 1653 that he secured with the oath during so called Pereyaslavskaya Rada in the following year. Individual oath was adjured by all of the Cossacks, namely around 60 thousand people. After that until the end of life Bogdan Khmelnitsky signed all the documents as «Hetman of Zaporozhe’s army of his regal Majority».

TheserelationswithMoscowwerebadly affected by the first hetman after Khmelnitsky, namely hetman Ivan Vygovsky, who wanted to return under the authority of Poland. Themajorityofthe Cossacksdidnotsupporthim  That was the beginning of two decades of internecine war that were called Great Ruin. These are the facts. And the rest was fabricated. The contemporaries and inheritors of Bogdan understood quite well the core of his legal relations with Moscow. Even in so called «constitution of Orlik» there is a phrase about Bogdan Khmelnitsk, “Having taken the troops of Zaporozhe, enslaved and humiliated people of Little Russia out of the authority of Poland he went voluntary under the authority of the Great Sovereigns, Tsars and Great princes the sovereigns of Russia”.

TSARISM AND the USSR DID NOT PERISH UKRAINIAN CULTURE, ON THE CONTRARY, THEY DEVELOPED IT

It is enough to take a look at the publishing offices of the first editions from which began our literature to play down the statement that Tsar’s autocracy oppressed Ukrainian culture. Both «Eneida» of Kotlyarevsky and «Kobzar» of Shevchenko were published namely in Saint Petersburg and not anyway else. The first one was published in 1798, and the second in 1840. And both works were published during the reign of the most reactionary reign of Paul I and Nicolas I. Just think of it: if the Empire got the purpose to eliminate the Ukranian free thought, would it allow to publish its best achievements right in its capital?

And both Kotlyarevsky and Shevchenko were not alone. In the magazines published in Saint –Petersburg and in the publishing offices were printed the works of Kvitka-Osnovyanenko, Panteilemon Kulish, «ultra nationalistic»  «History of Russians» and еven  «History of Ukraine» by Grushevsky, who  in the year of its issue taught  in the University of Lvov at the territory of Austria -Hungary. All that gave the right to the author of the romance «Black eyes», Ukrainian noble Eugeny Grebinka, to notice in one of the letters: «Saint-Petersburg is the colony of educated Little Russians». It used to happen, that some works of the Ukranian writers or the magazines, where they were published, were forbidden by the censorship. But not because they were Ukrainian! But because they were undermining the foundations of the State! Any state acts like that. If today someone begins to publish slogans that call up for split up of Ukraine or for the armed revolt they would be prohibited as well. During the Soviet times the scope of the support of the Ukrainian culture by official Moscow was quite unprecedented. In twenties it turned into Ukrainisation. The Ukrainian theatres were supported by the State. The Union of writers became in reality a ministry of literature. The scope of the Soviet Ukrainian film-making industry won’t be surpassed in independent Ukraine in the coming 300 years! Where is the oppression? In my opinion, «Yavorivsky’s» and «Pavlich’s» were so «oppressed» that they don’t know when one is well off.

АNTI-SEMITIC PSEUDO-CONSTITUTION OF PHILIPP ORLIK

“And you, did you read the «constitution» of Orlik?”, I asked all those who told that it was the first legal monument like this in the world. Not a single time I heard that my interlocutor read it. They could only repeat like a parrot, «the first in the world, the first in the world»…

Just think of it, why the word «сonstitution» is not of Ukrainian origin but of Latin? If Orlik had been the pioneer in inventing constitutions then to emphasize this word one should have used the Ukrainian word. It is always the way they do it. The Britishes invented a tank, the Frenches — cognac and the Russians — balalaika, these deeply national words have been spread all over the world. That is why before the constitution of Orlik there used to be other constitution? Of course there were! And so many of them that it is impossible to enumerate them. «Constitutions» were called (in Latin it means  «organization»),in Europe long time before Orlik, the Charters of workshops, towns, treaties between different parties (as a matter of fact, word «consensus» — «agreement», that is widely used by our politicians, has the same roots with the word «constitution») and in many other similar documents.

«Constitution» ofOrlik(tobeprecise, pseudo-constitution) appeared in 1710 when he ended up in Bendera together with Charles XII who fled from Poltava. Mazepa died for a short while till that. The cluster of fugitive foremen elected Orlik as a new hetman and asked the king of Sweden for citizenship. Charles replied positively. They only needed to regulate the relations between Orlik and his «government» in immigration, who had fear, that new «hetman» would become the dictator like the late Mazepa. The result of this «internecine war» was several pages with text that were not called «constitution» in original, but the «Treaties and resolutions between hetman Orlik and the troops of Zaporozhe ». And it was written in Russian! But not in proper Russian, more like in slang, «Wonderful and inconceivable God, merciful in patience, just in execution, as always, from the very beginning of the world, in his court he raises some nobilities and humiliates the other for their sins»…

The word combination «Ukranian people» is not used in this document at all — everywhere only «Little Russian», «Let us make the army of Zaporozhe and all the people of Little Russia famous forever!», «enslaved and  humiliated people of Little Russia» and so on. I would like to remind that everything that is connected with Little Russia irritates Yushchenko a lot. But he did like the «constitution» of Orlik, probably he did not read it either.

CharlesXII, was called according to the   «constitution» of Orlik, «The brightest protector of us, his regal majority of Sweden», due to will it was decided that we need «to elect a new hetman» and that was done. That is why, according to the constitution that is quite promoted by the nationalists «as the first in the world», Ukraine is the vassal of the Swedish king and it can elect a new hetman only having a permission of the official Stockholm because he called that sovereigns «the eternal protectors of Ukraine». But, fortunately it is just useless scrape of paper that does not mean anything — according to the name of its author – hetman Philipp (and not Pilip!) Orlik, like he is named in the text.

According to this «constitution» it was necessary to reestablish urgently the khanate of Crimea and begin friendship with it , «so that the fraternity and friendship with the khanate of Crimea is not affected by anything», and all the adherents of different faith should be driven out from the territory of Ukraine and first of all the Jews, «We mustn’t allow  the adherents of different faith  to live in Ukraine and not trust the faith of the Jews». Therefore, the «genious» and «incomparable» constitution of Orlik is the sample of outright anti-semitic literature in the spirit of either the late Middle age or of early Nazism, that surpassed for ages the book of Adolf Hitler. After this word-for-word fragment, the reader, probably guesses why the fruit of legal «insight» the nationalists would like to eulogize so often, but are afraid to quote. Because, according to his constitution ALL the citizens of Ukraine must be exiled from Ukraine – both the moslems  and members of Uniat Church and even orthodox! The constitution of Orlik only acknowledged the orthodox faith of Eastern confession, under the obedience of «the Holy Apostolic Fron of Constantinople». But this very kind of orthodox church does not exist in Ukraine right now! All the people should be exiled, according to mad, religious maniac Philipp, who as a matter of fact was not even an Ukranian, he was born from the Check catholic at the territory of Byelorussia!

The text is finished with the oath of Orlik. Guess whom? «To the motherland, Little Russia, our mother», whom he swears to comply with «these treaties and resolutions». A word «constitution» is not used even a single time!

GRUSHEVSKY IS THE FIRST PRESIDENT. THE SAME RUBBISH AS PSEUDO-CONSTITUTION

It is the easiest myth to disperse. In constitution of Ukraine in epoch of Grushevsky there were no a post of President. He held the appointment of the chairman of the Central Rada from the Ukrainian People Republic and there are a lot of papers left by Pan Grushevsky with and without his autograph. But there were no documents and never existed any document where he would act like a president. But still discussions are going on, on the agenda whether or not the Central Rada approved the constitution or the historians only have one of its drafts. We could have called Grushevsky our first emperor, it would be the same kind of lying. The myth about the «presidentship» of Grushevsky is dispersed in the book of Paul Usenko «Was Mikhailo Grushevsky the president of Ukraine?», issued in 2003. Its author witty expressed the core of its research, «It is impossible to become the president after one’s death».

WE’LL BECOME INDEPENDENT  — WE WILL LIVE BETTER THAN ANYBODY. AND IMMEDIATELY MINUS 6 MILLION…

The main thesis of nationalists in 1991 was the following, «The Russians ate our sausage. We will become independent and promptly we will live much better». Although as far as the production of pork concerned the USSR had the lowest rate in the Soviet Union if we calculate each pig. We had to check this thesis in practice because our population was reduced within 20 years by 6 million, not taking into account 4 million of workers who work as immigrants abroad and left Ukraine. In fact, in order to get independence, the whole generation of people, who born in the thirties and retired in nineties, have died. They did not sustain very high inflation rates, worsening of the standard of living and social stress caused by total change of the society. It is much more than during the time of famishment. Neither the people who are in power of Ukraine nor much of the people of the lower strata of society have not understood the tragedy of these victims.

But as far back as July 1991, several scientists from the Institute of economy of the Academy of Science of the USSR published in the newspaper «The truth of Ukraine» several articles, which gave evidence that it would be beneficial for the Republic if the Soviet Union does not split up. Their evidence was based on figures. The economy of Ukraine was integrated by 75 % to the Soviet economy, and first of all to the Russian economy. RSFSR supplied the Ukrainian SSR within united market zone with energy resources, raw materials, machine tools and cars at the price amounted to 3 % of the average price in the world markets. The Soviet Ukraine supplied the Soviet Russia with pipes, metal and food at the prices amounted to 8-30% of the average price in the world markets. The economists came to the conclusion that after the split up of the Soviet Union, Russia would raise the price for its products and energy resources to the level of the prices in the world markets. The forecast deficit of the trade balance would be in this case around 10 billion dollar annually and that is exactly what happened. Nobody heard this warning. Some people wanted to get rich during the sharing of «common» property and the other listened to the story that we would take away sausage from the Russian people.