My own misgivings about the Svoboda Party were published in a Brama on-line op-ed (“Opposition Blues in Ukraine”, Sept, 23, 2010): “Svoboda party may have a problem in distinguishing between orderly assembly and mob rule. Its nationalist image is turning out to be a disservice to rational nationalism which exists somewhere in a broader spectrum.”

Such misgivings are natural from someone from “a liberal anti-war crowd” – a label I have enjoyed for some time.

On the other hand, a question arises: Is the focus on Svoboda Party timely or sensible five months before the upcoming parliamentary elections?

For someone who is primarily attuned to the defense of Ukraine’s independence and democracy – which are being deliberately subverted by its own government — the short answer is No I shall come back to this question after a quick detour into the “economic freedoms”.

Economic freedoms in Ukraine, in practice, mean the oligarchic monopoly. And not only in Ukraine. Concentration of political power and wealth at the top in the United States and deregulation during the eight years of the Bush presidency produced a financial crash and drove the economy into a ditch in 2008. Enough is enough. While President Barack Obama is blamed for failing to magically restore the prosperity, America is actually reassembling an industrial policy under his administration (Financial Times, op-ed April 9).

Now come to the bedrock priorities facing Ukraine. Its independence and democracy are under a relentless pressure from internal hostile forces that have highjacked its government in the 2010 presidential elections, and are implementing the destruction of its identity.

The Svoboda party is not one of these forces — even if it may be a nuisance in important respects. The terminology of its condemnation has been largely discredited by careless exaggerations and should be taken with the grain of salt. Take, for instance, this passage in the letter: “Some Svoboda members have been displaying a more than academic interest in the writings of representatives of Germany’s fascist movement.”

Gimme a break. What are the limits of academic interest? Benito Mussolini, who knew something about fascism, explained its essence in these words: “Fascism should more properly be called cooperation, since it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

By that standard, today’s oligarchic social order in Ukraine and Russia eminently qualify as fascist. And so does any country where the military-industrial complex has acquired political power, camouflaged or not by democratic elections and pluralist double-speak. This covers just about every major and midsized power on the planet. The consequences –war and destruction — are visible worldwide.

Svoboda is of minor importance in a comparison with the latest travesty performed by the Yanukovych administration in the appointments of two former Russian KGB agents, one as defense minister, the other as national security chief. Both are almost certainly in the active service of the Kremlin’s imperial network. Their appointment is mockery of Ukraine as a nation. Does this faze the letter writers who focus on Svoboda ?

If such an affront isn’t worth their attention, a time-honored suggestion can be offered:: “Professor, snimite ochki” (take off your eyeglasses). And, if the Regions Party grip on Ukraine goes to its logical outcome, the academic freedom — and those willing to stand for it – eventually will go the way of the Executed Renascence of the 1930s

Incredible? The harbinger of such an endgame is the apparent helplessness or inability of the putative civil society – and the absence of an insurgent power larger than the Svoboda Party – to confront with large numbers the present regime of political persecution and gradual physical destruction of jailed opposition leaders. The plight of the latter has not moved the lethargic Ukrainian people from their seat.

Meanwhile, dwell on more irrelevance in the same letter: “Svoboda belongs to the ultra-nationalist Alliance of European National Movements, including some of the EU’s most extremely right-wing parties”.

So what? Look around before losing any sleep, and save the white gloves. Notice Ukraine’s crippled ministry of education, saddled with its Ukrainophobic boss.

Rightwing activism is ubiquitous, including Russia and America. In the USA, over 500 conservative talk shows exude appalling rightwing nonsense, distortions of the common sense, and often virulent anti-liberal and misogynous gibberish with racial overtones.. Rush Limbaugh alone commands nearly 20 million listeners. Not only are such orators not ostracized by politicians, but they actually provide the main theme of the Republican Party’s verse and the oiling of that Party’s predominantly white male base.

Ready for the advice from letter signatories to the leaders of Ukraine’s democratic opposition ? Abstain from forming unified electoral lists with Svoboda representatives

What would be the impact? Svoboda party alone would miss the five percent threshold,. while the national democratic front would lose up to the same 5 percent extra that may be needed to put it over the top — especially when vote counting is scammed by official handlers. Don’t buy the notion that pro-democracy voters are so thin-skinned and purist as to feel insulted by the presence of Svoboda people on a unified list.

What’s more, if a Socialist party were viable in Ukraine — in opposition to the present social Darwinism represented by the oligarchic regime – it should be included in a common front, even if it carried Marxist insignia. Recall Winston Churchill, a vehement anti-communist, who at the time of mortal peril to Britain from Nazi Germany had famously stated when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union: “If Hitler were to invade Hell, I should find occasion to make a favorable reference to the Devil,” regarding his policy toward Josef Stalin. Soon British supplies were flowing to help the Soviet Union.

Did Winston Churchill make wrong decision by forming that alliance? Let the academia debate that question.

In the absence of new ideas that could attract more votes, the pro-democracy camp seems to be stuck mostly in the same “right-of-center” ideological paste. Its promise of liberating the country from the authoritarian regime of President Yanukovych doesn’t seem to be a blockbuster

Also, the absence of a coherent agenda on the socioeconomic issues — in a country of breathtaking inequality and widespread poverty — is flabbergasting.

Something in the “Show me the money” department could swing the upcoming parliamentary elections. Unfortunately, it is the Regions Party, backed by its moneybags, that is better able to spend for election campaigning and to hoodwink the voters.. .

Again, the right decision for Ukraine today is to reinforce a united front to deliver the country from an authoritarian scourge.

Easier said than done. Perhaps typical is the recent show of the heavyweight Vitaliy Klitschko, who last year made a political debut by declaring himself to be a fighter for Yulia Tymoshenko, but then discovered more fun in staging his own political party, and now has decided that his party can garner more seats in the Rada by not joining the unified list recently agreed by the Tymoshenko and Arseniy Yatseniuk parties. Any bets about his political half-life?

Boris Danik is a retired Ukrainian-American living in North Caldwell, New Jersey.