At the same time as saying that in the USSR there was "the class of Stalinist masters that must be removed by force from the path of societal development" and calling "social revolution" what revolutionary Marxists call political revolution, Hornovy said clearly that this "social revolution is bolstered by the trend to national revolutions on the part of the oppressed nations of the USSR." (5)
In his works, which were written in the underground bunkers of the UPA, Hornovy devoted considerable space to the ideological struggle against Stalinism. Above all, he implacably and brilliantly exposed the consolidation of the ideology of Great Russian chauvinism, which was undertaken by Stalin in 1945. But he went further.
"A very important place in current Bolshevik ideology is occupied by the thesis about 'the progressive transition to communism.' Taking for granted that the first phase of communism, socialism,
24 already has been attained, the Stalinist masters contend that the second phase, a higher phase - that of developed communism — is now being built. In such a society the principle, "from each according to ability, to each according to his needs' will be realised, and there will disappear differences between city and village and between physical and intellectual labour."
Hornovy's response to this theory was the following: "There can be no transition to communism in the USSR, inasmuch as there is no socialism. So long as there is no social ownership of the means of production, so long as there exists the brutal exploitation of man and so long as the principle of distribution according to labour done is not realised (from each according to ability, to each according to his work), so long can there hardly be any talk of transition to communism." (6) Against capitalist restoration
The OUN and UPA firmly opposed restoration of capitalism in an independent Ukraine. Hornovy and Poltava constantly stressed this. Poltava criticised the Voice of America's broadcasts for the Soviet Union, saying: "The Soviet masses hate the Bolshevik socialism But that does not mean that the Soviet people are longing for capitalism, which was destroyed on the territory of the present USSR back in 1917-20. The Soviet people in their absolute majority are clearly against the restoration of capitalism. That is the result of the revolution."
Poltava added: "We, the participants in the liberation struggle in the Ukraine, who are inside the Soviet Union and have connections with the broad Soviet masses, know only too well that they have no admiration for capitalism — neither the old European kind nor the modern American kind." (7)
Pointing out that *under capitalism the masses of working people find themselves in the position of being citizens who are economically and politically powerless, " Poltava stated: "A situation in which some social classes grow rich and live in abundance while others go hungry and sink into poverty simply because all that they possess is their own hands, their labour power, is in flagrant contradiction to the concepts of social justice and national solidarity....
"The Ukrainian nationalists do not want there to be exploiters and exploited in the Ukrainian people; they do not want to see this people torn by class struggle. Since there is only one way to put an end to this dangerous situation, that is, by socializing all branches of economy, they consider this solution to be the basis for the new economic and social system."
Moreover, Poltava said, capitalism generates economic crises and wars, which are the greatest evil humanity faces. "One of the mechanisms for preventing crises is the introduction of planning into economic life, the planned organization of production and distribution. Planning in these areas is possible only in a socialized economy. For this reason, the socialization of the instruments and means of production is also one of the means for averting economic crises." (8)
In the light of this presentation of the political thought of Hornovy and Poltava, the question arises of what attitude the Ukrainian revolutionary nationalists took towards Marxism. This query was taken up in their time by a group of Ukrainian revolutionary socialists (Iwan Majstrenko, Vsevolod Holubnychy, Borys Levyts'kyi), who published the periodical Vpered ("Forward") in the West, and defended the UPA's struggle in the left wing of the workers' movement in the capitalist countries.
In this group it was believed that there were contradictions between the positions of Poltava and those of Hornovy, with the latter representing a Marxist current inside the OUN. In 1949-50, Vpered established contact with the OUN leadership in the Ukraine and got a letter from Poltava, written in agreement with Hornovy. Among other things, the letter says:
"It is only on the basic things that we agree with Marx's critique of capitalism. Thus, we make a positive assessment (although not in its entirety) of the socialist concept (as formulated by the various socialist currents) of building the society that is to replace capitalist society ...On these two points — in our view of capitalism and our conception of a classless society - at most we come close to some extent to the socialist theories, including Marxism.
"We have formulated our views not as 'disciples of Marx,' not as advocates of socialism, without being in the least attracted by Marxism and in a struggle against Marxism as an overall ideology, in the struggle against the pernicious consequences of Marxism on Ukrainian soil. We have worked out our viewpoints in an empirical way, starting off from our nationalist ideological positions • We cannot be linked to Marxism because in the most complete sense of the term, we are a national movement, not a class-struggle movement or a class-struggle internationalist movement, as Marxism would require." (9)
In his letter, Poltava stressed that the OUN was formed and continued to operate "as a movement struggling against Marxism, against the corrosive and destructive effects of Marxism on the
O. Diakiv-Hornovy, Ideia i chyn. Pouna zbirka Tuoriu ("The Idea and the Deed; Collected Works"), Association of Former UPA Fighters, New York 1968. There is an EnglishLanguage edition of the writings of O. DiakivHornovy, entitled The USSR Unmasked; A
Collection of Articles and Essays on Soviet
Russian Repression in Ukraine, Vantage Press. New York, 1976. But it is incomplete and the translation is not reliable.
4. P. Poltava, Op. Cit., p 171.
5 O. Diakiv-Hornovy, Op. Cit., P 258.
6. Ibid., pp 257-258.
7. P. Poltava, Op. Cit., pp 213-214. 8. 9. P. Poltava, Ibid, pp 169-70. "Lyst P. Poltavy ("Letter of P. Poltava").
Vpered, No 4, (13), 1950, pp 3-4.
International Viewpoint 8 April 1985
CUROW 3H7
BAL TIC dansk
POLĂND
ROLAND
Kiev
N.E. Donetsk
Dneoropetro
Odessa Crimea
BLACK SEA the source of the rumor about the unrepresentativeness of Hornovy and Poltava. The fact is that Stepan Bandera, the reactionary leader of the "Foreign Sections of the OUN" in the West had a hostile attitude to the democratic and left-wing positions held by the OUN on Ukrainian territory, and he raised the accusation that they represented adaptation to the prevailing ideology in the USSR or capitulation to it. (14)
It is clear that the OUN held a position of revolutionary nationalism, not revolutionary socialism. Vsevolod Holubnychy wrote about the OUN leaders "They were not Marxists. They did not approach the situation from the standpoint of any complete doctrine. That is probably their greatest weakness, becau a revolutionary party or organization can not be successful without a scientific doetrine. But in any case, they proceeded in the formulation of their program from the reality of the Soviet Society, from th real 'mood' of the people." (15)
In an independent Ukraine, the OUN leaders wanted to build a democratic socialist system, in accordance with the aspirations of the working people in the USSR, whom they understood well and to whom they were loyal. On the basis of their program for national revolution they were allies of the revolutionary Marxists, and all the more so because in 10 O. Diakiv-Hornovy, Op. Cit., p 149. The important article quoted here does not appear in the English edition published by Vantage Press. 11. Ibid., p 254. 12. A. Babenko (I Majstrenko). "Zavvahy do lysta P. Poltavy ["Remarks on the Letter from P. Poltava"]. Vpered, No 4 (13) 1950, p 5. 13. L. Shankovs'kyi, "Spohady D. Shumuhe u suitli faktiu" ["The Recollections of D. Shum uk in the Light of Facts"], Vyzvol'nyi Shliath No 1. 1975, p 64. 14. B. Levyts'kyi gives a good explanation of this problem in "Istorychne Znachennia rozlam u v OUN". in Vpered No 2 (11), 1950. This article has also been published in English in the Canadian publication Meta, Vol 2, No 1, 1978, under the title "The Historical Significance of the Split in the OUN." 15. W. Wilny (V. Holubnychy), "The Future of the Soviet Union", Fourth International, New York, May-June, 1951, p 80.
25
... Wrootaw present borders Polish borders before 1939 UPA zone of operation Political thought of Ukrainian intellectuals for the last half century and on our people's consciousness of the needs of independence and statehood." But what did Poltava mean by the Marxism against which the revolutionary nationalist movement had declared an ideological war?
"Stalin's version of dialectical and historical materialism we combat with the greatest determination as something unscientific, something contrary to the spirit of science, as an instrument used by the Bolshevik Party to legitimize its exploitative and colonial policy. The Stalinist dialectical and historical materialism has very little in common with Marx and Engels." (10) or.
What is more, in an extensive work entitled On the Bolshevik Ideological Front, in which he demonstrated that the Stalinists' "creative development" of Marxism, p represented, in fact a break with Marxism, Hornovy said: "It is becoming more and more difficult for the Stalinist masters to manipulate Marxism because it is precisely Marxism which is the theory that constitutes their most dangerous foe, for it is completely at odds with Bolshevik theory and unmasks their policies. Today, Marxism looms up equally as a danger for Bolshevism as once it was for Czarism." (11)
In his commentary on Poltava's letter, International Viewpoint 8 April 1985
WARSAW *
Lodź
A l'vor Iwan Majstrenko wrote: "Not knowing O. Hornovy's personal history, judging only from his writings, we characterised him once in the past as a revolutionary Marxist who had come out of a communist Marxist school. Recently we were more cautious in characterising him. In issue No 3 of Vpered, in introducing an article by Hornovy, we wrote: "In Poltava, one gets the impression of a nationalist school of thought, in Hornovy, of a Marxist one. " We still think that Hornovy's work On the Bolshevik Ideological Front is Marxist.
"If Hornovy himself thinks otherwise, that does not constitute proof. A character in a play by Moliere also thought that he spoke in poetry, when he spoke in prose. The information that P. Poltava has given us that O. Hornovy is a veteran OUN activist and does not come out of any Marxist school only confirms our Longstanding conviction that in the Ukraine reality the Marxist scientific arguments are so powerful in the fight against Bolshevism that even a veteran nationlaist like Hornovy has to resort to them and educate the young generation of nationalists in the country in these arguments." (12)
There might be some question whether Hornovy and Poltava represented only a "revisionist current in the OUN and not the ideology and program of the movement as a whole. g This opinion has been put forward from time to time. A careful analysis confirms what the historian Lev Shankovs'kyi said about this, that the two commanders "revised nothing in their works, were not 'opponents' General Taras Chuprynka but rather developed and clarified the official program and resolutions of the OUN, the UPA and the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council (UHVR)." (13) The latter was a political leadership body in which both Hornovy and Poltava held the positions of deputy president of the General Secretariat.
What Shankovs'kyi fails to clarify is
Osyp Diakiv-Hornovy (1921-1950). No photo of Petro Poltava exists (D, R.) their critique of Stalinism and capitalism, as well as in their goal of building a "Classless society" , they drew inspiration to a large extent from Marxist theory.
Four things, fundamentally distinguished the OUN leaders from the revolutionary Marxists. First, despite what Poltava said in a letter to Majstrenko, declaring "We nationalists do not deny the class struggle, because it is a fact and because without struggle it is not possible to make any progress in life or any social progress either," nonetheless, the OUN did not give primacy to the class struggle but rather to the "idea of a nation." It made an error common among fighters for the liberation of oppressed nations.
Secondly, although the OUN leaders recognized the October Revolution as a gain for the workers and defended what remained of it in the property relations, they accused the Bolsheviks of having played a reactionary role in the revolution, of usurping political power and of rebuilding the Russian empire, the prisonhouse of nations. While they made a distinction between Marxism and Stalinism, they did not see the difference between Bolshevism and Stalinism.
Fourthly, they made an error committed by many fighters for political revolution in the Eastern Bloc countries. On the basis of its political character, they considered the regime in teh USSR to be the most reactionary in the world, and the Soviet state to be the most dangerous imperialist power, one whose "parasitic class" , as they saw it, aimed to conquer the world.
Regardless of everything that divides us from the revolutionary nationlaists, we revolutionary socialists must honor the memory and heritage of Hornovy, Poltava and the other fighters for a Ukrainian national revolution in the 1940s. This is not only because of the respect theyearned as genuine revolutionists. We must remember them because their political activity and their theoretical work teach us valuable lessons about the enormous importance of national oppression in the emergence and in the reproduction of the totalitarian Soviet bureaucracy's system of power. They help us to understand that the political revolution of the oppressed working people is bolstered by the national revolutions of the oppressed nations of the Soviet Union. 26