From the discussion of public philosophers “src =” https://techumble.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/How-the-historical-past-becomes-an-ideological-present-From-the.jpg “alt =” How the historical past becomes an ideological present. From the discussion of public philosophers “width =” 100% “/>
How the historical past becomes an ideological present. From the discussion of public philosophers
Can modern historians control the influence of propaganda and government interference?
The conversation on historic memory (which took place remotely and was broadcast on Ukrinform), which was launched by the Estonian International Defense and Security Center (ICDS) as part of the Resilient Ukraine program, was at both interesting and meaningful.
Estonia is almost the only one of the former post-Soviet republics that has managed to overcome the historic challenge and the test of “victory”. Recall that in 2007, after riots and protests, this country managed to transfer the burial site of the Soviet army and the monument to the Soviet soldier in the city district to a military cemetery. This was accompanied by massive clashes of supporters of Soviet historiography and Estonian national patriots. It is interesting to note that seven years after the annexation of Crimea, the Estonian newspapers made the headlines saying that they were right when they moved the monument, because the descendants of the “winners” still have expansion plans for the former territories.
“How does the historical past become an ideological present?” – such was the name of the event, which was pronounced by the professor of the Ukrainian Catholic University Yaroslav Gritsak, the director of the Institute of the national memory of Ukraine Anton Drobovich, the political commentator Deutsche Welle Konstantin Eggert and the President of the Department of Public Relations and Cooperation of the Institute of Historical Memory of Estonia Sergey Metlev.
We give the most interesting ideas and recipes of the participants to the discussions, for convenience, breaking them down into key points.
1. IS THE GENERAL NARATHY OF EASTERN EUROPE AND RUSSIA POSSIBLE?
From the discussion of public philosophers “src =” https://nbnews.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/24417eff8494c213d18a029ad1d0f92a.jpg “alt =” How the historical past becomes an ideological present. From the discussion of public philosophers “width =” 100% “/>
Yaroslav Hrytsak, doctor of historical sciences, professor at the Ukrainian Catholic University:
– A general narrative is not possible. For there to be a common narrative, there must be a common story. In any community, the story (even in the same area) can be different. Ukraine, for example, has cultural, regional and linguistic diversity; it is difficult for him to build a common narrative. My colleague has written a book on the memory of border areas. According to his observations, in the Belgorod region (region of the Russian Federation, bordering the Kharkiv region, – ed.), there is only one type of monument, in Kharkov there are different monuments – from Bandera to Zhukov. There is only one memory except in Lviv. The Carpathian Museum is indicative: there is a room for the SS “Galicia” division, a UPA room and the Kolpak room – and all three are nearby. This is the state of Ukrainian memory. Each government wants to unite and no one succeeds. Fortunately. We have a democracy from memory by default. It is objectively such. Especially when countries as different as the Baltic States, Poland, Ukraine, Russia.
According to the materials: ukrinform.ru