Read the original text at 112.ua.
Despite all Russian and pro-Russian propaganda, the revolution in Donbas was not national and not separatist one, it had strictly class character (according to Marx). In fact, it was the last proletarian revolution in the world.
A unique and uncharacteristic for the modern world high concentration of the working class was gathered in Donbas. According to various estimates, at least 40% of the total employed population. Even in Russia in 1917 and in Germany in 1918, the working class concentration did not exceed 25% during the proletarian revolutions; and in the modern world, the figure is now around 10%.
It should be understood that the Donbas proletariat does not work on modern assembly plants, it is not a secondary working class like in the West, I mean something between blue and white collar workers. Donbas has coal mines, metallurgical and chemical industries, and equipment of the early twentieth century. That is a classic Lenin’s proletariat, which was earlier raised by Trotsky in Petrograd or by Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.
The second significant social stratum in Donbas is marginals, criminal and lumpen elements, illegally extracting coal, conducting petty trade, stealing, etc. Their share is estimated at 20-30%.
The marginals and Lenin proletariat constituted the absolute majority of Donbas and determined its basic class structure. But, as proved by the theoreticians of Marxism, the proletariat cannot have any national idea, no ideology, and, therefore, no separatism. The proletariat has only one enemy - the bourgeoisie, i.e., the owners of plants, mines, blast furnaces and chemical plants... In modern terms - the oligarchs.
Donbas has suffered proletarian revolution, provoked by the Euromaidan and annexation of Crimea, the workers rose to express its protest against poor living and working conditions. And it is not so important what slogans did the workers chant, it is important, what were the true motives of their protests. However, workers and lumpen had no chance of success, because in contrast to 1917 there were no Bolshevik Party in Donbas. Or rather there were no parties at all, there was an absolutely politically indifferent mass of people. And all proletarian revolutions without a party have no success.
As a result, all this excited lumpen proletarian mass was led by Russian representatives of power and the Cossack communities of Girkin and Strelkov, who were committed to the ultra-right ideas of the White Guard: Orthodoxy, the Russian world, anti-Westernism, autocracy, imperial discourse...
All of these ideas were alien and incomprehensible for the workers, they wanted just to strictly follow Lenin, to nationalize the factories, create the Soviets of Worker and Peasant Deputies, hang the bourgeoisie on the lanterns, nominate their national heroes Ponomarev and Gubarev. As a result, "soldiers of fortune" from Russia, all these bearded woman in caps, did not receive the support of the proletariat. There was a real threat to the complete failure of the whole project "Russian Spring" in Donbas.
The Kremlin, of course, became agitated and started full-scale provision of "humanitarian aid". At no one paid attention to the cries of the West about intervene in the internal affairs of Ukraine.
The popular heroes were thrown away, instead their own managers were sent. They removed even crazy Girkin his White Guards, they organized flow of volunteers and military experts, arms sales, launched massive propaganda of the Russian world. This propaganda was trying to convince the workers that their enemies are in fact not the oligarchs, but the Western Ukrainians, and Rinat Akhmetov and other "fathers of Donbas" do care about the lives of the workers.
The proletarian revolution was gradually transformed into an ordinary civil war, created LPR/DPR, and introduced compulsory mobilization. The proletarian revolution has become a sure-compulsory civil war, and the mechanism of personal revenge for killed relatives and destroyed homes has run automatically.
Russia took a part of Donbas, following the classic technology of intervention and provocation. It used a mediocre social policy of the Ukrainian authorities in Donbas, which has been conducted during all 25 years. Also Russia used the time of change of power in Kyiv.
Now the Kremlin has clearly started to implement a sharp increase manageability plan on the mandated territory, fighting against any unauthorized actions. That is why it began to shoot unmanaged thugs like Motorola or Givi. LPR/DPR is completely coming under the control of the Russian special services and financing from the Russian budget.
Those who hope for some Minsk agreements and the return of LPR/DPR to Ukraine are just naive idiots. We must be able to recognize the realities. The current policy should be aimed at preventing the further expansion of LPR/DPR territory.