WHY THE UKRAINIAN NATIONALISTS CONSIDER POROSHENKO'S GOVERNMENT ILLEGITIMATE

Repeatedly I have written that the concept of "legitimate and illegitimate" or "legitimacy and illegitimacy" have become filler words, used incorrectly by parts of Ukrainian society.

The biggest problem is that even some of those who call themselves patriots of Ukraine do not understand the true concept of legitimacy. They often say: "Yes, Poroshenko isn't perfect, but he is a president, he was elected legally through voting."

Obviously, these people do not see the difference between two different concepts - legitimacy and legality.

Legitimacy is not legality. Legitimacy is not legal, nor a philosophical-legal or a philosophical-political concept. Legitimacy, regarding a government, is an inner legitimateness from the authenticity of a government and its legitimacy in the eyes of its people. And the recognition of legitimacy of a particular government by a society depends only on its ideology.

The soviet government was lawful and legal because it was chosen according to Soviet laws. But this government was illegitimate in Ukraine because the Ukrainian people considered it an occupier, whereas the government established by the Ukrainian nationalist instrugents (OUN) was legitimate in the eyes of Ukrainians, but illegal in the view of the Soviet occupiers.

Saying that the Soviet government was illegitimate we are acting within a particular ideological position, according to which depends that the Ukrainian nation must have an independent national state!

We can also say that the Soviet government was illegitimate in terms of Christianity, because the policy implemented by this government was clearly anti-Christian. Minor signs of legitimacy were demonstrated by the USSR leadership only when it resorted to justice actions, which any government should to do, for example, to punish real criminals (rapists, murderers, etc.)

However, the Soviet government was legitimate in terms of communist ideology because it acted within the Marxist-Leninist idea of "a proletarian dictatorship" and other nonsense.

So, I repeat, the recognition of legitimacy and illegitimacy of a particular government depends first of all on the society's ideological position.

In terms of the Ukrainian nationalist ideology only a government is possible whose actions are aimed at securing the interests of the Ukrainian nation. This is not in the current government of  Poroshenko.

Firstly, the entire Ukrainian political system is not legitimate because: a) its system was built on a false ideological basis; b) its system is serving oligarchic clans and external forces. And it is not about a particular statesman, a political party or a government but about the state formation itself. As Vasyl Ivanishin wrote: "The only state system can be truly legitimate in Ukraine is the Ukrainian national state - a state of the Ukrainian nation," but the state named "Ukraine" still not become a truly national state!

Secondly, Poroshenko's regime (as well as its predecessor) is not acting to secure the interests of the Ukrainian nation. It is clearly anti-Ukrainian and hostile to our national interests, so it simply cannot be legitimate, especially in terms of its agreements with the enemy.

For us, the nationalists, Poroshenko's government isn't legitimate and its legal status doesn't matter for us. Just as the current government considers some of our national-defence actions as illegal. The supreme law for the Ukrainian nationalists should be the Law of God and the interests of the Ukrainian nation! Execution or violating the laws should depend only on particular circumstances of the liberation struggle process, of course, it is unwise to break the law in the case where it is possible to achieve a successful result without its violation.

So only a nationalist government is able to build a truly national state, protect the national interests and create political and judicial systems which will really be legitimate!

Original text by Igor Zagrebelny