Ukrainian Republicanism is a wide tradition founded upon the legacy of Taras Shevchenko and Mykola Kostomarov. Legacy that underlined the anti-colonial, universalist approach to national rights and solidarity between the peoples, idea of natural rights, as well as question of social justice and equality, opposition to ruthless domination of commerce, and absolute opposition to the society of “rich and poor”.
As Britannica defines the term “Republicanism” its a “tradition of political thought that stresses the interconnection of individual freedom and civic participation with the promotion of the common good” where “The phrase res publica is most readily understood as “that which belongs to the people,” where “the people” represent not just the masses but an organized society founded on justice and a concern for the common good. It follows, then, that a state founded on civic republican ideals is one whose political constitution is aimed at securing the common good of all its citizens. This task is chiefly fulfilled by the successful promotion of key ideals, such as mixed constitutions, civic virtue, and patriotism, and by institutions restrained by certain principles, such as the separation of powers and the principle of checks and balances”. In that regard, modern definition of republicanism is expanded and in many ways retroactively constructed by the “neo-republican” political tradition, who, sometimes successfully, sometimes not, try to adapt the thinking of many old authors for nowadays reality, recovering “lost” tradition of Rousseau and others. They recover the writings of democratic authors, and find insights for today's reality, where economic equality is absent from the proper discussion of democratic system. Instead, conception of equality and equal citizens, that all exercise self-restraint to achieve common prosperity, as well as realize common duty and responsibility to care for each other was exchanged for the conception of atomized individuals that are free to pursue their commercial activities at the expense of vast majority of the people, in many ways destroying democratic institutions in the process.
Ukrainian tradition of republicanism was in many ways similar to thoughts of Mazzini and Mickiewicz, underlining the need for national liberation, patriotism, human rights, interconnectivity between individual and collective rights, and the duty by realization of which persons are capable to exercise its rights and equality, defending it from sliding into an oligarchy, autocracy or foreign imperialist rule. Starting with Shevchenko and Kostomarov, this tradition achieved its peak with declaration of Ukrainian People’s Republic, and later realized itself in most political forces until the 1991 collapse of the USSR.
This tradition covers many insights for the civic and just future, the one where individualistic egoism and collectivistic totalitarianism have no place, and instead of such ills of humanity, a system of social equality, democracy, rights and responsibility will take place.
"Every member of the nation is a guard who diligently and conscientiously performs his duty at the high post of the Honor of the people. It is not known which of them will be called upon to sacrifice himself to protect this Honor. But everyone must be ready for this.
When the post is threatened, then the entire guard is called to duty; and woe to that nation whose sons are not equal: the honor of the guard itself becomes doubtful"1
The tradition most clear represented by social-radical republicanism of Taras Shevchenko, Kulish and Kostomarov, Ukrainian Radical Party, Ukrainian Social-Democratic Workers Party and Ukrainian Social Democratic Party, Ukrainian Party of Socialist-Federalists\Radical Democrats and Ukrainian People’s Labour Party\National Democrats, as well as Ukrainian Party of Socialist Revolutionaries and Ivan Bahryanyi’s Ukrainian Revolutionary-Democratic Party.
Other Ukrainian national liberation organizations and ideologies, while important in their own right and deserve a just place among others, differ from the Republican premise in a substantial way. Mainly, it is Nationalist movement, Independent Communist movement and Drahomanian anarchism.
§ 39 (41). […] Authorities, organization and government must exist on the earth, and this is power, and this power is from God, but the leader and the ruler must be subordinate to the law and to the popular assembly because even Christ commanded men to be judged before the popular assemblage; and since the leader and the ruler are the first persons, they must be servants and they must not do whatever comes into their heads but they must do what is established, and they must not magnify themselves and dazzle with their magnificence, but they must live simply and work zealously for society because their power is from God, and they themselves are sinners and the very last of the people because they are servants of all.
§ 40 (42). And this is another great lie: as if God would ordain that some should reign and wax rich while others should be in bondage and beggary, because this would not be so if they would quickly accept the Gospel: the masters are obliged to free the slaves and acknowledge them as brethren and the rich must share with the poor and the poor would also become rich; so would it be if a Christian love were in their hearts, because he who loves another desires that his beloved be as well off as himself.
§ (76). Ukraine loved neither the tsar nor the Polish feudal lord and established a Cossack Host amongst themselves, i.e., a brotherhood in which each upon entering was brother of the others—whether he had before been a master or a slave, provided that he was a Christian; and the Cossacks were all equal amongst themselves, and officials were elected at the assembly […]
§ (108). Because the voice of Ukraine was not stilled. Ukraine will rise from her grave and again will call to her brother Slavs, and they will hear her call and the Slavic peoples will rise and there will remain neither tsar, nor tsarevich, nor tsarevna, nor prince, nor count, nor duke, nor Excellency, nor Highness, nor lord, nor boyar, nor peasant, nor serf, neither in Great Russia, nor in Poland, nor in Ukraine, nor in Czechia, nor among the Khorutans, nor among the Serbs, nor among the Bulgars.
§ 109. And Ukraine will be an independent Republic in the Slavic Union. Then all the peoples, pointing to the place on the map where Ukraine will be delineated will say: behold, the stone which the builders rejected, has become the cornerstone.2
Ukrainian political identity was built on the opposition of different forms of oppression. Ukraine was a nation of serfs-slaves, living under foreign lords in a system of horrendous exploitation, in an autocratic state, facing assimilation and xenophobia. What meant to be Ukrainian in a political, citizenry way developed from a person's perspective on such oppressions, as Ukrainians couldn’t be ignorant to these sufferings. It was the basic building brick for our political identity.
I argue that while oppression changed, conditions too, this ideological and patriotic impulse that allowed Ukrainians to organize and create powerful connections, and in 1917, a state, still exist and relevant.
In many ways, nowadays the ideological system of extreme egoism is incompatible with the demands of time, and national self-determination as a whole. As ideology based on individual commerce and profit, tax cuts and complete lack of social responsibility. As Thatcher once said “There is no such thing as society”, it cannot possibly be compatible with the ideology of collective care, common good and self-worth community that needs energy, civic activity to sustain itself. As the second approach, that majority of the left shares, means that there are things that could be possible only if people have responsibility between each others, and where society exists to benefit individuals and individuals act in such way to sustain democratic-egalitarian society, even if it means exercising self-restraint, for example, in not spending all the money, but use its part for taxation purposes to benefit the society that guarantees rule of law, democracy, prosperity of your collective and culture, your security etc. It also means a need to realize your civic duty, mainly of military service, when your community is under threat, even if such service doesn’t directly benefit you.
It is impossible on one hand to promote radical individual egoism of libertarianism, as does the Ukrainian government, and at the same time ask for sacrifice for the benefit of your community. Two ideas clash, and Ukrainian government priority of promoting regime of extreme inequality, irresponsibility and oligarchic rule harms Ukrainian defence and Ukrainian identity, turns people away from their civic responsibility, as the idea itself becomes undiscoverable. The question of draft dodging becomes less of the question of cowardice, but rather “Why should I?” type of question, where under the dominant ideology, it is hard to find a consistent answer.
Far-right nationalism is also not an answer, as it degrades human, its empathy, its understanding of the world, and creates a system of perpetual banditry that in the end, ruins nations. Answer lies in giving a person a stake in its own country, an egalitarian system which focuses on connections between the people, shared care and solidarity. Such care is impossible in the system, where there are rich and poor with diametrically opposed experience, that the ground for common understanding, common good and common help just doesn’t exist, it is also impossible in the society where the discrimination spreads like weed on uncared farmland, such common connections are impossible too. At the same time, where there exists unjustified hate and bias, it cannot just stand as a hatred to one particular group, but spreads as a way society operates, as its logic and morale pierces other parts of human relations.
However, then the question is, if the government takes people’s rights away, why should we fight for the government, or, more broadly, realize our duty before the people? As Mazzini argued, acting on your civic responsibilities is a powerful education. As if one doesn’t learn to act, considering the interests of the others, one would exploit the rights to the point where they’d become privileges. In that sense, rights always need to be upheld from sliding into the system of autocracy or oligarchy, which could be realized with a level of civic participation, realization of responsibilities. It is, together with the fact, that your community exists not because, but in spite of corrupt government and elites, makes a good enough basis for you to defend your country, pay taxes, even in non-ideal situations, only if not your country engages in imperialist actions itself.
I would argue that there is a strong framework that is compatible both with national-democratic and marxist worldviews that would be extremely useful as a force in Ukrainian politics. It is intimately connected with the Ukrainian political movement itself and can correct the dire problems faced by neoliberal and oligarchic approach to the war and peace.
