Once our group submitted an application for a festival. As it turned out afterward, the festival was held only for Ukrainian-speaking groups, and there was simply no place for us there with our pseudo-English. Of course, they rejected our application.
Interestingly, it never even occurred to me to criticize the organizers. It’s their festival and their right to set requirements for participants. Moreover, I believe that this is how it should be in all spheres of life without exception, and only this order, called freedom, is capable of reducing most conflicts of our current life to nothing.
Now let’s take up the very same “state language.” After all, it is clear that the entire conflict, which has been going on for more than 20 years, is not about the “state language.” All this legislation is by no means requirements for the state and its officials—what language they should speak with people, what language they should write their laws in. No. This legislation defines how other people should behave. And this is exactly what causes the conflict.
I will not write anything about the conflict itself, its causes, and so on. I only want to say one thing—even though there are incantations that “the language problem is not important” and even that “it does not exist,” what is happening clearly shows that this is not the case. What is happening also shows that within the existing order, there is no solution to this problem. Right now, so to speak, the “Russian-speaking” have voted down the “Ukrainian-speaking.” Then, the “Ukrainian-speaking” will vote down the “Russian-speaking,” and then… 20 years is a long enough period to become convinced that the issue will not resolve itself “by itself.” But what can definitely be said is that intolerance will only increase. And as the experience of Belgium shows, “rising living standards of workers,” on which many rely as salvation, have no effect on this process whatsoever.
One can, of course, “solve the issue” by splitting the country into territories where supporters of one or another position will gain an absolute majority and, finally, be able to force the minority to behave as the majority wants. Perhaps everything is heading in that direction. But as I see it, this is a bad turn of events, since, as a result, violence will not decrease but increase.
Yes, and one more thing. Of course, I understand that language is only a pretext. The whole point is that this is a very workable pretext. In exactly the same way, various “forces” could play games based on language, territorial division, and other joys. I will not argue that “forces” are always up to something—this is their job. However, it is also absolutely true that if the problem does not exist, then the “forces” are powerless. And the problem exists—that is the trouble.
And the problem can only be solved by freedom. Freedom means that my property (including myself) is inviolable. No one can give me orders. But I also cannot give orders to anyone. No one can rob me. But I also cannot rob anyone. On my own property I set the rules myself, but I also bear responsibility for them. Let me remind you that the festival owner accepted only Ukrainian-speaking groups. Perhaps he lost part of his audience because of this. But it is his festival and his rules.
If this direction of movement is acknowledged, then the obvious consequences become clear. For example, you don’t like Tabachnyk rewriting history? But why don’t you think about what basis any politically appointed uncle has to determine what your past was like? In a free society this cannot happen. In it there simply cannot be “state” schools, universities, or “educational programs.” And if parents are responsible for their children, then they, not some uncle in Kyiv, should decide what and how to teach them.
In a free society, people pursue what they are willing to pay for—sacrificing their money, time, and other resources. The boundaries and responsibility here are completely clear. And if someone thinks that their compatriots should use a certain language, they will have to come up with a way to convince them of this. They will have to use their own resources, not someone else’s. In the end, they will have to become better than their competitors. And that means everyone who has any relation to this process will benefit from it. Well, naturally, there is simply no basis for conflict here.