“Stone-Breaker.” Quality assessment of the future

It has become a good tradition that Den prepares several surprises for its readers to be presented at the Book Forum in Lviv. However, we will reveal them later.

Practice proves that all experts, even the most qualified ones, are usually the least enthusiastic to make predictions for the future. The risk to make a mistake is too big (“I am not a prophet,” is a usual reply in such cases).

Den has always considered the expert mission, which is closely tied with the enlightening one, to be one of the most important in its work. But here is an interesting thing: it turned out that the collective combined “assessment of Den,” which has been carried out for many years (from the first months of the new century, and even earlier in many aspects), could brilliantly foresee the vector of future development in Ukraine during Kuchma’s time (establishment of deadly for the state oligarchic and corruption system), Yushchenko’s one (correct, beautiful declarations and terribly small number of real deeds), and Yanukovych’s reign (dead-end of Kuchmism), and at the same time to define, not only generally, but rather specifically, ways of exiting the systemic crisis. In particular, the crisis of humanitarian policy. Moreover, the absence of such policy was pointed out.

Systemic crisis can be overcome with a bold systemic concept of its overcoming. Such concept was proposed by our newspaper many years ago. And now, at a sharp turn of Ukrainian history, it is not only educational, but essential to remember (and analyze) the vision of the state’s humanitarian policy Den’s editor-in-chief, journalists, constant contributors, and experts have been honing for many years not only directly on the newspaper’s pages, but on the pages of our special project: publishing series Den’s Library. We will continue later about this. But first, a few brief remarks.

The editor-in-chief and our team in general set a goal (by the way, we did it on the eve of “the great disturbances” that awaited Ukraine in 2004 and now, 10 years after) of offering the society an integral thought-out project of humanitarian future of Ukraine in a concentrated form. And if at least two first books of our publishing project (Ukraina Incognita, 2002, and Two Ruses, 2003), let alone much closer ones in time (we will talk about them further), forewords to them by Den’s editor-in-chief Larysa IVSHYNA and the articles by our journalists written back then, were re-read now, the following conclusion would come to mind: if the empowered (and at the same time, irresponsible, which is a fundamental problem) part of the society had listened to those thoughts, our history could have been different. For example, Two Ruses was published in 2003, the year of Russia in Ukraine. If the idea that this book contained, a call for an honest analysis of tragedies, peripeteia, and achievements of histories of both Ukraine and Russia, a suggestion to reject the concept of “the big brother,” and even the concept of “brotherly nations,” to build our relations solely on an equal basis – if that call had been heard then, it is quite possible that this year, 2014, would become the year of Europe in Ukraine.

Tens of pages can be written on the subject “We in Den told back then...” or “We already foresaw it then...” However, it seems more appropriate to get down to specifics and provide the most accurate and relevant, in our opinion, quotes from forewords by our editor-in-chief to Den’s publishing and enlightening project. So, here we go:

“We must be ready.

“We are still divided. No, not by two banks. But by two worlds: the world of free action and thought, and the world of obsolete, slavish dogmas and stereotypes.

“Knowledge is important. But in order to educate people who will act in a different way, intellectual and moral conclusions must be made. If we actually remember that the Berlin Wall was not blown up, it was literally taken apart piece by piece, brick by brick, by millions of people. Free people, who were ready to do it at the right moment. The worldview challenge that the democratic layer of Ukrainian society faces can be worded in the following way: to blow up the ‘bunkers’ of obsolete thinking, to free people’s thoughts. And not only knowledge is required for that, but modernization of national character. We have to be ready for the moment when such a chance appears, and it is quite possible we will have to tear down our own ‘Berlin Wall’ inside of Ukraine (inside each one of us!)”

(From the foreword to “Subversive Literature” series, 2013)

“In times of a seeming overproduction of information, Ukrainians faced an acute deficit of their own quality intellectual product. It is said that a tragic history is a history of unread books. The new series in Den’s Library is a ‘sanitary train’ for journalists, politicians, public figures. For each one of those who wanted to live in our country, but do not want to see it like this. Now is the right moment. Yesterday was too early. Tomorrow may be too late. If Ukraine needs a revolution, it needs an intellectual one.”

(From the foreword to “Armor-Piercing Political Writing” series, 2012)

“We must realize: it was Kyivan Rus’ that added marginal northern Zalesye (‘Beyond-the-Forest Land’) principalities, the ones that later formed the nucleus of Muscovy, but not the other way around. It is important to ask ourselves: why does Ukraine, which is a direct successor of the mother country, still act as a colony?”

“We ought to rise to the level of our own history, which means the implementation of historical justice into lives of people and restoration of human dignity in them. Inheritors of great history do not have a right to be miserable, neglected, and scratch pathetically at Europe’s door. After all, great history demands different politics and other politicians, different rules of the game and different characters, a different level of education, the one that, so to speak, suits the historic level.”

(From the foreword to The Power of the Soft Sign, 2011)

Here we see a compact description of the newspaper’s humanitarian strategy. And we are convinced that it will become the future humanitarian strategy of the country, when it will be demanded by the state in reality, and not just in words. We know there are tremendous hardships and obstacles to come. From open enemies to hypocritical pseudo-patriots. Well, we must more often (even every day!) remember the wonderful words by Lesia Ukrainka, said about a modest little flower saxifrage (whose Latin name means “stone-breaker,” reflecting its incredible abilities) which, the poet was convinced, deserves more respect than the magnificent laurel. So, down to work, friends.