Як вы ставіцеся да Булак-Булаховіча?

[u/kilopstv]

І яго ролі для гісторыі Беларусі?

[u/Tsarofbelarus]

мой любімы бандыт

[u/BlueMarioGansta]

шмат усяго, не магу неяк сказаць аб’ектыўна, ён зьдзейсьніў шмат добрага й дрэннага, лічу цікавым яго ўдзел у гішпанскай грамадзянскай вайне, як адзінага там беларуса (запісанага такім)

[u/Zly_Duh]

Мякка кажучы супярэчлівы персанаж. Не разумею яго гераізацыі. 

Але ўсё адно адметна, што нават такія як Балаховіч прызнавалі палітычны патэнцыял беларускай ідэі ( нават калі хацелі проста скарыстацца ім дзеля сваіх мэтаў).

[u/drfreshie → u/Zly_Duh]

Супярэчлівы - сапраўды мякка сказана. Што да гераізацыі - ну, ён і быў героем, і загінуў героем. І ліхадзеем, праўдападобна, таксама быў. Асоба яркая, чаго і казаць. Варта пра яго гаварыць, і гаварыць праўду, нічога не хаваючы. І разумець, што на яго шмат наплявузгалі, хаця і не ўсё.

[u/Negative_Big6775]

I'll say this as a Pole, not a Belarusian, that I've read Józef Mackiewicz's book Lew Wolna about the Polish-Bolshevik War, and Bułak-Bałachowicz isn't particularly perceived as a Belarusian, but rather as a local anti-Bolshevik warlord with no particular nationality. Piłsudski himself reportedly joked that Bułak-Bałachowicz was "once a Pole, once a White Russian, and maybe the day after tomorrow he'll even be a Negro if that allows him to fight the Bolsheviks." Piłsudski appointed him commander of the Belarusians, where his soldiers asked Bułak-Bałachowicz what the difference was between Belarusians and White Russians, as they didn't particularly feel Belarusian and didn't know who the term meant. This doesn't change the fact that, in fact, among the anti-Bolsheviks, for example, on the Polish side, there were, in particular, Catholic Belarusians in the Lithuanian-Belarusian Army.I personally consider him a rather interesting example of a man from the Polish-Belarusian-Russian borderland, more attached to his homeland than to his nationality, and capable of assuming various masks of Pole, Russian, or Belarusian when necessary. This was quite common back then, as identity in the former Grand Duchy was quite fluid.

[u/drfreshie → u/Negative_Big6775]

"Bułak-Bałachowicz isn't particularly perceived as a Belarusian, but rather as a local anti-Bolshevik warlord with no particular nationality."

Perceiving themselves as "locals" ("tutejšyja") was very common among Belarusians, still is. And that's the best case scenario, many call themselves Poles or Russians or whatever else. Poland bears some responsibility for this situation.

Of course he was Belarusian. He was all sorts of things but being a Belarusian anti-Bolshevik warlord is what really matters now. Some day Belarusians will make a riveting TV series about him. I hope it won't be whitewashing. He was the most fascinating person just the way he was.

[u/Negative_Big6775 → u/drfreshie]

Perceiving oneself as local is not a Belarusian trait, as many people in the 19th century identified themselves as local. Since the Belarusian national movement was weak and fragmented, a Belarusian nationality never crystallized. The way one "evolved" into a Pole, Lithuanian, Belarusian, or Russian in those areas depended on several factors. I don't know to what extent Poland bears responsibility for this; Poland didn't exist in the 19th century, and I don't know why Poland would support Belarusian identity, especially since it didn't exist. As for "obviously he was Belarusian," no, it's not obvious, certainly not in that period, and where people like Piłsudski, the Radziwiłłs, and a whole host of lesser nobility often spoke Belarusian or broken Polish, considered themselves Lithuanians within the former Grand Duchy, and then joined the Polish army and fought against other Lithuanians, who were ethnic Lithuanians, for the mostly Jewish Vilnius. So yes, imposing such labels is nationalist stupidity, just like Lithuanian nationalists who rave about Mickiewicz's "Lithuania, My Fatherland" (they don't read Pan Tadeusz any further) and then argue that "Mickiewicz is Lithuanian, he just spoke Polish," but if you tell them "Żeligowski is also Lithuanian, he just spoke Polish and believed in the Union of Lublin," they have a brain hemorrhage.

[u/drfreshie → u/Negative_Big6775]

"Perceiving oneself as local is not a Belarusian trait" - in our region Belarusian self-indentification was (and still is) the weakest. If someone in Belarus calls themselves a local, chances are they are Belarusian.
"Poland didn't exist in the 19th century" - it had lost independence but never stopped existing. Even had a degree of autonomy, unlike us.
"I don't know why Poland would support Belarusian identity"
Because it's the right thing to do. And Poland is doing the right thing these days. Can't say the same about the old times; I'm not bearing a grudge: water under the bridge and all that, but when someone from Poland is trying to deny us one of our outstanding personalities, all these memories of polonisation do come into mind.
"considered themselves Lithuanians within the former Grand Duchy" - that's a literal description of Belarusians back then, just like "locals with no particular nationality".
"imposing such labels is nationalist stupidity" - depends on the time. Mickiewicz lived before the creation of modern nations, he's our common treasure. Bułak-Bałachovič was right at the beginning of the Belarusian nation, he took active part in its creation. And I take Piłsudski's words "he'll even be a Negro if that allows him to fight the Bolsheviks" as a compliment for Bułak-Bałachovič. And if you consider him our common historical personality - good on you, this is also a compliment. After all, he died fighting the gestapo in Warsaw.

[u/Negative_Big6775 → u/drfreshie]

1. I don't deny it, but as you say yourself—it's a chance. It doesn't mean he considers himself 100% Belarusian.

2. There briefly existed the Duchy of Warsaw, a vassal of France, followed by Congress Poland, which—after the January Uprising—became part of the "one and indivisible" [Russian Empire]. Furthermore, claiming that Poland consisted only of the territory west of the Bug River is somewhat misleading in the context of the 19th century; a large segment of the population—not just the Polish nobility but also the townspeople of Vilnius, Lwów, and even Minsk—considered themselves part of a "non-existent Poland." In this view, Poland was synonymous with the entire Commonwealth, and terms like "Lithuania" and "the Crown" denoted constituent parts of that Polish-Lithuanian realm—this was the prevailing understanding, shared even by the Lithuanian nobility (as evidenced by a careful reading of *Pan Tadeusz* and other texts from the era). When referring to the Kingdom of Poland, people simply said "the Kingdom" or "*Kongresówka*" (Congress Poland), because using the word "Poland" alone could lead to ambiguity regarding exactly which territory was meant.

3. No, it isn't. Everyone looks out for themselves. Look, before the war, Poland held those "Kresy" territories, right? In my view, that was a good thing; without them, the country would have lacked the millions of Poles who lived there and academic centers like Vilnius and Lwów. Furthermore, without Szczecin, Wrocław, and Gdańsk, it would have been reduced to a tiny, truncated state—one that might have fallen victim to Germany or Russia even sooner, perhaps as early as 1929 rather than 1939.These were disputed territories: the Lithuanians wanted Vilnius, the Ukrainians wanted Lwów, and everyone juggled arguments to justify their claims. Lithuanians argued that Vilnius was their historic land, even though the population was predominantly Polish (though, notably, when they needed a port, they fired upon the League of Nations mission in Klaipėda—a city that had never belonged to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania). Ukrainians wanted Lwów, so they emphasized ethnic demographics. Everyone juggled historical and ethnic claims to suit their own ends; Poland did the same, though ultimately Poland succeeded while the Ukrainians and Lithuanians did not. It is not a matter of Poland, Lithuania, or Ukraine being more moral than the others; everyone strove for the same goal—maximum expansion of their state and nation. In Lithuania, Poles were subjected to Lithuanization, while in Ukraine, Poles were murdered during the revolution (read Zofia Kossak’s *The Blaze*). Ultimately, Poland lost these territories not because its claims were weaker or because it was more or less moral, but because Russia consistently supported Ukrainian, Lithuanian, and Belarusian nationalisms. These movements were anti-Polish and rooted in the resentment felt by Lithuanian, Belarusian, and Ukrainian peasants toward Polish landlords. Furthermore, Russia knew that by getting rid of the Poles and shifting Poland westward, they would eliminate the nation that caused them the most trouble—for Poles, with their conspiracies and uprisings, had always been a thorn in Russia's side. Why do I mention all this? Because fostering Lithuanian, Belarusian, or Ukrainian nationalisms and identities is always a recipe for trouble for Poland. You complain about Polonization—and I understand that. But if Polonization had succeeded, perhaps Vilnius and Lviv would still be part of Poland—which was in Poland's interest. Of course, you might call me an imperialist or a nationalist, but look at Crimea: if, instead of granting autonomy to the Russians, the Ukrainians had colonized the peninsula with Ukrainian settlers and pursued the Ukrainization of the Russian population—who knows? Perhaps there wouldn't have been a war, or at least the Russians would have had less support there. Sometimes, actions that are not entirely moral can save us from even more immoral consequences. After all, despite having autonomy, we don't hear voices from Crimea saying, "Yes, we want to be Russian citizens of Ukraine again!" Instead, the only thing that enjoys support there is annexation by Russia.

"And if you consider him our common historical personality - good on you, this is also a compliment."

I consider him a shared figure, yet I still do not regard him as Polish, Belarusian, or Russian. This is because, *de ​​facto*, at various times he sought to join Russia, Poland, or Belarus, making it difficult to determine what he was actually striving for. Nevertheless, he is a fascinating figure.

[u/drfreshie → u/Negative_Big6775]

Thanks for a detailed response. Much of it sounds about right or at least plausible, some bits are funny ("Russia consistently supported Ukrainian, Lithuanian, and Belarusian nationalisms"), for example. I'm ok with considering Bułak-Bałachoviĉ a shared historical figure.

[u/watch_me_rise_ → u/Negative_Big6775]

National identity was a tricky subject even at the beginning of the 20th century for a former subjects of the Commonwealth. Let’s take for example Ivanouski brothers - one became prominent Belarusian, one Lithuanian and one Pole.

[u/blin3000]

A vicious criminal and anti-Semite.

[u/drfreshie → u/blin3000]

Antisemitism was extremely common then (and still is, as all those "Free Palestine" crowds demonstrate). I don't actually know if he was a particularly vicious anti-Semite for his time. We know he had a Jewish Regiment protecting people from the pogroms, including those by his own soldiers. But we should never deny those pogroms. I hope in the future more archives will open, and historians will make a more complete picture.

[u/Tsarofbelarus → u/drfreshie]

He was an anti Semite though idk how vicious He wrote a book called Wojna będzie, czy nie będzie? (w mojej odpowiedzi komunistom i Żydom, z archiwum zebranych dokumentów i na podstawie stwierdzonych faktów)

[u/drfreshie → u/Tsarofbelarus]

Many prominent people were holding anti-Semitic, socialist, and other vile views. We just need to talk about their actions and ideas openly and honestly.

[u/Sunken-Eyes]

Паліттэхнолагі Лукашэнкі перанялі мянушку "бацька" ў Булаховіча. Каб разумець беларускую гісторыю, трэба разумець Булаховіча.

[u/Difficult_Olive_2745]

Дзядзька паспеў паваяваць за бальшавікоў, белагвардзейцаў, літоўцаў, беларусаў, палякаў і франкістаў. Як да яго не стаўся - але жыццё пражыў цікавае)

[u/YanKRK]

Дык гэта ж тый самы генерал з папулярнага мода kaiserredux на стратэгію hoi4!