Whatever social topic is not seriously touched upon, they all turn out to be painful.
"Seriously" is when the issue is not considered from the point of view of propaganda. In propaganda, everything is colorful and beautiful, like in a children's kaleidoscope. It looks adorable, but it's really just a cardboard tube, cheap mirrors, and colorful glass junk.
To seriously touch on the topic is when the question is put in the context of interrelated phenomena and the time during which the problem arose and developed. In such conditions, exaltation dissipates. Then there is a choice between "nice", "useful" and "it would be better not to know".
Let's talk about collaboration, physical and spiritual cooperation with the occupiers. Let's see what is actually happening here.
Around 75 AD Joseph Flavius wrote in his native Aramaic (for some reason Google insists on correcting it in "Russian Language") the work "Jewish War", which describes the events of the Jewish revolt against Rome, in particular the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It is worth noting that the author of the work was not just an active participant and eyewitness of the described events. The ruler of Galilee, the military leader was defeated by the Roman army due to internal strife among the Jews and his own strategic miscalculations in defense.
After that, he became a true collaborator, as we would say now (although his contemporary Justus of Tiberias also thought so, calling him a provocateur), a translator for the commander of the Roman army, Vespasian. His advice helped Vespasian to later become the emperor of Rome.
The main reasons why Joseph Flavius decided to side with the Romans, in his own words, are as follows:
- Flavius claimed to have received signs from God that indicated that the Romans were destined to punish the Jews for their sins.
- After the defeat in Galilee, he realized the strength of the Roman army and sought to save his life by offering services to Vespasian.
- He believed that his role as a former influential high official was important to the occupied Jewish community and hoped to help his compatriots by mediating between them and the Romans.
That is, here we see a fairly standard set of self-justifications of collaborators, a kind of "Stockholm syndrome". Ideological sharp change of point of view and position to the opposite as shifting responsibility to higher forces to increase self-esteem.
This is followed by desertion, Voluntary abandonment of a military unit (VAMU) as a dominant manifestation of the instinct of self-preservation.
Here there is a contradiction between dominants: what is important, instinct or higher forces? But for this type of collaborator, schizoid behavior is normative.
And finally (turning the bridge over to our time) the topic of "fraternal peoples", "what a difference", "look into the eyes..." emerges, a set of populist clichés designed to avoid responsibility before the court that history has to deal with violators.
After all, if you choose them correctly, then the court of history can also be completely corrupted.
Here is the time to separate effective conscious collaboration, which implies strict criminal liability (I would like to, but there was no justice here, and there will never be), and loyalty to the ideology and actions of the occupier, which does not necessarily imply initiative in facilitating their actions.
Detailing the levels of responsibility and procedures for prosecution is a matter for lawyers and the concept of so-called transitional justice.
Let me briefly mention that the absolute majority of Europeans under Nazi occupation differed only in their levels of loyalty to the occupier. And after the defeat of the Third Reich, Europeans rushed ahead to write out political and personal "confirmations" for their participation in national resistance movements. In addition, all Europeans began to make documents that would justify the Nazis who worked for them. Therefore, such lynching organizations as the Jewish " Nakam" ("Revenge").
Modern political mythology in its popular version labels the residents of eastern Ukraine as supporters of the Russian regime and those who do not take active decisions and simply wait, hoping that a way out of the difficult situation will be found by itself and everything will somehow resolve itself and be fine. This stigma dates back to 2014 and has a deep history of decades of successful Russian information and propaganda operations in this territory.
A conscious pro-Ukrainian minority left this territory a long time ago. And, as far as I'm concerned, the fiercest Ukrainian nationalist (not on Facebook, but with a weapon in hand) is an easterner who is angry with the people of the Russian Federation. We could talk about their language of communication here, but they kill the monster silently.
Now let's talk about migration dynamics and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). Millions of people left their homes, and the political geography of the time of the Anti-Terrorist Operation in the East of Ukraine (ATO) lost its meaning. But it still remains in the mass consciousness, like the light of an extinguished star.
Instead, a more dynamic Ukrainian element successfully infiltrated the main cities and towns of western and central Ukraine, not to mention the city of Kyiv. It is worth noting that the anti-Ukrainian element has also spread throughout our country.
That is, people with a hidden (or not so) pro-Russian orientation are fairly evenly distributed across Ukraine. This fact is periodically reported to us by the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU), informing about the detention of arsonists of military cars recruited through the Telegram messenger. Perhaps one day we will learn about the real number and quality of all the detained agents who took part in various unpleasant incidents, and it will surprise us very much if we live to see it.
Now we are shown elderly women from the city of Vuhledar, who meet the occupiers and shout to them: " How much we were waiting for you and wanted you to come to us! How tired we are of these bastards with whom we live together!". And we immediately have a demographic cliché, a stereotype in our heads.
Young people aged 19-30, born and raised in independent Ukraine, who are completely indifferent to the official ideology, and who at the same time are so stupid as to fall for the promise of easy money from the Russians from the Telegram messenger, do not fit into this stereotype. After all, all that modern youth sees around them is that the one who has more money always wins.
Especially among those who continue to tell everyone about the importance of Ukrainian values, while they themselves have been stealing as much as possible for two generations.
Some of them are Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), some are local residents. There is no direct correlation with the place of birth. Their parents are probably the kind of people described below.
There is also such an interesting Russian-speaking segment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), who say that they support both Ukraine and the Russian Federation. And the war was unleashed by Putin and reptiloids, who are allegedly humanoid reptilian, and because of this there is no water in the tap and the entire infrastructure is not working well. People's homes were destroyed, they themselves were injured, but based on their opinion, the Russian Federation is not involved in anything bad in this situation.
In order for the reality of the scale and demographics of collaboration to fit into the light of the head of social network activists, one must first recognize the thirty-year ineffectiveness and disorganization of the official cultural policy, the lack of dynamics and the frank sabotage of the national ideology in the field of secondary and higher education.
In fact, everything effective that has happened in this area is the merit of civil society. With all the losses of cultural amateurism and the virtues of self-sacrifice.
In the existential question "Why do people loyal to the Russian Federation grow from the same roots?" there is a systemic error, and therefore it goes into the category of "eternal questions".
But if we accept the obvious fact that one of us is only a "field", that is, a territory, and in one way or another, we also have a common constitutional order, then it becomes clear that anything with the most diverse roots can grow in a field, especially if it is neglected.
The basic matrix of social formation is the family and the rhetoric of its members and their point of view. It is these ideas and the corresponding actions of adults that form behavior patterns. Next comes secondary socialization, a circle of communication that is equally repulsed by family settings. In those regions where there is a hereditary transmission of national values from generation to generation, no hostile propaganda will be effective.
An exception to this structure are the descendants of the occupiers of the previous Russian invasion, the children of collaborators of the previous communist regime, who organically fit into the current one.
Now about the modern segmentation of sentiments among the people. There will be no numbers and links – perhaps they will appear only after victory. The most loyal to the Ukrainian ideology in the occupied territories is the population of Crimea, of course, with the exception of those residents who recently moved there and have a different point of view. There, the effect of "enlightenment" among former supporters of the "native harbor" is quite significant. The territories occupied with the beginning of the full-scale war in Ukraine clearly revealed the disgusting behavior of the teachers and officials who live there. Some of them radically changed their point of view twice already, held referendums in the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine, then they repented to the Ukrainian people for this act, and then they repented to the Russians. The rural and urban population has become silent and dumbfounded, because the most important thing for them now is to survive physically.
In the territories that were captured by the Russian Federation in 2014, an exclusively pro-Russian orientation is being created. Perhaps there are some underground movements and dissidents of the spirit, but the third year of uniform informational pressure causes irreversible changes in the structure of behavioral patterns. Children there generally grow up supporters of the Russian Federation. This is not some big and unexpected news, it is only worth mentioning the history of janissary, because these situations are quite similar to each other.
My heretical hypothesis is that during the ten years of the war, in general, significantly more people who sympathize and have a favorable attitude towards the Russian Federation moved to the territory of independent Ukraine than remained in the occupied territories.
The arguments for this are as follows.
First, we greatly underestimate the number of high-level agents that the Russian Federation has brought to very serious positions in the Ukrainian establishment over several decades. Anyone who is interested in the history of intelligence knows that this has happened in many countries much more powerful and stable than ours.
By the word "we" in this case, I understand the incompetent but very emotional public opinion. However, the work is being carried out, even without the expected public arrests and sentences. In such a situation, it is better to do it late than never.
Secondly, the presumption of innocence tells us that until the court has recognized a person as a criminal, there can be no claims against such a person. And, accordingly, she can say almost anything, because we have freedom of speech and democracy. If you feel sorry for this place, look at the sabbath of Russian propaganda in the European Union, which we are trying to join.
Thirdly, the electoral weight of the votes of various supporters of the Russian regime is quite significant, because "what difference" is whose vote, and the elections will be held anyway. Therefore, politicians will gently kiss them in all socially sensitive places, so as not to accidentally lose their electoral advantage. It may not help them in any way, but that is a completely different story.
Fourthly, the Ukrainian cultural product is competitive only in the segment of those people who do not need to be convinced of anything anyway. It is possible to add the phrase "... and strategic communications" to each Association of co-owners of an apartment building, speak in a learned English-speaking manner and mention the word "narrative" in every sentence, but a political pornhub will always be more interesting.
Why do people who are not closely related to their lineage, ancestors and national identity, as they said earlier, more easily accept the behavior patterns and ideological attitudes of the occupiers?
Psychologist Philip Zimbardo made several important conclusions after the Stanford Prison Experiment (1971).
- Influence of the social context. Ordinary people can show aggression and cruelty when they are placed in a situation with a hierarchy of power, where they occupy both a subordinate and a dominant position.
- Identification with roles. The sense of one's own real power, which is given or promised by the strong party, provides an opportunity to make others powerless in order to increase self-esteem. Evil frightens and fascinates at the same time.
Another psychologist, Stenli Milhrem, famous for his obedience experiment (1962), emphasized that ordinary people can obey cruel orders if they receive them from authority figures. He believed that in any town you could find people willing to become concentration camp guards, because social pressure and authority could drive them to violent behavior.
The war is defragmenting Ukrainian society. Now it is difficult to say for sure how and according to what standards it will be reorganized. But one thing is indisputable that the previous settings according to which society functioned and was formed will no longer exist.
And the realization of the request for justice will dominate, since trust in the strength of the Ukrainian legislative system, to put it mildly, is not too great. Here is bad news for collaborators, because the level of social tolerance has decreased to a critical minimum.
The good news is that superficial social settings, or some unhealthy patterns in society, are quite easy to change if at least one of two factors is present: the expectation of reward and the fear of punishment. The priority of the award in Ukrainian society is quite questionable, but the fear of punishment is a very real motive.
If we start to fear now, it is possible to enter the stage of post-traumatic growth with a small number of losses. And this is the most humane thing that can be offered to them.