“The general plan”: a country of quality, responsibility, and effectiveness
Over the 19 years of independence Ukraine has made a huge jump from a closed society with deformed links to more a civil one. The country has already fulfilled a major goal: it has created the infrastructure of a civil society, such as civic organizations and movements, universities and intellectual centers, relatively independent mass media, and thriving private businesses. But, according to the well-known Ukrainian sociologist Yevhen Holovakha, there is one factor that stalls further development: high-quality human resources. Ukraine has an acute shortage of active, highly-educated, and highly moral people ready to assume responsibility for the field they are in charge of and to defend their rights in a civilized manner.
Naturally, one can’t say that there are no active Ukrainians. There are some. This small community has taken on the mission of preventing the fragile gains of social capital from vanishing. “Yes, of course, Ukrainian civic organizations are doing something, notably thanks to grants from Western foundations. However, civic activists of late have increasingly been addressing purely Ukrainian problems, which charitable foundations and foreign organizations do not deal with, for example, protests against police abuse or against Draft Law 2450 on peaceful assemblies,” says Hanna Hopko, coordinator of the Freedom Space volunteer movement. “More often than not, it is civic organizations that launch public actions, and other individuals join them. Naturally, if there were more people like these, this would produce better results and bring more pressure on the government or bodies that indulge in arbitrariness.”
Journalist Mikhail Taratuta expressed an interesting opinion the other day on the Moscow’s Echo blog: “There are hundreds of thousands of such organized groups (groups, not individuals) in the United States, whose system I know quite well. They may be large, with thousands of members, or small, consisting of five to ten people. They embrace, to a greater or lesser extent, almost the entire population of the country… Maybe, aware of all these mechanisms, the disillusioned and the passive will see that their small will, multiplied by the will of hundreds of thousands of people, can produce tangible results. I think some will consider this enough to take further steps.” Taratuta wrote about Russian society, but we seem to have many things in common. Firstly, we have emerged from the same past, where inertness and irresponsibility was cultivated. Secondly, in the 20th year of independence, many in both states are longing for us to march towards a common future. Recent events in Russia, where even natural cataclysms were fought against in a passive, theatrical and “photoshop” manner, showed what kind of future is possible.
Undoubtedly, social activity is an important, even crucial, manifestation of a civil stand. Successful societies, such as those is Japan, Sweden, or Switzerland, have been formed by people who understand that if citizens are conscientious and fill their lives with things of quality, they bear responsibility for their country. This is done without the romanticism of revolutions and barricades but with daily work in agreement with themselves and society.
The first generation of independent Ukraine is being formed. Is it capable of filling Ukraine with things of quality? Will it be socially active and effective, and, if so, who will teach them? Here are The Day’s special interviews on the occasion of Ukraine’s 19th independence anniversary.
Yevhen HOLOVAKHA, Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy); deputy director, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences:
“Yes, naturally, it is social institutions that are responsible for shaping personalities. Mainly this concerns schools and the system of higher education. Ukrainian schools should not focus on scholastics, for it is a Soviet or even tsarist-era system of education. Modern knowledge requires that an individual be educated as a person, as a creature that can control itself and its microenvironment, which results in the ability to influence macro-social processes. The goal is not only that one becomes a more dignified and effective person, but that people around you also feel similar needs. An individual should begin by gaining psychological and sociological knowledge in secondary school. One must understand the mechanisms which control one’s own psychology and which guided you. But we, Ukrainians, do not know how to resist pressure.
“Secondly, mass media is a powerful factor influencing the formation of one’s personality. Much depends on the culture of journalists, as journalists should not be guided by the general public taste, they should form this taste and find mechanisms that will be raised, not lower, the public’s level.
“Thirdly, it is, undoubtedly, religion. In Ukraine it still performs the formal function of attracting people to church, instead of performing a spiritual function — shaping morality and a system of relationships based on exalted principles. In other words, the church also needs high-quality people.
“And, finally, politics. We must demand that politicians behave decently. It is the function of civic organizations and the media to demand that officials and politicians show a high level of modern political culture.
“There is a prospect. Different people are growing up today. They are free of the social mechanisms that do not meet present-day standards in contrast to, say, me who spent the greater part of my life in a Soviet society. For this reason, our generation is incapable of radical changes: we can only keep the balance in order to prevent society from grinding to a halt altogether. Those who prevail in Ukrainian society are externals, i.e., people who are used to shifting the blame for their inadequate life and their mistakes to somebody else. In Western societies, however, internals prevail. If we want to integrate into the European community, internals, i.e. responsible people, should prevail here. To tell the truth, the balance has essentially improved over the past 20 years. Yet one important factor has remained unchanged: we still have, as before, a mere 13 percent of people involved in civic organizations. Look at Europe and the US: most of people there belong at least to one civic organization. Unfortunately, the new generation is still imitating, to some extent, our style because they learn from us. The burden will be reduced with every passing year. But the new generation brings new problems. They should themselves address these problems through self-control. It is difficult but possible.”
Bohdan HAWRYLYSHYN, member of the Roman Club, founder of the World Economic Forum in Davos, chairman of the MIM-Kyiv Supervisory Board:
“I agree that Ukraine has created the infrastructure of a civil society, and I am actually surprised to see so many diverse events taking place inside and outside Ukraine. Not all projects are being carried out, not all civil society activists are highly-educated, responsible, and moral. There are also problems with funding, as well as with the national and public context.
“Yet there already are some organizations, student and graduate networks comprising people aged 20 to 30, which work effectively and honestly. These are the foundations of a new sociopolitical elite.
“I believe that Ukraine will have gathered — by the 30th anniversary of independence — a critical mass of new people who will put Ukraine on the right political, economic, social, and ecological paths. All those capable of helping these people morally and financially must do so.
“Everybody is aware of the negative aspects of the current Ukrainian society, but one should not focus on this alone. It is far better to find and emphasize the strong and good sides and to build a future on these positive grounds.”
Iryna BOCHAR, graduate, Den-2010 Summer School of Journalism:
“Filling the Ukrainian civil society infrastructure with quality is a difficult and disputable question. Indeed, we have an infrastructure like this, but it is now filled with Soviet-era people.
“On the other hand, we have rather a variegated generation of young Ukrainians. There are quite a few people in this generation who are overtly indifferent to present-day social problems and confine themselves to pursuing material gains in order to satisfy their personal needs.
“However, there is a bunch of incorrigible dreamers who stand out illustriously against the backdrop of the majority, who have ambitious goals and a desire to improve our society. As a rule, they are well-educated people who take a proper view of the current situation and, thanks to active work in the young people’s milieu, know quite well about various spheres of sociopolitical life. These are people with an active civic stand, defined political views, and readiness to rally like-minded people in order to implement their large-scale and ambitious plans for the future. It seems to me these people have preserved our historical memory and have an innate feeling of responsibility for the preservation and development of their motherland. These people are now realizing themselves in all kinds of civic youth organizations, political, cultural, educational, as well as by way of scholarship programs and various competitions. They are doing volunteer work in charitable organizations and making a contribution to present-day Ukrainian cultural and artistic life. I personally know such people.
“But, in spite of our new experience, it is too early to assert that the brightest representatives of the younger generation will manage to fulfill, with the same success, their voluntarily commitments to a civil society. These people have not yet taken the test given by the authorities, i.e. a sweet and tempting opportunity to join ‘the elite’ in the corridors of power. If these people pass this test successfully and do not break their inner linchpin, the infrastructure will be filled with quality. Then we will be able to hope for long-awaited changes.”
Serhii STUKANOV, philosopher, member of the Founders Board of the Ostroh Club of Young People’s Free Intellectual Communication, Donetsk:
“I believe the situation will improve with every passing year, but, on the whole, it is too long a process to speak of the final solution to this problem within the span of one generation. The point is that the effectiveness of civil society mechanisms depends, in my view, not only on the institutions, on the one hand, and civic activism and self-denying work, on the other (Ukrainians have always been full of enthusiasm, if they only knew how to channel it rationally), but also on whether those engaged in this activity believe in the possibility of achieving our goals in the conditions of a corrupt society. I am convinced that a lack of this belief brings about inertness in people and makes them unable to independently do a great deal of work without waiting for checks or inspections.
“There is quite a popular jocular saying in Ukraine: ‘When the state needs something from us, it calls us citizens.’ If we analyze it (for, as is known, there is a grain of truth in any joke), it becomes obvious that it is not about a civil society or rule-of-law. This saying is popular just because many believe that one can become a citizen by receiving a proper document that confirms citizenship, i.e., following the ‘appointment’ to this role. In reality, it is impossible to make a citizen out of somebody, for being a citizen is a state of consciousness, an active personal stand, the awareness of freedom and responsibility, and, what is more, understanding that, if you work for a certain public cause, you work, above all, for yourself. As long as most of us continue to endorse this idea of citizenship and think that to be a citizen means to be a powerless cog in a criminal state that is using us to its own ends (which is in fact the case nowadays), no major changes can be expected.”
Ihor PASICHNYK, professor, Doctor of Sciences (Psychology); Rector, National University of Ostroh Academy:
“I find it difficult to speak about the entire younger generation: they face too many risks. But if it is about Ostroh Academy students, I am convinced that the vast majority of the young intellectuals being educated within the walls of our university are prepared to be actively engaged in the building of a civil society and assume their responsibility. The problem is different: top statesmen ought to draft a comprehensive program of selecting people, who are ready to do high-quality work, and to create conditions for these people to realize themselves. It hurts me to see talented Ostroh Academy graduates (good managers, financiers, political scientists, psychologists, translators) going to work abroad, where their knowledge and quality is in demand, although they have always dreamed to work in and for Ukraine. President Yanukovych has noted in his speeches that such a program should be mapped out. If those are not empty words and this idea — the selection of high-quality people from the kindergarten to the university — is put into practice, the state mechanism will begin to work in a right direction.”
