Wednesday, November 6, 2013

O. Litwin – October 4, 2013 

Dear All and BRUOC,

Clifford D. May reviews Ilan Berman's book, "Implosion: The End of Russia and What it Means for America" (Nat. Post, Oct. 1, 2013, p. A11) where he mentions that those who expected Russia to transition from socialism to democratic capitalism were mistaken. Organized criminal groups operate in cooperation with the government. Capital flight has surged, abandoning the country's uncompromising economic atmosphere. There is an exodus of people that rivals the out-migration that followed the 1917 Revolution. Putin struts the world stage, playing the statesman and diplomat, writing advisory articles to the NY Times on how the U.S. should behave while his scorched-earth tactics in Chechnia have left more than a hundred thousand dead.

He is tempted now to pursue an even more aggressive policy toward Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic nations and Eastern Europe. There is absolutely no chance for any meaningful reform leading to revitalization. This nation was built on soul-crushing ideologies and the author of the book would like to think that such nations are doomed from the start. But that may be wishful thinking. We don't know whether history is on the side of freedom. Do we even know that history takes sides?

All this has relevance to the advice of the EP to the devout Ukrainians. Putin has asked why Ukraine would want to commit suicide by signing the agreement with Europe. We may ask why Ukraine would want to commit suicide by following the soul-crushing ideology of Putin. Or, why the UOCC wants to commit suicide by signing the Agreement with the EP whose advice is to follow the ideology of Putin and his Russky Mir.

Before 1990, the UOCC was still a dynamic Church because the parishioners were the stakeholders. Then the By-law Committees kicked in their bit with an excessive concern for protecting the elitist positions in the Church and the rules were skewed against the laity. Eugene Harasymiw wrote that if the Proposed Bylaws were adopted, the "Sobornopravnist" principle would be severely compromised. The compromised silence of the Consistory has proven him correct. In preparation for more changes, the laity has been isolated, "instructed" (the Decree) and advised (the Message) and have nothing left to lose except their ONENESS with Moscow.

O. Litwin

No comments:

Post a Comment

Keep your remarks in line and in response to the body of the above letter. Be mindful and respectful. Please be diligent in providing sources to support your response. The aim is to educate one another.