FOR THE DIASPORA

Our situation began with a choice that was made by each of our ancestors. Perhaps their reasoning was to have a better life or to escape political persecution, but regardless of why it happened, at one point a decision was made to leave the Carpathians. They embarked on ships, leaving behind their homeland only to arrive at foreign ports where their surnames were altered, and their backgrounds often misrepresented. After this struggle they would face the daunting reality of cramped shacks and grueling labor in coal mines imposed by the giants of American industry.

It was in these circumstances that the majority of diasporan Rusyns lived for decades, with many eventually moving on to better jobs with a higher quality of life. During this time, the same people found themselves assimilating into the values of America, save for a faint touch preserved in religious beliefs or cherished holiday traditions.

A second choice was made when you desired to learn more about your heritage, and now you are here striving to do rather than just to know the truth. The diaspora of the Carpatho-Rusyn people has evolved over the past century to the point where we come from all walks of life and starting points regarding our Rusynness. It has even now become the case that more people have no idea that their ancestors came from the Carpathians than those that do. Because of this variability in background some of you may be incredibly knowledgeable about everything Rusyn already, whereas others may need a complete introduction to why this book even exists. Regardless of where you are on this spectrum, there will be something here to learn. For those that burn in heart toward helping those persecuted and oppressed in the homeland, this will be especially true.

Before getting into all of this, a background of who I am should be established. I am one of the few descendants of the Holdingford Rusyns in Central Minnesota. Before they came to America, my ancestors lived in Blaživ, a town in Eastern Slovakia, and Tarnavka, a Lemko village in South-Eastern Poland. The town of Blaživ was destroyed in the 1950s by the Czechoslovak government for being anti-communist, and the town of Tarnavka was razed to the ground by the Polish army in 1947 with its residents exiled to Western Poland.

Now I run the Society for Rusyn Evolution, the only Rusyn think-tank (as of 2023) in the world. I’ve visited a great many Rusyn places here in America and abroad, like the single remaining Rusyn village in Hungary, Komlóska, as well as the cities of Subcarpathia in Ukraine during the recent war where air raid sirens would ring out every night outside of my hotel window.

In this journey of activism work starting in 2020, it became clear that a few things were still depressingly true from the old days. We are still one of the poorest people in Europe, there are severe restrictions on the freedom of Rusyns, and the activists we currently have are woefully outmatched by the forces working against us. It also became very clear that the story we are told about our people and history is far from the full truth. The tale that we are a people from nowhere is not only inaccurate, but something that is used to delegitimize us as a unique nation. It is a chain that continues to hold us down at every turn because it limits the truth of what was and what can be.

This problem has come from mostly outside sources, but even some of our own have internalized this message and spread it amongst the knowing populace. Furthermore, time and again due to all of these factors, I have seen the enthusiasm of a new young Rusyn that has discovered their ancestry crushed by the realities of our current situation. It is not easy walking fully into the life of our people in a way that is authentic, and even harder to make a difference to it. With all this in mind I found it impossible to look away from the situation.

The purpose of the text before you is to not only explain why you should care about what you have just read as a Rusyn-American but also why you can and should help change this situation for the better. It is truly a struggle at the level of any civil rights movement you will find today, and furthermore this is inherently linked with you. It is our history, our culture, our future as a people that is at a place of exciting opportunity and depressing decline. But what exactly am I referring to when I write these words? What do I mean when I say us or our people? All will become clear in due time.

2 | FOR THE HOMELAND

It has been obvious for a time that the patterns of action that the Rusyn will so often find himself taking rarely lead to the light at the end of the tunnel. We have grown and excelled to the point of another plateau, the first one since the death of the Soviet system. To break through to another level the philosophy of our psyche must adapt to the challenges of today. In trying times we need to be realistic about the current position we hold too, and reflecting on this notion makes it clear that there needs to be something in between our current situation and full-fledged national awakening.

We want our language to be taught in schools, our heroes to be known, and the Rusyn flag to fly somewhere besides the backyard. While not yet the complete answer that we need to get to these in their entirety, this work is the middle point between our current stage and that new beginning of total transformation. Before we can answer what can go right we have to answer what has gone wrong. The Rusyn nation is in a way chasing a memory, one that might not have ever been accurate in the first place. The narrative of growing Rusyn identity in the world was fiction past the middle of the 2000s, most institutions are broken to the core and not just from lack of vision, and it was an all-too-common occurrence that the upper echelons of our societies either could not act on what needed to be done or were blatantly careerist. Our problem has been letting this spirit of ours drown in a pool of mediocrity. We are in the exact same position regarding our recognition in the state of Ukraine, achieving autonomy in any region of Carpathian Rus, and the institutionalization of Rusynness as we were 15 years ago.

In contrast to this negativity, there has been a certain newness in the air that has made many believe that change is possible including the author of this work. A new generation of people have risen to take up the mantle of Rusynness, with new ideas and values. They are those that make videos online, organize new projects outside the current institutions, and call out reality for what it is. This wasn’t here before a few odd years ago to any real extent. If you were to ask where we go from here, without question what is needed is seizing this moment of opportunity. We do this by first opening the eyes of our people to the situation they and their ancestors have encountered. Through the realization of systemic oppression even the most lost soul discovers what has been missing all along. In this event each Rusyn gains righteous anger and the desire for change. Then through that they are open to committing to the trials of forging it.

Before going further it should be made clear why you should listen to a Rusyn-American from across the ocean. To this question, the response is a brief one. My background of work over years proves the devotion and necessary knowledge to be worthy of the task. Years of activism like with the Society for Rusyn Evolution, traveling to Subcarpathia during wartime as I did in 2022, learning both Pannonian Rusyn and Carpatho-Rusyn, this is not the work of a mere amateur. The fact of putting myself on the line like this where those would not also speaks clearly to this. In intellectual matters, the books of the Sovereignty collection can speak well for me on if matters of politics are in question.

Your situation has been taken into account, as has every other region that Rusyns call home. Maybe some of you don’t even know there are other Rusyns in Slovakia, Subcarpathia, Serbia, Hungary. We are vast, and the way of the future is toward something new that connects each part. We cannot also forget the interplay of the diaspora and that of the homeland that has gone on for over a century. It was those who went to America and came back that brought Orthodoxy once again to parts of the homeland, it was Gregory Zatkovich an American Rusyn that was the first governor of Podkarpatska Rus in the Czechoslovak period. Our connection is not foreign, but consistent with history.

Therefore it is asked that you, those in the homeland, join me in this journey toward a possible future where the chains of our oppression are lifted. The time for Rusyns is short with the echoes of both prosperity and erasure knocking on the door of this life. Our future, our path, has begun to arrive if the prospective eyes bid on the correct horse. Doing so begins in the retelling of our history up until our time of oppression.

3 | HISTORY OF THE RUSYN NATION

Our nation, the Carpatho-Rusyns, is a Slavic one that traditionally inhabits a large section of the Eastern Carpathian mountain range. In this way we are connected to almost half of the European subcontinent, and to countries spanning from Bulgaria to Poland. The Slavs emerged from somewhere close to what is now southern Belarus and Eastern Poland, migrating over large swathes of territory starting in the early centuries of the first millennium. Eventually these tribal peoples would divide into roughly three subgroups, the West, East, and South Slavs. The important group relating to our own people is the East Slavs, or what would begin to be known as the Rus.

The Rus was a confederation of different Slavic principalities that originated politically from the migration of Scandinavian warriors and elites into the lands of what would become the three East Slavic states we know today. Over time these elites and their native warriors would spread further south, settling lands as far as the Taman peninsula at the foothills of the Caucasus. The local population was different compared to their rulers, as they were Slavic in ethnicity. Over time these original rulers began to intermarry and assimilate themselves until they were indistinguishable. The genes of these people live on in the Russians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, and Carpatho-Rusyns. 

The Rus confederation survived from the year 882 until its collapse in 1240 from the Mongol invasion. During this time, it became one of the largest states in Europe and a Christian nation as well. In the traditional narrative it was the baptism of Vladimir the Great during the year of 988 in the Crimean town of Chersonesus that began this transition, though the exact year and the legitimacy of prior attempts are disputed. While this is seen as the beginning of Christianity for the Rus in general, Rusyns themselves probably adopted it decades if not centuries later, and many pagan rituals were kept intact due to the remoteness of Carpathian villages.

After these four centuries of relative integration mixed in with periods of war between different factions of principalities, the dissolution of the Rus brought the annexation of various parts to its rival neighbors. Eastern principalities were ruled by the Golden Horde, a successor state to the Mongol Empire. Even today there are still faint signs of their terror, like the street of Bolshaya Ordynka in Moscow, which was named because of its association as the start of the road to the Golden Horde.

It would be centuries before these Rus would break free and unite into what would become the Tsardom of Muscovy. The western principalities such as Polotsk, Halychyna, and Volhynia would become known as Ruthenia and were absorbed into the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after a century or two of rocky self-rule. The most successful, and somewhat of a legitimate continuation of the Rus political system was the Kingdom of Halychyna-Volhynia which lasted from 1199-1349. Unlike others in the East, the people from these areas would never gain independence for their native territories again. No measure of self-rule was available until the birth of the Zaporozhian Sich in 1552. Even then, this would not be born out of the former principalities themselves, but those who fled for what is now Eastern Ukraine and Southern Russia.

What we think of as Rusyns now did not yet exist during the time of the Rus state. The territory we call home today was something of a no-man’s land up until the early 1200s. It is likely that some lived here on a subsistence life, but no more than a spattering of villages. Of these peoples, the most important would be the White Croats, a group not much is known about. Though it is popular to evoke their name as some type of heritage in modern Rusyn discussion, the extent of their population or influence is virtually untraceable.

In law this area was a part of the Kingdom of Hungary, and in practice this was a buffer to keep northern invaders away. As time progressed just having land as distance did not suffice. The Hungarian crown knew they needed to find more people to populate these areas and men willing to defend their borders. It was with this intent in mind that they would introduce something named the Vlach Law.

The Vlach law was a set of different laws that took place in the Austro-Hungarian empire that allowed for the settlement of outsiders and nomadic people to the edges of their empire. In return for some privileges such as being exempt from taxes for ten years and free land, many of these former nomads were entrusted to protect the roads from bandits. For some places like in Subcarpathian Rus and Transylvania, most of the area had never been settled before. Regions closer to centers of civilization like in what is now Eastern Slovakia had been attempted to be settled by Germans and others but routinely failed due to the inability to farm in the new environment.

Wallachians (the w pronounced like a v), who were the descendants of Latin speakers from the southern Balkans fled northward to escape the encroaching Ottoman Empire. In the north, Ruthenians from Halychyna and a province east of it named Podolia went west to escape serfdom and raids by the Crimean Khanate. They would settle together in the towns and villages across what is now Carpathian Rus, taking on the moniker of Wallachian-Rusyn over time. This event, which can be named as the Great Westward Expansion in Rusyn history, is the birth of what would become the people of our nation today. Due to the likely far higher population of Ruthenians, the Wallachian part of our heritage is usually only expressed in DNA and some cultural artifacts.

But what would become of this migration in time? People of course settled in these areas, but how this led to the present day isn’t exactly clear to the naked eye. Furthermore, the Rusyn experience depended greatly on where you lived. Before moving forward to a later time, let’s take a look at the geography and divisions of Carpathian Rus. Once you know these, things will begin to make a lot more sense.

3.1 | Carpathian Rus Geography

Carpathian Rus is a territory located in the Eastern Carpathian mountains. There is little flat land to be had which makes urbanization of people difficult. What settlements did occur were usually in the valleys in between mountain peaks. Divided into five to seven sections depending on the political view of the person, each region of Carpathian Rus has its own flair. The most important combination of these, otherwise known as the heartland, is a combination of the three areas of Pryashiv Rus, Lemkovyna, and Subcarpathian Rus. This is where Rusyn identity is the strongest, and where the majority of historical Rusyn figures come from.

A fourth, known as the Periphery, is another mountainous area just north and east of the heartland where there are many people close in local culture but do not have a Rusyn identity. Sotakia, Pannonian Rus, and The Southern Settler Lands are less known due to a myriad of reasons that will become apparent soon. For the sake of completeness they will be covered as well.

Pryashiv Rus is located in what is currently the Prešov and Košice regions of Slovakia. A territory roughly 100 miles wide and 12 miles on average from north to south, it is  characterized by a landscape of medium-sized mountains and a strong Rusyn patriotism as it was the central area for Rusyn culture in the 1990s and 2000s. Pryashiv itself is the Rusyn equivalent of the Slovak version Prešov, and should always be used when describing it as a Rusyn cultural entity. The majority of famous Rusyn thinkers and intellectuals that we know today such as Alexander Dukhnovych (Topol’a) and Adolf Dobriansky (Rudlov) come from this area. Reasons for this are not readily apparent, but the creation of new intellectuals and activists seems to have shifted east in modern times.

Sotakia is an ethnographical area that includes the city of Humenné and its surrounding villages in Eastern Slovakia. Those who come from this area are an intermixed group of people between Slovaks and Rusyns called Sotaks. Some go by this name, but most prefer to be identified as Rusyn or Slovak. Usually the way one can tell their ethnic allegiance is through what church they follow. For the most part Roman Catholics identify as Slovaks, while Greek Catholics and Orthodox followers identify as Rusyns. The dialect of this group is structurally Slovak with a great amount of Rusyn influence in vocabulary.

Lemkovyna is the only territory of the Rusyn heartland located on the northern slopes of the Carpathians in Poland. Its people go by the name Lemko or Lemko-Rusyn, owing to them using the word lem meaning “only” often in conversation. Names like Lemko, Boyko, or Hutsul did not originally take on the same meaning as a word like Polish had. For the most part, these were names that had been put onto groups of mountaineering Rusyns who had never used the term.

They were in a way a victim of bad ethnography. Over time the Lemko name stuck, and now it is incorporated into their identity. The Lemko-Rusyns have a different political history than other Rusyns, as they were ruled over by Poles and Austrians instead of Hungarians. The Lemko homeland is particularly flat compared to other regions. While it does have certain higher ranges, and is much rougher in terrain than Poland proper, there was really no substantial geographical barrier to entry except for the Beskids in the far south-east. Many mountain passes to Pryashiv feel like little more than elevated roads over hills due to their size. Because of this and its own cultural formation, Lemkovyna architecture and clothing are quite a bit different from somewhere in the highlands further east.

Subcarpathian Rus is the largest of the three regions that make up the heartland. Stuck further east bordering Romania, the majority of the Rusyn people reside here numbering around eight hundred thousand (800,000). It is also the only place to have legitimate cities in the capital and regional cities of Uzhhorod and Mukachevo. The south though flat like the rest of the Pannonian basin, is towered above by the Carpathians behind it, with certain peaks clearing two thousand meters in height. Linguistic diversity in this region is the greatest among the three, and because of this it is hard to implement methods of language standardization.

The Periphery is an area that encompasses the mountainous areas north and east of Subcarpathian Rus. This place in particular is the home of the Boykos and Hutsuls, peoples who were formed from similar migrations as the Rusyns in the west had from the Vlach law. Their connection to Rusyns in general can be greater examined in a whole book of its own, but for now understand that these communities are split between the ideas of being Rusyn or Ukrainian and have been for a while.

For example, one of the most influential Rusyn historians was a man named Alexander Bonkalo, a Hutsul from the town of Rakhiv near the border of Subcarpathian and the Periphery. Oppositely, identifying as Rusyn in a modern context is rather rare for Hutsuls except for the handful of villages residing in Romania.

A good way of understanding the Periphery is in its remoteness. Unlike other regions of Rusyns where there are mountains but not too high, or at least major cities within a few hours’ drive, the Periphery is almost the opposite. Characterized by mountain peaks rivaling areas of Romania, many of these villages are cut off from the outside world to a great degree. The reality of this terrain made it an opportune place for bandits and those wanted by the law to hide. It is thought that the moniker Hutsul originated from the sorry reputation of its immigrants, being likely descended from the Romanian word hoțul, meaning outlaw.

The Southern Settler Lands are a group of villages formed by Rusyns that migrated from Pryashiv Rus and Lemkovyna into the inner regions of Hungary starting in the 16th and 17th centuries. While most have assimilated completely and now see themselves as Hungarians, there are some remnants of this unique past that remain. A large percentage of the descendants of these settlers still follow Greek Catholicism and the town of Komlóska in the Tokaj wine region continues to identify as Rusyn. Whether this assimilation can be reversed depends on how dedicated Rusyn activists are to changing the situation on the ground. As of yet, not much public interest has been sparked on the topic.

Those of this ancestral group who still identify as Rusyns and recent Rusyn immigrants to Hungary from the Subcarpathia, region are politically represented by the Rusyn Self-Government. This organization is based within Budapest and conducts yearly activities for the population as well as attempting to champion their political interests. These activities range from summer camps for kids to political events held at their national headquarters.

Pannonian Rus refers to a collection of Rusyns that live in the Vojvodina region of Serbia and in Eastern Croatia. Their ancestors immigrated centuries ago to help colonize newly reacquired territory left desolate from wars with the Ottomans. The total population of Pannonian Rusyns is roughly 15,000, and the two villages central to this community are Ruski Krestur and Kotsur in Vojovodina. They speak a separate language known as Pannonian Rusyn and have their own script to accompany it.

3.2 | Between 1250 and 1867

The story of the Rusyn people after they migrated into our Carpathian Rus is available in different fragments. It was only in 1843 that Rusyn priest Michaelem Lutskay published Historia Carpato-Ruthenorum, or the first historical work done by an ethnic Rusyn. There were books and research before this, but their evidence is rather suspect when evaluating them. Any theories to do with the presence of Fedir Koriatovych, a Rus noble who had to flee Lithuania for Palanok Castle in Mukachevo is wrapped in forgery due to the politics of the era. In addition, works like the Gesta Hungarorum or the account of the Hungarian migration to the Pannonian Basin were written centuries after the events had occurred, further putting their viability into question. In general, before the great westward migration by Rusyns (from the lands of the Kievan Rus) starting in the 1200s, Rusyn history was the story of Ruthenia itself in a larger context. Besides deviations into who the White Croats were as has been already done, this remains true for all regions of Carpathian Rus.

What can be said about the period, and will help illustrate the nature of Rusyn evolution, is that not all villages and regions were settled at the same time. In the beginning it was actually the westernmost villages that had been populated by Rusyns first. The counties of Šariš and Spiš in what is now Slovakia also had relatively good recording keeping. By 1480 there are already recordings of Wallachian-Rusyns in the town of Blaziv and Tichy Potok forty kilometers east of the Tatra mountains. These places had previously not been suitable for colonization as records indicate Slovaks and Germans had attempted it without success.

Throughout the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries the rate of Rusyn colonization would increase and begin to cover large swathes of terrain. It is only in the early 1800s that the totality of Carpathian Rus that we know today is established from the foothills of the Tatras to Maramures county in the far east. These final settlements at the end by Hutsuls were illegal as the Vlach law had become a thing of the past. Authorities could not reach these areas easily, so eventually the attempt to stop them had been given up in all but name. It is here where the last holdouts of Orthodoxy would remain following the conversion of the majority of Carpathian Rus to Greek Catholicism in 1646.

Rusyns had a stroke of luck in the fact that they had the Carpathian mountains to their north and east, shielding them from any raiders that would come from the wild fields on the Eurasian steppe. This position did not come without its own downsides. There are no major rivers, ports, minerals, or trading routes that pass through ethnic Rusyn territories. This dearth of natural promise has historically led to below-average economic wealth, which was showcased in Edmund Egan’s 1898 memorandum on the horrid conditions of Rusyn villagers. Eventually this document would turn into the basis for the Hungarian government’s Highlands Program, an initiative focused on alleviating the situation.

As for Rusyn identity itself, the process of national realization was a long one. The formation of an intelligentsia for the Rusyn nation could really be said to have begun with the conversion from Orthodoxy to Greek Catholicism with the Union of Ungvar in 1646. An educated class of Rusyns would emerge from the reforms of the church as money would be poured into the provinces to raise the standard of religious life. These people were not nationalistic though, and those that succeeded the most would be assimilated into Hungarian high society. The political intelligentsia of the Rusyns would appear some centuries later in the form of the first wave of leaders beginning in the 1840s. They would be the first to take seriously the task of helping the largely illiterate peasantry understand their heritage. This was often done through organizations (labeled as societies) that would publish reading materials.

While this beginning history of Rusyns seems somewhat peaceful even if destitute, what would begin in 1867 with the creation of Austria-Hungary and last up to this very day is a string of plans and actions that would forever change our nation. It is one this date that Rusyns would start a journey of becoming one of the most oppressed people in all of Europe, with no country in Central Europe remaining innocent.

4 | HISTORY OF RUSYN OPPRESSION AND ERASURE

What we can first come to understand is that the condition we find ourselves in, both in Europe and North America, is not entirely the work of natural change brought forth by our own actions. If you are a diasporan, the reason why you likely do not know how to speak the Rusyn language, nor know anyone who does is a result of a dedicated policy to make it so. If you did not know that you were Rusyn at all or had believed yourself to be Slovak, Polish, Ukrainian, Hungarian, or Russian, then this is again in the same domain. The process by which these realities have manifested is from something called Rusyn erasure, and the reasoning why depends on the guilty party involved in it.

Rusyn erasure, referring to a process or tendency that results in Rusyns being misrepresented, delegitimized, or appropriated, has been pervasive for the past 155 years. To understand what exactly this means in practice we can go through each of the major examples of it up to today. While it may seem like a tedious expedition, knowing the overarching events is essential because merely observing where we are now and how we behave lacks reason as to why. Furthermore, lacking a map of the why blocks one from realizing the position they are in so that they can escape it. Our traumas as a nation could stack up to be as thick as a book, but with keeping brevity in mind this brief overview will suffice.

The original form of Rusyn erasure took place during the period of Magyarization in Austria-Hungary between 1867 and 1918, where the government in Budapest attempted to assimilate its minorities into becoming Hungarians. This betrayal had ended nearly a millennia of a just relationship between the two groups. Some of our historical figures had suddenly become Hungarians in history books, people’s Rusyn surnames changed to Hungarian ones, and forced teaching of the Hungarian language as the only language of study had become the norm.

It was common in elite discourse to say that many people in the villages desired this, though that was rarely the case. Our awakener Alexander Dukhnovych (1803-1865) had seen this problem develop even earlier than 1867 and had begun the first great movement toward Rusyn intellectual autonomy in the 1840s. It would start the trend of a select few who would keep our identity alive through the worst of times.

During this period of assimilation there would be an emigration abroad to the United States. At first it was for the economic gains involved, as the counties that Rusyns resided in were some of the poorest in the entire subcontinent. If a man worked for a few years he could return home and buy a reasonable estate with money to spare. After a while many stayed due to the increasingly uncomfortable political situation of the time. It is unknown how many Rusyns were lost to these policies, but tens of thousands were assimilated at the minimum.

WWI would bring about a sudden change and conclusions to the previous forms of political oppression. Now that Austria-Hungary would be at war with Russia, Rusyns and the Ruthenians of Galicia (which were both part of Austria-Hungary at the time) were seen as potential fifth columns due to their perceived Russophilia. Russophilia in this context relates to a specific set of ideas about the identity of the descendants of the Rus and their relation to the states they resided in.

In the original times of the Rus its regions had been together under a loose confederation. It was only in the process of Muscovy developing on its own in Eastern Rus, and what was in the west being absorbed by the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, that major political divisions began to occur such as the Muscovite and Ruthenian division mentioned earlier. Consequently the ideal of reuniting the Rus all under one kingdom was very attractive to segments of both populations who were under siege with threats of assimilation.

During the war the Austrian government enacted a policy of mass repression and extermination against its Rusyn population. Murder without trial of activists was a regular occurrence in Lemkovyna and by government order the first concentration camp in Europe was constructed and named Thalerhof. It is where thousands of Lemko-Rusyns and Galician intellectuals alike perished in horrid squalor. The harrowing events of the camp would be reported in news outlets like the New York Times, where the brutality of it all was showcased in a type of witness account. Without warning a person could be tied up and stabbed to death in a barracks, and a simple accidental nudge against a guard could prove equally fatal. An airport was built on top of the former grounds and there is no monument to the victims of the camp. Austria to this day refuses to own up to its crimes. Imagine if the concentration camps of the Nazi regime were so purposefully forgotten?

In addition to these actions the government of Austria began a process of total delegitimization toward the Rusyn people. As Ukrainian identity was seen as less hostile to Austrian rule, it was promoted to the Lemko-Rusyns and the Ruthenians of Galicia even though it was a foreign concept from the lands of the Cossacks. One could not simply be Rusyn, as this was seen as a suspicious action by the authorities. The native institutions of the locals were crushed, with propped-up Ukrainophile counterparts allowed to operate freely.

This round of oppression would not end us, and the Rusyn people would emerge from the war battered yet still alive without some of its greatest leaders and intellectuals. The year 1918 that had marked the war’s end would also note the first true attempt at Rusyn national sovereignty. It was on December 5th, 1918 that a group of over 500 Rusyns from 130 villages would declare the Lemko-Rusyn Republic. Its head would be Jaroslav Kacmarcyk, a Lemko from the town of Binczarova. This Lemko Republic’s official claimed borders covered nearly all of ethnographical Lemkovyna and some territory to its west.

It was a noble try, even if incredibly disorganized. The new government would be plagued by the inability to form a strong central authority. A famous account of the situation was written by Simeon Pyzh in his book of essays, A Short History of Carpathian Russia. For each village within its borders would have its own council look to make decisions, further weakening the state at large. People did not understand nor try to grasp the reality of political events at the time. Eventually when joining the Russian state was impossible, the Lemkos would look to join their brothers and sister in Subcarpathian Rus.

We, the Rusyn nation, living in a compact settlement in the southern parts of the Galician administrative units of Nowy Targ, Nowy Sącz, Grybów, Gorlice, Jasło, Krosno, and Sanok do not wish to be incorporated into the Polish state, and wish to share the fate of our Rusyn brothers [living] in Spiš, Šariš, and Zemplín counties as one indivisible geographic and ethnographic unit.

December 5th, 1918

Unfortunately, this plan would never come to fruition. Both the governor of Subcarpathian Rus at the time Gregory Žatkovich, a Rusyn-American, and the states of Czechoslovakia and Poland opposed this integration. It was in the end only a pipe dream that seemed too good to be real. Eventually the Polish authorities would disband the Lemko Republic in 1920 and put its leaders on trial. These were incredibly lenient compared to the Ukrainians in Eastern Galicia, and after they concluded the Polish government would mostly leave Lemkos to their own affairs. It was one of many differences that led to the significant difference in opinion regarding the character of the Polish state between these two groups until after the second world war.

Terrorism in Bohemia by Congressman Medill McCormick

New York Times, 1917

The Rusyns in Subcarpathian Rus experienced a completely different world in almost all respects. Like the Lemkos, the majority of Rusyns first wanted to join Russia after the end of the war. This was also not possible logistically for them as Poland controlled large swathes of western Ukraine and Belarus known as the Kresy. The westernmost part of the newly former USSR and the eastern border of Subcarpathian Rus were at a minimum 125 miles apart. Though a large percentage of the political class of the Rusyns at the time had called for some type of independence, the Wilsonian government in America would tell them that the only viable option would be to become incorporated into Czechoslovakia.

As part of this deal, the eastern section of Carpathian Rus (excluding Pryashiv) would become autonomous. Like many deals between nations in this period after the war, what was promised wasn’t exactly delivered. The notion of Rusyn autonomy was a superficial note on paper at best and the first modern appearance of internalized subjugation for our people. Czechs and Slovaks lined the offices of the provincial government, which itself had such little power compared to what it had been promised. The perception of the Rusyn homeland was also as a type of exotic backward place that lacked in civilization compared to the rest of the country.

The government of Czechoslovakia was as incompetent as it was controlling. Civil war in the Russian Empire led many former Ukrainian military members and intelligentsia to settle in Subcarpathian Rus with the goal of Ukrainianization. This was left to take root by the Czechoslovak government which did little to stop it. Native Rusyns would begin to be brainwashed by these Ukrainian nationalists through a variety of economic and cultural avenues. The ideals of Dukhnovych and the Rusyn language were downplayed to the level of subtle Rusyn erasure as they were totally against the new wave of theory about the Ukrainianness of Carpathian Rus. The worst of it would come in a coup in 1938 that would overthrow the legitimate government of Subcarpathian Rus.

What would be known as the project of Carpatho-Ukraine would set the preconditions for the worst era of Rusyn history. Ukrainian nationalists from Galicia formed as an infantry army known as the  Carpathian Sich that would cross over the Carpathians and attack the Czechoslovak forces as the Czechoslovak state itself crumbled, eventually overrunning them and declaring a so-called Carpatho-Ukrainian state. They were aided by a small handful of Rusyn natives like Avgustyn Voloshyn, who would now be described as political opportunists, while there was almost zero participation from the rest of the population in the government or army.

The Carpathian Sich was closely aligned ideologically with the other ultranationalist groups in Western Ukraine like the OUN (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) which was responsible for the massacre of Poles in Volhynia and aiding the Nazi’s in the mass killings of Jews in Ukraine. These regions had been the sites of regular pogroms against the Jews over the previous century, whereas in Subcarpathian Rus there wasn’t a single one that had occurred in the entirety of its history. Regardless of this, the Hungary army would eventually obliterate the small army and officially annex the territory in what would become a change of tune from the previous experience under their rule. In fact this time around the government of Hungary actually supported the Rusynification of Subcarpathia and did so for nearly five years. It would hold parts of Carpathian Rus until 1945 when it would be annexed to Soviet Ukraine under the pretense that it was a Ukrainian majority territory, and be renamed Zakarpattia Oblast. So would begin the Decades of Silence.

The Decades of Silence was the period between 1945 and 1991 when all countries Rusyns resided in besides Yugoslavia outlawed the Rusyn identity and language. Claiming oneself as Rusyn was to risk being put in jail, or worse killed indiscriminately. The ties between Rusyns and their heritage were torn away without regard for the consequences. Any communication between those in the homeland and the diaspora was cut off, and the same was true even between Rusyn regions.

Hard borders between the USSR and the various Soviet satellite states meant that any dialogue stopped completely. The Greek Catholic church was also prosecuted, with many of our religious leaders being executed by Soviet authorities with the rest having to work underground if they wanted to survive.

Our people were forced to take on new ethnic identities and go to specific schools for these that were created to foster their artificial conversion. For example, it was not uncommon for Pryashiv Rusyns to have to choose whether they identified as Slovak or Ukrainian, with most choosing the first option. In Subcarpathian Rus Ukrainization was a matter of state policy and has been ever since the annexation of Podkarpatska Rus in 1945. The Rusyn language became the Zakarpattian dialect, and the Rusyn culture to Transcarpathian culture. In Romania, where a small section of Hutsulia exists, these people were also by default assigned as Ukrainians. Anyone that stood up against these conditions or spoke the truth of the situation was quickly jailed or fined. Only after the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, and the Soviet collapse of 1991, did this begin to change for the better.

During this time the entire region of Lemkovyna was destroyed in 1947 by the Polish authorities under the idea that Rusyns were Ukrainians, and to stop the Ukrainian Insurgent Army required the complete removal of whatever Ukrainians still resided within Poland. It is called the Lemko Ethnocide and it was the culmination of a policy that began with the Austrians and Ukrainian nationalists and still exists today in modern Ukraine. Almost all Lemko-Rusyn villages were burned to the ground or resettled by Poles after the Lemkos were expelled. The government of Czechoslovakia was complicit in this as they shut down the border to Pryashiv Rus, stopping Lemkos from fleeing to there. Anyone who hadn’t been killed was rounded up and sent to Western Poland where many reside today except for the 10,000 that were allowed back at the end of the 1950s.

As we now enter the present day the effects of these events are still felt throughout the Rusyn regions. Thirty years of peace and recognition in most countries has still not removed the scars of the past, because the reality is that many of us are still living in it to this day. State policy in Ukraine is to declare Rusyns are Ukrainians, and as the government has gotten more nationalistic their attempts of Rusyn erasure have only gotten more pronounced. Now people are being arrested again in Subcarpathia for speaking out against the actions of the state and there is a full assault on Rusyn culture. Even Rusyn-Americans like Andy Warhol are being co-opted as Ukrainians through the help of propaganda research papers and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Street signs with the names of local Rusyns heroes are being forced to be renamed to Ukrainian nationalists under the guise of desovietization.

In the background we also have our cultural institutions almost completely funded and controlled by the state governments of Slovakia, Romania, and Poland which forbid any steps outside a predetermined course of action. There can be no advocation for autonomy or an apology for the actions of the past. These same governments have done nothing to advocate for the rights of Rusyns in Ukraine, and have at every turn supported the greater interests of the Western alliance without fail.

Through great struggle we have still prevailed and are near the highest level of Rusyn consciousness since the era of WWII. New projects are popping up all over the world like never before, and dozens of people every day are learning about their ancestry in Europe and abroad with a large percentage of them looking to help put an end to our erasure. Yet the threat of Rusyn erasure has not dwindled because we are unaware of its history and reach. Nearly every interaction we have with those who control the countries we live in is guided by the dynamic of subjugator and subjugated.

5 | THE MEANING OF CARPATHIAN RUS

These early facts while vital to know, do not give a clear answer to what we are or what Carpathian Rus is outside of geography. Of course we have been subjugated and our history is storied, but what about our soul? We understand nothing of the effects of the previous two chapters except for the physical elements without this second part. To this succeed at this end we can both describe what our nation is and the duty that the citizens inside it have.

Every nationality on earth requires a base set of beliefs to function as an organized unit. When other peoples are asked to explain the basis for their civilization, the answers flow quickly from their mouths. To the Indians they are the vanguards of Hindustan. For China, they view themselves the successors to the great dynasties of Sino civilization with the aim of reasserting these previous qualities. It is rare for any country or people to not have this in some form because they no longer be one soon after losing it.

The answer to this long-unanswered question in our case can be realized in the formation of a spiritual essence that aligns with the realities of our native being. A conclusion based in the acknowledgment of a separate local culture wrapped within a truthful man-made image. It can be most clearly stated as:

The idea of Carpathian Rus is one based on the foundation that the Rus peoples of the Carpathians form a unique nation worthy of its own future.

Through this we can begin to realize not only our distance from others around us, but connect as part of a greater idea to the reason why we matter. Except for the delineation between the inner heartland and the periphery, it does not matter if the Lemkos arrived in the 1300s or the Hutsuls later than all others. They both in the end have joined a local culture where the melting pot of these different groups has created a unique place with a purpose to develop. This answer is formed in the consequence of life experience that has only been shrouded in fog through the decisions of outsiders.

We in the Carpathians must take the knowledge of our history and the earliest political formations of our ancestors into account to realize that previous projects have failed because they did recognize the importance of local culture as we understand it today. Because of this they did not make a truthful enough image of a nation. We looked toward the Russians as a type of savior figure, and yet found out they were in many ways alien to us. Their speech was not intelligible, and their culture was peculiar in a way that was completely foreign. The error of Dukhnovych and other Russophiles to see them as a role model to copy alone and not further integrate with the local people has provided a real-life lesson to not repeat. They did not write in the text of the villager, but of the imperial scholar from Moscow. What was local was not seen as good enough, yet that is what makes any of these things possible.

As for the inclusion of all Carpathian Rus peoples into this entity of ours, the answer to why will become an apparent one. Both the Rusnaks, and Lemkos, and Boykos, and Hutsuls all originate from the merging of Rus and Vlach emigres in the Carpathians. To leave out one is to deny this common heritage between all. If a Carpathian Rusyn villager sees themselves as a Ukrainian now, they still unlike Ukrainians in the Dnieper, understand the Rusyn language due to this continuity between us all. Because they do not know any better, they will instead refer to it as po-nashomu, or our way of speaking. Likewise, the high religiosity and cultural holdovers from the time of Hungarian rule that distanced us greatly from other Rus did not merely go away at the time of the Soviet Union. A great percentage of the Orthodox clergy across the countries in which Rusyns reside is made up of ethnic Rusyns even though they are dwarfed in population is a testament to this fact.

These old cultural markers are also why when workers of Ukraine go abroad to make an income, those from Subcarpathia and from the rest of Ukraine separate themselves because of difficulties in dealing with other’s attitudes. Even the fables of the Carpathians cross ethnic lines like in the case of freedom fighter Andriy Savka, who though from the Pryashiv region, was written about more in folk tales as a Lemko bandit given his work against the Poles, and was known by Ruthenians as far away as the borderlands of southern mountainous Galicia.

All of these facts are to say that excluding those that do not have our national consciousness but retain the local cultural roots of Rusyns proves that an individual does not understand the reality of what a Rusyn is. It is making the same mistake that our forefathers made decades ago. Our peoples were on the edges of society, with our only close acquaintances being one another.

They do not truly share the imperial history of Galician Rus or Hungary because they are not the central people that created these societies. Instead, they created the interconnected highland of Carpathian Rus. It is merely the acknowledgment of the idea of Rusyn separateness that means all of those in the Carpathians be included. What some might think now in a greater artificial national context that is not aligned with local truth does not change the reality of what is true at all.

We must spiritually strive to push the boundaries of law and order to birth a national consciousness worthy of preserving these beautiful local attributes. It is a desire for all Rusyns of the Carpathians to join hands, or accomplish nothing at all. A movement may start in Pryashiv Rus and make its way east to the edges of Hutsulia, but the ending goal does not stop at the borders of Subcarpathia. There is not any in-between in this situation, for if this is not the case then we are merely the gathering of villages with some quirky ideas about who we are and nothing more.

Our people derive meaning from the duty of protecting the Rusyn culture, language, and have potential to flourish into something great. We represent the beauty of the last thousand years in Carpathian Rus and wish to elevate it even higher. Pointing to what is only acceptable now to those who believe is like invalidating the actual reality of what came before this outside oppression of our natural inclinations. Once this unification of overarching meaning has been accepted by the people of our society, we will have an acceptance of the purpose that lies ahead for us.

6 | UKRAINIANISM

In light of recent chapters on the formation of Rusyns and the historical background of their oppression, it is also prudent to further examine the single most difficult challenge that Rusyns face. In particular, how two national concepts have divided neighboring peoples and will continue to do so. This is the relationship between the Ukrainian nation and ours. Understand that while this chapter will be long, the purpose of doing so is to give enough context for those who have no background knowledge. Answering the question of why we are so disrespected by this nation directly leads us to the answers that we seek.

It is a truly tragic yet undeniable reality that as long as what it means to be Ukrainian is how it exists today, there will be never-ending strife between Carpatho-Rusyns and Ukrainians. To clarify why this reality is so, we must first understand the ambition of Ukraine itself in both present and historical contexts, and what it sees as integral to its existence. On one distinct side there is the perceived victimization of the Ukrainians, an important part of their national story not unlike us or many other peoples. In this case there is good reason for such a thing.

This particular tendency for perceived oppression does have historical and current political backing. The mistreatment of Ruthenian peasants by outsiders was a common occurrence throughout the centuries following the collapse of the Rus states by the Mongols. Those from the West colonized their former kingdoms, and most Ukrainians who were within the scope of civilization were forced to live on small plots of land with only the barest of subsistence farming. The majority of any profits too were sent away to the nobles in the castles or regional cities. Funnily enough, many who couldn’t stand it became what we now know today as Carpatho-Rusyns if they fled for the mountains, and Zaporizhian Cossacks if to the wild fields.

While not just those who are now Ukrainians were serfs in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Russian Empire, their regions were amongst the poorest in Europe. Galicia itself was seen as possibly the poorest in the 19th century even with its rich natural resources. Famines ravaged the land at the pace of every few years. Plagues too at various times wiped out entire villages and half the population of cities like Lviv. Combine this with not being ruled over by their own people, but ethnic outsiders, it gives little wonder as to why there is such a powerful undercurrent of anger in the culture of Western Ukrainians in particular.

This feeling was only further fortified by the actions of Russia in the previous centuries. In the time of the Russian empire there were complex assimilation policies outlawing the Ukrainian language and imperial decrees leading to the displacement of the Zaporizhian Cossacks to the Kuban by Catherine the Great in 1775. During the period of Soviet rule the majority of those in the Kuban who had been Ukrainian were assimilated into Russians, with the total Ukrainian population dropping from forty-nine percent in 1926 to just one percent in 2002. The complex nature of such events during this time should not be understated. By the Soviet authorities giving regions like the Donbas and Crimea to the Ukraine SSR, many of the actual wishes of Ukrainian nationalists were fulfilled. These decisions made for the legal incorporation of Russian majority areas into Ukraine, leading to the difficult post-1991 era. Why authorities did these things is rather vague except in the case of Crimea, which was given as a gift from Nikita Khrushchev, himself a Russian from Ukraine.

Modern attempts at meddling in Ukraine’s affairs even if geopolitically justified in the Russo-Ukraine war of 2022 only further advance tensions. Something that tactical politicians within Ukraine have already used to their advantage. There has never been a complete purge of Russian influence as large as has occurred over the past 24 months. This important part is not the full story. Aside from the ability to legitimate action through fear, this is not even the main actor that disallows what could be our peaceful coexistence. A true danger lies within the Ukrainian ambition in building their own empire of sorts.

There is a strong desire by nationalists and non-nationalists alike to not just unite the historical principalities of Rus, or otherwise the Ruthenian populations outside of Muscovy, but to also claim the lands gained by Cossack pillaging after their sworn allegiance to the Tsar in 1654 as well. This can be particularly described as the action of the Zaporizhian and Kuban Cossack Hosts, for which only the second remains in any legitimate form to this day though as stated above not really Ukrainian in character anymore. Writings and verbal statements, especially with the present state of politics can only get one so far in understanding the aims of a particular movement. Rather, they only provide background information in analyzing actual decisions. Insights from philosophical interpretations alone miss the second half of what went on. As is especially the case of the Ukrainians, one must look at historical political demands to realize the dream of nationalists. Below is a map created for a proposed Ukrainian state that was given to officials by Ukrainian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919.

Two things in particular stand out above the rest in regard to this map. One can first see very clearly that the entire region of Carpathian Rus is encapsulated within the proposed state boundaries. At this point it can already be acknowledged that the initial formation of what Ukrainian identity means as a sovereign state rested in part, on the inclusion of Carpatho-Rusyn territory in its boundaries. The second is the inclusion of the Northwestern Caucasus, Bessarabia, Kuban, Crimea, and much of Polesia. While an interesting map in its delusions, there lies the issue of national minorities involved. These lands, not so much in the case of the Kuban but certainly in the Caucasus and Bessarabia, were ethnic homelands of other peoples until the Cossack Host pacified them.

This was under the direct order of the Russian Empire, so it does not confer the majority of the blame in these ethnic liquidations to the Ukrainian ideology necessarily. What can be said about this situation is that by further claiming these invaded lands as historical Ukrainian lands, like in the case of Budjak, Crimea, and the former Novorossiya if we wish to stick only to modern boundaries excluding our case, it is politically validating the multitude of previous imperialist atrocities that made them this way. One should not be stupid and think that any nation will simply give up land for the sake of being philosophically more correct, but it does open a window into the Ukrainian mind when early formations of statehood arose.

Even at the time of this map the ethnic populations were very much swung toward the indigenous peoples. Crimea was as today a primarily Russian territory with varying levels of Crimean Tatars. Bessarabia was largely Bulgarian and Moldovan as the region had been an integral part of Moldavia until its annexation into the Russian empire in 1812. The populations in the western Caucasus also constituted a significant percentage of the population before their eventual removal because of their desire to remain free. It seems as though where a lone Ukrainian had once lived, that land was there for the taking. Now that some of them have been captured as integral parts of a sovereign state, the will to forever keep them is unrelenting in its tenacity.

The role that Cossacks play today in the thought of Ukrainian statehood is fairly good evidence of the role that these ambitions from a century ago still influence internal affairs. The picture of the Ukrainian Cossack is one of freedom-loving resistance against the state of Muscovy, not in its role of the Circassian genocide or general malpractice throughout the wild fields under the behest of the Tsar they now so openly speak against as a historical terror upon their lands. Any aforementioned attempts at accurately characterizing this legacy have been met with intense resistance and for a good reason. Reacknowledging its own imperial past would only help to destabilize the Ukrainian psyche as a whole because it challenges so many underlying truths.

Pan-Ruthenian imperialism, when putting away these other important considerations, is the core issue that makes it so difficult for us to even be acknowledged. The desire to make Ukraine synonymous with the lands of the Ruthenians and Cossack possessions creates a situation where to allow Rusyns to be their own entity changes the definition of what it means to be Ukrainian. What is meant by Ukraine would no longer be the Rus lands between Russia and the West, but something which can be chosen. There is no finality in that assessment, just a vast lingering grey zone with room for balkanization.

You may ask how this is fundamentally different or incorrect versus our conception of Carpathian Rus? This may seem like a competition between two ideologies alone, but that is only when looking at the mundane exterior of the existential conflict at hand. A first point to make is that our national scope is measured through local attributes. What we claim to be Rusyn is from what regions speak Rusyn (a language that Ukrainians do not understand), the historical precedence of what has been considered Carpathian Rus for centuries, the will of the people to identify differently, and the shared trauma we have endured. There is no convincing to be had here for the majority on what constitutes a Rusyn, we are merely crystallizing it. This cannot be said for the Ukrainians to the same extent.

They do not share our language, have not been through the same shared trauma of the past 155 years, and have tried at every turn to eliminate the native beliefs of our people. From our perspective this is nothing more than a virus attempting to erode us as a people because the beast of their project does not allow for any step outside of the rigid boundaries it has set. The fact of Rusyn identity not only steps outside this conception, but exploded through it in a way that is ideologically unacceptable has helped to produce the situation we now see. Anything else regarding the strain of our relationship is minimal in importance.

7 | WHY THE DIASPORA MATTERS

After all this reading you may still be asking why you should care about Rusyns? Most of us are heavily Americanized after all, and there is no immediate penalty for ignoring these topics. If none of this has stopped you from being disinterested you are free to leave now just as you were moments ago. Ask yourself a few things though before you do. Why do we look back on what was done by settlers to the natives of America with disgust? What about the boarding schools for Native American children in Canada and parts of America makes us feel ashamed? The forced assimilation, the ethnic cleansing, the brutality of foreign rule, these were all done to us as well. They were in fact so successful that so many of us live without knowledge of it having ever happened. Your current state has been a product of this environment.

By embracing our true ancestral identity and being we prove these efforts to be unsuccessful. The hollowed husk of what American culture is can be replaced by something authentic. What your ancestors called theirs can now be yours again. If you wish to go a step further and fight for the rights of our people, you also have a choice to be part of something special in the liberation of Rusyns from erasure and subjugation. The ability to do good in the world does not start a thousand miles away on an issue you have no personal affiliation with. It instead has been with you all along. We are a subjugated people; however this does not need to always be that way.

To recognize your own internalized subjugation you must start to see yourself as part of your larger group. This does not mean you lose your individuality entirely. Fully seeing your group and its shared experiences allows you to separate your personal qualities and those of the group itself. It makes you wiser and more intelligent to the stream of happenings in the world.

You and I are part of the Rusyn diaspora, which while part of the Rusyn nation, has experienced its own traumas separate from those in the homeland. Over time our two groups within the same nation will be able to grow closer as we recognize and integrate our personal trauma’s together, eventually helping to achieve a national vision. However we have to think about what is unique about us first to start that process.

If the original immigrant life of our Rusyn ancestors who left Europe starting in the 1880s was peculiar in any way compared to the dozens of other peoples, it was the quickness of their ethnic disappearance. Over 500,000 people in the United States have Rusyn ancestry yet only a fraction, maybe even as low as 5%, know that they have Rusyn DNA within them. Most historians will be quick to point out that this was common for any ethnicity that moved to the United States. While this may be true, it doesn’t discount the radical assimilationist policies at the time nor the attacks we suffered at the hands of different immigrant groups.

Widespread discrimination against new Slavic immigrants in the iron belt encouraged people to drop their ethnic identity and language. If one wasn’t called a hunky then they were affected in promotional opportunities and quality of education nonetheless. Think of the pathetic wages that our ancestors were often given with the low quality of life they could afford. It is not a surprise that various social ills in the character of drug abuse or similar vices are still prevalent even today. We were taught to be ashamed of our history so that once the tear down of the value in that occurred the values of the American could replace them. What’s most devious is the pressure for assimilation from people that experienced that same anti-Eastern European resentment side by side with our ancestors.

The reason why some people believe they are Slovaks, others Ukrainians, and even more are Russians is because there was a concerted effort for that to occur. We can see time and again that through the influence of the church and social clubs there were attempts at Rusyn erasure in the hopes to assimilate. If a family went to a Roman Catholic church because that was the closest thing around, they would be pressured to identify as a Slovak. This same thing can be said for the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic church and the Russian Orthodox Church in North America. Sometimes even governments would make it a state-sponsored mission to do so like the Hungarian government’s political dealings with Hungarian churches to reinforce the process of Magyarization. The Russian Empire did a similar thing with their churches across the United States.

As the United States entered the cold war era there was even less ability to identify yourself as a Rusyn because the cultures of Eastern Europe were seen as threatening to the fight against Communism. It also did not help that Rusyns descend from the same nation as the Russians with similar names. For the uninitiated, the word Rusyn may as well mean Russian but just pronounced a slightly different way. In general what had been at least a Slavic identity (even if assimilated into a neighboring ethnicity) was destroyed at the same time that the Decades of Silence was occurring.

In the end our situation was one that lacked a clear solution as the desire to rip apart our national identity came from all levels of power and national orientation. That was then and our current situation is a product of that environment. Our ability to counteract the old challenges we still face has changed though with the development of the Rusyn nation post-1991. The journey we are about to be embarked on is one that can reset the course of where we are headed.

It requires the desire from the homeland that still experiences the effects of Rusyn erasure daily, and a diaspora that has the resources, free-speech, and possible political influence on the Western government that far outweighs the capability of those in Europe. Where they cannot speak under threat of prison we can. In situations where new capital is needed our ability to produce it far surpasses theirs due to the more prosperous economy of the West. These microcosmic examples are where our destiny and responsibilities are positioned. No success can be accomplished without both of us working together.

8 | NATIONAL SUSTAINABILITY

When a Rusyn knows their history it is almost impossible for them to lack the need to do something in order to right the wrongs of the past, or more importantly, to stop any future events from occurring. One way that we can use this collective energy to good use is to help improve the national sustainability of our nation. National sustainability can be thought of as the basis for the continued survival of a people throughout multiple generations. Some factors that influence the level of sustainability that a country has are its political representation, institutionalization of language and culture, the population structure, economic conditions, external migration, and national vision. These are the things that political theorists and international relations experts focus on when making their predictions about the future.

If even just a few of these factors are off the mark then it can be extremely hard for a nation to survive over the long term. A good example of this is Japan, where their economic conditions are reasonable, their people control their own destiny, and the vision for their country established. All of these factors are present, yet there is a great deal of anxiety about the coming decades. This is because they are going through an extreme population crash that while not a death blow (there are 125 million ethnic Japanese) there will be negative ripple effects throughout the economy, intellectual life, and migration patterns. One in particular that will be particularly prominent in all aging countries is the collapse of social welfare systems brought on by the lack of young workers putting money in. In the future Japan and others like it will need a competent government that can deal with these issues and hopefully reverse the trends we see today.

When evaluating our nation on similar questions it becomes apparent quite quickly that few of them are in a positive position. We may in fact be in one of the worst situations possible in Europe. To get an in-depth picture on the direction that should be taken in the coming decade some further analysis of specific issues is required. No matter how terrible the situation looks, it’s important to realize that this is a necessary first step to change what is going on. Without confronting the bleakness of the situation the history of the last thirty years will likely repeat itself going forward.

8.1 | Political Representation

Overall the situation for Rusyns across the homeland and the diaspora is poor regarding political representation. Currently the positive factors on the national level regarding this are a few ethnic Rusyns in national governmental positions in Slovakia, an ethnic minority party from Romania (Cultural Union of Ruthenians of Romania), and a self-autonomy government in Hungary.

Ethnic Rusyns are suppressed and not represented in any capacity on the national or regional level within Ukraine, and the Lemko-Rusyns due to their displacement are not cohesive enough as a unit to develop something like a political party. Regional and local governments are dominated by ethnic Rusyns in the places they live, however there has been no development of a political culture regarding minority rights as a community like in the case of Hungarians with their Party of Hungarians of Ukraine (KMKSZ) in Ukraine, and the SMK-MKP in Slovakia.

While they are able to further the interests of their constituents in an organized way, we do not have this ability. Lacking it comes into play when matters of institutionalization and the economy are taken into account. The best way to push one’s agenda is not through the mass movement of people, but through an avenue where doing something beneficial to our cause is the established norm and legitimized by the state.

It is vital to recognize the effect of Rusyns in Ukraine lacking representation in particular due to the nature of their current suppression. Whereas the total amount of Rusyns in all areas outside of Subcarpathia in Europe may equal to something around 200,000, within the region is between 750-950,000 people, or somewhere between 60 and 75% of the total Rusyn population in the world. If someone is a Rusyn they are more likely to live here versus anywhere else.

This means that the majority of Rusyns have no formal opportunities to develop political expertise or connect with transnational Rusyn organizations in ways that are seen as non-harmful by the central government. Those that do so anyways run the risk of having their lives destroyed. You are also effectivity limiting the pool of potential leaders to roughly 3 out of every 10 Rusyns. Having the majority unable to participate in this situation severely limits the ability for us to survive or even project our voice into world politics.

8.2 | Institutionalization of Language and Culture

There is a dearth of representation on this front regarding all Rusyn regions with varying levels of recent success. The status of the Rusyn language is marred by its inability to gain status in modern society. Dual street signs are present in some areas, and a handful of Rusyns schools exist in Pryashiv Rus, however these do not often go up to the level of high school or undergraduate level education. There are no universities that teach specifically in the Rusyn language, and any program that does revolve around our people is often focused on the study of our culture. Literary and writing traditions are strong particularly in Subcarpathia, however most new books published are done through self-promotion and there is no formal market like with English. Work opportunities to speak in the Rusyn language are also nonexistent at the level of corporate environments. If we wish to move past the roadblock of language endangerment then it must be a possibility to go through education and a working career without needing to speak any other language than our own.

In the cultural scene Rusyns are often plagued by the issue of Orientalism from their western neighbors. This goes back to the Czechoslovak era at least and probably even before. If they are not seen as a strange minority from the east then the focus is on Rusyn folk culture and music alone. This in turn focuses activities and events in a type of museum-like display. A reasonable amount of this is fine, however a lack of modern invention pervades every level of our communities. There are almost no opportunities to watch Rusyn movies or television, online content is scarce at best, and the effect we have on popular culture in the larger states we live in is low. Like in the creation of new pathways for Rusyn students, the development of new modes of culture are a must.

8.3 | Population Structure, Economy, and Migration

While Rusyn regions stand out as slightly above average in fertility rates compared to the areas around them, with the difference being between +0.1-0.3 on average, their fertility rate is still below the replacement rate of 2.0. Even when taking into account that some of this may be due to the significant populations of Roma in the area, they are likely not doing any worse than any other regions. All the available data also suggests that at least in the case of Subcarpathia they are legitimately above the rest of the country in reproduction. Our own issues with fertility are aggravated by the lack of economic opportunities available to those that reside within Rusyn dominant areas. We are overwhelmingly a rural people that have historically lacked the ability for mass industrialization. What industry we do have has slowly eroded since the collapse of the Eastern Bloc, and with it the best choices to stay within the homeland. Mixed in with these events was educational collapse that has not been fully repaired.

It is not uncommon for masses of young women and men to engage in seasonal work abroad, particularly in Czechia due to the low salaries found at home. If one were to go up to villages in highland areas there will be examples of abandoned shops and factories in nearly every village. Living with urban decay is a universal reality for most. Many of the people that go abroad eventually stay in the places they found work permanently with only rare trips back to their native villages. It is a usual occurrence for their children to become separated from their heritage and forget how to speak the Rusyn language or know what their true nationality is. This starts the trend of assimilation not all dissimilar to the process that occurred in the United States to Rusyn workers who had originally gone there for a temporary source of income.

Changing the situation of these three factors will require a complete restructuring of the Rusyn lifestyle as we know it today. Mass industrialization and modernization needs to occur within the framework of a Rusyn national orientation to reverse the trends we see in emigration. What is required to do this is large amounts of capital from sources of wealth and a crop of new elite businessmen and skilled workers that are okay with a slow process of evolution that may take more than twenty years to rise to the standard of the rest of Central Europe. Without buy-in to the concept we will continue to remain a poor people without the resources to manage our own affairs.

9 | VISION IN NATIONAL POLITICS

As things stand today Rusyns are not entirely ready to move forward with a vision that rises to the level of nation-building. When we talk about the requirements to having a vision, this includes both where we want to go and a strong sense of who we are. Similar to the other lacking sustainability attributes in the previous chapter, these are missing from our consciousness for now. The majority of Rusyns retain a sense of folk identity not unlike in the time before nation states arose if they know at all, and furthermore we have no government institutions to call our own. This was not always the complete story as examples like the Lemko Republic show, however there has been a regression due to obvious reasons.

One day we will be ready to make the leap away from this completely, but for that to happen we need to have crafted an environment ready for it. This means activists today must focus on achieving goals that will lead to this new starting point. Without them your energy can be wasted on things that will usually have no permanent result at the end. It is also crucial to consider the time to success of your mission. With the pressures of assimilation and the already mentioned economic situation still slowly working their way through Carpathian Rus, there must be a sense of urgency. With this in mind I have laid out six primary goals to be completed over the next ten years. It is my belief that if these can be achieved, we will be ready to move forward with a national vision for our nation and no longer be on the defensive worrying if we will be assimilated over the next few generations.

The goals are as follows:

• Official recognition of Rusyns and the Rusyn language as a unique ethnicity and language in Ukraine.

• The implementation of the 1991 autonomy vote and the renaming of Zakarpattia Oblast to the Autonomous Region of Podkarpatska Rus.

• The implementation of Rusyn language education in primary and secondary education (from ages 5 to 18) in all regions of Carpathian Rus and the diaspora.

• The creation of Rusyn minority ethnic parties in Slovakia, Poland, and Ukraine to vouch for the interests of their respective populations.

• Double the population of self-identifying Rusyns in the diaspora and increase the self-identifying Rusyn population in Europe excluding Subcarpathia by at least 50%.

• Official recognition of the Lemko Ethnocide by the Polish government and the repopulation of Lemkovyna through cooperation with the state and international Rusyn organizations.

If it looks like these have been chosen to cover a wide array of issues, then you would be correct in that assumption. Avoiding obsession with a single thing by focusing on multiple domains with very different qualities gives the opportunity for people to focus on what they value the most. Through the first two goals our legitimacy as a people and safety from assimilation are maintained in Ukraine. Simply having our people recognized is not enough given the past thirty years and the track record that has brought with it. We cannot make do with just guarantees now, we need institutions of our own within a legal framework to counterbalance possible regressions of rights. If thought from a wider perspective as well, in this scenario both the international integrity of Ukraine’s borders and our concerns are addressed through a legitimate process in line with international law. Given our geopolitical situation this should always be our first option as half of our homeland is already in the European Union, with the other being right on its border.

Part of the problem we have faced in the past thirty years with the question of national politics in Ukraine is that nobody has stated goals like this openly. Because of that, their central government had no reason to take the Rusyn question seriously. If one also thinks about it from a historical perspective, our autonomy is legitimized by a few things besides the vote itself too.

The major one of these is that we had autonomy during the interwar period within Czechoslovakia and would have had it again if not for the annexation by the USSR against the will of the populace. Regardless of the blowback this will raise upon us, nothing in history worth anything has ever come without some difficulty. Now that all Western eyes are on Ukraine, it will be even more difficult for them to continue as they have in the past, especially if our activism methods have improved.

The fourth point is an extension of this focus on politics and should be seen as the most baseline step that can be made. Create political parties, gather up the available political capital we have in our position, and begin fumbling about as we learn how to play with power politics. The politicians of our future have to begin their training now before the opportunities that come will pass Rusyns by. Our third goal regarding language is something that starts to handle the problem of language and culture. This point addresses the baseline problem of not having enough of an audience to maintain creative endeavors. The amount of artistic expression will expand as the amount of speakers who feel they have the ability to use their language expands.

The final two goals were chosen because of the need to put other regions besides Subcarpathia on the path toward sustainability. With Lemko identity and culture now hanging by a thread, the actions taken to save them must raise to the level of acknowledgment and repatriation. We know this because cultural activism where Lemkos reside now has simply not stopped assimilation in any meaningful. If Poland does recognize the responsibility for their actions and makes significant steps toward this end, there can be a path forward. In addition to this, our aim must always in part be focused on the recollection of Carpathian Rus in territory and ethnic identity. If academic assessments are even close to being correct, there could be as high as one million people who are ethnically Rusyn but don’t identify as one. The stated statistics of population doubling and increasing by half may look significant, however in pure numbers this is something like 20,000 to 40,000 in the diaspora, and 70,000 to 105,000 in the western parts of the homeland. That is something as minor as 10-15% of the under-nationalized population with ten years to achieve it. When looking at it from the perspective of actual numbers it is not as towering of a figure to behold.

As we move forward and cover topics like identifying Rusyn erasure, it is important to not lose sight of these overarching goals. It is good to work against systems of oppression that we have endured through activism, and it is better to fight for a situation where we can focus on what comes after. Remember that the act of rebellion is only half the battle that a people face in a movement. You must be for something that invigorates others to join your cause. If that is kept in mind our hearts will be in the right place and so will our actions.

With this said it is just as important to base your own specific goals off of these larger ones so that they are personally connected to you. For example, if you want to help in the self-identification of Rusyns in the diaspora you can set up a specific goal like increasing awareness in your own town. It is a subject for a later chapter, however know that while some parts of our movement need centralization, others will have to rely on a wide array of people influencing the world in their own way.

FOCUS | THE THREE POLITICAL GOALS

To many the three political goals might seem like a far-off dream without reality in mind. It has always been a similar reaction at least when offering them in private conversation. Of the myriad of reasons often give the most common is about a certain country we all know about. This immediate flight to hopelessness is complete and utter nonsense in the opinion of the author. The structures of power around Rusyns are weaker than what you probably believe, and we cannot be with such pessimism yet for the mere fact that we do not even know exactly what will happen if we push the boundaries of these issues. However it is clear that no organization or person has gone far enough to find out.

Let us first at least agree that the situation we face today is not to the level of power disparity found previously. The dysfunctional state of Ukraine even with its Banderites is nothing compared to the former might of the USSR. It may be harder to achieve certain political ambitions under the watchful gaze of a nationalist authoritarian government rather than a communist one, however there are still so many options to choose from. The frank reality is that over the past thirty years nobody has used the international structures available to us effectively once. How many filings have we done with the United Nations? What efforts have we taken to showcase our situation to the general public? Have we actually done anything worthy of getting national attention? Answers to all of these range from never to a rare occurrence decades ago.

The key to succeeding against a force with overwhelming power compared to you is to use asymmetric tactics. Playing fields with the most potential to find ground in are in domains like media outside of government control. There are other areas that rhyme with the word vanilla, but we don’t need to arrive there just yet. A simple one playing off this ability in media could be just the literal act of protest in Kiev or Washington D.C. with signs stating our message clear and Rusyn flags waving. Imagine the absolute storm this would cause around the world (especially in Kiev) if we played the cards just right.

Regardless of if mainstream news would cover it, there are ways to benefit no matter what. Upon the arrest of protesters which would likely happen Ukraine, we could then further disperse news and footage across multiple social media networks, creating the narrative of Rusyn oppression in real time for the rest of the world to discover. This footage can then be taken back to the homeland where we can further show people in real life what the government’s current opinion of us is. Avenues for funding can be set up through events like this and have been done so for causes that took a similar approach. Donors can’t donate money if they don’t know about the problem. This is one example of many others just like it that have not been utilized.

Danger rests in acts like these, and we would sure enough want to phrase any material put out in a non-separatist manner, however the extreme focus on danger is exactly the problem. Risk is involved with any level of success and if activists like ourselves only create plans with zero risk then nothing will be gained. Why this timidness has taken root in us could be a discussion that goes on for days, but the root of the matter is that to achieve what we desire some traumas must be replayed. There can be no light at the end of the tunnel without more arrests, more propaganda, and greater strife with others. It is the way of things when acting against established power. The methods are the easy part, and the will to have courage is much harder.

As for the recognition of the autonomy vote of 1991 and the reestablishment of Podkarpatska Rus, this will invariably involve the West to some degree. Because of the newly found reliance on these countries for support to maintain Ukraine as a state, its sovereignty is limited. A decision like autonomy for Podkarpatska Rus begins in Kiev but ends in approval from D.C as long as Ukraine has not fallen completely to Russia or gone off the deep end. If that happens then vanilla strategies are fully applicable. This means that the real corridor to achieving these goals is through convincing Western powers to back the moves. Whether you want to utilize the thought of separatism or human rights or both at the same time is up to your own discretion. The powers in the West are more favorable to appeasement than those in the East.

On the note of political parties outside of Ukraine there is even less at stake. If the governments of Central Europe have not kicked out the Hungarian minority parties who have links to nationalists in Hungary, a state on much worse terms with these nations, then there is little to fear in our case. It’s hard to believe that fear like in the case of Subcarpathia is what will be the bottleneck to our development on this front. The likely issue will be in the nationalization of each Rusyn group which is not strong overall. We can see this particularly in Slovakia where the number of Rusyns as a second ethnicity was far greater than those that labelled as first.

The issue is therefore relating to every other one we’ve ever had as far back as anyone can remember. Instead of focusing on the educational avenue for this to develop it may be well worth it to have a select group create these new parties and develop them from there. It can be on the level of villages or districts at first with a support base in the hundreds. The opportunity here is not in the immediate political gains but to build a type of brand for which you are able to do many of the same types of educational work. In general the benefits are actually quite numerous. An incredibly valuable one is having the ability to create a youth wing that can feed into the pipeline to leadership while furthering your political goals at the same time. Doing this in a format like a school would be almost unheard of and lacks interaction with real politics.

The difference between the current situation and the goals of the new Rusyn decade can be covered by simply doing as others have showcased it can be done. If we can use the tactics that have worked for activists for other causes in a variation that fits the Rusyn environment better then there is overnight progress. In the case of Subcarpathia not much can be said on the will to go against the instinctual revulsion to danger. The question that citizens of the region should ask instead of one relating to strategy is what would it take to go all-in on changing their situation. What will fundamentally evolve their outlook from focusing entirely on the personal consequences of actions to the goals they wish to achieve from them? That is the bottleneck that has been refused to address.

FOCUS | NOVA LEMKOVYNA

From now on the project of repopulating the Lemko homeland can be assigned the name Nova Lemkovyna. The beginnings of Lemko territorial regeneration do not flow from the acceptance of the total Lemko population to the ideals laid out in these chapters, nor the recognition of the Lemko ethnocide by the state of Poland. A small, dedicated group of people with a range of skills and who can be organized effectively is needed. For the average Lemko, the idea of Lemko-Rusyn nationalism to our level will always remain somewhat of an extreme break from the average patriotism. As such, this initial stage of gaining resources through great difficulty will not be inherently appealing.

We are attempting to lead a revolution in national development only seen once before in the state of Israel. To this end we are also attempting to do it first through democratic means with meager amounts of faith that Poland will allow our autonomy under their guidance. Even if they are not particularly keen on the idea of a Lemko return, these rules for resettlement will apply in any case. If there is a concerted effort to stop our rightful return at all, then the manner in which we find national sustainability is far outside the optimism that this book holds.

Attempting our project requires a generous amount of cash reserves, land, man-hours, and managerial experience. The biggest issue we have in this ordeal is that there is simply a shortage of Lemkos in Poland for something on as wide a scale as this. This is another junction where the diaspora and homelanders are required to interact to achieve their connected goals. Not doing so is really not an option at this current stage. Having little of the mentioned qualities in future organizers due to an insufficient pool of candidates means a distinct lack of funding and structure, with an insufficient crop of loyal activists and functionaries that will range in the hundreds meaning we are unable to project physical action into the world.

As this first group is starting to form a number of places of residence must be chosen. The closest ideal in this regard is again similar to an Israeli idea. This time it is in their settlements of the West Bank with only a marginally less serious stance. Think of them as new ideological capitals through which every Lemko can intermingle. Research must be done to identify the best candidates on the factors of local politics, ease of access, and affordability of land, with a mix of former villages and current towns now settled by Poles being the optimal strategy.

Symbolically these act as the starting point of the recolonization. In particular, the towns of Florynka and Komanzca should serve as key operational points in the west and east, though if they are exceedingly difficult this should not be a stopping point at first. Others can be chosen instead to fit the same purpose. Having these places of physical congregation will help greatly increase our odds of success, and also increase the visibility of our movement. It is important in its marketing to not make these plans inherently negative toward the Polish state (and especially so if they are willing to let us resettle). A less threatening image of acting as a place for Lemko culture to thrive is a good frame, as it is inherently true too. We must act as if this is a new moderate project in the reclamation of Lemko-Rusyn identity. While on the outside looking in one could see things like Lemko stores, kids camps, and festivals, in reality there are other goals also involved. Hidden in plain sight amongst the activities is an interest in spotting the most interested of the lot for the purpose of giving them resources to become part of the next generation of dedicated patriots.

Those taken in by these new centers of intellectual discourse should also be partially integrated into the rest of Carpathian Rus’ intelligentsia. Why this must occur is simple. Without the proper understanding of what Carpathian Rus means as whole they will be apt to lead themselves astray on their own thinking of Lemkovyna as merely its own entity alone. Even more than this though, those that wish to change the situation of the Lemko need to experience what an entirely Rusyn environment is like. Without seeing the formation of political life in Subcarpathia and Pryashiv all they will have to go on is their untested ideals. Having a certain amount of non-Lemko intellectuals also devote mentoring attention to the region will help minimize this concern.

As this first mission of creating an intellectual center takes off, there is a wave of gritty non-ideological work that must be done from the connections that are made. These revolve around the purchase of more land and local industry. With the offer of cheap houses and well-paying jobs, there will be Lemkos in the west that return home whether they are intellectually aligned or not. At this point within the first decade, this suffices the initial goal of turning the situation from a negative to a positive. By simply doing this, a short trickle of intelligentsia formation here, the return of a handful of villages there, a foundation is being laid for future action.

Do not get lost in the process of gradual evolution in the situation when thinking of the long term. The first stages of creating Nova Lemkovyna in this segmented way serve as the build up to the ultimate climax moment of autonomy within the Polish state similar to the former Podkarpatska Rus. We do not need complete sovereignty for regeneration of what was wrongly taken from us. If the power to ask for this has not occurred, then the buildup of resources to reach that moment is what is required at the moment. If they refuse then that energy shifts toward making it profoundly hard not to. Gradual progression for the sake of it should not and cannot be the end result of these struggles. National sustainability is instead the end goal of everything we do.

10 | STAFFING A MOVEMENT

Achieving radical change with the previously mentioned goals or modified ones of your own requires a multitude of different roles if it is to achieve anything at a meaningful scale. Being interested in improving the quality of the Rusyn condition is really only the first step to achieving this. When we look back at historical movements of other nationalities that succeeded and those who are attempting to do the same thing in the modern day, we can see a pattern in their structure. A movement develops its own ecosystem as it reaches maturity with a plethora of different avenues to contribute.

This is a positive characteristic because not everyone is wanting or capable of every role that is available, and knowing where people fit on the bus makes sure that everyone is happy to be part of the ride. The following will be a description of each of the five roles that are needed with the responsibility left to you of figuring out what role fits best. Remember, while some may be more public-facing or interesting a combination of all of them together is the ideal. There is no shame in knowing what you are even if it’s not the most flashy of positions.

10.1 | Thought Leaders

The thought leaders are what make up the philosophical backbone of any movement. They often toil away at the canvas or computer producing another work that raises the standard of intellectual development or sparks a revolution in culture. Here is where you will find the majority of those who argue or rebel against current systems of erasure through words. They are the ones who will write vicious articles opining on how what is being done is not right. Those of a more creative persuasion will put their thoughts through the form of fiction or other non-political mediums. It is through their analysis that we gain the direction to point our energy toward even if they do not take up a position in leading civil society.

If you have grandiose ideas or naturally think on topics similar to the ones you have heard so far, then this may be the place for you if you’re ready to put in the work and act responsibility. Becoming a public thought leader produces a heavy weight of challenges for the individual. It is a path fraught with peril, especially if you become controversial as is sometimes needed to get a message across. One dedicated wrong move in ideology can also send your people tumbling down the staircase for the next decade. Because of this it is important for those in this class to have a great deal of background education and a position in society where they can run the gambit on their ideas with others in similar positions.

10.2 | Activists

Activists are people that put the philosophy of the thought leaders into reality. They are the ones who picket a government office, attempt to influence people through social interaction, and quite often have a tenuous relationship with authority at best. It is important to not mix up this category with those focused on cultural preservation and education, a topic we will be looking at in the next subsection. A truly committed activist can go so far as to turn into a revolutionary if the situation so requires it, though there are often chances for it to be avoided in all but the most authorities scenarios. People in this group must have a high tolerance for negative emotion and a great deal of self-confidence to continue toward their goals when met with hard opposition. This means someone who has average to below-average anxiety versus the average person and with above-average disagreeableness. Former armed forces members, thrill seekers, and those with a tendency to act in times of crisis fit this role well.

While the thought leader category seems to be somewhat similar to the activist one, especially in terms of being in the camp of dissenting opinions, the major difference between them is in the way they influence society on average. A thought leader may or may not eventually take to action or become a leader of a movement at a certain point, but an activist lives within this zone.

Think of the difference between a professor before the abolition of slavery in the United States writing about its cruelty and need to end versus an individual who is helping slaves escape to the north. As you can imagine, while there is some overlap here the profiles for both differ in most areas. People who are activists are incredibly valuable and needed because intellectual thought must be combined with real action. Without this the ideas of a movement remain just that. In times of oppression they are also important because they act as a defensive force for the rest of the population. As it stands today this category might be the one where we need newcomers the most.

10.3 | Educators

The educators are those who help with the recording of knowledge and the transfer of it to future generations. These are the teachers, the proselytizers, and those that attempt to conserve our culture and environment. Every people needs a structure which their youth goes through so that they can become educated just as it also needs someone taking notes on events that happen so they can be recorded in history. Those in this group fulfill that role inside a peoples movement, and in turn produce the next crop of young activists and thought leaders. A good example of someone in the modern era who fulfilled this role is Professor Magocsi, who helped lead the mass renationalization of the Rusyn people around the world through his writing and research. People in the professions of teaching, wildlife conservationism, academia, and religion fit into this category.

10.4 | Functionaries

When thinking of the functionaries, imagine those who live a life devoid of political intrigue. These are the people that fill roles in society that allow it to continue. In other words, normal people without some clear political or cultural mission. From the perspective of a Rusyn movement, these people may not be functionally as important to our mission, but are nonetheless valuable because their work allows for the others to be able to work toward their goals and not simultaneously worry about if their society will fall apart. Anywhere from 80 to 90% of a given population falls into this camp and can be identified as largely non-political or unwilling to make the leap into one of the other categories.

The best thing to do if you know that you are in this group, whether it be because you want to live a normal life or because of a different circumstance, is to give support when you can to those in greater danger. Granting legitimacy to Rusyns aspiring for change does not have to be an inherently dangerous thing to do. This can be as simple as a small yearly donation or the subtle spreading of their ideas to those you know, but in general your job is fulfilled through you embracing Rusynness to the extent you can and being a contributing member of society. Not everyone stays here for the majority of their life, and if you are still in school it is recommended that you focus on the development of yourself first.

10.5 | The Financiers

The financiers are the people that fund the movement with both political and economic capital. Regardless of how many great ideas a person comes up with, or how committed an activist is to their mission, the resources to actually enact it come from somewhere else. Everything has a cost, and in politics this goes to the extreme if you are attempting anything beyond the most basic of practices. This is not even mentioning the cost that each person endures through their work. If someone cannot work full-time at the tasks we have in front of us they will not get done. The solution to this problem is found within this group.

While the common understanding is through the angle of capital, financiers are a group of more than only wealthy people who look to help further a cause through economic patronage. They are people who have power within whatever system we operate in and are willing to use it to help our interests. This may be a politician who is not openly Rusynophile but subtly creates the conditions for an opportunity to improve our recognition, or a police chief that holds off on some activist protesters getting arrested until the news stations arrive so the photos can be plastered on the internet.

The common definition still applies, but we must think more inclusively because people like this are what we need. Unless we wish to overthrow a government we need to find ways to gain a foothold of legitimacy in the public space. No matter what the end goal is our legitimacy amongst the common people needs to be established too. Doing this on our own without financiers is incredibly difficult as we would be working against the entire establishment to institute our change.

10.6 | Putting This Information To Use

Now that you have learned the main divisions within a popular movement it is important to understand that in real life things will not be as definable or static. The majority of people who develop into becoming a member of one of the four actionable groups (thought leaders, activists, educators, financiers) were once functionaries at one point in their life. As one ages to the point of retirement, or when they decide on major life decisions like starting a family, their place in this order shifts. For example, many activists when entering middle age transition into more of an educator role. This can be seen in the familiar tale of the college student activist eventually becoming a professor. Those that rise up to lead us, or what can be termed as national leaders will often inhabit a role between thought leader, financier, and activist all at the same time.

Use these divisions instead as a way to think about how you are acting within your own movement and to see what you are missing. It is important to take stock of where exactly you are in relation to your goals. If you are Rusyn who is attempting to make a difference in the national consciousness of the diaspora in Pennsylvania, recognize that you will need all of these types of people to succeed. Having a group with only one type of person will lead to an overabundance of one quality at the expense of the others. In some cases it will sink your ship of dreams entirely.

11 | DECENTRALIZED ACTIVISM

When the topic of centralized and decentralized activism was mentioned in the chapter on national vision it was written that it would be brought up again later on. Now that you are here it is time to investigate the matter as was promised. What will be referred to as centralized activism is the coordination of activities or projects by a group with a goal in mind, and decentralized meaning people acting on their own or through groups without leadership on social media or some other means.

The first rule of note on the subject is that if you desire to make positive change to political structures or gain power within them, this can only be completed through the use of centralized activism and obsessive focus on a goal. Some things can be brought down through decentralized means, but the action of building something else cannot. A group or political party is suitable for fulfilling this obligation of centralization. Think of the leaders of the civil rights movement who formed the NAACP to organize boycotts and lobby the federal government. For a less peaceful example, the Bolsheviks can be thought of as an organized group dedicated to bringing about Communism to Russia.

The political background of the parties involved does not matter for this rule of organization to be relevant. It applies just as much to ethnonationalism as it does to the most liberal cosmopolitans. Why this is so is because of a few different reasons, but one of these is that to make replace something from an established and organized order you too must meet them at a similar level. Just as a regime has its thought leaders, financiers, and educators you too must be on the same wavelength to combat their propaganda, coercion, and plotting. In a more technical way we can also look see that without organization almost nothing can be achieved in any domain of life. It takes a centralized structure to make a business work, a school to function, and a government to operate. Without this it is energy and emotions strewn about in a type of anarchy.

With the development of the internet and more ways than ever of connecting with people online, it is a common belief that this has somehow leveled the playing field between activists and governments. Now in a decentralized context people can create content they want spread or through an anonymous chat group thousands of people can meet in person to protest and get the results they desire. The truth of it is that this hasn’t played out as expected over the past couple decades. When you analyze the effectiveness of decentralized activism, which we can say takes the form of individuals working independently and flashpoints of group activism lacking structure, there hasn’t been an incredible amount of success. The protests of the Arab Spring did not lead to a democratic wave at all through the Middle East, a rise of the alt-right in the United States through a variety of content creators proved unsuccessful in changing any meaningful policy, and attempts to influence the cultures of authoritarian states like China through the use of social media have been a complete failure. Oppositely, we can see a distinct rise in the power of these states through a greater ability to surveil their population.

If you like to work alone or have no ability to interact with other Rusyns this is bad news. However, the use of decentralized ways of activism can work in certain cases. At the top of the list in this regard is in places like Subcarpathia where there is no teaching of who Rusyns are in public education, and the governmental pressure to shut down any possible Rusynophile schools would be extreme. A workaround would be to get the education through different means like on the internet or personal mentoring. These attempts will never work as well as centralized education where entire classes can be taught at once in a physical setting, but something is better than nothing. This is what was meant at the end of the previous mention of decentralized activism and how sometimes we will need to rely on it.

As the next generation of Rusyns our commitment to the goal of national sustainability requires us to constantly think of how we can improve our means of activism and education. When you’re planning your own projects, this means you focus on how we can move toward this end. Instead of creating a few videos to educate the people of your hometown on who Rusyns are, think of how you can use your content to eventually create a type of club where people can learn and make friends. If you have a more politically focused temperament, do not immediately go to trying to organize a protest. Instead begin building a group of dedicated individuals that will need to be taken seriously when you do picket the government building in the future.

12 | RUSYN ERASURE

The fundamental essence of Rusyn erasure is held within two concepts interconnected with each other. At one level of analysis you have the reality of Rusyn erasure itself. These can be policies enacted by governments, the appropriation of our national figures, and the de-legitimizing belief that the Rusyn language is a mere dialect. The reality of these has been discussed plenty enough in previous chapters.

A level above this is the concept of social and institutional oppression. Social oppression relates to the resulting disadvantages manifested through beliefs and actions negative to Rusyns at the level of social interaction. An example of this could be the inability to speak Rusyn at work because the environment developed and reinforced the notion that speaking the language is a lower-class thing to do. Systems like this are created by Rusyn erasure and reproduce it at increasing degrees the longer they remain functional.

Institutional oppression in contrast develops from actions or policies put in place at the institutional level. We see this in Rusyns being unable to have their issues represented in national politics because they are not officially recognized as a national minority and are consistently subjected to forms of erasure. When combined this is called structural oppression, the interaction and accumulation of these policies and practices between institutions and social environments. This is what you or I mean when we talk about the broad picture regarding the situation of Rusyns within Ukraine.

Referring back to the connection between Rusyn erasure, it is important to distinguish between these two as we go forward in our work. The need to tackle Rusyn erasure is not to deal with the act itself necessarily because the true goal is to break down systemic issues that we face. Our most ample way of doing that is aggressively calling out the main things that reinforce it in society. By making it exceedingly difficult to get away with what have been common actions we move toward a place where the level of current oppression is unsustainable.

Analyzing if something is Rusyn erasure is a fairly simple process structurally in that if something discounts our agency as a nation, delegitimizes our status as a people, or results in us being misrepresented then that is by definition erasure. You will notice that this previous sentence did not take into account the purpose behind something as a validation of whether it is or not. Just because someone does not mean to partake in Rusyn erasure does not mean that it can’t happen, especially in the case of personal attitudes or beliefs. These incidents should be treated differently when you go to confront them, but they fundamentally share the same category of upholding the structures that work against Rusyns.

What is a simple process can become one that is incredibly difficult if you do not have the background knowledge to understand the situation. In cases like this we would recommend extensive research, especially if you are partaking in activist activities, however the path of modern Rusyn erasure usually follows a set of particular avenues. These are listed as bullet points below to give a structured view.

• Propaganda that defines Rusyns as something other than an autonomous people (ex: Rusyns are agents of Russia or Hungary).

• Producing fake statistics to back up delegitimization of Rusyns in some way.

• Claiming ethnic Rusyns and their work are actually the product of a different people.

• Biased research driven by money or ideology.

• Cultural attitudes manifested in things like Rusyns are unable to “speak right” or are speaking a bad dialect of Ukrainian.

One of the greatest showcases of modern Rusyn erasure came on Twitter when a government official in a series of tweets promoting the Ukrainianization of street signs in Kiev stated that a specific street would be changed to honor Andy Warhol, implying he was Ukrainian. In a follow-up tweet he then incorrectly claimed that Warhol’s family was from Western Ukraine, when in reality they were from Pryashiv Rus in Slovakia.

Suffice to say he never apologized for this action, and most attempts of erasure won’t be so brazen as the one shown here; however it illustrates that we are not just dealing with crackpots on the internet when it comes to these issues. The threats against us range from the individual up to the highest levels of government in certain countries. Things like this will continue as long as we do nothing about it, which brings us to the point of what can be done.

At the bare minimum there must be effort in educating the Rusyn populace on what these terms of Rusyn erasure and structural oppression in a Rusyn context mean. These will be accomplished through both centralized and decentralized modes of activism. In lockstep with education is purposeful confrontation with the erasure and those that do it. It can be as simple as merely posting the two-word phrase in response to a social media post all the way up to physical confrontation. The point of our work on this matter is to induce a sense of uncomfortableness regarding their actions. Consequences are required when these things occur otherwise there will be no reason to stop them.

If you’re in Europe, inform them on how this is in direct contradiction to the European values that their own nations claim to uphold. This will shift the conversation into a place where they will be on the defensive and working to prove that they are aligned with those values rather than attempting to substantiate their false claims. We are not inherently looking for dialog unless it is cases of unintended erasure, where a gentler informative approach is the key to success. The attempts to be gentle with the carrot over the past thirty years have proven that there has been no substantive difference. Now is the time of the stick and even the Rusyn leaders of years past need to understand that their methods are obsolete.

Once you have begun to accomplish this on a personal level think of how you can do this on a greater scale. Creating groups and organizations focused on systemic issues will do a great deal more over the long term than individual cases. If you are not willing or up to the task, it can also be beneficial to develop guides or teach others how to do the same things you are doing. There is a vast collection of choices to choose from that can each contribute value to our mission. 

13 | RUSYNIFICATION

How we identify things to ourselves and others fundamentally affects the way in which we think about them. It is the reason why when a conqueror takes control of new territory they change the name of towns and locations to something that legitimizes it as theirs. What was once Constantinople becomes Istanbul, and what had been Ungvar in our case would now be Uzhhorod. Erasing these previous ties acts as a way to break the history of something and its predecessor history. It is also why the Ukrainian government has been advocating to change street names all over their country including Subcarpathia. In many cases this is a valid way of distancing themselves from a Soviet past, and in others an attempt to Ukrainianize various symbols of uniqueness from minorities.

Layered in with our conception of a vision for the next decade is the need for Rusynification, or the process by which we systematically change an environment by replacing foreign values, language, and ideas with native Rusyn equivalents. This goes part and parcel with the concept that to break free from the influence of some outside force their background, or soft power has to be eliminated along with the visible elements that are apparent to all. The simplest way to begin doing this is by revising the words that we use to fit the natural dialect of the region.

In our case we face a somewhat strange reality. Because we have never had a sovereign state of our own, many of our native names for towns, historical locations, and other such things specific to us have never been used officially. They have an informal designation like Pryashiv, which is different from the common word Prešov that the Slovaks have or what Magocsi uses to describe where Rusyns in Slovakia live, however nowhere is this used in a governmental capacity. Something can be said on the way that national governments have railroaded this from occurring, but the truth is that the majority of fault here is on us.

We have not been good at putting energy toward this in a way that would provide results. In Slovakia and Poland their governments have been quite admirable in their willingness to have dual language signs and Rusyn names for towns and villages native to our homeland if the village is past a certain population share of Rusyns. Even in Ukraine we have had success in changing a city like Mukachevo to its native Rusyn spelling (from Mukacheve in Ukrainian) when furious enough to protest.

We need to do more, but what does that mean exactly and why? At the most baseline level we can assert our sovereignty in Rusynification through the use of words in our language rather than using foreign equivalents. By using these in regular life, political contexts, and intellectual work we assert that these things are ours. The city of Krenytsya may be contained within the state of Poland, but it is a Lemko-Rusyn city. While the Ukrainians may call a certain region Transcarpathia, we call it Subcarpathia as that is our own historical name for the region.

If we continue to do this within all domains and contexts of speech we accomplish a few things. The first of these is the fact that we are helping to stop Rusyn erasure in its tracks by delegitimatizing foreign ownership of our homeland. Secondly, we are differentiated from others through a non-confrontational tactic with low potential for danger. This makes it an easier hurdle for most to do. People that are not Rusyns will know that those of us that use these terms are, and it is one more way for the under-nationalized Rusyn population to see the difference between outsiders and their own. It also serves as something of a protest in politically repressive situations. Even if someone is not outright protesting, their usage of native terms makes it very clear of their stance. Arresting someone for using our words would result in a perfect flashpoint to broadcast to the entirety of Europe and the free world. Either way we win using the strategy while also being able to get most Rusyns to participate.

14 | INTERNALIZED SUBJUGATION

As humans we often assume that our thoughts and beliefs are independent from any outside force. You may be sure that whatever is bouncing around in your brain is a product of your own making, but this is rarely the case. One test you can do to examine this is to sit down and write out the stream of thoughts that come to you. Now after you have done this for a minute or so think of where you first heard them and how they were phrased by the person you heard it from. It will probably be surprising to find out that you can probably name where some of them are from and that they line up the way they said it word for word.

If you’re worried about this now don’t be overly so. This is a natural process of socialization, and the most interesting ideas are often the ones that stick long after you’ve heard them. You for example are reading this book and will probably remember a few select phrases which then pass on to the next person you speak with. Our experiences with this social technology can become a problem if they are maladaptive in quality. This means that they inhibit thought in some way that is not positive for us over the long term.

The Rusyn nation unfortunately has many maladaptive ideas layered within its psyche. A majority of these have taken root from outside forces that we then internalized. The most common one we can analyze is internalized subjugation. This word refers to the process of an ethnic minority group internalizing the legitimacy of a foreign people to rule over them or to have their interests put first. It can take shape in foreign politics, but its primary application is in domestic avenues of control over minority groups. One of the most common ways this occurs is through the acceptance of external (or publicly allowable) answers as in-group conclusions.

If a nation-state is particularly sensitive to losing its grip on power, especially with its ethnic majority populations, a culture of forced patriotism will commonly arise. Because the minority group cannot speak openly about their true opinions without the risk of retaliation, the only narrative that is available to the public is the one that supports the positions of the state. The strength of this narrative is in its repeated usage at any points of contention between the two peoples. If this goes on for long enough, the true (internal) beliefs of a people will begin to mesh with the artificial (external). By the time of the next generation, there will be little distinction as the new group will not have lived in a time when this difference was visible.

We can see this in action in Subcarpathia where the government of Ukraine is constantly subjecting the native residents to a repeated process of verifying their patriotism. If an activist asks for us to be recognized, the common response is asking if they are loyal to the state of Ukraine. Should someone say the treatment of Rusyns is inexcusable, then they are questioned whether this is separatist. There have even been cases of someone speaking our language and being asked to speak Ukrainian by their own kind because otherwise they are supposedly a bad citizen. In this environment there is no way that public discussions on important issues are possible. Everything must therefore work through the underground, which cuts off knowledge from those not directly in the know. Now unless a person really tries to find different sources of information, all they hear is the government narrative.

While we do need to challenge these narratives head on, our first task is to recognize their influence on each of us without being in danger of doing so. This first step is rather easy and can be replicated on a mass scale. Take any political or cultural issue you like, whether it be civil rights, sovereignty, language, etc. and first think about what your opinion is in a Rusyn context. For example, should Rusyn be a language that is taught in schools and universities?

After you’ve made up your mind, try to examine what a different nation would think on the topic regarding their own situation. For example, what would the overwhelming majority of Poles and Germans say when asked the same question about their own native language? If your answer is incredibly different from theirs, then know that this is probably not the true intellectually sovereign answer aligned with what is best for the Rusyn people. It is in fact one that is shaped by politics and suppression. Perhaps the country you live in is uncomfortable with the answer you would give, or you have eternalized the feeling that we are not worthy. The point is, something is amiss here where an external answer became an internal one.

Eventually you will have to speak on the contradictions you find in yourself and our community if you wish to be part of the solution, but for now just think on all the examples you can come up with for a week or two. What manifests itself that you didn’t expect? By doing just this we can move miles ahead in intellectual freedom while not putting ourselves at risk. It is an immeasurable mental act that not a single person outside of yourself needs to know, for now. For the most scared amongst us, it is a good low-hanging fruit.

15 | HANDLING COMMUNICATION

It should come as no surprise that the actual implementation of something is often vastly more important than the idea behind it. How you communicate, what you do to protect your privacy, and the way in which you pick and choose people to work with is the strategic basis for your success. As we are a minority group that is seen as potentially hostile in at least one region, the chances of being at least watched by a security service if you have any business with Subcarpathia is high. This will be true regardless of whether you are actually radical or not. Do not worry too much about it if you are American as your diplomatic position is strong. For citizens of the European Union and Ukraine this is a different story. In that case, you must not only do the work of activism but learn the job of concealing yourself. This is not an optional directive if you wish to do your work over a large span of time.

Many other sources can and will do a better job of implementing security and communication procedures that help your personal situation. Instead of doing that task, another critical thing that we can do instead is look at the mindset of Rusyn communication. In particular, how we should be processing and acting toward peoples and events outside of ourselves. How you communicate with other nations should never be the same as how you interact with other Rusyns. While this seems like an easy point to get across, Rusyns have not done a good job internalizing this and it has led to a myriad of problems. Chief among these was the main topic of the previous chapter, internalized subjugation.

Even though you learned how to spot the patterns of it that take place within daily life and how to break free from it in the moment, not much was spoken about how to stop it as a systemic issue. The truth is that it is just one of many originating from the same source. With that in mind, let’s take a swing at all of them at the same time.

Except for a few rare exceptions, which typically are reserved for individual people, there is no true dialogue between peoples in the same way as between two of the same group. This does not mean that conversation is impossible, just that we cannot do so in an unguarded manner. Our future is fundamentally separate from theirs due to the consequence of our differences and special interests. What may be good in the case of the Slovaks for example, does not inherently make it so for our Rusyn population.

One does not need to go beneath the surface to make this clear in real life. It can be found in the Starina reservoir or the one almost built in Tichy Potok where the benefit of added water supply came at the cost of eradicating a set of Rusyn villages. This is an extreme example where mutual benefit was not achieved; however it illustrates a case in which what was good for them was not good for us.

The point here is that any Rusyn interaction with foreign peoples, the majority populations of the states we rule in, or allies is required to be done so through the prism of calculated negotiation. As we come to realize our own interests and the nature of this dance the probability of achieving them is directly proportional to our ability to vouch for them on the world stage. No matter how much modern ideas of globalization will convince you the need for this is not the case, not a single country or person will give us the thing we desire unless we reach for it ourselves.

In fact, unless we counter at every turn the natural incline is to take away the small capital and power we have. The Spanish do not give autonomy to the Basque because they are unique subjects, nor do Polish help the Silesians who are a nation of similar size to our own. They do this not because they wish to crush these minorities for the sake of it, but because it reduces the power of the central government, an institution that represents the interests of their ethnicity.

What this means then is that all our external communication should be the same as if we were negotiating over a pay raise or writing up a contract between business clients. Not everything about our situation needs to be known by the outside because that can be used as leverage against us. In times where we are in trouble and have no reasonable option other than to conform to the majority narrative we will do so until the first moment arises that can dispel this obligation. If other nations desire mutual cooperation we will do so and be forthright in our attempts if there are benefits, all while keeping in mind our own position.

The importance of learning this distinction between friend and foreigner does not stop at the door of ending internalized subjugation nor from these basic examples. Being cognizant of other people’s interests and how they differ from your own can also set you up in a good position to market the positions you fight for. Part of the job of activism is to be a salesman for the products you supply, it’s just in this case that you are not working for a company. Once a person gets past the depressing realist fact of differences in these things there is a great power that is unlocked. Because you may know that a group believes in certain ideas or have their national security framed in a certain context, your attempts at interaction can be tailor made to line up with the best way they can to achieve what you want. These are key components to the overall strategy of a successful movement.

Before publishing anything with the desire to enact change take stock of what exactly Rusyns need and contrast it to the policies and interests of the group you’re trying to influence. Think on how exactly that will affect your security situation. If you have been running on autopilot and begin to evaluate it there is a high degree of likelihood that whatever thing you’ve produced is for ethnic Rusyns regardless of if that was the goal. It might be that there are facts inherently understood in our communities but not others without explanation, or your general appeal offers no value or pressure to the specific thing that is being targeted. Regardless of what, this is how people get in trouble in more ways than one. If you fight against this by training yourself to think about it every time, eventually this new mode of action will be internalized, and your productivity will expand dramatically.

16 | KEEP THE FUTURE IN MIND

We have discussed many things on this short journey, from the ways in which Rusyns have been oppressed to the nature of our goals for the next ten years. Structural oppression in a Rusyn context and its reinforcing agent of erasure was laid out and analyzed so that you could understand the full extent of their existence. Near the end some of the most basic but effective strategies to achieve success in activism were also examined with an ending note on the need for a certain mindset when communicating your ideas. All subjects combined in this informational book have been created to serve the development of intellectual thought for individuals looking to join the Rusyn cause.

With these foundational principles it is hoped that each person will contribute to the future of the Rusyn cause in their own way. Some people were meant from the time they were born to be educators while others are destined to be the activists at the front lines of political campaigning. No choice is right or wrong except in the rejection of what you know inside you were meant to do. If that is meant to be connected to Rusynness but only give support in a donation then it is up to you to decide if that is good enough. For most the will to action is too great to let history pass them by. Ask how much of that inability to do more is just internalized subjugation and how much of it is a personal choice.

In the short term we will have time to spread the knowledge of these new definitions and strategies to the greater public. This movement will still be here six months, twelve months, and two years from now. Yet there is an obvious limit to this freedom of time and space. There is only so much time in the urgency we find ourselves in to build institutions, confront signs of erasure, and educate the remaining sections of the unknowing populous. The movement of our intellectual and political gears must be in constant rotation to keep up with the needed pace.

Part of the stage we are in now is also about improving yourself so that when the real moment of crisis occurs there will be one more to lead the way forward. It is about forming the interpersonal skills to lead people through frightening and mundane times. Do you have what it takes to stand up now in the face of something as powerful as another ethnocide or period of silence? If nothing else is taken from this book then take that question and the aforementioned terms from above.

For those that fear the course that our actions will bring after reading, it should be clear that if we do nothing now then our situation will only get worse with time. At the slightest move of standing up for ourselves, those that look to have the previous trends of our nation continue will be wanting to label us as extremists, as terrorists, or separatists and that is a reality. However that pales in comparison to what happens if we do nothing. The structural oppression that our people endure only gains strength as the erasures we have experienced are reinforced through inaction. When nobody confronts those that look to do us harm they will only be emboldened to act stronger. Using this logic soon enough the diaspora will not have a homeland that it can see, and the people of the homeland are transformed into a historical relic.

A beautiful slice of the future that can now be grasped instead is a Rusyn decade of progress. This lies within the articulation of goals that so many have wanted but few have dared to say. We can finally look forward to the mission of getting our autonomy and rights respected, our population growing, and with hope the reconstitution of the lost territory of Lemkovyna. In the end though, these are a mere six small goals that come before an even brighter light at the end of the tunnel. The work toward an end goal is decades away and many more plans in the making. Through our confrontation with what matters most, we might just break through the barriers of our struggle to get there.

Starik Pollock

Originally published July 31, 2023.

Copyright © 2024 Общество про русиньскый розвій