Дискурс Пи (Apr 2022)
Euromaidan Media Discourse: Debate about the Lessons
Abstract
Monograph review: Baysha, O.A. (2021). A Discursive Fracture of the Social Field: The Lessons of the Euromaidan. Moscow: HSE Publishing House This article is an analytical review of the monograph by the Russian political scientist Olga A. Baysha "A Discursive Fracture of the Social Field: The Lessons of the Euromaidan". The research subject of the monograph is the causes of the Ukrainian revolution and its social consequences after 2013. Drawing on the theories of E. Laclau, Ch. Mouffe, N. Carpentier, the author conducted a thorough discourse analysis of media sources. The constructivist approach made it possible to show how the meanings of concepts "Euromaidan" and "Servant of the people" were formed. The monograph describes how the socio-political conflict in Ukraine led to a violent solution to the problem of civilizational choice through antagonistic discourse. This is revealed by the examples of the political struggle on Independence Square (Maidan Nezalezhnosti), the beginning of the "anti-terrorist operation" in Donbass, the tragedy in Odessa's Trade Unions House on May 2, 2014. Antagonistic and agonal discourses are separated. If for the first type of discourse the category "other" means "enemy", then for the second one it is "opponent". The author also succeeded in showing that the Euromaidan revolution and the presidency of V. Zelensky are united by the colonial discourse. The aspiration of a part of the elites and society to the West led to the formation of discursive hegemony and a totalitarian closure of the meaning of the Ukrainian identity. This made it possible to designate the opponents of Euromaidan as enemies and use weapons against them. The advantages of the monograph include a large research base of media sources. The author's advice on finding a compromise in resolving the conflict in Ukraine might be considered important: to allow alternative discourses, to make the Ukrainian media discourse borders permeable. Among the shortcomings of the work, it should be noted the analysis of the sources of only one side of the conflict in Ukraine, as well as the ideological bias of the author.
Keywords
