Language to Kyiv

The Kiev Congress "Ukraine-Russia: Dialogue", organized by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the Russian Pen-Center and the Third Republic, ended.

“We felt heroes, going to Kyiv. We risk our business, financing, loyalty of government agencies and partners. We arrived, and the Ukrainians seem to be told: what have you arrived? Normal move, I like it. This is reality, otherwise we are too romantic about the Maidan. I was waiting for sweet embrace and glad that my expectations were not confirmed.”

"Ukrainians know more about us than we are about them. They know our politicians, oligarchs, journalists, writers, pop stars and high cultural figures. We began to be interested in their lives only after the Maidan."

So that we in Russia can tell the truth about the Ukrainian revolution, and not retell lives and agites, try to talk to us on equal terms

"The Moscow liberal intelligentsia has one unpleasant feature: condescending and firmly treat Ukrainians as younger brothers and believe that we all know about them. Here I saw an equally unpleasant line: the Ukrainian liberal intelligentsia believes that if the Russians do not understand, then there is nothing to talk about with them. I ask you, Ukrainian partners, make us learn more, answer you more, answer you. Our questions.

This is from the collective summing up of the Congress. It began with the detection of insoluble contradictions in the camp of journalists, they could not cope with emotions and quickly moved away from the initially declared topic of propaganda wars to mutual accusations of bias, and even propaganda - nationalism from the Ukrainian side and imperial chauvinism from the Russian. Colleagues from the "rain" (which, apparently, after the notorious story with a survey on the blockade of Leningrad, are prone to reinsurance), in particular, the definition of pro -Russian activists in eastern Ukraine: "Coloradas" was outraged. Like, this is an insult to the St. George ribbon. Alas, if colleagues from the rain saw pro-Russian activists with their own eyes in their twilight state of consciousness and feverish-aggressive behavior in the urban environment, they would understand that this is pro-Russian activists insult the St. George ribbon. Well, and I have already mentioned the main point of disagreement: is there a disconnection of the Russian channels a violation of the freedom of the media or is it the principle of the fight against propaganda as a weapon of mass destruction? Here, opinions were divided not on the principle of nationality of the participants in the discussion, but by the way they controlled their emotions and used professional knowledge.

We know little about each other, but we love to speculate about each other, Russians and Ukrainians. It seems to us that if you use the Russian language, then we can correctly describe reality. But this conceptual scheme no longer works. The last four months have changed the Russian language as a language of interethnic communication Ukraine - Russia. If you have not seen the Coloradus in its natural habitat, you cannot correctly evaluate the word. Our language, in addition to becoming an instrument of propaganda, fails us, not knowing how to describe reality.

The voice of a young civilian activist from Lugansk: liberal values and freedom, human rights should be higher than disputes about the language

It was completely incomprehensible to some why the Russian language as the second state could be the "threat of the state interests of Ukraine" (the topic of discussion was formulated). Like most Russian colleagues, it seemed to me that it would be a reasonable step for reconciling the east and western Ukraine: if the East Ukrainian Vandei seems to be the price of the issue of life in the country, why not make concessions? At the discussion, which I was offered to conduct together with the Ukrainian journalist Mikola Veresem, it turned out that some people (though in words) are ready to sacrifice the integrity of the country for the sake of preserving the language, some are afraid of its marginalization (and, consequently, the decline of educational and cultural national systems), and some genetically remembers the Russian language as the language of imperial depression. The most reasonable thing that sounded in this emotionally heated dispute is that the Ukrainian political nation is now being formed from below, this is a Ukrainian choice, therefore, the choice of language. It is necessary to form a new public contract, and then it will become clearer what role, for example, in the structures of civil control will play Ukrainian, which Russian. And finally, the voice of a young civilian activist from Lugansk: liberal values and freedom, human rights should be higher than disputes about the language.

All discussions Ukrainian colleagues from respect for guests led Russian

Interestingly, the last thesis was almost literally repeated on discussions among human rights activists and lawyers. Lawyers discussed the technique of future chandeliers (since without this step the country will not be cleansed of corruption and dependencies harmful to national interests), and human rights activists - political prisoners and migrants. And they very quickly agreed without wasting time on emotions: yes, human rights and lustration mechanics are the main thing. If you choose this subject optics, the language will cease to be a shaky soil of a bad understanding. On the contrary, it will become a field for cooperation between Ukraine and Russia.

The most indicative was noted by the poet Lev Rubinstein: all discussions Ukrainian colleagues from respect for guests led Russian. A synchronous translation was planned, but the translators were left without work.