In my opinion, nothing new has been happening in Ukrainian politics for some time now—roughly since 2002. Everything that followed was easily predictable, even obvious. The Maidan was the only exception (and a pleasant, positive one, certainly). After the Maidan, everything returned to the well-worn track. That Yushchenko would prove hopeless in terms of real change was obvious from the moment he appeared on the political scene in 1996. Tymoshenko’s destructive populism was evident from the moment she betrayed Palyvanych Lazarenko—indeed, from the moment this lady headed the “shadow cabinet” of the Hromada party.
Yet despite the obviousness of the “big picture,” political life still churned within it, and, as it should, it consisted of events. Something was happening; life was boiling, and its content could shift. Viktor Andriyovych went and dissolved the Rada in 2007. He could have chosen not to. But he did. In the “big picture” of general patterns, this changed almost nothing—the consequences of dissolution and non-dissolution would hardly differ—but still, there were chances for internal processes. Things might have turned out in such a way that something would have suddenly grown from this event, something about which this malevolent author could later say: “nothing new has been happening in Ukrainian politics since 2007.” Not since 2002, but since 2007 at least. Well, for instance, those who needed to could have insisted on compliance with the Constitution during the formation of a new majority after the early elections. Look, the “tushkas” might not have settled in so easily afterward…
Many such examples could be given. However, since Yanukovych’s enthronement, events have disappeared from political life. This is, of course, my personal opinion and even sensation. It’s like the ticking of a clock. You don’t mark every second; you mark those seconds when something happens, when something surprises you—and we are surprised by those things that could have not happened, or could have happened differently. In this sense, Ukraine is devoid of political events. Every day you expect new nastiness from the state, and you receive it in full. Tick-tock, nothing new. Tymoshenko was locked up in the slammer for political reasons. Not surprising. Lutsenko was given four years, and they even mocked him with “confiscation.” What did you expect. Privileged kids kill people with their cars. Self-evident. Police torture, maim, and kill. Normal, they’re cops. Every day new laws trample our freedom and human dignity. Well yes, how else would it be. Tick-tock.
Only recently did I understand why the feeling of absence of events is so complete. There is also another side to the process: the so-called society. In its normal and healthy form, it churns and bubbles with color, and politics is merely the foam on its surface. With us, however (and this is again a personal opinion), it is the same phenomenon, just in different scenery. Our society is still ready to fight over whether Bandera was a hero or not. And, generally, it is very interested in history and “historical justice.” The main enemy for us is Tabachnyk. For the same reason. So they closed the exhibition at Mohyla—it would seem, an issue resolved many years ago—you may not like this or that “daub,” but that’s not a reason to close exhibitions, and closing is called censorship. But no! A whole discussion flared up! Or some Svoboda member said something offensive to singer Haitana. An obvious thing—racism is racism—but no, dear Kapranov brothers write to us that there is no xenophobia in Ukraine, because, oh please. And so the Haitana case, it turns out, is beneficial to Ukraine’s enemies. That is, the issue is not violence as such, but who commits it. Congratulations, dear Kapranov brothers: Yanukovych is your president. That, it seems, is the point. All these years, “society” and “power” have been moving toward each other, and now they have finally met. And now, more than ever, it is obvious that this is simply a reflection in a mirror, two sides of the same coin, a Möbius strip, or any other similar analogy the reader will come up with. Society and power sing the same song, just their parts in the chorus are different. And, it seems, on some subconscious level, “society” is beginning to be horrified by its own reflection. But it still doesn’t understand what it is. Hence the hysteria, the despair, the screaming. A scream so loud it is already indistinguishable from silence.
Therefore, according to my (once again subjective) feelings, everything has stopped now. Around is silence, without meaning or content. The only question is whether there exist somewhere outside Facebook any people at all—some movement that would differ from the current power and its society in a substantive sense. Or perhaps one should hope that people will finally understand that “power” is an evil caricature of themselves. I don’t know. So far I see nothing. Rather, I see a complete stupor. The socially active still work for their party in the chorus. They seek for society a “common unifying goal.” They choose a Good Tsar for themselves. They think that people can be changed by politically adopted laws. They consider it legitimate to impose on adults how to live, what to love, and generally—what to do. But Viktor Fedorovych is already doing all this. You don’t like A. Why?