“Intolerance is the basis of political capital in Ukraine”

ZHYTOMYR — Political experts have recently started speaking about a “radicalization of social sentiment.” It appears in sociological surveys and Internet comments; when it comes to dealing with the current government, bloggers do not mince their words. The events on May 9 in Lviv showed that there are also people who use this to their advantage.

The efforts of the scholarly community to find out how social harmony deserve attention. Last week the Ivan Franko Zhytomyr State University held an international conference entitled “Tolerance as a social problem of the present day.” Naturally, the discussions went beyond the intended direction. For example, the vice rector for research at the Interregional Personnel Management Academy Mykola Holovaty, Ph.D., defended the thesis that the Ukrainian ideology of solidarity can become the basis of state-building in Ukraine at length. According to him, this ideology, which embodies the highest ethical standards of social life, can ensure social unity and social harmony. Pointing out that interethnic tolerance implies a readiness of certain ethnic groups to accept the peculiarities of the values of other nations, the head of the philosophy department from the Buryat State University (Russia) Ivan Osinsky, Ph.D., stressed that such tolerance is a necessary condition for the survival of society. The professor at the philosophy department, the Ivan Franko Zhytomyr State University, Mykola Kozlovets, Ph.D., expressed confidence that in order to understand what it going on in society, people and their culture new intellectual practices are badly needed. In turn, these require scientific courage, personal freedom and intellectual innovation. It is hard to disagree with his argument, but the question arises: Are the social scientists currently working at higher education institutions in a position to exercise such courage and freedom?

The head of the conference’s organizing committee, rector of the Ivan Franko Zhytomyr State University Petro Saukh expressed his vision, pointing out that the following principle can be the only imperative of tolerance: “If you live, let others live, too!” And then: “If you have your own opinion, you should be able to listen to the opinion of others. Because we live in a world of symbols and what we say denotes content. Having said at some moment that the USSR is the evil empire, you won’t find understanding with some people. Or after calling the UPA a gang of bandits, you won’t find a common language with others. One should be tolerant in conditions of intolerance.”

Developing these thoughts he told The Day: “The problem of tolerance is not new. Violence, intolerance, are the Alpha and Omega of life, human existence, and organization of society. The struggle of people for their existence leads to a conflict, intolerance, violence, radicalism, and this has existed in society, in the world, from the most far-off times. But in the late 20th and the early 21st century we fully realized where it leads to and how it can end. So there is one way out: in teaching the culture of tolerance.”

COMMENTARIES

Mykola ZAITSEV, Ph.D. (Philosophy), head of the department of cultural studies and philosophy, Ostroh Academy:

“In my opinion, the part of society in which radical sentiments are growing, regardless of whether they are right or left, is alienating itself from tolerance. And when it is absent, it establishes for itself the limit to fulfilling the government’s demands. It will be able to realize some strategic plans only when the majority of society will be mobilized around its fulfillment. This is impossible without tolerance. And radicalism, which undermines the roots of tolerance and will continue to grow, works against society. For people who suppose that their radical sentiments and actions work for the state simply don’t realize that they ruin the foundations of this state and its society.”

Serhii KYSELIOV, candidate of science (Philosophy), assistant professor of the department of political science, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy:

“Scholars must explain and show what really happens within society. But, in fact, their opinion is somewhat disregarded. Intolerance in Ukraine is the foundation of political capital in almost 90 percent of cases. Therefore, if one can earn such capital, no one is going to refuse from it. Scholars must explain and society can do as follows: if a person comes to power and does not fulfill expectations, they shouldn’t be reelected. This is very easy, this is the European experience. Indeed, it is quite radical, because it gives quick results. But to adequately record choice, one should observe it. This is what civic society and similar organizations exist for. If a person acts alone, of course, he or she will achieve nothing. Why is democracy so developed in the US? Because civic society is really powerful there. That is what we lack so badly.”