The Ethnonym “Ukrainian” is Allegedly Sounding Like a Slur to Polish People

I have a working knowledge of Polish, and can understand it, especially in written form. But any intricacies of the language are foreign to me.

I don’t know how genuine problem this is but the ethnonym “Ukrainian” has entered circulation rather recently, and it comes from Polish. The first to speak of Ukrainian nation (украинская народность) was the historian Nikolai Kostomarov in an essay titled “Two Russian nationalities.” Where he said there are two branches of Russians, Greater Russians and Ukrainians. This however cannot be considered the first use of the ethnonym Украинец.

The latter was adopted by some circles by the end of the nineteenth century but remained widespread among political activists and intellectuals only. By the outbreak of the First World War and especially towards its end, this identification got more currency. (See my posts here and here and here). I recall Oles’ Buzyna saying that the ethnonym “Ukrainian” was first officially used in the Austro-Hungarian military in 1916, on the orders of Emperor Karl I.

Otherwise it took root in 1920s during Soviet Korenizatsiya…

US Diplomats Should be Wiser Before They Shitpost


These are the problems:

  1. Moscow was saved from Mongol destruction, unlike Kiev, because of those deep woods. Moscow became the preserve of Russian culture, while Kiev embarked on a long journey of estrangement from Rus’.
  2. All of the buildings shown are built in the style known as Ecclesiastical Baroque, they all come from the seventeenth and eighteenth century when Kiev was under Russian rule.
  3. It is a common trope of the Svidomites to point out the antiquity of Kiev over Moscow but the old Kiev has little in common with the modern Ukrainian state.

Russian is Still the Dominant Language in Ukraine

Remember this blog’s central thesis “Russian is the dominant language in Ukraine”, which claims 80% of Ukrainian linguistic space is occupied by the Russian language. The other day these graphs were sent to me:

It would seem that Ukrainian has gained a little, however, since publishing my thesis, several things have occurred. First off, now all media and businesses must publish their stuff in Ukrainian, This obviously will increase the share of posts in Ukrainian by a considerable amount. But even with this, and not counting Donbas and Crimea, Russian still occupies more than 50% of the Ukrainian linguistic space.

Bandera Gone With the Wind

I still remember what a certain Svidomite troll on my old blog, Austere Insomniac, said of the church of Dmitry Sydor. Dmitry Sydor was an Orthodox priest, and a Carpatho-Rusyn activist, and his church was struck by lightning which toppled the cross upon the dome of the church. He interpreted it as a sign of God’s displeasure…

Dmitry Sydor was then persecuted for separatism, that was still under the presumably pro-Russian Yanukovych, and allegations were made against him that he received money from the Russian World Fund. Meanwhile though, Western funds, Soros and others were operating freely and several years later, the people on Western payroll ousted Yanukovych. This is to remind anyone who thinks that Russia should have engaged in buying influence in Ukraine the way West did. Russia did not have an even playing field in Ukraine. Besides, going against the collective West in the game of buying influence was a losing proposition from the beginning.

But weather signs have been rich this winter, strong winds have destroyed a supersized portrait of Stepan Bandera in Ternopol, Halychyna, Ukraine.

The gods hate Bandera too, not just Poles, Russians, and Belarusians, and just about anyone in Ukraine and around it. Even more ominous image has been generated on the other side of the country, in Kharkov.

The wind has split in two the national flag of Ukraine. Funny that the Ukrainian flag is associated with the homeland of Bandera and contains in it the colours from the coat of arms of Lvov, that is a golden lion on an azure field. A variant of this flag was given to the people of Halychyna by Empress Sophie as a thank you for help in suppressing the Hungarian revolt. Emperor Franz Joseph called them Tyrolleans of the East.

The Tyrolleans were the epitome of loyalty in Austria because they stood loyal to the Habsburgs when Napoleon invaded. The Ukrainian flag was introduced to Russian Ukraine by Sichovi Striltsy, a group formed of Ukrainian nationalists that was originally part of the Austrian army.

There Weren’t any Ukrainians Before the Break up of Austria in 1918

Let me continue the topic [see here] of Ukrainians not existing before the Great War. I have recently uploaded a short video featuring an unknown, West Ukrainian, elderly gentleman, which I titled in Russian There weren’t any Ukrainian under the Kaiser (the Austrian Emperor). Let’s check out the contents, here is a transcript.

The interviewer:

Tell us, during the Austrian rule, did your parents consider themselves to be Ukrainians?

The interviewee:

We Ukrainians did not exist back then during the Austrian rule. Back then, the official nomenclature was “Ruthenians”, and otherwise the name was “Rusyns”. And we all called each other “Rusyns”. And only after 1918, when Austria broke up, we began calling ourselves Ukrainians. Until then it was considered that we were all Rusyns.

Bathory under Pskov. Antonio Possevino in black.

Rusyny or Rusyns, as I anglicise it, is a term that means a man of Rus’, a Russian. Before suffering a rebranding in the twentieth century, the ancestors of the Ukrainians were known as Rusyns in what is now Western Ukraine, and as Malorossy (Little Russians) in Ukraine proper. To my knowledge, the first person that suggested there is a separate ethnic identity called Ukrainians was, to my knowledge, the historian, Nikolay (Ukrainian: Mykola) Kostomarov, who wrote the essay Две русския народности (two Russian ethnicities). The term was used in the early modern period to denote the Polish gentry (I may be descended of those according to a family legend) and Cossacks in Central Dnieper area. A video on my channel by Mikhail Onufrienko says that the Poles began referring to the entire area of South-Western Rus’ as “Ukraine” (borderland) at the suggestion of Papal Legate, Antonio Possevino, to divide the lands of Rus’. However, this was not accepted by the people.

The Readers should know that in the nineteenth century, the area known as Ukraine was much more limited and there did not exist an ethnicity called Ukrainians. Also, when Taras Shevchenko mentions Ukraine in his poems, it is the Ukraine you see above that he mentions.

The most important point to take away from this is that Ukraine is an ahistorical entity. Ukraine’s statehood begins in the time of the Great War, 1917 more precisely, when the first entity named Ukraine was formed, following the February Revolution. Ukraine’s legitimacy is based on a peasant vernacular codified into the Ukrainian language, a mixture of Polish and Old Russian, and perhaps some historical geography, where the Ukrainian nation is said to live in the territories that belonged to Poland before the division of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the late eighteenth century + areas settled by the Russian Empire in nineteenth century along the Black Sea coast with populations originating from these formerly Polish territories. The detail one needs to remember is that the peasant vernacular was never the language of the cities. Cities in the East and South of Ukraine were established by the Russian tsars and were consequently Russian speaking, and cities in the West of Ukraine were Polish speaking. Lvov was a Polish city until World War II.

The latter is where the stereotype of Ukrainian being a language of country bumpkins comes from. The Svidomite Ukrainians find this offensive, and another thing they find offensive is their old ethnonym “Maloross”, Little or Lesser Russian. They show their rural ignorance here as well because Maloross was an ecclesiastical designation. In the Greek understanding, Little referred to Greece Proper and Greater to the colonies. In Poland, the Greater Poland meant the center, and Lesser Poland meant the province. The only reason why the Ukrainian nationalists chose the name Ukraine for the new nation they sought to create is that it lacks any connection to Russia. However once they severed the connection to Russia, they need a new narrative to explain their existence. Let’s see how they cope?

As a trained historian, I would suggest to them to explore the linguistic origins of the Ukrainian language, and tie its origins to the history of occupation of Western Russia by foreigners. Then continue with a discussion of the Ukrainian movement in the nineteenth and twentieth century, what motivated it, what were the ideas surrounding it? The ethnogenesis of Ukrainians is hiding in these processes. But that is not what the Svidomites are doing. Instead they lie to children:

Rus-Ukraine the first Ukrainian state

They lie to children about the Old Rus’ being the first Ukrainian state, and they included Staraya Ladoga and Novgorod in it. What they do not realise that the Old Rus’ has its origins in the north, around Staraya Ladoga, and it was began by Swedish Vikings called Varangians in the east. The Primary Chronicle of Nestor tells us that these Vikings were invited by the Slavic tribes in the south, therefore Rus’ originated in the north and came to the territory of contemporary Ukraine from the north, not the other way around. The christianiser of Rus’, St. Vladimir, spent youth in Norway, and then came to Kiev from Novgorod. The Svidomite mythologisers create a fictitious called Rus’-Ukraine. Old Rus’ was really one of the first state formations on the territory of Ukraine (although that was only the Central and Western Ukraine of today, the Black Sea coast was controlled by Kipchak nomads) but it was not a Ukrainian state. Was it a Russian state? Yes, and the Russian Federation is its direct descendant, while the Ukraine is a mutinous province without historical statehood to derive its origins from.

Recently Alexey Arestovych suggested Ukraine rename itself into Rus-Ukraine, or Ukraina-Rus. To which Volodymyr Vyatrovych replied that putting Rus with Ukraine would just come out to foreigners as Ukraine and Russia. That is because Rus is Russia, and Ukraine is part of Russia. The debate on whether Ukraine is Russia or not are still raging today.

To illustrate how much the Ukrainian officialdom is in the grips of myths and lies about history, check out this initiative by the Lvov and Kiev city councils. Not so long ago, they decided to rename the Russian Federation into Moscovia, believing that Peter the Great renamed Moscovia into Russian Empire in 1721. What actually happened in 1721 is that Peter the Great assumed the title of All-Russian Emperor, and thus the Russian Empire was born. Previously, Russia’s rulers held the title Tsar of All Russia, and before that Grand Duke of All Russia.

Moscovia, from which comes the English word, Muscovy, was a designation employed particularly in Poland and Lithuania that ruled over part of Russia, and laid claim to the entirety of Russia. The Kiev and Lvov representatives must think that if Ukraine was unfortunately named by the Poles, then Greater Russia, or what is now the Russian Federation must suffer the same kind of rebranding.

To wrap up, every Ukrainian is at the same time a Russian because his ancestors were Russians. Ukrainians are defined purely on their language, which is a local patois of Old Russian and Polish. Maybe this is why the government there is so hostile against the Russian language.

The Ever-amazing Wonders of Bolshevik Nation Building

On this blog, I have been talking a lot about the soviet policy of Korenizatsiya, which essentially created the Ukrainians out of West Russians, however, little was I aware how messed up the same policy was in Central Asia, where also unprecedented nations were created out of other nations. For instance, the country in focus currently, Kazakhstan, was created out of the Kyrgyz people. The populations of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are linguistically and culturally barely distinguishable from each other, and it bears a question why these two nations were divided?

I have recently noted that Kazakhstan is assuming the political culture of neighbouring Kyrgyzstan. But I did not realise how geographically close Almaty (the Soviet capital of Kazakhstan, formerly “Verny” – a town built by Russians) is from the capital of Kyrgyzstan, Bishkek. Cross border cultural exchange is apparent here, after all, the border is arbitrary, and should not really be there. Much like the border between Russia and Ukraine.