The unnatural power of human society and technology has grown so great that it has, ironically, come full circle to become natural again, writes Timothy J. LeCain. Responding to Dipesh Chakrabarty’s “Four theses”, LeCain considers the resulting breach in what once seemed like an impregnable wall of separation between natural history and human history.
The urgency of global challenges such as climate change and the need for collective action might be expected to reduce the importance of identity politics and questions of difference. Yet it remains the case that there is no neutral conception of humanity for us all to belong to. Roshi Naidoo considers the options for fashioning new languages of solidarity.
A majority of almost two-thirds opposed the Association Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine in a referendum in the Netherlands on 6 April. As the public debate surrounding the referendum gained pace, the Ukrainian independent TV channel Hromadske became an important forum for associated discussion. Now that the results are in, Hromadske journalist Volodymyr Yermolenko assesses the implications for EU-Ukraine relations, and European politics in general.
It seems that, subsequent to the “hybrid war” between Ukraine and Russia, reconciliation efforts have ensued – but only at first glance. In fact, what we witness is a continuation of war by other means, writes Tatiana Zhurzhenko. Mapping the growing alienation between the two nations, she asks: under what conditions is dialogue possible?
Today, the Maidan revolution lives on in a wealth of documentary films about the events of 2013-14 in Ukraine. Yustyna Kravchuk compares and contrasts the approaches of the films’ creators, and the implications of these for the articulation of collective political desires.
The audit culture resulting from neoliberal policies has had a deleterious effect on all sectors of society, and no less so on the universities, says higher education expert Jon Nixon. Clearly, the logic of austerity constitutes an existential threat to the great humanistic traditions of scholarship.
Russia has adopted an open policy of dividing the European Union and undermining the security of its members, of which the Dutch referendum questioning the Association Agreement with Ukraine is simply a small part. So says Timothy Snyder in a succinct account of the background to the 6 April referendum.
Intervening in the UK referendum debate is fraught with difficulty for EU actors, writes Andrew Glencross. This is not least because they are largely deprived of their most common rhetorical device: appealing to a normative commitment to European unity for the sake of continental peace.
In a frank discussion with Kultura Liberalna’s managing editor, the post-Yugoslav writer Dubravka Ugresic considers the state of European values a quarter of a century after the fall of the Berlin Wall. A lack of serious public forums, says Ugresic, has resulted in a lack of democratic thought.
A borderless Europe may seem like a distant prospect at the moment. But as struggles for universal access to the global commons beyond the nation-state intensify, it is bound to become a necessity, say Ulrike Guérot and Robert Menasse.
On 6 April 2016 in the Netherlands, a referendum will be held on the Ukraine-European Union Association Agreement – the first since the enactment of the Dutch Advisory Referendum Act from 1 July 2015. More than 427,000 requests were received, significantly more than the 300,000 required. To be valid, a turnout of at least 30 per cent of eligible voters is required, of which a simple majority defines the result. The referendum’s outcome is not binding for the government, but if negative, will have a strong symbolic impact on the rest of the European Union, and further alienate Ukraine from Europe. Zaven Babloyan, a publisher and translator from Kharkiv (Ukraine), reflects on political misunderstandings, a lack of solidarity and literature as the last hope.
The unholy alliance of bureaucracy and race, among the most pernicious of imperial legacies, is very much alive today. So says Vlasta Jalusic, who urges proper political reflection on the implications of this for a world system in which both Africa and Europe are still marked by genocides of the none-too-distant past.
Even the mainstreams of democratic societies are vulnerable to destructive and dangerous sentiments in the midst of crisis, writes Jonathan Leader Maynard. But with radicalising calls to extremism at the forefront of public debate, what impact might speech have on violent behaviour?
Oleksandra Matviychuk of Kyiv’s Center for Civil Liberties was awarded the Democracy Defender Award in Vienna on 24 February 2016. The prize, awarded annually, is the initiative of 16 country delegations to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The following text is based on Matviychuk’s acceptance speech.
A critical analysis of nations and nationalism is as crucial now as it ever was, argues Bruno Schoch. But so long as it protects civil liberties and cultivates a constitutional patriotism, then a nation of free and equal citizens remains an ideal worth striving toward.
With president Petro Poroshenko and prime minister Arseniy Yatseniuk having lost their image as radical reformers of late, Iryna Solonenko says it is up to Ukraine’s new reform-minded actors in both government and civil society to secure a new social contract. However, the challenges they face are formidable, as the legacies of previous regimes persist and resistance to change among the old guard remains fierce.