Human Rights Crisis in Ukraine: Uprising in Flames
Andrea Chalupa is a writer, journalist, and producer in New York. She is the author of the 2012 eBook Orwell and the Refugees.
Andrea helped launch online video for Condé Nast Portfolio and AOL Money & Finance. She reported on-camera for these outlets, covering the 2008 presidential conventions, the Sundance Film Festival, and Ford Motor Company's Scientific Research Laboratory. For the Huffington Post, Andrea writes on business, entertainment, and politics. Interviewing C.E.O.s and business leaders, Andrea's stories skew towards the offbeat, such as the popular "C.E.O.s Who Go to Burning Man" and "Bette Midler on Creating Green Jobs."
As an online video host and producer, Andrea's on-camera interviews include discussing the blogosphere vs. the mainstream media with Arianna Huffington, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brezinksi of Morning Joe, and Bob Schieffer of CBS News. After graduating from the University of California at Davis with high honors in History, Andrea worked as a community organizer in the 2004 presidential election, wrote for the Portland Mercury in Portland, Oregon, attended the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, and lived in Kyiv, Ukraine where she auditioned to be a national news anchor for 5 Kanal, started a Doors-inspired band, and oversaw the translation of her grandfather's Soviet memoir about growing up under Stalin and his years as a tortured political prisoner in a secret NKVD prison.
Violence broke out in the streets of Kyiv, Ukraine today between pro-democracy protesters and riot police. At least nine people have been killed and hundreds more seriously injured, including journalists for Reuters and the AP. The fighting turned central Kyiv into a fiery war zone as black smoke continues to billow up from the city.
The protests began late November after Ukraine's president Viktor Yanukovych suddenly changed his mind about signing an agreement that would align his country with the EU and its anti-corruption requirements. Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe, according to Transparency International, a watchdog-dog organization. Benefiting from a weak opposition, Yanukovych was elected democratically in 2010, but after taking office he repeatedly changed the constitution to consolidate his power. His abuses range from privatizing national park land for his own use to his son, a former dentist, being worth an estimated $500 million. To further turn his back on the West, Yanukovych in December accepted a $15 billion lifeline from Russia, a country with an abysmal human rights record and a history of committing genocide against Ukrainians, which I wrote about for TIME.
In reaction to Yanukovych's warm embrace of Russia, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians demonstrated in Kyiv's Independence Square for weeks demanding closer ties with the EU. Since then, with the repeated use of violence on protesters by riot police, the demonstrations have been calling for him to resign. In January, Yanukovych illegally passed sweeping anti-democracy laws which included criminalizing unauthorized demonstrations, freedom of speech, investigative journalism, and wearing helmets--a necessity for protesters given the violence inflicted by police.
As I've written about before for Big Think, Ukrainians are fighting to live in a stable democracy--something you and I in the West take for granted. The courage of Ukrainians in the face of yet another government crackdown, this one the most violent to date, underscores that determination. From The New York Times:
The push into Independence Square by anti-riot forces spread chaos and fire across the protest zone, with tents ablaze as police advanced through clouds of smoke and tear-gas. The 20,000 or so protesters sang the national anthem against the din of percussion grenades, fireworks and what, on occasion, sounded like gunfire.
A phalanx of riot police officers, backed by a water cannon, pushed through protesters’ barricades near the Ukraina Hotel and fired tear gas as they advanced toward the center of the square. People covered in blood staggered to a medical center set up in the protest encampment.
In the late evening, a group of several hundred riot police officers finally overpowered protesters at the barricades near the Khreshatyk Hotel and, banging their shields, began to move towards the center of the protester’s encampment on Independence Square. Another phalanx that had earlier penetrated the area, pushing down Instituts’ka Street past the Ukraina Hotel, was stalled by a wall of flaming rubber tires.
With visibility sharply reduced to just a few yards by thick clouds of acrid smoke, it was often difficult to determine who was firing what at whom. Music blared from a stage set up by protesters who, although boxed in all sides, showed little sign of dispersing.
Image Credit: EspressoTV livestream
Swiss researchers identify new dangers of modern cocaine.
- Cocaine cut with anti-worming adulterant levamisole may cause brain damage.
- Levamisole can thin out the prefrontal cortex and affect cognitive skills.
- Government health programs should encourage testing of cocaine for purity.
A study on flies may hold the key to future addiction treatments.
- A new study suggests that drinking alcohol can affect how memories are stored away as good or bad.
- This may have drastic implications for how addiction is caused and how people recall intoxication.
- The findings may one day lead to a new form of treatment for those suffering from addiction.
Political division is nothing new. Throughout American history there have been numerous flare ups in which the political arena was more than just tense but incideniary. In a letter addressed to William Hamilton in 1800, Thomas Jefferson once lamented about how an emotional fervor had swept over the populace in regards to a certain political issue at the time. It disturbed him greatly to see how these political issues seemed to seep into every area of life and even affect people's interpersonal relationships. At one point in the letter he states:
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend."
Today, we Americans find ourselves in a similar situation, with our political environment even more splintered due to a number of factors. The advent of mass digital media, siloed identity-driven political groups, and a societal lack of understanding of basic discursive fundamentals all contribute to the problem.
Civil discourse has fallen to an all time low.
The question that the American populace needs to ask itself now is: how do we fix it?
Discursive fundamentals need to be taught to preserve free expression
In a 2017 Free Speech and Tolerance Survey by Cato, it was found that 71% of Americans believe that political correctness had silenced important discussions necessary to our society. Many have pointed to draconian university policies regarding political correctness as a contributing factor to this phenomenon.
It's a great irony that, colleges, once true bastions of free-speech, counterculture and progressiveness, have now devolved into reactionary tribal politics.
Many years ago, one could count on the fact that universities would be the first places where you could espouse and debate any controversial idea without consequence. The decline of staple subjects that deal with the wisdom of the ancients, historical reference points, and civic discourse could be to blame for this exaggerated partisanship boiling on campuses.
Young people seeking an education are given a disservice when fed biased ideology, even if such ideology is presented with the best of intentions. Politics are but one small sliver for society and the human condition at large. Universities would do well to instead teach the principles of healthy discourse and engagement across the ideological spectrum.
The fundamentals of logic, debate and the rich artistic heritage of western civilization need to be the central focus of an education. They help to create a well-rounded citizen that can deal with controversial political issues.
It has been found that in the abstract, college students generally support and endorse the first amendment, but there's a catch when it comes to actually practicing it. This was explored in a Gallup survey titled: Free Expression on Campus: What college students think about First amendment issues.
In their findings the authors state:
"The vast majority say free speech is important to democracy and favor an open learning environment that promotes the airing of a wide variety of ideas. However, the actions of some students in recent years — from milder actions such as claiming to be threatened by messages written in chalk promoting Trump's candidacy to the most extreme acts of engaging in violence
to stop attempted speeches — raise issues of just how committed college students are to
upholding First Amendment ideals.
Most college students do not condone more aggressive actions to squelch speech, like
violence and shouting down speakers, although there are some who do. However, students
do support many policies or actions that place limits on speech, including free speech zones,
speech codes and campus prohibitions on hate speech, suggesting that their commitment
to free speech has limits. As one example, barely a majority think handing out literature on
controversial issues is "always acceptable."
With this in mind, the problems seen on college campuses are also being seen on a whole through other pockets of society and regular everyday civic discourse. Look no further than the dreaded and cliche prospect of political discussion at Thanksgiving dinner.
Talking politics at Thanksgiving dinner
As a result of this increased tribalization of views, it's becoming increasingly more difficult to engage in polite conversation with people possessing opposing viewpoints. The authors of a recent Hidden Tribes study broke down the political "tribes" in which many find themselves in:
- Progressive Activists: younger, highly engaged, secular, cosmopolitan, angry.
- Traditional Liberals: older, retired, open to compromise, rational, cautious.
- Passive Liberals: unhappy, insecure, distrustful, disillusioned.
- Politically Disengaged: young, low income, distrustful, detached, patriotic, conspiratorial
- Moderates: engaged, civic-minded, middle-of-the-road, pessimistic, Protestant.
- Traditional Conservatives: religious, middle class, patriotic, moralistic.
- Devoted Conservatives: white, retired, highly engaged, uncompromising,
Understanding these different viewpoints and the hidden tribes we may belong to will be essential in having conversations with those we disagree with. This might just come to a head when it's Thanksgiving and you have a mix of many different personalities, ages, and viewpoints.
It's interesting to note the authors found that:
"Tribe membership shows strong reliability in predicting views across different political topics."
You'll find that depending on what group you identify with, that nearly 100 percent of the time you'll believe in the same way the rest of your group constituents do.
Here are some statistics on differing viewpoints according to political party:
- 51% of staunch liberals say it's "morally acceptable" to punch Nazis.
- 53% of Republicans favor stripping U.S. citizenship from people who burn the American flag.
- 51% of Democrats support a law that requires Americans use transgender people's preferred gender pronouns.
- 65% of Republicans say NFL players should be fired if they refuse to stand for the anthem.
- 58% of Democrats say employers should punish employees for offensive Facebook posts.
- 47% of Republicans favor bans on building new mosques.
Understanding the fact that tribal membership indicates what you believe, can help you return to the fundamentals for proper political engagement
Here are some guidelines for civic discourse that might come in handy:
- Avoid logical fallacies. Essentially at the core, a logical fallacy is anything that detracts from the debate and seeks to attack the person rather than the idea and stray from the topic at hand.
- Practice inclusion and listen to who you're speaking to.
- Have the idea that there is nothing out of bounds for inquiry or conversation once you get down to an even stronger or new perspective of whatever you were discussing.
- Keep in mind the maxim of : Do not listen with the intent to reply. But with the intent to understand.
- We're not trying to proselytize nor shout others down with our rhetoric, but come to understand one another again.
- If we're tied too closely to some in-group we no longer become an individual but a clone of someone else's ideology.
Civic discourse in the divisive age
Debate and civic discourse is inherently messy. Add into the mix an ignorance of history, rabid politicization and debased political discourse, you can see that it will be very difficult in mending this discursive staple of a functional civilization.
There is still hope that this great divide can be mended, because it has to be. The Hidden Tribes authors at one point state:
"In the era of social media and partisan news outlets, America's differences have become
dangerously tribal, fueled by a culture of outrage and taking offense. For the combatants,
the other side can no longer be tolerated, and no price is too high to defeat them.
These tensions are poisoning personal relationships, consuming our politics and
putting our democracy in peril.
Once a country has become tribalized, debates about contested issues from
immigration and trade to economic management, climate change and national security,
become shaped by larger tribal identities. Policy debate gives way to tribal conflicts.
Polarization and tribalism are self-reinforcing and will likely continue to accelerate.
The work of rebuilding our fragmented society needs to start now. It extends from
re-connecting people across the lines of division in local communities all the way to
building a renewed sense of national identity: a bigger story of us."
We need to start teaching people how to approach subjects from less of an emotional or baseless educational bias or identity, especially in the event that the subject matter could be construed to be controversial or uncomfortable.
This will be the beginning of a new era of understanding, inclusion and the defeat of regressive philosophies that threaten the core of our nation and civilization.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.