Donbas as an Object of “Genetic Reformatting”

Oleksiy Volovych

The Minister of Culture of Ukraine Yevhen Nyshchuk’s words (21st November 2016 during the broadcast in the program “Freedom of Speech” on ICTV channel), that in the East of Ukraine “there is no genetics, because the cities had been deliberately populated by the Soviet power”, personally I take as a recognition of the historical fact of the natural development of the autochthonous Ukrainian population in that area having been warped for political and economic reasons by the Stalinist regime, one of the many crimes of which, as we know, was the forced relocation of many peoples of the former USSR. And rightly Yevhen Nyshchuk pointed out that “the situation that had developed in the East and South of the country — is “the abyss of consciousness”.

Indeed, hundreds of thousands of people, mostly Russians, with different mentality and perception of the world, for whom the Donbas was just a territory, rather than their native land, had been forcibly resettled among Ukrainians with the aim of Russification. According to Yevhen Nyshchuk, “deliberate blocking of access in some regions of Ukraine to truthful information, to the development of culture, tradition… When there was some migration, people did not receive then the full information about the history of the region, its traditions”. And in order to improve this situation and “to awaken people in the East”, Yevhen Nyshchuk considers it necessary to use books, children’s education, creative activities, movies and the like. “The mission of culture is to sew up this wound like doctors sew up the limbs of our wounded guys”, — said the Minister of Culture.

However, pro-Russian journalists and politicians raised furious noise in social networks and the media, accusing Yevhen Nyshchuk of his attitude to the people of the Donbas as to defective and “flawed” ones. This opportunity was not missed by the official Press-Secretary of the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova. She made an official statement and made pretty dubious and groundless generalizations: “Kyiv’s implementation of the Minsk Agreements is out of the question as long as the Government of Ukraine considers Donbas a different “cultural-genetic” category of people, whose consciousness, from the point of view of the Minister of Culture of the state, can be corrected”.

Once again, the “Opposition Bloc” ingratiated itself before Moscow and in its statement said: “These words are a direct insult to millions of citizens of Ukraine, who actually are seen as the “second class”, hinting on the fact that they are foreign bodies, a brake on the way of Ukrainization, accusing them of reluctance to assimilate and abandon their native language, culture, traditions and religion”. “The Opposition Bloc” demands immediate resignation of Yevhen Nyshchuk. I think Maria Zakharova and the Kremlin leaders liked this statement by former “regionals”: “Well done, guys!”

In response to these vicious assaults and attacks, Yevhen Nyshchuk said that his words about the “absence of Genetics” (in the sense of a sustainable, progressive and continuous development of human society in the historical dimension) were taken out of context. According to him, “if you pull out a quote from the Bible, it may seem that it was written by an atheist”…

Genetic Sociology

From school biology textbooks we know that genetics is a science about heredity and variability of characteristics of plants and living organisms. Due to the universality of the genetic code, genetics studies all forms of life, including a human in his social environment. Human genetics is closely related to anthropology, in particular to the theory of evolution, since it studies physiological, psychological, philosophical and sociological aspects of human evolution.

M. Hrushevskyi, “Principles of Citizenship (Genetic Sociology)”, 1921A great Ukrainian historian and philosopher Mykhaylo Hrushevskyi was one of the few Ukrainian public figures of the early 20th century, who sought to develop the scientific basis of genetic sociology. In his work “Principles of Citizenship (Genetic Sociology),” he analyzed social human societies of the past, seeing a decisive role in their evolution “in the competition of individualistic and collectivistic tendencies and their periodic alternation”. According to M. Hrushevskyi, the development of societies obeys the laws of social development, which control the changes in the forms of human society, and a major factor in the historical process is the people and the state.

M. Hrushevskyi paid special attention to sociological analysis of the Ukrainian ethno-cultural environment, in particular to the phenomenon of Ukrainian history such as Kossacks. Investigating the reasons, circumstances and prospects of the development of the Ukrainian society, as the main factor of its formation, M. Hrushevskyi first called the national self-determination of the Ukrainian people within the framework of the national-cultural autonomy within a federated Russia, but later he drew the conclusion that after the unification and integration of the majority of the Ukrainian society, political parties and movements, the main goal should be to create their own independent democratic Ukrainian state.

The laws of “social genetics” can work in pure and undistorted form only in the situation of normal development of a certain human community without great social upheaval. But the ideal conditions for the development of human societies do not happen in reality because of the different social disasters, especially wars, revolutions and social experiments of totalitarian regimes, including relocation and even destruction of large masses of the population in times of peace, an example of which can be collectivization, Stalin’s terror and Holodomor in the 1930s.

Colonization of the Donbas in the Times of Tsarist Rule and Soviet Power

Relocation of Russians and foreigners onto the territory of Ukraine began under Empress Elizabeth. For example, in 1753 Serbs were settled in the lands of Zaporizhzhya Sich and Southern Hetman State on the right bank of the Siverskyi Donets, where the Slavo-Serbia was established, which bordered on the lands of the Don Cossacks. The boundary between the Zaporizhzhya and Don Cossacks was established by the decree of Empress Elizabeth back in 1746.

In 1762–1763, Catherine II issued two manifestos on foreign colonization of the South of Ukraine and resettlement on its territory of Russians, Serbs, Bulgarians, Moldovans, Germans and representatives of other nations. Catherine II set the task to dissolve the Ukrainian ethnic group among other ethnic groups, depriving it of national characteristics and identity and, in the end, to completely Russify it. These settlements were guarded by Russian troops, whose number exceeded the number of the new settlers. Often between the new settlers and the Ukrainian Cossacks a there were misunderstandings and clashes, but the colonists were sided by the imperial power. Cossacks countered the Russian expansion with the help of effective economic development of the region along with forceful displacement of the uninvited colonists supported by the tsarist government.

At the beginning of the 18th century, Ukrainian Cossacks and peasants completely dominated in the development of the Black Sea and the Azov Sea region, and finally made the region part of the Ukrainian ethnic territory on which there was a dense network of Zaporizhzhya zymivnyky (wintering places), palankas, slobodas (“free settlements”) and cities. Attempts to oust the Ukrainian population or assimilate it with the Russian one were not too successful in tsarist times. In 1794, the share of Russians in the Right-Bank Ukraine was only 0.1 %, in the Left Bank Ukraine — 5.2 %. According to the census of 1897, there were already 3.8 million Russians on the Ukrainian ethnographic territory (the total population was 27.8 million people), i.e. 11.7 %. According to Census of 1926, in the territory of the Ukrainian SSR there lived 4.2 million Russians (12.1 % of the total population), and in 1939 — 2.7 million (9.2 %).

In the early 1920s, the majority of the population of the Donbas were Ukrainians — 64 %, Russians were the second largest ethnic group (26 %). In 1939, the share of Russians in the Donbas was already 32 %, and that of Ukrainians — 61 % of the total population. In 1989 in the territory of Donetsk region lived 2.6 million Ukrainians, 2.3 million Russians, 83 thousand Greeks, 76 thousand Belarusians, 28 thousand Jews, 25 thousand Tatars; in the territory of Luhansk region — 1.4 million Ukrainians, 1.2 million Russians, 33 thousand Belarusians and 12 thousand Tatars. Under the total Russification, the intensive growth of the number of Russians in the Donbas was due not only to their resettlement from Russia, but also a record of different ethnic groups as Russians.

In the 1920s, the share of Russians among the rural population of the Donbas was 15-17 %, and among the urban — about 75 %. The Soviet government continued the socio-economic policy of the Russian Empire on the use of labor resources for the economic development of the Donbas. Preference was given to immigrants from remote regions of Russia, because they, unlike Ukrainians, were cut off from the previous place of residence, which contributed to consolidation of their place of work and to a decrease in turnover of labour. Donbas was quite an attractive region for salaried workers and criminals, the work in the mines for whom became a way of serving the punishment or rehabilitation.

The idea of the ”genetic reformatting” of the population of the Donbas was that settlers were forcibly cut off from their lands all over Russia, from their centuries-old way of life and moved to a foreign for them land. This way was interrupted the organic connection of the genetic chain of generations, without which there cannot be full-fledged self-comprehension by a separate individual of his place in life and in the society, there cannot be a full-fledged personality at all. To become a full-fledged personality, one has to absorb a particular life experience of one’s predecessors, from great-grandfather of the grandfather in the land where they have lived for centuries.

In the process of the “genetic reformatting” was also grinded the autochthonous Ukrainian population of the Donbas, which was deprived of the native language and culture, the right to their land, and very often, the life itself. It should be added that the most massive relocation was carried out in the 1930s, during the period of aggressive atheism, collectivization, Holodomor, Stalin’s terror and merciless industrialization on the blood and bones of millions of people, which led not only to a loss of traditional human values, but also to people’s turning into frightened slaves.

Despite the formally international policy of the CPSU, there were constant social and domestic tensions between Russian migrants and Ukrainian indigenous people of the Donbas. In particular, Ukrainization of the 1920s was perceived negatively by the Russian population of the Donbas, leading to conflicts on linguistic grounds. In the 1920’s – early 1930’s Russians were reluctant to integrate into the Ukrainian culture. After the short period of Ukrainization many people who took active part in it, were repressed. This shows that the so-called Ukrainization was designed to identify the Ukrainian national-patriots, in order to root them out.

In order to prevent conflicts between the Ukrainian and Russian population, in 1927 government of the Ukrainian SSR initiated the establishment of the Donbas of Russian and other national administrative regions. However, in 1939 the system of administrative-territorial construction based on ethnicity was canceled, as the one that did not work.

Like in the rest of the country, the famine in the Donbas was the result of forced collectivization and the forced absolute confiscation of grain and other food in the village. In 1933, in Donetsk region famine killed 20 % of the population, at least half a million peasants. However, the cities almost did not suffer from the famine, as all industrial workers received food rations. At the end of 1933 the All-Union Committee on Resettlement was created for the purpose of populating (mostly by Russians) of the Ukrainian villages devastated by the famine in the Donbas, in Odesa, Dnipropetrovsk and Kharkiv regions.

In 1951 there was a deportation of a part of Ukrainian population of Western Ukraine to the Donbas, where immigrants who already then were called “Banderites”, experienced all sorts of moral and physical harassment from both the local population and authorities. However, despite the contradictions and misunderstandings between the East and the West of Ukraine, the overwhelming majority of residents of the Donbas sought to reach a compromise. Lack of exclusively pro-Russian orientation of the population of the Donbas in the early 1990s is strongly supported by the fact that its overwhelming majority supported the idea of the declaration of Ukraine’s statehood in the referendum of December 1, 1991. According to the latest census (2001), the proportion of ethnic Russians was: in Donetsk region — 38.2 %, in Luhansk region — 39.0 %, in Kharkiv region — 25.6 %, in Zaporizhzhya region — 24.7 %, in Dnipropetrovsk region — 17.6 %, in Kherson region — 14.1 %, in Mykolaiv region — 14.1 %, in Odesa region — 20.7 %.

”The Soviet People” = “The Russian Nation”

One of the ethno-social experiments in the former Soviet Union was the Soviet regime’s attempt to create a so-called “new historical community — the Soviet people”. The first attempt to consider the Soviet people as an integral ethno-social category was made by N. Khrushchev in his report to the ХХII Party Congress in October 1961: “In the USSR, there is now a new historical community of people of different nationalities who have common features — the Soviet people. They have a common socialist Motherland — the USSR, the common economic basis — the socialist economy, the common class structure, the common worldview — Marxism-Leninism, the common goal — to build communism, and many similarities in the spiritual realm and psychology”.

The official language of “interethnic communication” of the Soviet people was Russian. Technically, the new ethno-social category of the Soviet people did not affect the national feelings of the peoples of the USSR, and allegedly contributed to the “strengthening friendship of peoples and flourishing of socialist nations”. But in reality the party postulate about the inevitability of “merging of nations and peoples under communism” led to Russification of non-Russian peoples of the USSR.

The ideological component of the concept of the Soviet people was Soviet patriotism — love of Soviet citizens to their socialist Motherland, loyalty to the Communist Party, the Soviet government and the idea of communism. In fact, Soviet patriotism was an instrument in the struggle against national aspirations of the non-Russian peoples.

At the same XXII Congress of the CPSU they adopted the “Moral Code of the Builder of Communism”, which people of my generation learned by heart at school. I must admit that I liked the Code and I thought that if all the Soviet people observed it, we would soon live under communism, as we had been promised by N. Khrushchev. Even on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union, I felt that despite all its “temporary drawbacks”, it had a very important advantage over the capitalist countries — namely, the unshakable unity of the Soviet people. But soon the Soviet Union collapsed and the artificially formed “Soviet people” ceased to exist. All the peoples of the USSR, “fled to national quarters”. This shows that it is impossible to ignore the ethnic factor in the formation of political nations.

After 1991, the analogue of the “Soviet people” in Russia became “Russians” — the multi-ethnic population of the Russian Federation. Recently, at V. Putin’s insistence, in Russia has been discussed the draft law “On the Russian Nation and the Management of Inter-Ethnic Relations”, which is quite critically perceived by Russian nationalists and liberals. The law provides for creation of a special state body which would be responsible for the “socio-cultural adaptation of migrants”, i.e. for Russification of non-Russian peoples of the Russian Federation.

During the discussion of this draft law, there are growing calls to count as part of the “Russian nation” all ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers living outside the Russian Federation, that is, to extend the functioning of the “Russian nation” to the extent of the “Russian world”, which, according to its apologists, does not have borders. The concept of boundlessness of the Russian Federation and the “Russian world” is implanted in Russia at the highest level. For example, at the recent ceremony of handing the Russian Geographical Society’s awards in the Kremlin, V. Putin again “had his moment” of Freudian sense of humor, saying that “Russia’s borders end nowhere”. Putin is echoed by Prime Minister D. Medvedev, who says that “we cannot be divided by borders, we are connected on a deeper level…”

The adoption of the law on the “Russian nation” will be a support for the missionaries of the “Russian world”, claiming that “a Ukrainian — is not a nationality, it is a Russian resident of the area called Ukraine. Residents of Ukraine had been imposed the language, false history and the worst thing — the idea that Russians are their enemies”… Ukrainians are urged to fraternize and unite with the Russians in the new Russian Communist-Horde empire, part of which should be “the area called Ukraine”…

Lenin and Stalin against the Donetsk Republic

Insinuations and speculations of Moscow strategists and pro-imperial fifth column in Ukraine around the “Russian Crimea” and the so-called “Novorossia” (“New Russia”) have never stopped over the years of independence of our state. Brazenly falsifying the well-known historical facts, the pro-Kremlin ideologues argue that the Novorossia and the Crimea are “primordial Russian lands”, allegedly wrongly included in Ukraine in 1919. During phone-in with the nation on 17 April, 2014, V. Putin called the southeastern Ukraine by term Novorossia: “Using the Tsarist terminology, I want to say that this is not Ukraine, it’s Novorossia! Here are Kharkov, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, Mykolayiv, Odessa — in tsarist times they were not part of Ukraine, they were given to it later. Why this was done, I do not know”.

In our opinion, the head of the neighboring great power ought to know it. It seems that Vladimir Vladimirovich in his time not very carefully studied the history of the Communist Party, while studying at the Faculty of Law of Leningrad State University. If he had been a diligent student and had attended classes properly, he would know the position on the issue of the Bolshevik leaders Lenin and Stalin, whom he adores and whom he tries to emulate.

Here is a short retrospective journey into history for Vladimir Vladimirovich: In February 1918, some of the Bolsheviks and Social Revolutionaries, who did not have positions in the government of the illegitimately founded at the end of December 1917 the Ukrainian People’s Republic of Soviets, decided to create the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Soviet Republic (DKSR) of the RSFSR, which geographically covered Sumy region, Kharkiv region, Donetsk region, Yekaterynoslav region, Kherson region with Kryvyi Rih, Yelysavetgrad and part of the Don Cossacks region. The decision to create DKSR was taken February 14, 1918, by the IV Regional Congress of the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih area. V. Lenin subjected to devastating criticism the attempts of “some comrades from the Donetsk basin” to create DKSR, calling it “a groundless and harmful whim”. The Council of People’s Commissars of the RSFSR did not recognize the Donetsk-Kryvyi Rih Republic either as independent republic, or a part of the Russian Federation, and V. Lenin demanded strict respect for the sovereignty of the Soviet Ukraine, non-interference in the activities of the Central Executive Committee of the Soviets of Ukraine. Ya. Sverdlov, J. Stalin, N. Skrypnyk and other Bolshevik leaders also opposed the creation of the Donetsk republic. February 17, 1919 the RSFSR Council of Defense under the chairmanship of Lenin adopted a short resolution on the fate of the Donetsk republic: “To ask Comrade Stalin, through the Bureau of the Central Committee to carry out the liquidation of the Donkrvvbas”. To this, Stalin said: “There will be no Donkryvbas, it’s time to stop being busy with trifles!”.

If today the Bolshevik leaders resurrected and saw what V. Putin is doing in the Ukrainian Donbas, they would certainly “scold” him, and say: “You are following the wrong path, Comrade Putin! Stop doing all this nonsense and fighting against the brotherly Ukrainian people!”. I think the leader of the RF Communist Party comrade G. Zyuganov would also be told off: “And you, Comrade Zyuganov, why didn’t you use your eyes?! Not only that you have not explained to Comrade Putin the Party’s policy, but you still indulge him in his aggressive raids against fraternal Ukraine”…

Russia’s Informational Aggression in the Donbas

For many years prior to the annexation of the Crimea and the occupation of the Donbas, Russian agents had been intentionally propagating “Russian world” in the South-East of Ukraine, using tools such as media resources, pro-Russian NGOs, the organization financed by the RF government — “Rossotrudnichestvo”, the “Russian-Speaking Ukraine movement”, the Branch of the Institute of CIS Countries, etc. As a result of Russian subversive information and psychological operations, at the time of Russia’s armed occupation of the Donbas there had been formed the “fifth column”, the backbone of which was local oligarchs and pro-Moscow political lackeys — the Party of Regions.

For nearly three years of the military occupation of part of the Donbas, the Kremlin continues the experiment in social genetics for further information zombifying and “genetic reformatting” of the population of the region, both in the occupied and in the Ukraine-controlled territories. The occupied areas of the Donbas are in fact isolated from the information field of Ukraine. Until now, the Ukrainian media are actually absent in the occupied territories of the Donbas. As part of anti-terrorist operations in the ATO zone, remains neglected carrying out of information and psychological operations among the local population. In the weak Ukrainian information flow very seldom one can find content for the moral support of Ukrainian citizens in the occupied territories.

Information-propaganda operations are carried out by the Kremlin not only in the Donbas and in Ukraine, but in almost all countries with varying degrees of intensity, focus and content. Not accidentally, November 23, 2016, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on countering Russian propaganda. The document points out that Moscow conducts “hostile propaganda” against EU countries, finances political parties and other organizations within the EU, including right-wing and populist associations. I think that this Resolution of the European Parliament opens up additional opportunities for Ukraine to cooperate with the European Union on the issue of countering Russian subversive information-propaganda operations.

In my opinion, first of all it is necessary to take urgent measures (to adopt laws) to introduce temporary restrictions (censorship) in the information field of Ukraine. It is necessary to suspend the activities of political parties, public organizations and mass media, which cooperate with Russian special services in the field of information and distribute anti-Ukrainian information products and chauvinistic ideology.

In the Donbas today there is not only the armed struggle, but the struggle for the minds and souls of people. An armed struggle is always won by the one who wins ideologically, informationally, civilizationally and economically. Unfortunately, Ukraine so far is losing the information war for the hearts and minds of people, not only in the occupied, but even in the controlled by Ukraine territories, where people still cannot normally watch Ukrainian television channels and watch only Russian ones.

Since the spring of 2014 the psyche of the population of the occupied areas of the Donbas has been constantly traumatized by the “life” among the explosions and shellings, lack of elementary living conditions, health care, high cost of food, and in some places, their complete absence. And all this takes place in the situation of rampant banditry, intimidation, harassment, terror and arbitrariness of local “authorities”, as well as continuing zombifying by Russian and pro-Russian media. According to Yevhen Nyshchuk, such circumstances result in “an abyss of consciousness” among the local population.

Today, the life of ordinary citizens is difficult not only in the Donbas, but throughout Ukraine. But even in these circumstances, there are people who had lived a year or two in the occupied areas of the Donbas, and then managed to leave temporarily for the “mainland” Ukraine, they see for themselves that life “in Ukraine” is much better than in Luhandonia. Therefore, the more often and the greater number of the residents of the occupied territories will travel to Ukraine, the more they will begin to see clearly, and more obvious to them the falsity of Putin’s propaganda.


Of course, in the Donbas, for many years ahead there will be a certain part of the population that will never be even tolerant to Ukraine, let alone will love and consider it dear. For them Russia alone will remain their “homeland”, and Putin — their lifelong idol. In my opinion, after the liberation of the Donbas from the Russian occupation, such people should be helped to leave for their home country if they so much wish to. And if they do not wish to, let them live among us, but quietly and peacefully and law-abidingly, albeit with a fierce hatred of everything Ukrainian. Nothing can be done, they are the consequences of long-term “genetic reformatting” Donbas population on the part of Putin’s Russia.

Ideologically we will win Putin’s propaganda machine only when in Ukraine the level of life of the people keeps steadily rising, and people who live in the occupied areas of the Donbas see this and to compare with their “life” in the Russian reserves such as “DPR” and “LPR”.

If each of us does not personally take care of our own state and passively waits for the government to do it, nothing good will come of it for us. If we do not have a full-fledged civil society, capable of effectively and constructively influence the government, then we will continue to remain amorphous population, easy to manipulate, as it had been done for the past 25 years. The fate of our Ukraine depends on each of us. Construction of a new, truly independent Ukraine is the sacred cause and the duty of all the Ukrainian people, who share a desire to be free people in a free state, to live in a country where everyone is equal before the law. After the Maidan of 2014, the Ukrainian people has finally shrugged off its soul the fetters of fear and obedience, having freed its titanic creative energy of the architect. Today in Ukraine in the crucible of Euro-Maidan and the Patriotic War in the Donbas, before our eyes is being born a real political Ukrainian nation — an alloy of Ukrainians, Russians and representatives of other ethnic groups both, in the West and in the East of Ukraine. And this is a guarantee of our victory over our enemies.


Схожі публікації