Image of an “Enemy” as a Factor of Constructing the Ukrainian National Identity

Keywords: national identity, national strategy, image of an “enemy”, “We” / “Others”/ “They”, conflict

Abstract

The article shows that contrary to the fact that constructing the image of an “Enemy” for a long time has been remaining an inseparable element of the strategy of forming a national identity, yet it should be regarded as a rudiment of the national policy of the modern period, since then homogeneous national identity was the only way to gain political independence of a conscious proper cultural cutoff of the community. Meanwhile, in today’s conditions, the formation of a homogeneous national identity is a conflict strategy that can lead to a social split and fragmentation of the state borders. Given this, strategies that are aimed at ensuring a high level of citizens’ loyalty to the political state institutions on the basis of “constitutional”, “territorial”, “regional” and other patriotism seem more fruitful. Under conditions of implementing such a strategy and rational cultural policy aimed at developing a system of super-ethnic values that will be shared by the majority of the population of a certain state, it is possible to overcome the world-view split and save the national identity.

Author Biographies

Nataliia Kryvda, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Ukrainian Philosophy and Culture of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Svitlana Storozhuk, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine

Doctor of Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Philosophy of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine

References

Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1995), “The Social Construction of Reality. A treatise on the sociology of knowledge” [“Sotsialnoe konstruirovanie realnosti. Traktat po sotsiologii znaniya”], Medium, Moscow, 323 pp. [inRussian]

Brubaker, R. (2012), Ethnicity without groups [Etnichnost bez grupp], Higher School of Economics, Moscow, 408 p. [in Russian]

Durkheim, E. (1990), On the division of social labor. The method of sociology [O razdelenii obschestvennogo truda. Metod sotsiologii], Science, Moscow, 575 p. [in Russian]

Dzyuba, I. M (1998), “Internationalism or Russification?” [“Internatsionalizm chy rusyfikatsiia?”], KM Academia Publishing House, Kyiv, 276 p., viewed 21 January 2020, available at: http://litopys.org.ua/idzuba/dz.htm [in Ukrainian]

Ethnic groups and social boundaries. Social Organization of Cultural Differences Collection of articles [Etnicheskie gruppyi i sotsialnyie granitsyi. Sotsialnaya organizatsiya kulturnyih razlichiy Sbornik statey], (2006) / Ed. F. Bart, New Publishing House, Moscow, 200 p. [in Russian]

Gellner, E. (2003), “Nations and Nationalism; Nationalism” [“Natsii ta natsionalizm; Natsionalizm”], Taxon, Kiev, 300 pp., viewed 21 January 2020, available at: http://litopys.org.ua/gellner/gel04.htm [in Ukrainian]

Gibernau, M. (2012), The Identity of Nations [Identychnist natsii], Tempora, Kyiv, 303 p. [in Ukrainian]

Gritsay, E. & Nikolko, M. (2009), Ukraine: national identity in the mirror of the Other [Ukraina : natsionalnaya identichnost v zerkale Drugogo], European Humanities University, Vilnius, 220 p. [in Russian]

Habermas, J. (2002), “European National State: its achievements and limits. About the past and future of sovereignty and citizenship” [“Evropeyskoe natsionalnoe gosudarstvo: ego dostizheniya i predelyi. O proshlom i buduschem suvereniteta i grazhdanstva”], Nations and nationalism, Praxis, Moscow, pp. 364-380. [in Russian]

Haidt, J. (2015), “The top 10 reasons American politics are so broken”, viewed 21 January 2020, available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/01/07/the-top-10-reasons-american-politicsare-worse-than-ever/?utm_term=.1726c3c50170

Hegel, G. V F. (2000), Phenomenology of the Spirit [Fenomenologiya duha], Science, Moscow, 495 p. [in Russian]

Hnatyuk, O. (2005), Farewell to Empire: Ukrainian Discussions on Identity [Proshchannia z imperiieiu: Ukrainski dyskusii pro identychnist], Criticism, Kiev, 528 p. [in Ukrainian]
Hrabovych, G. (1997), “Towards a History of Ukrainian Literature. Research, essay, controversy” [“Do istorii ukrainskoi literatury. Doslidzhennia, ese, polemika”], Fundamentals, Kiev, 604 s., viewed 21 January 2020, available at: http://litopys.org.ua/hrabo/hr06.htm [in Ukrainian]

Hrushevsky, M. (1991), Who are Ukrainians and what they want [Khto taki ukraintsi i choho vony khochut], Knowledge, Kyiv, 240 p. [in Ukrainian]

Hrytsak, Y. (2011), Passions for nationalism. An old story in a new way [Strasti za natsionalizmom. Stara istoriia na novyi lad], Criticism, Kyiv, 176 p. [in Ukrainian]

Kasyanov, G. (2007), “Ukraine-1990: “battles for history” “[“Ukraina-1990: “boi za istoriyu””], viewed 21 January 2020, available at: http://magazines.russ.ru/nlo/2007/83/ka8.html [in Russian]

Koser, L. (2000), The functions of social conflict [Funktsii sotsialnogo konflikta], Idea Press, Moscow, 208 p. [in Russian]

Kostomarov, M. (1847), “Books of being of the Ukrainian people” [“Knyhy buttia ukrainskoho narodu”], viewed 21 January 2020, available at: http://litopys.org.ua/rizne/kmt02.htm [in Ukrainian]

Kostomarov, N. (1861), “Two Russian nationalities” [“Dve russkie narodnosti”], Osnova, SPb., No. 3, pр. 33-80 [in Russian]

Kravchenko, V. (2011), “The enslavement of history: Soviet Ukraine in contemporary historiography” [“Ponevolennia istoriieiu: radianska Ukraina v suchasnii istoriohrafii”], Ukraine, the Empire, Russia. Selected articles on modern history and historiography, Criticism, Kiev, pр. 455-528. [in Ukrainian]

Kryvda, N. (2017), “Ukrainian identity as a worldview construct” [“Ukrainska identychnist yak svitohliadnyi konstrukt”], Scientific Journal of NULES of Ukraine. Series: Liberal Arts, Iss. 274, pp. 109-124 [in Ukrainian]

Lysyak-Rudnitsky, I. (1994), “Soviet Ukraine from a Historical Perspective” [“Radianska Ukraina z istorychnoi perspektyvy”], Lisyak-Rudnitsky I. Historical Essays: in 2 vols: vol. 2, Osnovy, Kiev, No. 2, pp. 457-469 [in Ukrainian]

Nowicka, E. (1990), “Swojskość i obcość jako kategorie socjologicznej analizy”, Sxvoi i obcy; E. Nowicka (red.). Instytut Socjologii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa, s. 5-53.

Smith, А. (2004), Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Review of the Theories of Modern Nations and Nationalism [Natsionalizm i modernizm: Kriticheskiy obzor teoriy sovremennyih natsiy i natsionalizma], Praxis, Moscow, 464 p. [in Russian]

Stepyko, M. (2017), “Contemporary Ruthenia: An Ethnopolitical Project or the Crisis of Ukrainian National Identity” [“Suchasne rusynstvo: etnopolitychnyi proekt chy kryza ukrainskoi natsionalnoi identychnosti”], Strategic priorities. Series: Politics, No. 1, pp. 39-46. [in Ukrainian]

Storozhuk, S.& Goian, І. (2016), “The ethnic hrinciple as the basis of civil politics”, Cherkasy University Bulletin: Philosophy, No.11/13, рp. 31-36.

Yaсk, B. (2017), Nationalism and the moral psychology of the community [Natsionalizm i moralnaya psihologiya soobschestvay], Publishing House of the Gaidar Institute, Moscow, 520 p.
Published
2020-11-30
How to Cite
Kryvda, N., & Storozhuk, S. (2020). Image of an “Enemy” as a Factor of Constructing the Ukrainian National Identity. IDEAS. PHILOSOPHICAL JOURNAL. SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC ISSUES, (1(15)-2(16), 57-66. https://doi.org/10.34017/1313-9703-2020-1(15)-2(16)-57-66