We embraced a huge number of challenges that have become the norm, and we have been living in this threatening environment for a long time. Nevertheless, our attitude towards the State is evolving, and so does the State’s attitude towards the society, the people, and an individual.
Ukrainians and Ukrainians
Ukrainians are convinced that polarization and hostile sentiments prevail in our society, while our foreign partners believe that there is no unity in our ranks. The study “(Dis)connected: Polarization in Ukrainian Society” was carried out by OPORA and the Kyiv School of Economics with the aim of confirming or refuting this hypothesis. The problems that we need to cure depend on the truth and realistic assessment of the situation.
However, study results indicate that there is no polarization in Ukrainian society. On average, a fairly large proportion of respondents (67%) identify themselves with majority when it comes to assessing the state of affairs in our country. Over 77% of Ukrainian citizens disagree with the statement that mobilization is being conducted in a fair way. If the respondents not only feel comfortable in their beliefs, but also perceive themselves as being in the majority, that is, forming the largest part of Ukrainian community, then this is indicative of unity and like-minded people. Therefore, the population groups that were initially seen as polarized in theoretical terms are not afraid to express their views nor do they feel like a marginalized minority.
In my opinion, mutual disagreement or public discussion is a characteristic feature of Ukrainian identity. Be it our government, newspapers, friends or family members, we take everything others say with a pinch of salt. Members of condominium association hold discussions about the color and type of flowerbed that should be planted in the curtilage of apartment building. This is indicative of the fact that Ukrainians have developed a culture of dialogue and discussions, but perhaps there is some room for improvement in terms of controlling our emotions and adhering to the “do no mutual harm” principle. This is especially evident on social media. The people of Ukraine are exhausted by prolonged war, but the study data shows that “a Ukrainian is not a wolf to his fellow countryman”. Ukrainians have no pleasure in witnessing other social groups getting punished on the basis of their residence, military background, religious affiliation or language. We are more favorably disposed towards those who have been fighting in the war or switched over to Ukrainian language, but there is no hatred or total condemnation of Ukrainians abroad. Despite the absence of a political process, we are not polarized. Each of us is different and has different life experiences, but we are not aggressive or hostile to each other. The military and their families tend to feel lonesome and they are somewhat more distanced from civilians than vice versa. Obviously, this is due to the fact that civilians cannot understand the pain of a woman waiting for seven days to get in touch with her son who has gone on an assault mission. So when one woman is trying to borrow some money to buy a treadmill for her recovering son, who hasn’t been out of the house for more than a year, from a woman whose son is on active duty, they don’t feel much empathy for each other. A veteran would seek support from his comrades in arms rather than total strangers who do not understand his reaction to the noise created by a slamming door.
However, all this is not about rifts in the society. They are non-existent. For those who would really like to understand the subject in more detail, I recommend reading OPORA’s study report along with a description of study methodology.
Ukrainians and the State
The historical dimension of this issue is obvious to me. Vitaliy Portnikov made a good point about the fact that the State was alien to the people of Ukraine. That’s why Ukrainians did not feel mutually dependent or obligated to the State, nor did they have any respect for it. Ukrainians had been living in a paradigm of survival for a long time, while the State was the main source of threats. If the State plays the role of a repressive apparatus, as was the case with the Soviet Union, the people are obviously trying to cut contacts with this dangerous entity to a minimum. Many of those who dreamed of establishing the State of Ukraine were repressed or convicted. My grandparents didn’t just serve time in prison camps for having such dreams, but they also lived in hope that one day they will see the blue and yellow flag flying over the well on their native soil. From their perspective, the State of Ukraine was a promised land with no chance of reaching it and living a happy life. I adopted a similar attitude. I do not consider any of our presidents, parliamentarians or government officials to be the personification of Ukraine because they come and go, but the State has to survive, undergo reform, and become a source of protection and unique identity of our citizens. As for me, a victory in this war is the preservation of our statehood.
We are paying a steep price for creating public value of our State, regardless of political actors, formal or informal leaders who are at the helm of it. It is the people who are engaged in the struggle for existence and independence of this institution. I am convinced that this is the last war that will lead us either to the survival or liquidation of Ukrainian statehood. The same applies to the general trends of globalization and high residential mobility of citizens around the world. Your opportunities for studying and doing business don’t have to be tied to your passport – there are formal and informal conditions for fulfilling your needs in other countries. Even if you were born here, you can easily go abroad and live in another paradigm or jurisdiction.
In authoritarian regimes and hereditary monarchies, “I am the State, and the State is me”, while in democratic regimes, the State is the flesh and blood of its people.
Ukraine is a republic that held a national referendum, in which more than 90% of citizens (making up an absolute majority in all regions, including Crimea) voted for independence.
Political disconnection
From my point of view, democracy is an ideology of the system of government. By contrast, authoritarian regimes do not uphold any values and have no common tasks, except for retention of power. They do not respect human rights, engineer a system of public administration to suit their own goals and objectives, and consider every citizen as a physical or physiological resource, but definitely not as an electoral resource because it makes no sense. Autocratic regimes are not based on any ideology. As it turns out, communist China, theocratic Iran and shut-in North Korea have a lot in common. However, it has nothing to do with values. It’s all about reaching common goals and objectives, increasing the effectiveness of mutual assistance and survival. Meanwhile, democracy aims to ensure that citizens exercise influence over the State or local government either directly or through elections and legally elected representatives.
The aforementioned results of OPORA’s study on polarization are not only about military service, mobilization, and willingness to take certain life risks. They are indicative of voluntary or non-voluntary participation in the defense of our State and engagement in nation building at this stage of the war for independence, which is a form of democratic participation.
For example, citizens of the Russian Federation have a formal right to vote, but they entered into an implicit agreement with their authoritarian government: they stay out of politics as long as the government leaves them alone. The so-called Russian oppositionists in the West say that they have nothing against us, they just don’t care. This is a death knell for them.
On the other hand, Ukraine is definitely a democracy. Despite unfavorable conditions, members of Ukrainian society are involved in nation building, just like little ants. They did not escape into inner emigration. Instead, they take certain actions that contribute to the survival of the State on a daily basis. Does this mean that the State will be absolutely perfect? Should we be idealistic about our country and our people? Absolutely not. We are all imperfect. Our enemies and corrupt officials should be tried and imprisoned in the name of Ukraine. We need to work on ourselves.