Конкуренція інтепретацій природи соціально-політичних потрясінь в Україні в 2013-2015 рр.
eKMAIR
Переглянути архів Інформація| Поле | Співвідношення | |
| Title |
Конкуренція інтепретацій природи соціально-політичних потрясінь в Україні в 2013-2015 рр.
Competing Interpretations of the Nature of the Sociopolitical Turmoil in Ukraine in 2013–2015 |
|
| Creator |
Якушик, Валентин
|
|
| Subject |
Україна
трансформація революція інтерпретація Ukraine transformation revolution interpretation |
|
| Description |
The article contains the main ideas of the author’s presentation at the 19th International Council for Central and East European Studies (ICCEES) World Congress held in Makuhari, Japan, 3–8 August 2015. The multi-aspect, multi-level (“volumetric”) vision and understanding of the complex, contradictory, and, in fact, tectonic transformations of modern Ukraine is important and topical for the political science and for development of effective practical political programmes. The paper discusses a variety of significantly different from one another (both in its depth, and in the general direction) interpretations of the nature and content of the ongoing (or just emerging) transformations in Ukraine that are clearly manifesting themselves in the following areas: a) in the daily life of millions of citizens of Ukraine and the citizens of those countries in which a large (or a certain) part of the population perceive the problems of Ukraine as their own ones, often assessed as being of a vital importance; b) among politicians (Ukrainian and international / foreign) and a politicized part of the “expert community” (political scientists, economists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, journalists and other “professional interpreters”, including those who position themselves as social scientists); c) in academic research, for which the academic truth is of a higher importance than the short-term “party truths” and “corporate truths”. Pluralism (and direct or latent confrontation) of interpretations of the events in Ukraine in 2013–2016 manifests itself at the following levels (or in the planes of): 1) defining the type and the sort of dominant processes (in particular, along the axes of “revolution” – “coup d’état”, “civil war” – “foreign intervention”, “European integration” – “de-industrialization” under the “external control”, etc.); 2) selection of an interpretation methodology (one-dimensional, simplified, or, alternatively, multi-level, multi-faceted; focused on deep understanding, or on propaganda, uncritical promotion; paying main attention to “local” / related mainly to a particular country, or to the sphere of “regional” (a region of the world), and civilization, as well as to the global dimension, etc.); 3) the perception of Ukraine as a naturally culturally, politically and regionally “divided society”, or as a “unitary country”, and in this regard, in particular, substantiating and /or promoting/using institutional and organizational models of “federalization” or, alternatively, “unitarianism”; 4) the choice of approaches to the periodization of the preparation for the launch and implementation of the processes of transformation of the modern Ukraine; 5) crisis (degradation) of the state structures (manifested, in particular, in the “paralysis of the will” of the authorities (power structures), incompetence, corruption, degeneration of public functions, often being substituted by “volunteer activities”; lack of real humanitarian technologies and their substitution by “spin-masters’” political technologies of the struggle for power and its retention; 6) appearance of the “traditional Ukrainian archetypes” on the surface of socio-political life of the country, which were clearly manifested during 1917–1922 civil war (in particular, in the so-called “Makhnovshchyna”, “ataman movements”; divisions into “national-conscious”, “white” and “red”), and during the earlier periods of the country’s history; 7) domestic and international mechanisms of legitimation of power and a sharp “conflict of legitimacies”; 8) decentralization and separatism / irredentism; 9) the boundaries between the “cultural-political Europe” and the “Russian world”, which are closely connected to the history of Ukraine, the territories of which, prior to 1917–1918 revolutions, were part of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires; 10) social mobility among the new elites, and social and political responsibility of the elites in general. Political transformations that began in Ukraine in autumn 2013 and continue nowadays are of a multi-faceted and multi-vector nature, which do not allows to reduce them to only one plane or direction. At the same time, the long-term prospects of the development of the political situation appear to be unclear and of a contradictory nature. That kind of complex, “hybrid” political conflicts involves a number of internal and external actors. The consequences of such conflicts may be very far from the initial expectations of these conflicts initiators on the opposing sides. У статті розглянуто основні аспекти та рівні різноманітних інтерпретацій природи та змісту суспільно-політичних трансформацій в Україні напередодні та після зміни влади у лютому 2014 р. Матеріал статті містить основні ідеї доповіді автора на ІХ Світовому конгресі Міжнародної ради з центрально- та східноєвропейських досліджень (ICCEES), що проходив у Макухарі (Японія) 3–8 серпня 2015 р. |
|
| Date |
2016-12-22T13:31:21Z
2016-12-22T13:31:21Z 2016 |
|
| Type |
Article
|
|
| Identifier |
Якушик Валентин Михайлович. Конкуренція інтепретацій природи соціально-політичних потрясінь в Україні в 2013-2015 рр. / Якушик В. М. // Наукові записки НаУКМА : Політичні науки. - 2016. - Т. 186. - С. 43-53.
http://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/10295 |
|
| Language |
ua
|
|
| Relation |
Наукові записки НаУКМА: Політичні науки
|
|