My Professor Emailed Me…
My Professor Emailed Me…
This isn’t atypical, professors email their students a lot and I personally don’t have a problem with it. The reason why I’m writing here is because of the contents of said email. Don’t worry, it’s nothing illegal.
Some of you might remember me writing about a library display where some of the posters had the OUN flag. I went to two of my professors about it (history and political science) to see if they knew anything about the display itself and the flag. To make a long story short the answers I got were disappointing, they didn’t know anything. I went the slightest extra mile with my history professor as he actually looked up what the flag was during our meeting. I went to him the next day to push a bit more on how it might be inappropriate to display neo-Nazi images in our school. I don’t want to go over every detail but if you are new and want to know everything or just need a refresher here are the posts: Part 1 and Part 2
So, resuming after that, it has clearly been a little while since I’ve had this conversation with my history professor and I honestly thought this would be the end of such a shitty saga, but yesterday he emailed me about it. At the end of our last meeting he claimed he wasn’t an expert on Ukraine so he is not the best authority to be asking, I brought up Ivan Katchanovski as an authority saying maybe I’d just read his works. He was unfamiliar with Dr. Katchanovksi so I spelled out his name as my professor seemed curious (he even wrote it down) and in turn he told me to look into Timothy Snyder. Our chat ended there and I thought that was it, but it wasn’t.
When I looked at my school email yesterday I saw one from him (special notifications for my professors so I don’t miss anything important) and the subject line referenced Katchanovski and the red and black flag. I wont write the email verbatim but i will do my best to give an accurate retelling:
“Hello SpaceDogs,
Because of our last office hours together when you brought up issues about the red and black flag and Ivan Katchanovski, I wanted to take them to the head of the Ukrainian “club.” I made sure not to out your name or class so you can be certain none of this will connect back to you. I directly pasted his thoughts below, and because I am not an expert on this topic I cannot help much but I encourage you to read far and wide and critically. Context is important. Scholars like William Risch have issues with Katchanovski’s arguments. Of course, we should listen to fringe ideas, but one must be careful with them and consider differing perspectives.
Regards,
Professor”
So Katchanvoski is fringe, huh? Well, as you can see this isn’t the greatest start and I was honestly shocked when I saw this email in my inbox, I don’t remember ever alluding to wanting him to investigate for me, but I guess my pathetic attitude made him pity me. I will be honest, when I read the subject line I was a little excited, thinking he had contacted Katchanovski for me, but when I read the full email I saw that wasn’t the case.
I am sure you are all curious about what the head of the “club” said. Again, I cannot write verbatim but I will summarize:
The head of the club has many issues with Katchanovksi’s perspective. He claims that Katchanovksi is very in line with the Russian government’s narrative and those on the academic left are eating it up. He (the head of the club) rejects both the idea that Ukraine is a proxy for NATO and that the US planned the Maidan coup. He says Katchanovski’s sniper argument is interesting. But he has many issues with all of this stuff. He cites William Risch’s critique of Katchanovski and links it: https://commons.com.ua/en/rozstrili-na-majdani/
for a shorter piece he gives this one: https://kyivindependent.com/euromaidan-murders-case-why-is-the-verdict-criticized-and-why-is-it-about-russia/
This next part is difficult for me to write but he goes on to compliment Risch’s piece as it acknowledges that the whole ordeal was very complicated and messy, he even makes a little comment about Katchanovski making a big deal over one supposed sniper. Some state actors and academics are taking advantage of the situation to form their own narratives.
He asserts that other things Katchanovski has written about are completely wrong, especially when it comes to the Donbas: it wasn’t a civil war, they were Russian backed separatists who had so little public support that they only gained ground after Russian soldier boots hit the ground. He cites Serhy Yekelchyk for the Russian troops in Crimea and other parts of eastern Ukraine. There is no incident of Ukrainians ever wanting to separate and join Russia. He says it is more similar to Quebec and Alberta’s issues with the Canadian feds. There is a right wing presence in Ukraine but it is not that pervasive, especially not in the military and government. There are more far right wingers in Western Europe and North American than in Ukraine.
About the flag, he links this article: https://kyivindependent.com/everything-you-didnt-know-about-ukraines-flag/
He summarizes the article, how back then it had nothing to do with fascism and was more about resistance. Resistance to who? It’s not clear as it was the 12th century and both Russian and Ukraine did not exist. It is correct that the UPA uses the flag, it is not intended to be fascist, although some divisions did fight alongside the Nazis. But they only did that because they wanted to be free from the Soviets (he then brings up the holodomor as a reason why). But they eventually turned away from the Nazis as they saw that they (Nazis) didn’t actually care about Ukraine. He doesnt know about any anti-Semitism from the group but cites Snyder’s Bloodlands as a piece to read. Some of the UPA were in line with the fascists but that did not last. Even with such a messy history it is safe to assume that those who wear the flag do not align with fascists and just want to express Ukrainian resistance to imperialism (which it has a long history of fighting against).
That’s it. That’s the email.
I’m going to be completely honest with you all, this was the catalyst for me. This is what finally did me in and caused me to break down. I haven’t cried in so long but this is what did it. I couldn’t hold it in anymore and just let the tears and sobs out.
I know I sound pathetic and a passerby liberal or conservative will read this and look down on me, call me a psychotic tankie who can’t handle the truth. I get it, I do. But this moment just cemented the fact that I am in a horrible institution and am truly alone.
I’m fringe, just like Katchanovski, and I have no one else here like me.
I don’t know why he would email me this. He had good intentions, I know, but god does it suck. I thought our conversation was done. I knew I was alone and I was the only person i could ever rely on, but this just for some reason made it worse. This is so much more than an uphill battle for me, I’m practically scaling a steep cliff.
Rest assured I did not respond, and from what I can tell he sent it after our class. I wonder if he noticed how off I’ve been this week. Who knows…
The last thing I’ll do is drop out, so don’t worry about that, but this has just gotten a lot more complicated…
You're viewing a single thread.
it wasn’t a civil war, they were Russian backed separatists
i.e. Ukrainians, therefore engaging in a civil war
who had so little public support that they only gained ground after Russian soldier boots hit the ground
They weren't trying to "gain ground", they were trying to separate the ground they had from Ukraine! Why would a minority in Ukraine seek to totally defeat the Ukrainian military like Russia is doing? That would be suicide to attempt. This dude is a fucking rube.
There is a right wing presence in Ukraine but it is not that pervasive, especially not in the military and government.
Citation fucking needed that Azov does not represent a pervasive issue, or that Holocaust-denying ambassadors don't. This fucker can only make a claim like this by rewriting history to claim banderites were progressive and then on top of that ignoring the Nazi iconography and actual hate crimes and war crimes committed against other ethnicities. Worthless perspective.
The Red and Black flag is literally "blood and soil", this isn't hard. Jesus . . .
These arguments are so bad they refute themselves. Unfortunately, that doesn't help you all that much since he's dumb enough to assert them. This guy reminds me of some other well-meaning de facto liberal historians I've known. You're better off trying to find solidarity with students than professors most of the time, unless you can find the odd immigrant or someone whose lived experience encourages them to take a perspective more like yours. It sucks, but you can probably find at least one or two allies.
Even if everyone at your school does suck, remember that you aren't alone and you aren't crazy. Being "fringe" is to be expected of decent and informed people when the status quo is monstrous, and in fact I'd say it's necessary.
I may have screwed up in my summarizing of the statement. When I wrote “gain ground” I meant gain support., that’s my bad for doing a terrible job of paraphrasing. What he said in the statement was “[the separatists] were flailing and had comparatively little public backing until Russian troops moved in to support them in 2014.” That’s my bad but I don’t know if what he actually said helps his case.
With regards to finding solace in my fellow students, I don’t think that’s going to happen any time soon. So far everyone in my classes follows a similar line of thinking, even when one girl (who is an immigrant from Latin America) criticized Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil” piece we had to read for our holocaust week, in another class she doesn’t pull any punched against the Soviets (essentially equating them to Nazis in how they treated the Polish). Maybe future courses will be better but I won’t hold my breath.
I may have screwed up in my summarizing of the statement. When I wrote “gain ground” I meant gain support., that’s my bad for doing a terrible job of paraphrasing. What he said in the statement was “[the separatists] were flailing and had comparatively little public backing until Russian troops moved in to support them in 2014.” That’s my bad but I don’t know if what he actually said helps his case.
Then it's just a [citation needed] issue since they did just fine on the referendums that neoliberals reject out of hand, the Azovites still saw fit to butcher thousands, and the East is consistently interested in a conciliatory stance towards Russia. It's still a weak argument. What happened? The public only gained enough confidence in them once they got the direct support of one of the larger militaries in the world? Is that an own somehow? Anyone would gain more public confidence when they went from being shelled to shit to actually winning because Russia put its whole fist on the scale.
With regards to finding solace in my fellow students, I don’t think that’s going to happen any time soon. So far everyone in my classes follows a similar line of thinking, even when one girl (who is an immigrant from Latin America) criticized Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil” piece we had to read for our holocaust week, in another class she doesn’t pull any punched against the Soviets (essentially equating them to Nazis in how they treated the Polish). Maybe future courses will be better but I won’t hold my breath.
Some people are much easier to disabuse of their shit than professors. Even the person you mention here might be able to be dissuaded. I once dissuaded a student who said "Ukrainians greeted the Nazis as liberators" in a single conversation after class. It's just a matter of certain stories being normalized and never challenged, but often students are much less attached to specific positions than academics are. If someone takes a rhetorically flimsy point but you don't feel up to fighting it during class, consider just approaching them after class and just expressing concern. Avoid being mad or confrontational even if you are frustrated and speak to them like they're a fellow human who is also doing their best but may have been let down by people they trusted to guide them on the right path.
Also consider that there may be people (perhaps like yourself) who don't agree but just don't speak up. Sometimes you need to look for more subtle tells than someone shouting in the middle of class "The Maoist peasant uprising against landlords was the most successful and comprehensive land reform in history . . ." etc.
Also consider that there may be people (perhaps like yourself) who don’t agree but just don’t speak up.
My thoughts exactly. I don't think you are going to find people who walk around with a red star pin on campus (I do but im a weirdo), but @SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml can definitely find people who are more sympathetic to socialist ideas. I find anti-imperialism to be a very good topic for that for instance. Maybe i'm optimistic about Canada but I've met socialists in the most conservative areas of the US, so anything is possible.
What sucks is that people the who call themselves anti-imperialist seem to have a skewed definition of what imperialism is. I don’t want to write off every single person, professor or student, but it’s difficult to sustain hope as when I think I’ve found a peer that goes out the window the next sentence they say. I’ll keep an open mind but not so much I’ll end up disappointing myself, if that makes sense.
Yeah I get that. People who consume western media often have skewed views of the world/imperialism (I did too at some point). But I do think that right now it’s easier than ever to point out west’s hypocrisy.
I sound like a huge pessimist and a downer, but I will keep my mind and heart open. It would be nice to have allies but if I have to go at it alone I will.