In: Ukrai͏̈nsʹkyj sociolohičnyj žurnal: naukove ta informacijne vydannja, Heft 23
ISSN: 2079-1771
The article summarizes the research data of the discourse on Muslims in the Ukrainian media in terms of determining their inclusive potential. Based on the theoretical concepts of social inclusion, othering, social distance and discourse, the concepts of «inclusive discourse» and «inclusive potential of discourse» are conceptualized. The latter is understood as a characteristic of the influence of a certain discourse about a social group on the possibility and conditions of social interaction with this group. Considering the results of quantitative and qualitative analysis of the array of Ukrainian media publications about Muslims, the article presents the meanings of the nodal sign «Muslim» that influence social interaction with this group: extraterritoriality, exoticism, violence, disasters, accidents. An analysis of the headlines points to social distancing from Muslims through such discoursive mechanisms as «presenting the group as homogeneous» and «denying subjectivity». The five discourses of Muslims in the Ukrainian media identified in the previous stages of the study are characterized in terms of their inclusive potential. The main indicator of inclusiveness is the convergence of «we-they» discourses, what is embodied in the similarity of the chains of equivalence and the logic of difference between «we» and «they» discourses. With the usage of this tool, it has been proven that the discourses «Muslim-the hero of Ukraine» and «Muslim-protester» have inclusive potential in Ukrainian society, while «Muslim-terrorist» and «Muslim-victim» do not have such potential. In addition, the «Muslim-believer» discourse also is characterized has some inclusive potential.
The article is devoted to the study of the biggest challenges, threats and dangers for modern Ukrainianness. The issue of challenges, threats and dangers facing Ukraine and Ukrainianness since 1991 is very relevant today. Scientists who work in the field of crisisology distinguish the concepts of «challenges», «threats», «dangers», «crises», «risks», «catastrophes», «collapse», «wreck», etc. The theoretical and methodological basis of our study is a combination of scientific potential of crisisology, conflictology and Ukrainian studies. Crisisology, conflictology and Ukrainian studies face the task of transdisciplinary understanding of the essence and severity of these challenges, threats and dangers, which are relevant in many areas such as military-defense, geopolitical, demographic, state-building, spiritual worldview, ecological, economics, energy, information, cultural and artistic, linguistic, moral and ethical, scientific, nation-building, educational, political and legal, social, territorial, technological, financial, etc. To these are added threats and dangers: 1) large-scale war with Russia; 2) total spread of COVID-19 in Ukraine; 3) the implementation of a new geostrategic course in Russia (called «geopolitical revenge»); 4) spreading the ideology of the «Russian world», intensifying new attempts by the Russian Federation to dismember Ukraine, supporting separatization and federalization of Ukraine; 5) possible escalation of the Russian-Ukrainian and Armenian-Azerbaijani conflicts, which could lead to a new global confrontation and even a world war; 6) ineffective fight against corruption in Ukraine; 7) the lack of a proper response from the authorities to the need to immediately end Russia's information and psychological war against Ukraine; 8) destruction of small and medium business and further financial and economic stratification of Ukrainian society; 9) procrastination with the solution of the poverty problem (in conditions when about 60% of Ukrainians are below the poverty line); 10) possible man-made disasters in Ukraine; 11) possible transformation of Ukraine from a subject into an object of international relations; 12) possible rejection of European integration; 13) discrediting the Orange Revolution and the Revolution of Dignity, in order to spread Russian narratives about the coup in Ukraine; 14) intensification of interfaith conflicts in Ukraine; 15) inadequate decision-making by incompetent authorities (threat of economic decline and large-scale financial crisis in Ukraine, possible change in Ukraine's vector of development, threat of capitulation, refusal of the authorities to resolve the «Ukrainian crisis» (which began after Russia's aggression and has become a factor influencing the security of Europe and the world) from the standpoint of Ukraine as a subject, not an object); 16) refusal to solve the problems of internally displaced persons; 17) possible «freezing» of the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict in order to further destabilize Ukraine; 18) strengthening of geopolitical and geoeconomic instability, intensification of intercivilizational and geopolitical confrontation in the world; 19) possible decline of democracy and rise of authoritarianism in Ukraine; 20) expansion of the border with Russia (in case of its absorption of Belarus); 21) possible disintegration of Ukrainian society and world Ukrainiannes; 22) further violation of international law by the Russian Federation; 23) exacerbation of the economic and migration crisis in Europe; 24) radicalization of part of the Islamic world; 25) due to the collapse of the USSR. The challenges, threats and dangers facing Ukrainians can unfold at the global, continental and national levels. Ukrainians must find adequate answers to modern challenges and mechanisms to minimize threats and dangers; ensure stable economic growth; to create a powerful system of national security, army and defense-industrial complex; find ways to ensure national interests in the current crisis; to develop optimal models for resolving the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict, reintegrating the population of the occupied territories and restoring the territorial integrity of Ukraine.