By Liubov BEVZENKO, Candidate of Science, Institute of Sociology, Ukrainian
National Academy of Sciences
As the presidential campaign approaches, I would like to share the results
of the latest polls and try to answer the lasting question of the Ukrainian
people's attitude to the existing regime. However, sociology, like all
the other sciences in this country, is in a miserable condition. Whenever
we hear about this or that poll it means a dedicated and strenuous effort
on the part of those still willing to finance the rather expensive polling
procedures. This does not happen often now.
At the beginning of 1997, we carried out a nationwide poll within the
framework of a planned research program - and I stress planned, not commissioned
(1,200 respondents from different regions). Looking back at the turnout
now I find myself thinking that the trends we discovered then have hardly
changed. The figures spoke for themselves and now that those in power,
faced with elections, seem to have once again remembered the people, these
figures should be cited again.
During that poll we asked the respondents what they thought the ruling
elite lacked in the first place. In fact, the question read, "If you think
that decisions made by those in power are not always correct, what, in
you opinion, is the main reason for such wrong decisions?" Practically
none of the respondents considered that most of the decisions made were
the right ones; 29% stated that dishonesty was the main reason; 22% pointed
to the lack of desire to assume any responsibility (which is akin to dishonesty,
you will agree); 27% considered incompetence the main reason. Most respondents
believed that those getting to the executive summit were mainly concerned
about their positions and pockets, not the state and people. In fact, this
view was fully supported by 67% of the respondents, and 24% tended to agree
with it.
Indirect evidence that people suspect those in power of dishonesty and
incompetence is the fact that the populace is keenly interested to hear
about top-level bureaucrats' involvement in or with criminal cases.
We asked the respondents to determine precisely how interesting they
found certain aspects of life at the top. 70% pointed to this involvement;
53% wished to have more information about the ruling elite's personal incomes.
Professional experience interested 58%; 54% mentioned IQ and academic background.
Considering this, I think that the electorate would welcome the publication
of the elite's tax returns and IQ tests as is traditionally done in the
West. As for tax returns, the issue has been raised on more than one occasion.
It would, of course, be interesting to watch the IQ issue put to the vote
at the Verkhovna Rada, especially if the vote were a roll-call one.
The third group of poll indices is habitually referred to as private
life: health, family, and friends. This is generally considered of special
interest to the man in the street. Ukraine, however, turned out very different
from, say, the United States. 34% of the respondents wanted to know about
the ruling elite's health; 28% were interested in their social background,
and even fewer (23%) wanted to know about their friends; 22% percent cared
to know about their family status. Apparently, the masses are mostly interested
in what they believe to be the main cause of wrong decisions made on high:
dishonesty and incompetence. Considering that 38% of the respondents stated
that their life was "very dependent" on the ruling elite (37% said that
dependence was "sufficient"), this interest is keen indeed - and rather
hazardous for those getting prepared to run in the next presidential race.
Such was the "elite topology" of mass consciousness at the time of our
poll. I think that the most recent developments - I mean all those publicized
criminal cases involving the elite - served only to sharpen some of the
aspects mentioned here. How are the people to elect another President,
how are they to be sure that the candidate has the right IQ and is honest
and competent enough for this highly demanding post? One of our questions
was, "Who will you listen to trying to understand where truth and falsehood
are in our society?" 18% mentioned journalists; 10%, friends; 8%, experts,
but most (48%) declared they trusted no one except themselves. It would
be very useful to know exactly what they meant.






