What is to be done?

I can remember my heart filling with joy in the 1990s, when the notorious Article 9 of Soviet Ukraine’s Constitution was repealed – the article that declared that Soviet people should live their entire lifetime in accordance with and through the prism of an ideological (read: Communist Party) doctrine. It seemed to me (and I am sure not only to me) that it was at last the time of a long-awaited freedom of thinking and creating – without bowdlerizing, pressure, restrictions or guidelines, without the diktat of an all-pervading communist ideology which said that nothing, especially art, could be outside Party control. This deideologization was enshrined in a 1996 Ukrainian Constitution article which said that no ideology can play the leading or decisive role. But, as it often happens, a good at first sight idea can eventually lead to negative consequences. What do I mean? The constitutional concept maintains that today’s Ukraine is a deideologized society. Yes, we seem to have broken loose from the grip of a communist ideology, but the latter is still holding out and continues to foist its deceptively-idealistic ideas on society. Despite the fact that the PACE has pronounced communism as criminal as Nazism, present-day communists (especially in Ukraine) are trying, with goggled eyes and foam at the mouth, to convince the world that those “mistakes,” caused by circumstances, were still for public benefit because, you see, circumstances demanded cruelty and the end, as is known, goal justifies the means, and that Ukrainian communists are today the most communist-minded (the most honest and fair) of all. It is strange to see the communist ideology – the ideology of the downtrodden – getting along quite comfortably with the pragmatism of oligarchs in the ruling coalition. This kind of a creeping revival of the great Soviet Union goes hand in hand with quite a successful revival of Stalinism in Russia. The latest joint celebration of the Great Victory in the Second World, and the so-called Patriotic, War on May 9 was in a way an acid test to assess the extent to which the current leadership has pushed Ukraine towards the restoration of Stalinism. Indeed, the pomposity and ostentatious deference to war veterans have fully “justified” the new leadership’s efforts. It is absolutely clear now that recognition of Russia’s current ideals and its aspiration to “link” Ukraine to its ambitious goals is in fact one of the hidden “compensators” for the allegedly cheap Russian gas.

The 1996 Constitution of Ukraine has proclaimed Ukrainian society as one free of any ideology. It has also denationalized Ukrainians by withdrawing the entry “ethnicity” from the internal passport. This has in fact created a void in human consciousness, sort of an ideological and ethnic vacuum. What was given in exchange? Nothing. On the other hand, Ukrainian society began to be actively supplied with the ideas of cosmopolitism and solidarity. The role of church was immediately boosted – an otherwise positive fact which, nevertheless, increased the number of various denominations and sects. Attempts were resumed to find some kind of a Ukrainian national idea (UNI). But, in fact, everything was confined to idle talk. Today, there are as many of these ideas as opinions. Unfortunately, there is no uniform formula or definition of a UNI which could become the linchpin of a present-day society. What also puzzles me is the claim that no idea can dominate in Ukrainian society, for if the UNI begins to prevail in society, this will mean domination of a UNI-tinged ideology. The adoption of a UNI will in a way run counter to the Constitution’s article on deideologization of Ukrainian society.

In my view, the postulate of a deideologized society was wrong from the very outset. Ideology is in fact a faith without which one can only eke out a primitive beastlike existence. The question is different: what kind of ideology is it – humanistic, progressive or not; whether it will lead our society to development or to stagnation; and, finally, whether it can give an impulse to a sustainable movement towards civilized (European) values?

So we have today a paradoxically dangerous situation – a deideologized, deethnicized, demoralized, disoriented, and disillusioned Ukrainian society which, like a sail-less and rudderless ship, is exposed to all kinds of influence, especially in the criminal anti-Ukrainian, antinational, direction, under the external pressure of the media (of mass intoxication, rather than information). Little wonder, covert and overt Ukrainophobes and enemies of the Ukrainian state and all things Ukrainian have easily seized this opportunity. Indeed, this “Torricellian vacuum of ideology” began to be successfully filled with all kinds of sects (surveys show an explosion in this field), spiritualism, various soothsayers, psychics, a host of anti-Ukrainian organizations, such as Slavic Blocs, Russian Blocs, Fraternities, We Speak Russian, etc. Today, the powerful Russian media, which have in fact been fully controlling Ukraine’s space since The Day independence was proclaimed, are successfully imposing on us their imperial ideology, an ideology of violence, cruelty, our second-rateness and inferiority, as well as their vision of history and the idea of our alleged inseparability from and kinship with the history of Russia. As for the attitude of the current leadership, it is just bursting with joy to play up to their big brother. Bitter as it is, we must admit that Ukraine is now beginning to move ever faster down the road of humiliation and the loss of national priorities and the feeble gains of independence.

Our current leaders claim that the previous government was too much steeped in ideology, while the present-day one, pragmatic and deideologized, is “for the grassroots.” It is strange to hear this because the previous government’s ideology drowned in vanity and waste, while the humanistic ideas proclaimed on the Maidan remained a mere declaration. In other words, the previous government was as much deideologized as the current one is: the only difference is that the former used clans for this purpose, while the latter in banking on personalities.

So what kind of ideology should Ukraine have today? In my opinion, it must carry the ideas of ethno-anthropocentrism, i.e., it should first of all work for Ukrainian identity, with due account of our mentality, and fully focus on the individual rather than on fetishes. Undoubtedly, this task could be fulfilled by documentary television at the initial stage: “Documentaries could benefit Ukrainian society (and, above all, the UNI. – Author) in terms of the interpretation of certain personalities and historical themes” (“Vasyl Viter: Bohdan Khmelnytsky’s figure hides meanings Ukrainians need,” The Day, No. 24, April 22, 2010).

Today, the “ideology of a different Ukraine” (Ukrainsky tyzhden, No. 19) should be as follows: “Those concerned over this country’s destiny need clear-cut answers to the question whether Ukraine will embark on the road of real European transformations and how political and everyday-life corruption will be put an end to.” Therefore, taking into account that the current so-called opposition is unable to offer Ukrainian society a program of Ukraine’s further development and, hence, a new ideology, its activities in the miserable and helpless manner that we can see today, are definitely doomed to failure. It is for this reason that the disillusioned society is looking indifferently at these somewhat artificial demonstrations. “The opposition will have no broad support unless it offers the society’s European part a new ideological platform which may in fact bring about a true resistance movement.”

It should be admitted today that the Party of Regions is winning because (what I consider the main thing) it has put together the classical Little Russian inferiority complex (this is also an ideology, which explains the half society’s approval of an abrupt tilt of Ukraine towards Russia) and the easy-to-understand desire to live better. In other words, this party is playing excellently on the poverty of its future electorate.

To break loose from this vicious circle, this country really needs the opposition, but not the one that is now represented in parliament. To meet the challenges of today, the opposition must:

— change its election-time slogans and, what is more, hide its party flags. There should only be one flag – the yellow-blue flag of Ukraine – in the struggle against the current government;

— create powerful online and print media resources and a TV channel (why not?) in order to explain to ordinary people its ideas, economic development projects, energy independence projects, application of up-to-date energy-saving technologies, advantages of the European direction of development, conduct a true comparative analysis of the government’s activities (a government action bulletin of sorts, with commentaries), etc. What matters here is the method itself: it should be comparative, analytical and based on arguments rather than peremptory and primitively critical. Indeed, the role of the media and especially journalists is coming today to the frontline of the struggle for a new Ukraine – it is perhaps even more important than the role of politicians;

— get itself ready for hard and longtime work. Hit-and-run attacks on the authorities will only incapacitate and disillusion society as well as increase the government’s power;

— radically increase the activity of opposition media resources abroad, especially in Russia, conduct explanatory work among millions of ethnic Ukrainians in Russia (their exact number is unknown), and cause them to fight against authoritarianism and totalitarianism in Russia and, hence, in Ukraine;

— establish international links with oppositions in other countries – first of all, in Russia and Poland;

— establish and further maintain close ties with various religious communities that support the Ukrainian state;

— enter into the closest possible contact with youth organizations, especially those of students;

— put special emphasis on ties with the youth wing of Plast. As Plast is gravitating towards the system of continuing step-by-step upbringing, it can successfully replace the old ideological dogmas in the field of patriotic education. The temporal dimension and continuity of generations can make Plast a powerhouse for Ukraine’s future patriotic cadres – from the kindergarten to mature age;

— and, what is the No. 1 task today, the parliamentary opposition should join forces with extra-parliamentary oppositionary groups, especially students. The media recently reported that ten extra-parliamentary civic youth organizations had set up an association called Sprotyv (Resistance) in order to oppose government actions, as far as infringements of the freedom of speech and individual rights are concerned. Naturally, the parliamentary opposition must immediately support this initiative.

In my view, all these measures are today the only effective way to carry out transformations and to help society voice its protests. No doubt, it is hard and painstaking work which will take more than one year for its results to be evident. But the results are bound to come. Everything comes to an end, and the same will surely happen to the current government if the opposition manages to offer a better and more effective way and power is wielded by true patriots rather than time-servers.

I am convinced that public disillusionment will gradually vanish, our society will at last see an active opposition, and aspiration for transformations and European values will become irreversible. What is on offer is an evolutionary, not revolutionary, way of societal development coupled with a gradual increase in qualitatively new national and patriotic thinking. I am aware of a rather idealistic nature of what has been proposed in this article, but it is hard to deny the fact that a society needs to be constantly educated.

So, opposition, let us get down to hard, painstaking and multifaceted work!