The Role of Moral Default in Political Nation Forming Process in Ukraine (end of 2013 – beginning of 2014 years)

Nov 9th, 2014 | By | Category: Civic Actions, Civil Society, Events, In Depth, Politics, Protests, Ukraine

 by Vira Yaroshenko

Ph.D. in Political Sciences, Associate Professor of Political Sciences Department,    Petro Mohyla Black Sea State University

Research of the political and ethical aspects of the events of 2013-2014 years, using axiological and historical methods is one of the options to define the role of moral default as a catalyst for the formation of a political nation in Ukraine.

Moral default, which appeared and took place in 2013 in Ukraine, struck with its unexpected depth and unpredictable consequences. In a short period of time the page of newest Ukrainian history turned into real scene, where almost each Ukrainian citizen became, in a particular role, a subject of political and historical process.

The cause of the protest actions of Ukrainian citizens, supporters of the European direction in Ukrainian foreign policy in November 2013, was governmental suspension of the signing EU-Ukraine Association Agreement. The slogans of demonstrators of Euromaidan in Kiev reflected demands and was the reminder, from the citizens to the power, concerning its obligations to sign the Agreement, which was a logical step in the continuation of the previous decisions towards the European external choice of Ukraine. And only after the brutal violation of the rights of civil protesters, inadequate governmental response to peaceful actions of citizens, beating of students at the Maidan on the night of November 22, 2013 there occurred a social explosion, that spread all over Ukraine and acquired revolutionary political content aimed at the removal of current Ukrainian government led by President V. Yanukovych.

The reason of this social explosion became the lack of trust and credibility to compromised authorities or the moral default. Conversion of Ukrainian citizens their rights and trust to control the distribution of state resources and to determine the future national development to their political leaders, who did not fulfill the obligations to the voters, and did not act according to the public interest, is associated with the term “default”, which is synonymous to the term “bankruptcy”. Since by credit in this sense stands axiological category “trust”, which is politician’s moral value characteristic, the term “moral default” according to the author is a justified terminological structure that characterizes irresponsible, “bankrupt” government. Moreover, huge part of the citizens realize the danger of spreading immoral relations in the society, when injustice, dishonesty, cynicism, human rights violations, bribery, and corruption become common and normal. That’s why a lot of people, who believe in moral values, consciousness, justice and trust, hoped and counted on the entering the European Union as a concentrated European system of common moral values. People perceived this external policy as a kind of medicine from the “bankruptcy” of moral life, as an instrument that, from their point of view, was able to save our society.

Treacherous position of citizens, supporters of Antymaidan, who have not passed the exam for morality, for whom dishonesty, breach of laws, corruption, unfair power has become the norm and tradition of daily life, enhanced the depth of moral default. Preferably, these fellow citizens living in the Southeastern regions mostly migrated from Russia during the latest years and the years of Ukrainian independence in particular. They have marginal culture, preserved by Soviet stereotypes and compensatory after exposure of the totalitarian regime illusion of prosperity. Annexation of the Crimea by the Russian Federation was made possible by the treacherous position of such Ukrainian citizens. Annexation became cynical and arrogant towards Ukraine as well as towards the international community. The occupation of Ukrainian territory by Russian troops undermined the credibility of the brotherly neighboring Slavic people, which was a manifestation of moral default. Since then disrupted system of international security at the international level began to lose confidence in the guarantees of international security. This can be considered as another manifestation of the moral default. The local governmental councils during their regional sessions provided evaluations of the protest movements and separatism. Overall, the results were subjected on support or non-support of Maidan. Some political figures as a former President of Ukraine V. Yanukovych, for example, had fled to Russia, continuing the criticism in the media about all the changes taking place in Ukrainian society after the victory of the revolution, trying to downplay its enormous moral capital. Unfortunately, significant number of patriotic Ukrainian people consciously or unconsciously, actively or passively promoted destabilization and the spread the radical separatist spirits in society. Each mistake, made by the new government and Maidan activists had serious destructive consequences.

For example, decision made by Verkhovna Rada concerning language issues caused primarily negative reaction among Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens, which was used by Russian aggressors for the so called “protection” of these people. This “creeping occupation” became possible with support of non-patriotic citizens in different regions of Ukraine (mainly in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine).

Evaluation of protest actions, understanding the essence of social explosion and forecasting of upcoming events by Ukrainians and members of international community was quite controversial and emotional. It is clear that the objective analysis of the epicenter of events is complicated by some subjective impressions and dynamism of the situation in general. It should be also noted that the usage of manipulation technologies in the media in favor of various interested groups and the actual information war in the media had a huge influence on the subjective evaluation of those events. Maidan activists, protesters, patriots, heroes through media handlers (mostly Russian TV channels and pro-governmental officials and deputies) were declared as “banderivtsi”, “fascists”, “criminals”, “extremists”, “terrorists”. Antymaidan supporters, security forces, and the minority of Ukrainian citizens supported corrupted authorities, because they used to solve all their problems without putting any effort into productive work, quality education, and the law. “Antymaidanivtsi” tried to organize similar meetings to demonstrate their commitment to V. Yanukovych and to convince the Maidan activists. Later they became leaders (“Trojan horses”) in Putin’s aggressive plan of the occupation of Ukraine by Russian troops

The aim of the protests was verbally concentrated on proclaimed slogans and posters, for example: “Shame!”, “We Got Tired of It!”, “Gang Out!”, “Criminals Out!”, “For European Union!”, “For Welfare Life!”, “Glory to Ukraine!”. The main aims were institutionalized by the Action Program, which was adopted by Maidan activists and presupposed: dismissal of M. Azarov’s government, getting back to the Constitution of 2004 (which established parliamentary-presidential republic), releasing of political prisoners, withdrawal of “Dragon laws”, calling the new presidential elections in 2014 and signing the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement.

The driving force of the protest movement was in an incredibly high and powerful life potential of Maidan participants, which was directed on moral “recovering” of the Ukrainian society, returning the failed trust credibility (moral default) in different expressions. They tried to build trust and justice between each other and gave the trust credibility to the new political leaders, to the national and international laws. People from the Maidan didn’t give up during a very cold weather, despite of using water cannons, sniper bullets and other weapons by state authorities. Moreover, the quantity of riot police “Berkut” representatives and “titushek” (dressed criminals) was much larger than the average number of people on Maidan. In contrast, using of the military force against peaceful protesters has led to a dramatic increase in their quantity. After that their number has grown to hundreds of thousands of protesters and the protests spread throughout Ukraine. The victims of the wrath of protesters were monuments to Lenin (who personified the totalitarian Soviet regime) in all cities of Ukraine. Vanguard of the revolutionary struggle included mostly young people, whose level of patriotism and national consciousness during the revolutionary struggle had increased significantly. Average support of Maidan was 60 % (Western Regions – 90 %, South-East – 30 %) of Ukrainian citizens.

The main peculiarity of the protest movement was the institutionalization of direct (street) democracy. The main center of the protests was Maidan in Kiev, where the representatives of different regions of Ukraine arranged encampment. By means of self-organization they created a strict and disciplined system of civil organization. As well as in peaceful periods of time during the periods of assaults on security forces The Council of the Maidan was functioning there as well as the system of technical support of communication, platform for protesters (and also for the guests, artists, etc.) performances, system of public order, self-defense against attack security forces, points of heating and food preparing,  medical care, legal assistance, open university. People of all ages, mostly middle-aged and young people were among participants. There were primarily workers and people with higher and secondary education. They managed to take vacation from their regular job and replace each other on duty, to provide volunteer work in almost all possible areas of Maidan functioning. People, who supported the protesters in all regions and cities, gathered and sent them warm clothes, medicines, food, money and took to the local streets with posters and political slogans, demonstrating their solidarity and support. Leaders of the opposition parties cooperated with Maidan, but definitely did not lead it. Members of Parliament from the opposition parties – “Batkivshchina,” “Udar” “Svoboda” and individual deputies spoke to Maidan activists, reported on the work of Parliament, cooperated with activists concerning various issues of Maidan functioning, coordinated preparation of political decisions pre-approved by The Council of Maidan for consideration in the Parliament.

The result of the revolutionary stage of the period of November 22, 2013 and before March 21, 2014 was the victory of the Ukrainian citizens against the morally bankrupt government and accumulation of huge moral capital of the revolution. At the same time the biggest result was the formation of Ukrainian political nation.

It should be mentioned that dismissal of M. Azarov’s government, V. Yanukovich’s withdrawal from the presidential duties, returning to the Constitution of 2004, which established parliamentary-presidential republic, releasing of political prisoners (for example famous Y. Timoshenko), cancellation of “Dragon laws”, forming temporal people’s government, appointment and preparation for presidential elections in May 2014, signing the political volume of EU-Ukraine Association Agreement is a rather long list of the results of Ukrainian citizens’ four months struggle for their rights to lead a safe and prosperous life in the independent and sovereign country.

Unfortunately, too high social price was paid with the lives of about 100 dead (“Nebesna Sotnya”). That’s why there are very high social expectations and critical evaluation to the newly appointed Ukrainian government. This conversion of moral and ethical social capital of the Revolution into gradual moral improvement and “recovering” of society, restoration of confidence towards each other, to the new government, to the state and the laws, the emergence of self-organization, solidarity, the common definition of principles and rules, regulations for the separation of powers, national resources, responsible attitude of political leaders to the elections and transparent and public monitoring of their authority should be the consolidation of the results obtained.

The legitimacy gained by the people of Ukraine in late 2013 and early 2014 years and victory over the corrupted and morally bankrupt authority was possible because of the active role of the deputies from the opposition parties of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. At the same time, when the new parliament was formed, some deputies from the Party of Regions left it and joined the other political unions. All this helped to introduce and support by voting the democratic reforms, determined to the peaceful development. Some deputies, who perceived victory of the Revolution in a bad way (nearly 100 people of total 450 membership of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine) left the country. Communistic fraction except for its leader P. Simonenko still participate in the work of Verkhovna Rada, but do not vote on the most key issues.

The former President of Ukraine V. Yanukovych, who has left the territory of Ukraine was withdrawn from the duties of the President, through the media shows his disagreement with the decisions of the Supreme Council and refusal to recognize them as legitimate. His appeal to the Russian President V. Putin with a request to protect the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine from “banderivtsi” was the pretext for the Crimea occupation and implementation of Putin’s administration their aggressive plans. V. Yanukovych, who was declared wanted by the results of the allegations made ​​by him in relation to the massacre of peaceful demonstrators, no more has the influence on current events in Ukraine. Further so-called referendum in Crimea on March 16, 2014 and the annexation of Crimea to Russia has shown complete disregard of national and international laws and was another manifestation of the moral default. It should be also mentioned that international arbitration institutions play the important role in determining the legitimacy of current political changes in Ukraine. The recognition of international organizations – the UN, PACE, OSCE and Venice Commission and state officials of other countries of the legitimacy of accepted political decisions of current Ukrainian authorities confirmed the pattern of democratic development of Ukrainian society. We highlight the fact that the territorial integrity of Ukraine became the symbolic indicator of the maturity of the political nation, of the true meaning of national values and made people reconsider the relations between each other and politicians by defining “who is who”.

By the content and nature of the political events of late 2013 – early 2014 it can be roughly defined as the revolutionary national liberation.

First of all, these processes were revolutionary because there was a change of criminal clan political power with pseudo / neo-totalitarian political regime to the national patriotic political power and democratic political regime. Essential element to the consolidation of Ukrainian victory of this time, unlike during the previous experience, should be too high social price of this victory and citizens’ awareness of their own role in consolidating gains through self-organization, the functioning of real democratic institutions, organization of authority and control over the activities of the new government. It is important to recall that the Orange Revolution of 2004 did not have a revolutionary character within the meaning of the future evolution of social system. Members of the Orange Maidan, having received a temporary victory, further provided a political leader V. Yushchenko with a great trust in democratic change. This led to the actual return of the same model of political power and of the same rent-seeking oligarchic political elite in the person of V. Yanukovych. In fact, converting conquered Ukrainian victory in the credibility of political leader, who had not proved his loyalty to voters, is also a manifestation of moral default.

Secondly, these processes were the nation building because there was a rapid formation of Ukrainian political nation in the fight for their constitutional rights and freedoms as well as territorial integrity. Outside threat to the territorial integrity of Ukraine from the Russian government was a powerful factor in consolidating solidarity and unity of the Ukrainian nation.

The original dream of Ukrainians to have their own state, to be rulers of their own land was tested by periodic loss and recovery due to the liberation struggle of the independent state as the condition for welfare and decent life of the nation. State is a force that gathers people together. State is an institutionally implemented condition of people living together based on common law, morality and traditions. Very important is the requirement of political justice (internal national distribution of power), which is the prerequisite for social progress and follows the most democratic political regime. And the most important role in developing guidelines, rules, procedures and rituals of separation of powers is precisely taken by the political nation.

As a historical phenomenon nation is a socio-cultural, economic, political and communicative unity of the people, providing them civilized life within the global community. Nation creates a viable society and the state, guaranteeing its security and vital interests. In modern world the nation serves as a carrier of the main objective (national idea) of society development in general. A nation does not become a geopolitical reality, subject and object of international relations and law as long as it does not form a nation-state as the legitimacy of its right to self-determination and the organization of society.

To determine the role of moral default as a catalyst for the political nation formation in Ukraine during the revolutionary events of 2013-2014, it is advisable to analyze some historical stages of Ukrainian political nation development.

Remembering truthful pages of the past is one of the conditions of political nation formation and the example of social synergy (common statement examples of interaction between government and society). It is also a critical step of the past “processing” that is “historization” of the past as a tool to modernize present.

The term “historization” comes from the French scientist P. Bourdieu and means “to historize” as to put in historical perspective. In fact, this is requirement to apply critical method for the awareness and understanding of the past. It is about the importance of the establishment of historical memory in Ukraine, declassification of the archival materials of 1932-1933 Holodomor and the role of awareness of historical facts by Ukrainian citizens. For example, the interpretation of the forced collectivization to hide the political repressions or the usage of Bandera (“banderivtsi”) image to justify separatism and destabilize society.

Among Ukrainian and foreign scientists, who analyze the role of memory in the life on the society we can mention: P. Bourdieu, M. Edelman, H. Welzer, S. Lurie, P. Ricœur, H. Kenigh, M. Heidegger, S. Freud, R. Schneider, K. Naumann, P. Nord, T. Adorno, A. Etkind, M. Ferretti, S. Averintsev, G. Diligentskiy, E. Fromm, Y. Levada, L. Gudkov, S. Romanenko, B. Dubin, S. Glebova [1].

For example, B. Dubin puts the main emphasis at the fact that: “…ineradicable past that demands “clearing-off” will impose itself to the present. Probably that’s why perceptions of the past can sign here the structure of some medical symptom. History includes mostly what happened as a fact, but what wasn’t solved as a problem and that’s why it continuously repeats” [2].

The success of political nation forming in modern Ukraine depends on the citizenship of the individual, the individualization of civil society, manifested in organizational and ideological models of Maidan. Democratic citizenship – is the willingness and ability of a person to perform active citizen participation in public affairs and the state based on a thorough understanding of rights and responsibilities, including the critical rethinking of the nation’s past and the responsibility for it to ourselves and to others [3].

It should be noted that the criterion of citizenship of the individual as part of a political nation considered: the ratio of personal values with common civic values ​​of society, which manifests itself in the assertion of their words and deeds in their own way of life, human rights; effective attitude towards civic values ​​when implementing them in practice in difficult times; respectful attitude to the study of history, traditions and language of the state; interest in the social, political, economic and cultural life, the desire to work for the country and inside its borders; the degree of personal and meaningful aims with civil purposes; the degree of civic responsibility, identifying ourselves with the other citizens of the country; characteristics of beliefs about themselves and about their country.

According to the degree of manifestation defined criteria in each personality, the level of civic self-defining can be high, medium and low. Also in accordance of how the rights and freedoms of the individual are protected by the state, the ratio of the individual interests and the interests of the state, there are different models of civic identity: destructive (from Soviet totalitarian regime, when the person served to the state), transition (the period of Ukrainian independence and proclaimed democratization from 1991 to 2004 years) and the rational model (the period of independence from 2004 to the present, the period of social capital formation as well as developing of civil society and political nation).

Pedagogical and ethnological aspects of citizenship were explored by P. Ignatenko, V. Popluzhnyy, N. Kosarev, L. Krytska, psychological and pedagogical were researched by M. Boryshevskyy, O. Sukhomlinsky, I. Tysyachnik, K. Chorna, and political and psychological – M. Ivanov and others. But the understanding of the citizenship formation, the analysis of the political nation creation in the “critical memory work” recess in the content of what was happening to the society in the past, including the rationalization of the historical experience of collectivization period 1932-1933, activities of S. Bandera, which wasn’t studied properly because of classifying archival materials or reticence.

The past becomes a place of society self-designing and the focus of the past updates the future. Recently, the author of the paper started working on the study of declassification of archival materials, involving students of the political sciences faculty to the analysis of these materials. Moreover, author’s series of speeches in Mykolayiv Oblast live radio broadcast called “Patriotic Page” made it possible to: 1) recognize the importance of researching the power of facts as an image of “the truth of the past” and its influence on the style of thinking of the young and older generations, and 2) make the assumption that the facts of the political decision of the majority of issues, including the question of the moral education of citizens, the issue of property rights in Ukraine, which are separated by time, confirm the following: the past becomes a place of society self-designing and the focus of the past updates the future.

Modern information and communication technological capabilities of controlling the past (“politics of memory”), enhance its imagery, and hence the social value of images. We, unfortunately, are not the best examples of the usage of such technologies during the election campaigns, particularly in the 2004 elections and the revolutionary events of 2013-2014 years and as a result – “Two of Ukraine” in electoral consciousness and “banderivtsi” in militaristic rhetoric.

Oblivion, which involves the disappearance of the past, can be an evidence of the “short” memory and unwillingness and inability of society to remember, and thus to understand their selves. “Those who cannot remember the past – as pointed M. Heidegger – doomed to first invent it.” Category “burdensome past” can become the object of political exploitation and become the weapon of political struggle. How T. Adorno determines “clear mind” dissected the curse of the past. Skip to critical records involves removal of taboos, prohibitions of traumatic past, public debates and intensification of political education. The first such experience was analyzed and researched in Germany. Germany has shown an example of the changing role of memory in legitimizing the political system, the inclusion of a normative foundation of the collective identity of dark past. It was one of the grounds of political consensus, within which there was a departure from the idea of ​​”special German path”, the Germans managed to integrate into the European world and stabilize the new German democracy [4].

The current political culture of Ukrainian society is characterized by a pronounced functional imbalance that leads to systemic imbalance. This is despite the fact that it is common – Ukrainians always had been a good land lords and had the ability to develop private farming, even at the cost of their life. Psychological effect of having their own farm, own property, to dispose of his good, to be conscious, independent were and now are the archetypal features of Ukrainian mentality. This clearly proved the literal content of the document from the declassified archive:






«3/Х 33 y.



On the collective crops of the Tarasivka village of Pervomaysk region (Currently Mykolayiv region, approx. authors) the citizen Didyk was detained and brought to a village council by the overseer, because she was steeling the grain. The Head of the Tarasivka village council – Mankovets Moisey Arhipovich, 38 years old, ordered to put her to the cellar, from which latter she tried to escape. Then by Mankovets order Didyk was dressed iron horse “pastern” which usually goes awry horses.

After some time, the dispossessed Didyk escaped and was arrested for the second time in 4 days in the collective farm corn.

The Head of the Tarasivka village council – Mankovets Moisey Arhipovich was prosecuted for violation of revolutionary legality.

Case completed and submitted to the People’s investigator for trial.

The results of the court will be announced later.

The Head of the Odessa police office / Tsertovych / [5]

Analyzing such documents, which in 1934 by order of the CPSU (B) were removed from the archive and kept, of course, in secret, we come to a conclusion that the fact of hiding the documents is a direct evidence of the totalitarian Bolshevik state crimes against its citizens. Manifestations of genocide can be proved by almost every page of these historical documents. “Black boards”, “ethnic cleansing”, “concentration”, “rozkulachennya”, “denunciation”, “grain procurement plan”, “GPO”, “competition”, “collectivization”, “farm”, “prodkram”, “typhus in an orphanage”, “incitement to rebellion”, “kulatski elements”, “independent farmers”, “do not make us slaves”, “have pity on the hungry children”, “terrorist group”, “kill sticks”, “Ukraine has not perished”, “village Piski. Bashtanka” – these keywords include declassified documents in Mykolayiv oblast archives [6].

Such evidences of subject-object state / individual relations, which were based on the “revolutionary legitimacy” and focused on repression (removing) by state not only bread but also dignity from its citizens. From 43 to 146 villages in the Mykolayiv region disappeared from the map as a result of the Holodomor of 1932-1933 years, and for many years these facts have not been documentary known. The only sources of evidence were memories of grandparents, then their children. It is not difficult to agree that they passed on to their children and grandchildren alienation of the state almost genetically. From the 100 students’ scientific papers in Petro Mohyla Mykolayiv State University in 2013 and its genealogical investigations 11 students indicated cases where their relatives were affected by the Holodomor of 1932-1933. Students who participated in the analysis of archival materials treated the task with particular diligence.

Radio listeners in the Mykolayiv region, mostly the elderly, after notification about declassified documents revealed extraordinary emotional impressions and started to call to the studio. In particular, someone couldn’t find the difference between the Holodomor events of 1921-1922, 1932-1933 and 1947; someone tried to blame Stalin’s disease as the cause of his actions. And there were also those who offered to provide documents from the family fund. This can explain the features of political culture with traumatic tags in the perception of the image of the state. So, of course, historization is a challenge of our time.

Flawed and inconsistent laws, human rights violations unfortunately let smart traders use such illegal means as “mole burrows” for taking of another’s property. After nearly a century the urgency of properly functioning research as an important element of interaction between economic and political systems is very high, especially due to the lack of effective model of organizational and regulatory framework of social and economic relations in modern Ukraine. Pre-election promises of almost all politicians in Ukraine since independence concerning promotion of the middle class formation (which is a sign of strengthening the institution of property) actually turned into declarations and, on the contrary, became the obstacles on the way of strengthening the middle class and caused deepening stratification, enrichment oligarchic stratum. Confirmation of specific facts that struck its cynicism became possible after winning of 2013-2014 years Revolution. Threatening spread of criminal cases acquired sharing land assets of the former collective and state farms, as well as laying the new owners of the land lease agreements for vested shares. At the same time, along with the traditional pattern of unlawful distribution and redistribution of land resources, the facts appeared concerning the covert purchase of land taken under the guise of registration under long-term lease on an irreversible transfer of ownership. Very dangerous are modern persistent tendencies to “shadow” buying a significant amount of agricultural land by natural and legal persons in Ukraine, including the orders of foreigners.

The proliferation of these facts has caused hidden social protest in society, reducing public trust in government, a moral crisis; the outflow of the working population abroad became part of the united social cause of explosion in November 2013. If we compare the old with the modern developments, in the opinion of the author, hidden and not analyzed facts with the absence of its conclusions made, have a negative projection on the present of our society as obstacles to democratic transformation. Declassification of archival documents is critical, rational “processing” of the past, which is associated with “historization” of the past and present and modernization undoubtedly contributes to the formation of rational civic identity in Ukraine as the basis of a political nation.

Since morality in a democratic society is one of the important dimensions of political life, morality is an integral component of the stability of the political system, a significant indicator of a society and its political consciousness, the formation of the Ukrainian political nation requires the formation of a common civic culture, which combines the traditional values ​​of the Ukrainian people with the values ​​of minorities in their modern civilized form.

The set of expressions of moral default – loss of trust to politicians, to the state, to national and international laws, to fraternal Russian people, traitors to the nation, all this played the role of catalyst of the Ukrainian political nation forming. In Ukraine the criminal power and the threat from external aggression proved to be a powerful catalyst for the consolidation of society. The remnants of post-totalitarian attitudes of consciousness rapidly vanished from former Soviet subjects, who rapidly transformed into citizens of a democratic European country. A survey conducted by the Ukrainian TV channel “1+1” March 9, 2014 gave an absolutely enchanting results: Ukraine’s entrance to the EU was supported by 77% of the citizens, NATO membership – 70%. Ukrainian reaction to moral default led to such results in accelerating the formation of political conscious nation, which in peaceful time would have taken years.

Saving the result of the revolutionary phase late 2013 – early 2014 years in Ukraine needs further actions:

–        Protection of the territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state;

–        Converting of the moral and ethical social capital of the Revolution into gradual moral improvement of society, restoring confidence in each other, the new government, the state, the laws;

–        Improvement of self-organization, solidarity, the common definition of principles, rules, regulations separation of powers, national resources;

–        On the wave of high social expectations, critical assessment of the performance of the newly appointed Ukrainian government, lustration and real fight against corruption;

–        The successful holding of presidential elections in Ukraine in due time May 25, 2014, voting for a wise, respected leader of the nation – “moral beacon”;

–        Signing the economic part of EU-Ukraine Association Agreement;

–        Accession to NATO;

–        Careful reform in areas of social development, adaptation to European and international standards, which are based on the respect of human rights and the preservation of national values;

–        The objective understanding of the historical experience of Ukraine with an awareness of catastrophic consequences uncompromising rivalry of political elites. Historical memory, to eliminate “blind spots” of the past.

Ukrainian political nation will be able to accept and implement innovative areas of development, to ensure the irreversibility of democratic choice, to focus energies and resources on social development, to produce highly contemporary culture in all its aspects. At the same time, to implement state-national identity of Ukraine, the State is required to provide the high level of political stability, open wide prospects for successful modernization.




1. Glebova I.. I.. Travmatycheskoe proshloe i natsyonalnaya politicheskaya kultura (Traumatic Past and the National Political Culture) // Politicheskaya Nauka: Issledovaniya polytycheskoy culturi: Sovremennoe sostoyanie: / RAN YNYON.Tsentr sotsyal.-ynform.yssled., Otd.polyt.nauky.; Ros.assots.polyt. nauki. Red. and comp. Malinova O., Glebova I. – Moscow: INION RAN 2006. – pp.114-140.

2. Dubin B. Konets veka (The End of the Century) // B. Dubin. Yntellektualnie gruppi i symvolycheskye formi: Ocherki Sociologii sovremennoy kulturi. – M., 2004. – p.156.

3. Yaroshenko V. Problema gromadyanskostі v umovah demokratichnoї transformatsії ukrayinskogo suspіlstva (The Citizenship Problem in Democratic Transformation Conditions of Ukrainian Society) // Naukovі pratsі. Naukovo-metodichniy-zhurnal.- T.69. – Vip.56. Polіtichnі nauki, Pravoznavstvo. – Mykolayiv: MDGU, 2007. – pp. 46-50.

4. Glebova I.. I.. Travmatycheskoe proshloe i natsyonalnaya politicheskaya kultura (Traumatic Past and the National Political Culture) // Politicheskaya Nauka: Issledovaniya polytycheskoy culturi: Sovremennoe sostoyanie: / RAN YNYON.Tsentr sotsyal.-ynform.yssled., Otd.polyt.nauky.; Ros.assots.polyt. nauki. Red. and comp. Malinova O., Glebova I. – Moscow: INION RAN 2006. – pp.114-140.

5. Materials of Nikolaev regional archive // Ф. 11, оп 1, д. 13, р. 60.

6. Materials of Nikolaev regional archive // Ф. 2000, оп 2, д. 24. – К.: 1996.  

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.