ТРАГІЧНА НАСТУПНІСТЬ У ПОЛІТИЦІ НАЦІОНАЛЬНО-ВИЗВОЛЬНОГО РУХУ В УКРАЇНІ В ХХ ст.

The article considers the policy of national-patriotic forces in Ukraine during the national liberation struggle of 1917-1921 and in the era of Perestroika. In both periods, the actions and decisions of the Ukrainian democratic elite were of a fateful character. It emphasizes the prevalence in the policy of national leaders of the state paradigm on the economic one. Against the background of the social crises that accompanied the revolutionary changes, the corresponding distribution of the priorities of state policy led to the defeat of democratic forces. Against the backdrop of the political crisis in the Russian Empire, Ukraine's national leaders were given the opportunity to pursue their own independent policies. Being socialists, the leaders of the Central Rada were well aware of the main problems of the Ukrainian people. The government realized the great importance of settling the land issue for the peasants - the most widely layer in the structure of Ukrainian society at that time. However, the development of the statehood model for Ukraine took the priority place in the work of the Central Rada. As such, autonomy was considered as part of the renewed Russia. As time has shown, the lack of solutions to the main social and economic problems was one of the reasons for the complete loss of independence. After decades, on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the leaders of the national-patriotic forces once again got the opportunity to create their own democratic state. As in the era of the Central Rada, the issue of affirming statehood was again placed on the first place on the agenda. This time in the form of complete independence. At the same time, other important issues, including economic aspect, less attention was paid to them. Later, Ukraine, like other Soviet republics, gained independence. However, the majority in the new Ukrainian government retained the communist nomenclature. For today, Ukraine continues to defend the right to own statehood, and it is necessary to take into account domestic experience of state building to prevent past mistakes