In the shadow of Bandera

I didn't want to talk about it. Rather, I believed the Slovaks and their visions of nations, which – as in the “Beniowski” – are like “the chains of cranes.” I wanted to believe that our shared experiences would overcome our old grudges. But it turned out to be a dream.

In the beginning, the President's decision to receive the Order of Zelensk has caused my amazement. In time, however, I gathered my thoughts and concluded that it was justified.

Historical flagism, in my sense, to Poles manifested itself as a violent reaction increasing out of a sense of harm. Could the Ukrainians have felt hurt on Volyn? They could have. For many reasons. Is it always wrong? Nope. In many cases, their sense of harm had real sources. However, the criminal ideology of “Integrated Nationalism” of Dmytra Donckow imposed on them. I read that book. I was most struck by the comparison of the multiethnic problem with the field on the chessboard, where there can be only 1 figure. In my opinion, it was a metaphor leading to acceptance of cultural cleansing. This kind of reasoning led Volyn to a wave of atrocities.

It is clear that UPA besides fought against the USSR. Therefore, many Ukrainians see it as a form of heroes and a symbol of the conflict for independence. They request these symbols. At the same time, UPA cannot be a symbol worthy of imitation. It is simply a evidence to the extraordinary ability of Ukrainians to organize themselves, but for Poles it remains primarily a symbol of burning villages and massacre of civilians.

It is not possible to ignore Zelenski's statements to "The Economist", in which he warned the West of the possible consequences of limiting aid to Ukraine, or akin statements by Natalia Panchenko on Ukrainian television. Demagog.pl presents arguments for the explanation that it did not call for violence. I'm willing to presume that she just wanted to inform you about a possible scenario. However, I am puzzled that the interview was given to a Ukrainian tv station, not to Polish audiences who, according to this explanation, were to warn.

However, both statements have a common denominator. They presume that limiting aid can lead any refugees to violence. If this had actually happened, it would no longer be classical flagism understood as a extremist reaction to actual or imagined harm. This would be an even more dangerous mutation – force utilized as a tool to force further privileges. It would no longer be due to the feeling of harm, but due to the simplification of the previously received support.

I am amazed at the deficiency of consequence from the interviewer Natalia Panchenko. It is equally amazing that Zelenski's message can be read as an argument for possible social consequences in order to exert political force and remains publically available.

It is besides not to be overlooked that there is simply a Mirorec website containing data of those considered opponents of Ukraine. The specified presence of specified a task raises the question of whether a akin treatment of political opponents will besides not decision to disputes within the European Union.

Glorification of a peculiar political tradition can lead to tame reasoning that, under utmost circumstances, allows force against full groups of people. past knows these mechanisms. Therefore, the effort to glorify ideology or movements that have regarded force against civilians as an acceptable policy instrument should be treated with utmost caution.