UKRAINIAN AND HUNGARIAN RIGHT-WING CONCEPTS IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY

In the 19th century with aspirations for democracy and liberalism highly prevalent alternative socio-political ideology has been spread, the so-called nationalism.It was due to the great part of consolidation of various European nation-states which were created. As a result, the starting point of the nationalism is the nation, as it is unified as a whole through the common language, a common culture and a common history. The nationalism makes everything in the interests of the nation not in the interest of class category.Binding to national institutions and patriotism, the patriotism makes all other ideology more effective.At the same time the nationalism comes from the insecure backgroung, because on one hand wanted to build a multi-unit-national identity, on the other hand, most single people wish to be interpreted as a very heterogeneous group of people.
The purpose of this study, the above mentioned right-wing nationalist political movement in its various forms and manifestations, trying to negotiate with Ukrainian and Hungarian territories in the first half of the 20th. century. In the above mentioned countries nowadays activities are very common phenomenon which can be observed, these two far-right organizations, their social impact of the current social and public life. It is therefore timely to consider these right-wing ideologies, to make comparative analysis of how they were formed and evolved culminated at the beginning of the last century, how can the date of such concepts claiming radical right-wing organizations, which is based on historical events in the past. At the beginning of the 20th century Ukraine has not developed as a unified nation-state, there were areas in the bond of the neighboring countries, which emerged as a result of a different mentality of the population, the evolution of nationalist ideas were created. The right-wing social trends were most typical rather longer in Poland, and later were typical of Soviet power in with subordinate areas of Western Ukraine. Nationalism as a terminology concept in the Ukrainian journalism appeared in the 19th century, the years of 80th and 90th. While Ukraine at that time didn‘t function as a unitary state, so the main goal of nationalism appears first in spreading the propaganda of the Ukrainian statehood. At the ends of the 19th century – in the beginning of the 20th century "nationalists" were represented as affluent and religious intellectuals so this phenomenon has become well known as "bourgeois nationalism". The liberal-democratic state forces (e.g. M. Hrusevszkij) largely distanced themselves from the above mentioned "nationalists", Hrusevszkij called their radical ideology as "... the alternative chauvinism..." [5]. In one of his writings we can read the following: "... Nationalists will not be Ukrainian defenders in any way....".[5] The confessional and rather left narrow-minded social group has monopolized the nationalism name in the 1910s, and during the years 1917-1921 revolutions exile, while the Liberal Democrats remained in force and they cherished the idea of an independent Ukraine.
In the 20th. century in the definition of the Ukrainian nationalism major role was played by Dmitro Doncov (1883-1913) in his work "Nationalism", which took over and modernized the Ukrainian "integral nationalism" concepts1. The creator of the concept of "integral nationalism" was France, which was at that time the public by mixing elements of totalitarianism and have been associated with monarchism. George Armstrong characterized the integral nationalism by the following properties: 1) Belief in the superiority of the dominant nation. 2) The presence of a charismatic leader, one person who represents the "will of the people" alone. G.Armstrong believes that in the Ukrainian "integral nationalism" the Liberal Democratic and Christian principles are strongly present.[11] O. Szubtelnij,Ukrainian historian, his opinion is that the Ukrainian "integral nationalism" terminology often untraceable by terms such as "Organized nationalism," "revolutionary nationalism" therefore he determines that the Ukrainian version is "working class nationalism" [10]. Doncov in his work particularly pays attention to the fact that the Ukrainian people have no proper political elite, single socio-political trend. Thus, the Ukrainian "integral nationalism" followers wanted to create a new identity in Ukraine "type". According to D. Doncov "The nation is an outstanding value which can not have other objectives as an independent nation-state construction" [6,54]. This shows that the Individual is placed above the nation's ideology. The main guidelines: 1)Involving the Ukrainian history to myth, as social unification. 2) Unified state ideology. 3) The war and achieved goals, the actual construction activity was manifested, with "all over Ukraine" slogan. The state's political elite can only be crossed in the hands of the most powerful people. In the Eastern part of Galicia, D. Doncov began to move the highly prevalent and significant mass of people to the Ukrainian struggle for their independence. Doncov‘s works were highly prevalent among the youth in the Western Ukraine also became a statute of the the Ukrainian Nationalist Organization (ОУН), though Doncov was not a member of no one single Ukrainian radical nationalist union. The Ukrainian Nationalist Organization which was established in 1929, actively used to achieve its goals by the transformed Ukrainian "integral nationalism" ideas and became the most radical and extreme right-wing organization for that period of time. Their main slogan was: "The Ukrainian bread belongs only to the Ukrainian nationalities".[8] So the don Zionism was the Ukrainian nationalist extremist organizations credo. Discussing the Ukrainian right-wing ideas in the first half of the 20th century it is definitely worth to mention Stepan Bandera's name, who was the leader of the Ukrainian Nationalist Organization radical wing (ОУН-Б), in 1939 they became as a separate entity. Its followers, the so-called "banderists" wanted to achieve Ukraine‘s independence, spread the Ukrainian interests, proposed radical solutions to achieve them. The banderists ideology‘s main points: 1). „People are the nation's highest and most valuable type of human society. 2). Conditions for the development of the nation can only provide the nation-state. .. "[9] The main purpose of the national-liberation policy is that all nationalities within the Soviet Union should fight for independence and for their rights.

 
1Author Charles Maurras, who has called the concept "national-recognition integrale", its most important principles were: the true nationalist state placed all over

Bandera's personality viewed in different ways: Western Ukraine considered him as real hero, though his name is hallmarked with mass murder against the Galician Polish residents. The Soviet historiography often identified the words "banderizm" with the word the banditry. The doncov Ukrainian nationalism in the future were showed in different interpretations. For example Andriy Bilinszkij and many historians and political scientists think, that between the years 1920-1940 the "integral nationalism" of the concept of nationalism is not the same, therefore they called it xenophobia. Another group of historians (Motil O.) considered that in the first half of the 20th century there were two types of nationalism: one of it is the so-called "small print" of nationalism, which united the national aspirations of the general human values with democratic ideals, and the second, the so-called "capital" Nationalism was a radical trend in which the Individual values and nationalist ideals have been in complete contradiction with each other. Having examined the issues of nationalism, in many cases, there can be found contradictions. At the same time the nationalism comes from unknown background, because on one hand it has build a multi-unit-national identity, on the other hand, most single people wish to be interpreted as a very heterogeneous group of people. As e.g. the east and west regions in Ukraine were developed in different way, were not united, neither socially nor politically. Differences can be found in the Ukrainian Nationalist Organization of national concepts as well. Most active members of the organization, such as Konovalets was Polish, Olena Teliga wasof Russian origin. Nationalism is a political tendency, which provides consolidation for political nation, rather than for the country's various ethnic identities of violent tranformation. Thus, the Ukrainian right-wing concepts in the 20th century, the conceptions characteristics of the different countries in different regions of the socio-political still developing, so the extreme right-wing radical ideas and their activities kept local, western Ukraine character. On the contrary to the early twentieth century, Ukraine was a single sovereign state, however, the extreme rightist nationalism was also seen in this country. First of all, the term "Hungarism" has been spread, its author was a Catholic bishop of Székesfehérvár, Prohászka Ottokar (1858-1927). The word Hungarist didn‘t mean the same ideology which was illustrated by another representativeFerenc Szálasi some time later. Prohászka was extraordinary erudite scholar-priest, writer and politician and at the same time trying to find a solution to people's problems. In his works the idea of self-defense was defined by the liberal ideology loosening, against thenation destruction and moral debauchery. Great role has in protecting the Hungarian race of the Austro-Hungarian Empire as the other dominant nations. Posterity showed as Christian socialist in the works (Modern Catholicism in 1907, the number of days of Truth, 1927) pays special attention to certain nationalities and removal of the restriction. From 1918 demanded the numerus clausus1, in 1944 the Hungarian classics of anti-Semitism has become the point of reference, Prohászka was more often cited. According to Csaba Fazekas who was a historian he was "right-wing conservative" [1] minded. Ethos was central role in shaping the consciousness of the 1930s. The next step in the Hungarian right-wing extremist tendencies became widespread in the early 1930s Hungarist movement. In 1932 Zoltan Mesko naturalized their image, the Arrow Cross, which was originally an ancient Hungarian symbol. The movement took this symbol as Christian symbol, emphasizing that the country are protected from all the four directions in case of attack. Hungarism was aimed to break the power of the internal enemy! Its aim was the usury capital reduction and domestic producers, facilitating useful capital. Hungarism was the small people's movement. Socially sensitive, but rejected all forms of Bolshevism! It was thought to bea trap and the main enemy of European civilization! As you can see, the Hungarian right-wing ideologies have played an important role in moral base provided by Christianity, but to increase the political role of the church has been rejected. From the late 1930s until 1945, Szálasi Francis (1897-1946) was the Hungarian far-right leader, who took the term Hungarist from Prohaszka and also reinterpreted by him and he said that the idea of the "Hungarian interests " [4.16] was included in itself. Szálasi defined Hungarism as the form of the Hungarian national socialism, which is not equal to either the German National Socialism nor with the Italian Fascism. Separated the Hungarism from far-right idea, as he considered that the the right-wing idea is much less than the national socialism. [5] His work and ideas clearly qualifythe extreme far-right idea. TheArrow Cross Party was led by Szálasi which came to power in Germany in 1945, 170 days was on power from 16th of October, 1944 till 4th of April, 1945. The party was known by its anti-Jewish fanatism. Szálasi‘s concepces started to flourish again among some political movements. The Hungarian and Ukrainian right-wing ideologies came from different political and social sources, but they had equally significant impact for that age. In both cases, the ideology of dominant nation greatness was highlighted, and wanted to achieve this within the framework of the nation-state leading by a charismatic leader. 1The law adopted in 1920 in Hungary, named "closed number", limited Jewish participation in higher education. In Hungary it has been reached for a small period of time in 1945, as only one movement has no power to make great changes unless, the current political power couldhelp for the movement.
It has not enough to power on masses of people, they could only manage their smaller, more radical group. It wasn‘t different with the Ukrainian variant, but they were not able to take over the political power. The Hungarian and Ukrainian right common features: the supremacy of national interests; strong relationship with socialism; cult leaders. Different performance features: the Ukrainian right-wing local nature, while the Hungarians were represented throughout the country; on the Hungarian part confessional major impact, while it was infignificant factor in Western Ukraine; the question of the unitary state, the Hungarian right-wing revision was motivated by its territories lost in 1920, while the representatives of Ukraine wanted to unite the most liked areas in the east and west; the Hungarian right-hand side of the 1930s was influenced by the National Socialism from the west, while the Ukrainians prefer the socialist USSR ideological system. So we can see that the socio-political trends in different countries were developed from historical background. All nationalist and right-wing ideology specific problem comes from its own, and each nation tries to find the answer for their problem. The highly popular ideas today look for their source from the past , they also mythologize and treat arbitrarily with the historical facts. Therefore it has great significance to study the historical past, its comparison in order to prevent their negative impact on the social and private individuals.


Sources and bibliography
1. Fazekas Csaba Prohászka Ottokár zsidóellenességéről- //http://www.uni-miskolc.hu/egyhtort/cikkek/fazekas-prohaszka.htm
2. Prohászka Ottokár Az igazság napszámában - http://gondola.hu/media/prohaszka/Prohaszka21.pdf
3. Motyl O. Sovietology, Rationality, Nationality: Coming to Grips with Nationalism in the USSR (1990)
4. Szálasi Ferenc A magyar nemzet felépítésének terve. – Budapest.- A Királyi Magyar Egyetemi Nyomda 1933-as kiadása alapján készült.- 15.old. összesen 46
5. Szálasi Ferenc Börtönnapló. - http://hu.metapedia.org/wiki/Sz%C3%A1lasi_Ferenc_b%C3%B6rt%C3%B6nnapl%C3%B3ja
6. Андрій Білинський Громадські організації в СРСР- Мюнхен-Чікаго, 1969. – 160с.
7. Горєлов М. Українська державність у ХХ. столітті ( історико-політичний аналіз) – Електронний ресурс.- http//izbornyk.org.ua/ukrxx/r02.htm
8. Донцов Д. Націоналізм. – Лондон: Українська видавнича спілка; Торонто: Ліга визволення України, 1966. – 363 с-
9. Плохій С. Великий переділ: незвичайна історія Михайла Грушевського. — К., 2011
10. Поліщук В. Український інтегральний націоналізм як різновид фашизму [Електронний ресурс] : Праці В.В. Поліщука. – Режим доступу до сторінки http://poliszczuk.narod.ru/fashizm.htm#_ftn1
11. Полтава П. Хто такі бандерівці і за що вони борються. – lib.oun-upa.org.ua
12. Субтельний О. Революційний рух [Електронний ресурс] : Електронна інтернет онлайн ―Бібліотека Студента UaRus‖. – Режим доступу до сторінки:http://studentbooks.com.ua/content/view/451/49/1/3/
13. Український націоналізм 1935-1949" (Ukrainian Nationalism 1935-1949), Джон Армстронґ, Columbia University Press, 1955