Translated by Ollie Richardson & Angelina Siard
The Kiev journalist and editor of the “Kapital” Internet publication Vyacheslav Chechilo offered his version of a manual on the “correct” criticism of the Ukrainian reality, based on primary empirical research concerning the notions of limits of what is permissible and impermissible in post-Maidan Ukraine, reports the correspondent of “Politnavigator”.
The journalist published his “manual” on a social network. We provide his text in full:
“A short reminder about ‘how to criticize in the correct way’
Well, it’s kind of so that people don’t stop offering their hand for a handshake in a society that is decent for a capital city.
It is permissible to scold officials and politicians, but it is not permissible to offer a reminder about where they came from, and who brought them to power.
Respectively, it is permissible to criticize the consequences of Maidan, but not Maidan itself.
It is permissible to criticize certain people, but not ‘the people’. Even if at first they vote for Yanukovych, and then for Poroshenko.
It is permissible not to walk with the portrait of Bandera or Shukhevych, but it is impermissible to publicly doubt their outstanding role in the formation of the Ukrainian State.
It is permissible to post any fakes from patriotic websites, but it is impermissible to refer to Russian and ‘vatnik’ websites. Even if they write the truth.
It is permissible to discuss any projects concerning the exit of the country from crisis, including a supply of water from Mars. It is permissible even to deride them. But it is impermissible to propose the restoration of economic relations with the Russian Federation, and also to doubt the unconditional positive-for-the-country role of the EU Association.
It is permissible to scold Trump or Merkel, but it is impermissible to scold the US or the EU.
It is permissible to criticize activists and journalists who work for money. But it is impermissible to criticize those who work for grants.
In any conflict between ‘vatniks’ and ‘patriots’ it is permissible to say where the patriot isn’t right, but it is impermissible to say where the vatnik is right.
It is permissible to write in Russian, but it is impermissible to defend the Russian language.
It is even permissible to criticize the army. For example, for slow rates of offensive or an absence of fighting spirit. But only not for the facts of excessive cruelty towards civilians, shelling of cities, marauding, and so on.
It is permissible to scold the economic policy of the government, which fulfils the program of the IMF, but it is impermissible to scold the program of the IMF.
It is permissible not to like the posts of Shkiryak or Pashinsky. But it is impermissible to like the posts of ‘formers’, and also the posts of people who criticize the authorities, who don’t adhere to the aforementioned rules.
Did I forget anything?” wrote Vyacheslav Chechilo.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.