Two Non-Opposite Peoples

Aim. To conduct a social-philosophical study to identify the specifics of modern Ukraine and its people. This specificity is significantly determined by the special “history-fate” of Ukraine, the long decline of the former Kievan Rus – the break-down after the Mongol invasion, the state’s unrealization, the impossibility of collecting East Slavic lands and spiritual humiliation. Moscow naturally prevailed both as a state and as an Orthodox shrine.

Methodology. The method of hermeneutics and the method of philosophical analysis are used. To achieve the research aim, a number of works by famous Russian thinkers – F. M. Dostoevsky, I. A. Ilyin, N. A. Narochnitskaya and other authors are analyzed in accordance with the stated problem.

Results. The novelty of the research has been achieved, determined by a new vision through the identification of the causes of the failure of Ukrainian state-building projects: poor political understanding and doctrinaire (nationalist) myopia of the Ukrainian political elite; ignoring the centuries-old historical and ethnocultural unity of two “non-opposite” peoples; self-identification of the Ukrainian people based on the symbols of Ukrainian nationalism and Nazism and narrow-minded narcissism. Additionally, the destructive and divisive technologies of the West, the dubious “Ukrainian idea” (with a focus on the West) and irrationally scaled Ukrainian grievances were influenced. The result was the excessive anti-tolerance and Russophobia of a significant part of the Ukrainian people. In general, the process deserves the name of “Banderization” of the people, society and the state of Ukraine. It is shown that Dostoevsky’s thought about “errors of the heart”, about “an infected spirit sometimes even in the whole nation” is appropriate for understanding the Ukrainian processes of the late twentieth and early twenty–first centuries. It is shown that I. A. Ilyin’s term “supranationalism” is able to reconcile “non-opposing” peoples again, since it asserts both the homeland with national culture and the pricelessness of the spirit and culture of any other people – in the face of God. In conclusion, the hope is expressed for the gradual restoration of the fraternal union and the welfare of the East Slavic peoples.

Research implications. The study continues the Orthodox and national patriotic tradition of understanding two “non-opposite peoples” and countries – Ukraine and Russia. In modern conditions of confrontation with the collective West, this work contributes to the awareness of the national essence and mission of the two peoples, especially Ukrainian, and the strengthening of traditional values.

1. Ilyin, I. A. (1993). Collected Works. Vol. 2. Bk. 1. Moscow: Russkaya Kniga Publ. (in Russ.).

2. Narotchnitskaya, N. A. (2004). Russia and Russians in World History. Moscow: International. Relations Publ. (in Russ.).

3. Ilyin, I. A. (1993). Collected Works. Vol. 1. Moscow: Russkaya Kniga Publ. (in Russ.).

4. Brzezinski, Z. (2012). Strategic View: America and the Global Crisis. Moscow: Astrel Publ. (in Russ.).

5. Brzezinski, Z. (2017). The Grand Chessboard. Moscow: AST Publ. (in Russ.).

6. Alekhina, E. V. & Zalozhnykh, Yu. S. (2023). Modern Slavophiles: Assessment of the Special Military Operation as a Confrontation between the Ideologies of Sovereign Statehood and Ultra-Globalism. Part I. In: Contemporary Philosophical Research, 4, 36–46. DOI: 10.18384/2949-5148-2024-1-140-147 (in Russ.).

7. Nikonov, V. A. (2017). Leadership in Russian. Moscow: E Publ. (in Russ.).

8. Gritsak, Ya. (2000). Drawings of the History of Ukraine. Formation of the Modern Ukrainian Nation in the XIX–XX Centuries. Kyiv: Geneza Publ. (in Russ.).

9. Buyanov V. S. (2017). Foreign Policy Activities and International Security of Russia. Moscow: Delo Publ. (in Russ.).