Are “mud baths” always salubrious?

It seemed that a series of latest scandals, such as the Lozynsky case and the Artek affair, would explode society. But it did not. What is this? Overall apathy? Emotional atrophy? Total disappointment with the government and, hence, indifference? This is all the more dangerous now that we have a chance to replace the current government. We tried to find out how and why society reacts to scandals. Where is the problem — in ourselves or in the system?

The presidential campaign started de jure earlier last week, and experts agree that the main candidates for the presidency will be focusing on two C’s. Firstly, each of the candidates will try to prove (at least by word if not by deed) that he or she is the most efficient crisis manager. So the first C is crisis-related subjects. The other one is compromising materials.

A wave of high-profile scandals swept over Ukraine well before the official beginning of the election campaign. Ii is worth recalling in this context the fuss around Viktor Yanukovych’s summer retreat in Mezhyhiria (a flash in the pan indeed, for the gentleman is still living unperturbed in the scandalous dacha), the Lozynsky case, and now the shocking Artek scandal. A parody banner has been posted on the Internet: “She is working — they are in Artek.”

Yet, by all accounts, the pedophile story is only the first swallow. “Lists of Verkhovna Rada members with untraditional sexual attitudes may be published in the near future,” says Mykhailo Pohrebynsky, director of the Kyiv Center for Political Research and Conflictology.

Volodymyr Fesenko, chairman of the Penta Center for Applied Political Research, forecast earlier last week: “The ongoing ‘Artek scandal’ has dealt a blow to BYuT, but I am sure the latter is going to strike back shortly. The intensity of mud-slinging is going to rise — this is inevitable.”

The backstroke has already been made: the BYuT MP Serhii Sobolev has accused the Party of Regions leader Viktor Yanukovych of masterminding the raping and beating up of a woman in Yenakievo, Donetsk oblast, in the 1970s and promised to have the case reopened owing to the newly discovered evidence.

The games our politicians play using compromising materials (such materials are not always untrue), expose, to put it mildly, the moral degradation of the ruling class, on the one hand, and allow people to see those who call themselves elite “in all their beauty,” on the other.

Scandalous facts about Ukrainian politicians’ private life and even criminal offences have traditionally been made public during election campaigns in the past few years. The truth about politicians, no matter how shocking it may be, is a plus because publicity is perhaps the only remedy for those who decided, after taking hold of governmental levers, that they have the right to get away with things that any other individual who obeys the law and the philosophy of human relationships cannot even begin to imagine.

Paradoxically, we know the truth about, say, Lozynsky, but this cannot change the state of affairs. Firstly, Lozynsky, who is suspected of murdering a man with an unprecedented cynicism, is out at large. Secondly (and this arouses the bitterest resentment), Ukrainians showed a rather indifferent attitude to this glaring fact.

The experts The Day is interviewing today are unanimous in that the election system must be changed — otherwise the situation will be conserved for years to come. Incidentally, Yulia Tymoshenko’s ex-ally Mykhailo Brodsky recently told Ukrainska Pravda in detail that he used to personally carry in stationery boxes to the BYuT headquarters the money this bloc earned by selling places on the ballot. This is common practice, not only in the BYuT, and everybody knows this, but everything remains at the same level due to a lack of reaction and interest in changing the state of affairs.

Vilalii KULYK, director, Center for Civil Society Problems Research:

“First of all, I must say that our politicians have developed immunity to criticism from their rivals, the media, and civil society. In other words, our politicians are showing a weak reaction to all kinds of accusations. It is only when something crosses the limits (for example, a murder or a rape of children) that politicians begin to react.

“Politicians tend to resort to mudslinging in their narrow-party interests only and thus cause the public to reject and mistrust the wars of compromising materials.

“On the one hand, we receive a lot of new information; on the other, we do not see that anything can change. And, knowing all this, politicians are also doing nothing to change the situation.

“It is necessary to cleanse the political system, remove the currently acting players from the arena, and adopt new rules of the game. Only in this case can we speak of some kind of qualitative changes. As for the small steps aimed at resetting the system, one must, first of all, establish strict control by civil society over the fulfillment of the promises politicians and political forces have given. This is the number one task.

“Secondly, there should be a societal demand for this control. Society should also formulate the rules of the game.

“Thirdly, there should be strict liability and real punishment.

“The cleansing of the government system requires, above all, the political will of both the president and the Verkhovna Rada. While everything is clear with the parliament, the head of state is still capable of showing political will — if not the current incumbent (I strongly doubt this), then his successor. But if he or she fails to do so, the corrupt system will remain consolidated for years to come.

“Regarding of the system of populating ballots, I will say that it is impossible to change anything now, even though the BYuT itself (as well as other political forces) is aware of the necessity to update the list. I do not think that selling places is still a top-priority task for big party players, such as the BYuT or the Party of Regions.

“The scandals that have erupted in the last while… are prompting leaders to conclude that trading places on the ballot means damaging their authority, which is easier to lose than to win.

“I also believe that the quota of places on the ballot for sale will be shrinking with each election, because this will only tarnish the image of political parties. All the parties and their leaders will learn a lesson.”

Kostiantyn MATVIENKO, expert, strategic consulting corporation Gardaryka:

“First of all, I would like to point out that disseminating the information on Heorhii Gongadze’s death was the beginning of the end of the Kuchma regime. At the time, society showed an extremely dramatic reaction — quite in line with the situation. After all, Yushchenko’s victory over the former regime’s candidate Yanukovych was caused by Ukrainians’ reaction to the murder that occurred when Kuchma was in power.

“Unfortunately, the Ukraine Without Kuchma campaign and the Orange Revolution are the only achievements on civil society’s record.

“You mentioned the banal purchase and sale of places on electoral ballots. You and I, by force of our profession, and society as a whole have a full picture of the situation, which we call ‘They are all scum.’ We understand this intuitively, so new mudslinging and new scandals will change nothing in the awareness of people. Suppose we come to know more — who lives where, who and how seized a plot of land, a factory, or a TV channel. So what? We also know about how ballots are populated, but this does not change the attitudes of those who form them, does it?

“Now about Mr. Brodsky who recently disclosed to Ukrainska Pravda the secrets of how the BYuT picks its nominees. Do not forget that Brodsky is, in fact, a dummy candidate who is playing in favor of the Party of Regions.

“How can this be changed? It is impossible to change this democratically via the elections. We have passed the point of no return. Our politicians are a closely-knit caste. There is also vertical mobility in Ukraine, i.e., people who come into politics and public administration at a time when generations are changing are dynasts. It is worthwhile to recall the young team of Kyiv Mayor Chernovetsky. The father of Kyiv Council Secretary Oles Dovhy is a Verkhovna Rada member, and such examples are numerous.

“The latest scandal is about the daughter of Labor and Social Policies Minister Liudmyla Denysova, who was allowed to assume a very high administrative office right after graduation.

“Therefore, the existing close-loop system is designed to reproduce itself without taking into account the interests of society. I will say it again: it does not take it into account, let alone represent it. It is sad that politicians cannot be replaced with others, because they draw up election laws for themselves.

“Information-based society calls for changing not only the functions but also the very nature of government. Being in power requires a high level of qualification, which the voter is unable to assess. In other words, if an MP is really a lawmaker, he or she should be a highly-skilled person, but the present-day promotion campaigns for parliamentary or presidential candidates make it impossible to ascertain their qualification level.”

Yevhen HOLOVAKHA, Doctor of Philosophy; deputy director, chair of the department of sociopolitical processes, Institute of Sociology, Ukraine’s National Academy of Sciences:

“It is a well-proven fact that the truth is far more difficult to deal with than lies. I have even an aphorism about this: ‘Lies are more humane than the truth.’ But we are not the only ones who find it difficult to deal with the truth — it is a universal problem. All over the world, journalists have to fight before telling the truth — such is the nature of their job.

“What does one have to do with the truth? In general, journalists should not ponder this matter too much. Their function is simple —digging up the truth. From then on, it is a problem of the entire public. This applies to the politicians who are afraid of the truth because they have to live in an extremely dirty world as well as to those who do not want to live in this mud. But the latter should know that the truth that shows dirt is better than the lie that soars above the clouds.

“We must learn to handle the truth. Naturally, the path to democracy is long and winding, so it is very important to learn to accept the truth without detriment to the psychological condition of society. But if we want to get back to the totalitarian past, where we learned from Swedes the truth that a nuclear power plant exploded next to our house and people were dying there, then we do not need to form this habit. Yet if we wish to move on, we will have to come across a very unpleasant truth every time.

“Different countries choose different ways and different truths. For example, when our neighbors came to know how hard and intolerable the truth is, they backed up. Now everything is calm and serene in their country, and nobody is tormenting anybody with the truth. But if we wish to march towards a well-developed, rather than wild, democracy, we will have to put up with the torments that the truth causes.

“On the other hand, law-enforcement bodies and, moreover, the intellectual elite should react to mudslinging if it involves allegations of crimes. The general public, as a rule, reacts to this very strangely and indirectly, deciding on whom they can or cannot trust — because an individual who is burdened with their personal and family affairs is unable to make a sound judgment of this. So the tasks are different: intellectuals need to present things in a way that will be easy to understand for all people, politicians, react in terms of legislation, and journalists. Should closely follow all this.”