A young veteran as a subject of history: the European experience and Ukrainian perspectives

Our purpose in the current Ukrainian-Muscovite War must be something more than the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Everyone wants to get from this war their own benefit. For Moscow, the war in the east of Ukraine - a way to partially satisfy imperial ambitions, unite their own society and raise the rating of Putin. For Ukrainian oligarchs and politicians Moscow's aggression was saving coli, which has suspended the revolutionary process, redirected activity of the revolutionary forces instead combat the internal enemy to counter external aggressor. Thus, it seems that the current war is beneficial Moscow, beneficial to those who dwell on Kyiv Pechersk hills, but the effective Ukrainian patriots it is not profitable. The only "benefit" for the patriot - is to be able to risk themselves and shed their blood for their country...

In fact, today's war carries the benefit for us, Ukrainian nationalists. The benefit, which has nationalist seek is to ensure the interests of its nation and in particular the implementation of the principles of its ideology. In this respect, the war is useful, since it leads to the transformation of social consciousness and the emergence of new socio-political and spiritual phenomena, which will be crucial in the further struggle for the realization of the ideas of Ukrainian nationalism. Of all these phenomena can be specially singled out the phenomenon of volunteer soldiers and officers at the front. In the future conclusion of the war both phenomena can be combined into one - a phenomenon of the young veteran. This type, a young soldier returning from the front, played crucially important role in European history of the first half of the XX century. The same type has not lost its potential today.

Before we talk about veterans of the First World War and their place in European history, a brief look at how changing European warrior and European war during a millennium.

Warrior of traditional Europe - a knight, a feudal lord, an aristocrat. The fate of medieval Europe was solved not huge armies that were based on the full potential of a society, as a hordes of knights. Sometimes nobles were forced to use the services of the national militia, and the main burden of the war (and its achievements) lying on this military-political elite.

The situation changes when the Kings begin the path of absolutism as well the city - are exempt from the power of local lords. To replacement for the Knights-aristocrats become the phenomenon of soldier - a warrior-mercenary. The word "soldier" has a common root with the Italian. «Soldi» (money) and «assoldare» (recruit). Soldier - a person who is not fighting for the faith, not for glory and honor of aristocrat and not to preserve their socio-political situation. Soldier - a mercenary, a man who is fighting for the money. With the proliferation of crossbows and then firearms, soldiers get more wins over the Knights. Eventually over time, becomes to the phenomenon of the regular army.

Gradually changed the place of civilians in the war. I can not say that during the Middle Ages civilians in general stood aloof of military conflicts theyr feudal lords. However, one a feudal lord generally not attitude with hostility to the people, controlled by another lord. Similarly, this people did not do much opposition to a foreign lord. Analogue of modern patriotism and nationalism in the Middle Ages was limited primarily to the loyalty of vassals to his overlord. Patriotism, concern for the interests of the state and society, and the greatness of his native land in the first place were the responsibility, a function of the feudal elite. However, this situation still was not absolute. With legitimate monarch were associated not only aristocrats but also the Commonwealth. One of the clearest examples of a mobilization of broader (for the most feudal elite) masses gives us the Hundred Years War in France.

The situation has changed drastically due to the French Revolution. One of the key concepts on which was based the ideology of the French revolutionaries, was the idea of popular sovereignty and the nation-state. In terms of the Christian Middle Ages source of power is not the people but God. Pope holds in his hands two swords of power - the sword of spiritual power and the sword of the secular authority. Pope delegates the sword of secular power for the monarch as the anointed by God. In the revolutionary ideology that was based on the philosophy of the Enlightenment, the source of power is the people, not God.

The people, the nation - a community of citizens of one country; These citizens have a generally equal rights and responsibilities (although at the same time economic inequality continues to exist). Within the meaning of French revolutionary Republicans when they were attacked by another country, monarchical state, against these "invaders" had to climb all French citizens (in this case in terms of the most "invaders" their actions were not aggression, but merely protection of legitimate - Christian and monarchical system). That defense of their own state began be regarded as the duty of every citizen at a time when it was previously the duty of the monarch, Cabinet of Ministers, regular army, organized by the monarch or (even earlier) - the feudal elite.

Interestingly, a more conservative country at a time when the French themselves started an aggressive policy, responded quite symmetrical, started a guerrilla war in response to the invasion of Napoleon. First of all, against the Napoleonic invaders deployed guerrilla war in Spain. Frenchmen, full of revolutionary ideas for the Spaniards are atheists who need Kill at first all cases. In the article "The belligerent Church and the nation" Dontsov cites an interesting the then prevailing dialogue, a conversation - "catechism" between the priest and the child:

- Who is our King?

- Ferdinand the VII.

- Who is the enemy of our country?

- The Emperor of France

- Who is he?

- He is evil of all evil on Earth.

- Who are the French?

- Christians in the past and now just bad nation.

- Is it a sin to kill this French?

- No, Father, it's a good thing; only because this we can deliver native country from the force of conqueror ...

Religion was the prerequisite for the partisan opposition French in Tyrol and partly in Russia. A little bit different was the situation in Prussia. Firstly, the basis for the stimulation partisan opposition there was a romantic nationalism grown up by philosophical thought (J. Fichte etc ). Secondly, for the first time in the history of call for the deployment of partisan warfare came from the legitimate royal power. In the spring of 1813 has been issued a royal edict of landshturm deployment of partisan warfare. According to this edict, each national of King of Prussia had to resist the invaders in all available methods. The ideal Germanmilitary was "armed nation". Then famous military theorist von Clausewitz introduces the concept of "absolute war."

Collectivization of war reaches its peak during the First and Second World Wars. During The World War the body of Europe was covered by huge cracks - the front lines. They are cuting trenches in the soil, and the lights turn red with blood, clouds of toxic gases. To remove these front lines, emperors, heads of cabinet ministers are required multimillion army. The same situation is observed during the Second World War, only then except front lines occurs aircraft, which is bombing enemy cities. The boundary between the military and civilians disappear. There is a phenomenon, which the German philosopher, a veteran of both world wars Ernst Junger calls "total mobilization". Participants in the war are not only soldiers, officers and generals. These same participants in the war are scientists who are developing new forms of weaponry, as well as multi-million masses of farmers, workers in industry etc. Blurred boundaries are between war, economy, politics, ideology, art - all are mixed in a "total mobilization".

Generally, the whole process collectivization war was destructive. Special conclusion of degradation soldier profession is a modern view to the army and the military. Modern soldier or officer is an "employee", "proletariat", which is aloof from the process and "work". It is very obviously formula "army out of politics." It is justified by different beautiful phrases and actually its aim is to ensure the existence of today's political elites. For example in Ukraine several times could have military coup. But the army was silent. Silent when Ukraine refuse nuclear arsenal; silent when its army destroyed; silent when officers had to live awfully; silent when the country was full of lawlessness. Starting by generals and ending by lieutenants, the army was involved in present kleptocratic system, a system of lies, corruption and lack of any high benchmarks.

Collectivization of war and soldier profession was a destructive process. However, sometimes the process of collectivization gave the birth to alternative opportunities for the development of humanity, or at least some countries. An example of paradoxical logic of history here is The First World War. The First World War was far away from a variety of romantic imagines. However, she gave a birth to the type of person very close to building a new aristocracy in Europe. There is such a concept as "aesthetics of disgusting" - search aesthetic content that is not the basic understanding good and beautiful things. Something similar was observed during the First World War, when tens or hundreds of thousands of soldiers find higher meaning in the mud of the trenches, the clouds of toxic gases and the death of their brothers.

Another was the situation with the veterans of the First World War in European countries such as France, Germany and Italy. There, they were not the most important social group, which formed the deployment of the revolutionary nationalist movement. In all three cases, veterans were characterized by very high levels of patriotism. It was a special type of patriotism - patriotism, rinsed in the blood, burned in the fire, rich in iron and lead, weathered a few years spent on the front. In all three cases, the veterans, with special spirituality of warrior, had an aversion to bourgeois democracy and parliamentarism. In all three cases, the veterans saw the two poles of evil - capitalism, the power of "money bags" on the one hand and the "Red Menace" - on the other hand. All these qualities are manifested in a special way in the German veterans. Germany lost the war, not lost by militarily, but politically - because of capitulatory policy of state officials and the destructive activities of leftist forces.

The fastest political victory with the participation of the veterans of the First World was achieved in Italy, where veterans were the basis for the deployment of fascist movement. In Germany, the situation was somewhat different. After returning from the front, the soldiers saw rampant and anarchy of leftist forces. First of all, their force was aimed at neutralizing of the "red threat" - Elimination of the Bavarian Soviet Republic, suppression of unrest, arranged by Communists, neutralization of the leftist propaganda. Gradually Veteran factor in Germany is gaining more clearly defined organizational forms. Emerging the "SA" - storm troops - who for a certain time became the main striking force of the young National Socialist movement. Task №1 for German Stormtroopers - is to prevent revolution, the socialist revolution. However, when this task is generally performed in the minds of Stormtroopers seem reasonable idea if we were able to stop the revolution, so - and we can lead her. The possibility of such a revolution for Hitler was a very important argument, which he used in political bargaining. Having a "safety net" as storm troopers, he was able to come to power completely legal through.

After Hitler came to power "SA" was liquidated . On the one hand, he betrays those revolutionary ideals for that veterans are fought. On the other hand, still can not deny that the environment of "SA" was not ideologically monolithic and carried some destructive. But despite this, the fact that the victory of the National Socialists in Germany - this largely merit of the veterans. Here, of course, it is necessary to separate the positive and negative aspects of National Socialism., I did not justify such features of Nazism as anti-Christianity , totalitarianism (instead of organic state and society) racism. However, in the National Socialist regime was implemented a number of positive features: anti-communism and, more broadly, anti-Marxism, rejection of demo-liberal values  and parliamentarism attempts to create a new aristocracy (SS), fostering vitality and heroic virtues, attempts to rebuild some traditional proportions, the desire to preserve the village and at the same time trying to humanize the city and the area of  technology. Similarly, should be the approach to fascism, which has a much more positive features.

In France, the situation was slightly worse. Various nationalist organizations failed to unite. Instead, leftist forces crossed the ideological confusion and united. There was not a single charismatic leader. Winning the war in the case of the French did not give such a result, as in the case of the Germans - gave the desire for revenge. Nevertheless, veteran`s movement in France was strong enough and it can put on a par with similar movements in Italy and Germany.

Something will repeat, to clearly articulate a paradoxical sense of history. The historical development of Europe leads to the fact that there is a mass society, to which disclosed two perspectives: either demo-liberal and capitalist or communist. Community degraded loses high ideals and organic proportions. Aristocracy disappears, the only "elite" - a handful of politicians who often represent the interests of any holders of big capital. The war degenerating into the massacre, which performed by "donates" of the inventions technological progress. And suddenly from this war emerging category of people who make challenge for the capitalists , communists and socialists, most of parliamentarism and bourgeois society. Make a challenge around the world to save his homeland. There are germs of a new aristocracy.

Now let's look at the situation in Ukraine. First, we have the phenomenon of volunteers. A significant percentage of these people - are representatives of the nationalist movement or right youth. Other - people are not deprived of a share passionarity.

Soldiers and officers of the armed forces will enriched by combat experience. Organic desire to protect their homeland, arising under enemy fire, creates appropriate patriotic feelings. However, there is a special hatred for the government - and the generals and some lower-level commanders and politicians. A significant percentage of these soldiers and officers under favorable conditions may be involved in the process of revolution. At the same time can happen as a "concentrated" power version of Revolution ("ATO on Pechersk hills") and permanent recovery of state and society by revolutionary methods.

Revolution - is not only providing to dictatorial powers for Dmytro Yarosh. Revolution - a total PROCESS (not just ACT), which should cover the whole country. Anyone who risked his life and lost brothers, has the right to ask a lot of questions to the police, officials, criminals, businesses ...

Of course, the revolutionary situation generates a portion of chaos. Not everyone of those who are fighting on the Ukrainian side, worthy in order to form a new national elite. Not everyone will hold out at the temptations, that will opened before him. Revolution devouring its own children, it is a natural and necessary phenomenon. Maybe after the victory of the main stage of the revolution purges of her travelers will continue not less than a decade. But this revolution is necessary, and anyone who gets in her way, has understand all the responsibility which rests upon him. 

by Igor Zagrebelniy