{"id":6674,"date":"2026-06-08T11:50:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-08T11:50:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/youtubexyoutube.com\/?p=6674"},"modified":"2026-06-12T13:48:16","modified_gmt":"2026-06-12T13:48:16","slug":"ukraine-is-running-out-of-heroes-so-its-digging-up-dead-nazis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/youtubexyoutube.com\/index.php\/2026\/06\/08\/ukraine-is-running-out-of-heroes-so-its-digging-up-dead-nazis\/","title":{"rendered":"Ukraine is running out of heroes, so it\u2019s digging up dead Nazis"},"content":{"rendered":"
A wave of symbolic reburials exposes the fragile foundation of Ukraine\u2019s national identity project<\/strong><\/p>\n The Ukrainian government is determined to gather the entire (albeit small) pantheon of Ukraine\u2019s 20th-century national heroes in one place. Simon Petliura and Andrey Melnik are to be joined by one of the founders of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), Evgeny Konovalets, whose remains will be transferred from Rotterdam. This action is more than just a tribute \u2013 it\u2019s a painful attempt to construct a \u2018sacred foundation\u2019 for the nation. But this attempt reveals a tragic void. Kiev has no need of Konovalets as a historical figure; rather, it needs him to fulfill a political function \u2013 to separate friend from foe. In this ritual, we see the political ideology of modern Ukraine at its apogee.<\/p>\n The reburial of Konovalets\u2019 remains must be viewed through the lens of Carl Schmitt\u2019s book \u2018The Concept of the Political\u2019. The Ukrainian political class is engaged in a fundamental Schmittian act: Making an existential distinction between \u2018friend\u2019 and \u2018enemy\u2019. Schmitt insisted that \u2018the political\u2019 has no substance of its own, but crystallizes in the moment of existential opposition between what he called \u2018us\u2019 and \u2018them\u2019. The latter is the \u2018hostis\u2019 or public enemy \u2013 i.e. not merely a private enemy. Political community is constituted by the possibility of actual war. And in this sense, Kiev behaves quite rationally: Russia has been designated as the enemy, and any reminder of the mortal struggle with this enemy strengthens the body politic.<\/p>\n However, Ukraine\u2019s problem as a \u2018young\u2019 state is not the absence of an enemy (there is no problem with that; the enemy has been identified and is consistently demonized), but rather a catastrophic shortage of friends in its own history. Schmitt wrote that the political world requires not just negative identification, but also positive \u201cconcrete order\u201d<\/em> that binds the community together from within. A creative identity requires a pantheon of founding heroes, creators. The tragedy of the Ukrainian national myth is that, lacking positive national heroes, it is forced to appoint the enemies of its enemy (Russia) as \u2018friends\u2019.<\/p>\n The Ukrainian national myth is being built on a foundation of pure negativity. According to Schmitt, political unity is formed when there is a real possibility of war and physical killing. If there is no enemy, there is no politics. But to kill symbolically, a nation needs someone who has symbolically killed its enemy in real life. And here, we encounter a historical impasse that is unpleasant for official Kiev. Ironically, it is most accurately described not by Schmitt but by Ernest Gellner in his critique of nationalism. Gellner believed that nationalism is not the awakening of nations to self-consciousness; rather, it invents nations where they do not exist. Ukraine\u2019s example is one of the most striking illustrations of this thesis.<\/p>\n \n Read more<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Throughout its documented history, the people of Malorossiya (Little Russia \u2013 a region that constitutes part of modern-day Ukraine) existed within the lens of a triune Russian people. Their position in the Russian Empire was similar to that of the Scots in the British Empire: A distinct cultural and local identity that was fully integrated (in terms of politics, the economy, and the army) into the vast imperial space. The Scots colonized and fought for Britain, not against it. They provided Britain with scientists, poets, and politicians. Similarly, the people of Malorossiya built the empire, not destroyed it.<\/p>\n Gogol, Razumovsky, Korolev, and dozens of statesmen and military leaders were all part of the pan-Russian cultural and political project. It\u2019s quite hard to find an authentic \u2018fighter against Moscow\u2019 among them. So, to fill the void in its pantheon of \u2018national heroes\u2019, the imagination of Ukrainian ideologists is forced to make a sharp leap forward in time, skipping over centuries of history in which Malorossiya was a co-author, not an antagonist, of Russia.<\/p>\n Not until the 20th century did Ukrainian history produce true enemies of Russia, those who were eager to shed the blood of \u2018Moskali\u2019 (Ukrainian slur for Russians). Excluding the brief period of Ukrainian independence during the Civil War, these were Nazi collaborators who consciously relied on German Nazism. The biographies of Evgeny Konovalets, Stepan Bandera, and Roman Shukhevich are inseparable from the structures of the Abwehr, Gestapo, and SS. Ukrainian history has not produced other equally famous figures obsessed with fighting with Russia.<\/p>\n Looking at this \u2018heroic\u2019 pantheon, one involuntarily recalls not only Schmitt but also Claude Levi-Strauss and his concept of \u2018bricolage\u2019, explained in his work \u2018The Savage Mind\u2019. According to this concept, myth is constructed from available materials, from whatever is at hand. And the \u2018available material\u2019 for Ukrainian mythmaking turned out to be the corpse of their enemy\u2019s enemy. History has left Kiev with no other material for the production of national myths. And this is not an accident, but the essence of Ukraine\u2019s political construction.<\/p>\n When a nation\u2019s heritage consists solely of Abwehr agents, and this heritage is steeped in the total rejection of a vast portion of its own cultural ecumene (i.e. Russian literature, canonical Orthodox Christianity, the shared victory over Nazism in 1945), that nation cannot find a friend\u00a0who was engaged in creating something positive, and ends up elevating a friend\u00a0who destroyed and betrayed.<\/p>\n

\n \u00a9\u00a0 Wikipedia; Fine Art Images \/ Heritage Images \/ Getty Images <\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n