Hatred during the war: a sociological aspect

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Mariupol State University Kyiv

Hatred during the war: a sociological aspect

S. Kataiev

doctor of sociology, professor head of the sociology social work department

Classic Private University, Zaporizhzhia

Ya. Zoska

doctor of sociology, professor chair professor of the philosophy and sociology department

Катаєв С. Л., Зоська Я. В. Почуття ненависті під час війни: соціологічний аспект

Метою дослідження є аналіз ресентименту в теоретичному та конкретно-історичному аспектах сучасної російсько-української війни.

Методологія дослідження. Методами дослідження є теоретичний аналіз та синтез, соціологічна концептуалізація феномену ненависті під час війни.

Результати. Результатом дослідження є узагальнення з позицій соціології почуття ненависті під час війни. У статті проаналізовано почуття ненависті до ворога під час війни.

Ненависть у соціологічному дискурсі розглядають як складову ресентименту в межах трактування цього явища в творчості Макса Шелера. Стверджують, що ненависть до ворога-загарбника, який намагається знищити країну, є виявом високої моральності й додатковим мотивом до опору. Ненависть загарбника та агресора - це вияв аморальності, низького духовного рівня. Ресентимент - це самоотруєння душі. Преса поширює ресентимент для посилення психологічної складової війни. Ненависть іррадіює на всі сторони відносин. Усе, що репрезентує ненависного суб'єкта: одяг, мова, і що завгодно, якщо воно співвідноситися із цим суб'єктом, викликає також ненависть.

Ресентиментний тип шукає у всьому причини для агресії. Помста й ненависть призводять до того, що знецінюються буття та світ. І ненависть викликається не властивостями об'єкта, а самим запереченням і знеціненням буття й сутністю об'єкта відносин.

Під впливом ресентименту формується деструктивна позиція. Тобто при ресентименті примирення неможливе. Сам факт існування супротивника викликає бажання знищити його.

У росіян радикально помилкова картина світу, яку вони не бажають змінювати, а маніакально прагнуть слідувати їй. Їх дії перебувають під впливом помилкового визначення ситуації, яке реально за своїми згубними наслідками.

Новизна. Здійснено аналіз ресентименту в теоретичному та конкретно-історичному аспектах сучасної російсько-української війни.

Практичне значення дослідження полягає у використанні сформульованих положень для розробки концепції ідеолого-політичної складової війни Росії проти України.

Ключові слова: війна, Україна, Росія, ненависть, ресентимент, Макс Шелер, соціальне безумство.

Kataiev S., Zoska J. Poczucie nienawisci podczas wojny - aspekt socjologiczny

Celem badania jest analiza resentymentu w teoretycznym oraz w konkretnym historycznym aspektach wspofczesnej rosyjsko-ukrainskiej wojny.

Metodologia badania. Metodami badania sq: analiza teoretyczna oraz synteza, socjologiczna konceptualizacja fenomenu nienawisci podczas wojny.

Wyniki. Wynikiem badania jest uogolnienie pod kqtem socjologii poczucia nienawisci podczas wojny. W niniejszym artykule zostafo przeanalizowane poczucie nienawisci do wroga podczas wojny.

Nienawisc w dyskursie socjologicznym jest rozpatrywana jako czqsc resentymentu w ramach interpretacji tego zjawiska w tworczosci Maxa Schelera. Twierdzq, ze nienawisc do wroga-najezdzcy, ktory probuje zniszczyc kraj, jest przejawem wysokiej moralnosci oraz dodatkowym motywem do oporu. Nienawisc najezdzcy i agresora jest przejawem niemoralnosci, niskiego poziomu duchowego. Resentyment jest samozatruciem duszy. Prasa szerzy resentyment w celu powiqkszenia psychologicznego elementu wojny. Nienawisc rozpowszechnia siq na wszystkie strony relacji. Wszystko, co jest reprezentowane przez nienawistny podmiot, jak na przykfad: odziez, jqzyk lub cokolwiek, co jest zwiqzane z tym podmiotem, rowniez powoduje nienawisc.

Resentymentalny typ we wszystkim szuka powodu do agresji. Zemsta i nienawisc prowadzq do dewaluacji egzystencji i swiata. Nienawisc nie wynika z wtasciwosci przedmiotu, tylko wynika z samego zaprzeczenia i dewaluacji bytu oraz istotq przedmiotu relacji.

Pod wptywem resentymentu ksztaftuje siq pozycja destrukcyjna. Czyli w stanie resentymentu zawarcie pokoju nie jest mozliwe. Sam fakt istnienia wroga powoduje chqc do jego zniszczenia.

Rosjanie majq radykalnie btqdny obraz swiata, ktorego nie chcq zmienic, wrqcz przeciwnie maniakalnie pragnq go nasladowac. Ich dziatania znajdujq siq pod wpfywem fatszywego zdefiniowania sytuacji, ktore jest realnym w swoich szkodliwych konsekwencjach.

Nowosc. Przeprowadzono analizq resentymentu w teoretycznym oraz w konkretnym historycznym aspektach wspotczesnej rosyjsko-ukrainskiej wojny.

Praktyczne znaczenie badania polega na wykorzystaniu sformutowanych postanowien do opracowania koncepcji ideologicznego i politycznego komponentu wojny Rosji z Ukrainq.

Stowa kluczowe: wojna, Ukraina, Rosja, nienawisc, resentyment, Max Scheler, szalenstwo spoteczne.

The purpose of the study is to analyze the ressentiment in the theoretical and specific historical aspects of the modern Russian-Ukrainian war.

Research methodology. The methods of the study are theoretical analysis and synthesis, sociological conceptualization of the phenomenon of hatred during the war.

Results. The result of the study is a generalization from the standpoint of sociology of hatred during the war. The article analyzes hatred towards the enemy during the war.

In sociological discourse, hatred is considered a component of ressentiment in the context of Max Scheler's interpretation of this phenomenon. It is commonly believed that hatred towards the invading enemy, who is trying to destroy the country, is a manifestation of high morality and an additional motive for resistance. Hatred from the invader and aggressor is a manifestation of immorality and a low spiritual level. Ressentiment is self-poisoning of the soul. The press spreads ressentiment to strengthen the psychological component of war. Hatred irradiates all sides of the relationship. Everything that represents the hatred subject (clothes, speech, and anything else that is associated with this subject) also causes hatred.

The ressentiment type looks for reasons for aggression in everything. Revenge and hatred lead to the devaluation of existence and the world. What is more, hatred is not caused by the object's properties but by the very negation and devaluation of existence and the essence of the relationship's object.

Under the influence of ressentiment, a destructive position is formed. That is, reconciliation is impossible when there is ressentiment. The very fact of the enemy's existence causes a desire to destroy them.

Russians have a radically erroneous picture of the world, which they do not want to change but are maniacally eager to follow. Their actions are influenced by an erroneous definition of the situation, which is realistic in its disastrous consequences. hatred war sociological

Novelty. The article analyzes the ressentiment in the theoretical and specific historical aspects of the modern Russian-Ukrainian war.

The practical significance of the study is in the use of the formulated provisions to develop a concept of the ideological and political component of Russia's war against Ukraine.

Key words: war, Ukraine, Russia, hatred, ressentiment, Max Scheler, social madness.

Introduction

Hatred can be moral or immoral. Hatred towards an invading enemy who is trying to destroy the country is a manifestation of high morality and an additional motive for resistance. Hatred from the invader and aggressor is a manifestation of immorality and a low spiritual level.

In general terms, without a specific historical context, hatred in sociological discourse is considered a component of ressentiment in the works of the German sociologist M. Scheler [9]. Hatred between peoples looks like social madness.

This article refers to the sociology of war, which has been developing especially actively in recent years due to the war. The collective monograph of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, «Ukrainian Society in the Context of War» [5], is the most substantial contribution to sociological science. This area of research in Ukrainian sociology is represented by a number of authors, and the most active among them are M. Trebin, H. Kysla, S. Khobta and others. In particular, S. Khobta considers that the methodological perspective of the world-system approach, taking into account geopolitical aspects, is the most fruitful for understanding the war and military conflict in Ukraine [6]. At the same time, M. Trebin is convinced that the actualization of war sociology in Ukraine is due to the need for scientific analysis of qualitatively new trends in armed struggle, causes and consequences of military activities [4]. H. Kysla considers methodological approaches to the study of the war phenomenon in Ukraine [2]. An extensive analysis of sociology of war was carried out by I. Rushchenko [3]. There are a number of sources that provide an overview of problems in the sociology of war in the international field [8; 10].

Research objective and methods

The objective of the study is to analyze the ressentiment in the theoretical and specific historical aspects of the current Russian-Ukrainian war.

The study uses theoretical analysis and synthesis, sociological conceptualization of the hatred phenomenon during the war.

Results

Ressentiment is a feeling of hatred towards someone whom the subject considers an enemy, the cause of their failures. It is powerless envy, a feeling of weakness or inferiority. This leads to the formation of a value system that negates the «enemy» value system. The subject creates the image of the «enemy» to get rid of the feeling of guilt for their own failures.

The ressentiment concept was first introduced by F. Nietzsche in his «On the Genealogy of Morals» [7] work. According to the philosopher, ressentiment is a defining characteristic of the slaves' morality, which is opposed to the masters' morality. Ressentiment is a more complex concept than envy or hostility. The ressentiment phenomenon is the sublimation of the inferiority feeling into a special system of morality.

According to M. Scheler, ressentiment is primarily driven by impulses of revenge, hatred, anger, envy, hostility, and treachery. Let us consider in more detail the ressentiment concept according to M. Scheler [9].

The desire for revenge by itself is only material for ressentiment. Revenge is included in the process of ressentiment only if the subject to whom it is directed remains unrevenged. In this case, revenge is accompanied by a feeling of dissatisfaction with the impossibility of committing an act of revenge for one reason or another, and this is accompanied by an understanding of one's own powerlessness. Max Scheler notes that conditions for the emergence of ressentiment exist only where the special power of these affects goes hand in hand with the feeling of powerlessness from the inability to transform them into actions due to physical or spiritual weakness, due to fear and trepidation towards the person at whom the affects are directed. Along with the realization of one's own powerlessness, one of the main conditions for ressentiment formation is an attitude of value-based comparing oneself with other people. Such a value-based comparison usually turns out to be not in favor of the comparator, and as a result, it is saturated with envy, hatred, jealousy, etc. In combination with the realization of powerlessness, this comparison gives rise to specific «value-based illusions of ressentiment,» which consist in the belittling of the valuable qualities of the comparison object or the falsification of the values themselves. The result is the devaluation of the other person. The feeling of revenge is formed on the basis of pridefulness that does not correspond to the external status. Overcompensation is implemented for insufficient social recognition. The gap between the claim to dignity and the actual low status is important. Politics, of course, provides a particularly wide field for the release of ressentiment emotions. A politician takes out their emotions through public swearing. Ressentiment irritation increases with offers to resolve the situation. Under the influence of ressentiment, a destructive position is formed. That is, reconciliation is impossible when there is ressentiment. The very fact of the enemy's existence causes a desire to destroy them.

Ressentiment is self-poisoning of the soul. The press spreads ressentiment to strengthen the psychological component of war. Hatred irradiates all sides of a relationship. Everything that represents the hatred subject (clothes, speech, and anything else that is associated with this subject) also causes hatred.

The ressentiment type looks for reasons for aggression in everything. Revenge and hatred lead to the devaluation of existence and the world. What is more, hatred is not caused by the properties of the object but by the very negation and devaluation of existence and the essence of the relationship object.

Ressentiment can be seen as a manifestation of social madness. However, in the case of Russians, it is the madness of destroying everything human; in the case of Ukraine, it is quite another matter, it is the madness of heroes who have challenged an enemy that is much stronger.

The phenomenon of social madness is discussed in detail by Ukrainian sociologists N. Panina and Ye. Holovakha in their «Social Madness» book [1].

One of the manifestations of social madness is war. War is the cumulative effect of other manifestations of social madness. Now we understand that war is a natural consequence and the main manifestation of social madness.

When describing a particular society, psychiatric terms act as metaphors or allegories that reflect and explain attitudes towards that society.

In military propaganda, there are considerable mutual or mirror accusations. It is a very common opinion that people are brainwashed. Where is the criterion for who is right? The criterion is international public opinion, which acts as a kind of arbitrator whose picture of the world is adequate. There is a competition between two pictures of the world, two competing definitions of the situation. What are the origins, the reasons for the social madness of Russians?

Russians have a radically erroneous picture of the world, which they do not want to change but are maniacally eager to follow. Their actions are influenced by an erroneous definition of the situation, which is realistic in its disastrous consequences. Russia is infected to the core with a false consciousness. Therefore, only force can change the situation. Russians have nothing, in their opinion, to repent of. This is a fundamental difference from the situation with false consciousness that existed after the Second World War, after the fall of the Stalin dictatorship.

Mass situational disorientation in Russia is also caused by specific social conditions. It is enough to create conditions of impunity, and a crowd of maniacs and sadists will rush to smash up houses, kill, and rape.

The pathology of the Russian mentality lies in the delusional idea of the superiority of the Russian world. This creates a number of social madness determinants. The erroneous ideology of the greatness of the Russian world - an erroneous picture of the world - then an erroneous social consciousness - it, in turn, causes an erroneous definition of the situation. This, in turn, leads to a moral of ressentiment towards Ukraine, i.e., aggression, hatred, and revenge. Revenge for betrayal, for the rejection of the Russian world. There is an attempt to destroy a renegade who has moved to someone else's camp. Russians have the misconception that Ukrainians are fraternal people who have betrayed Russians.

The total violation of international relations by Russia is madness. For the modern world, such a violation is impossible and must be punished.

Russia is waging the war according to the logic of the Middle Ages, but with the means of a modern and digital society. Tanks and other weapons from the Second World War are of the modern era, and drones and missiles are weapons of the digital age. But the mentality of Russians is archaic, medieval. For a modern person, this mentality looks like complete madness.

In the «Social Madness» book, this phenomenon is considered for internal social life; war transfers psychopathology to external relations regarding the enemy.

The madness of war is manifested in the extreme degree of dehumanization and cruelty towards civilians. This pathology is a consequence of the decline and regression of social consciousness. There is a primitivization of it, a transition to the level of tribal consciousness. This is certainly a pathology for a civilized person. War in traditional and early modern societies is aimed at capturing territory and destroying the enemy.

The war of the digital society is a struggle to defend humanistic values, human rights, and a decent existence.

For Russia, the technological, digital component of society is not immanent, but artificially borrowed. Therefore, the public consciousness does not correspond to the digital society. Russia has shown itself to be a primitive society armed with modern weapons.

Russians' fight against «the Banderites» (members of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists; the term derives from the name of Stepan Bandera, head of this faction) became ugly and irrational. After all, Russian soldiers were looking for «the Banderites» in Bucha, where they could not have been anywhere near. While ordinary, uneducated soldiers were unaware of this, the command knew what and where was happening in Ukraine. The factor of fighting «the Banderites» in this war has become cynical, frankly erroneous, and manipulative nature. The Russian media created an image of Ukrainians in the eyes of Russians as absolute evil that must be destroyed. If you do bad things to a bad person, it is good. Propaganda did everything to form the image of a Ukrainian as a bad person in order to break the bonds of morality among Russians towards Ukrainians. And they succeeded: the outrages in the occupied suburbs of Kyiv are proof of that. A tragic, fatal mistake caused by prejudice, deception, and rejection of the unfamiliar. The government cynically motivates soldiers by exploiting the negative aspects of historical memory.

The moral justification for killing and destruction is based on an erroneous belief about the cultural nature of the enemy. A common component of the warring parties' motivation is hatred towards fascism, shaped by historical memory. The enemy is convinced that they are fighting fascism.

This is a civilizational war. Russians are trying to present it as a war between Russia and the West. In a certain way, it is. It is not just about Western countries helping Ukraine with weapons, diplomacy, and economic sanctions. There is a conflict of values here. Russians are fighting the West, viewing it as an aggressive absorber of everything Russian and primordial. Ukraine, on the other hand, wants to become a full part of the Western world.

By inciting hatred towards Ukrainians, Russian propagandists seek to make the entire Russian people complicit in the crimes committed by the Putin regime. Therefore, on the battlefield, a soldier cannot renounce their subjectivity and claim that it is not they who kill, but the weapon; by renouncing their subjectivity, a soldier preserves their moral integrity on the battlefield. But hatred permeates the Russian army, so it has no moral justification and is the source of the crime against Ukraine.

Conclusions

In sociological discourse, hatred is considered a component of ressentiment in the context of Max Scheler's interpretation of this phenomenon.

Hatred towards the invading enemy who is trying to destroy the country is a manifestation of high morality and an additional motive for resistance. Hatred from the invader and aggressor is a manifestation of immorality and a low spiritual level. Hatred irradiates all sides of a relationship. Everything that represents the hatred subject (clothes, speech, and anything else that is associated with this subject) also causes hatred. Under the influence of ressentiment, a destructive position is formed. That is, reconciliation is impossible when there is ressentiment. The very fact of the enemy's existence causes a desire to destroy them.

Ressentiment can be considered a manifestation of social madness. But in the case of Russians, it is the madness of destroying everything human. In the case of Ukraine, it is a completely different matter, it is the madness of heroes who have challenged an enemy that is much stronger.

Russians have a radically erroneous picture of the world, which they do not want to change but are maniacally eager to follow. Their actions are influenced by an erroneous definition of the situation, which is realistic in its disastrous consequences.

Список використаної літератури

Головаха Е. И., Панина Н. В. Социальное безумие: история, теория и современная практика. Киев : Абрис, 1994. 168 с.

Кисла Г., Черній Л. Методологічні підходи дослідження феномену війни. ENPUIR - електронний архів наукових публікацій Українського державного університету імені Михайла Драгоманова. 2020. URL: https://enpuir.npu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/38250 (дата звернення: 07.02.2023).

Рущенко І. Соціологія на війні. Український соціологічний журнал. 2017. № 1-2. С. 43-52.

Требін М. П. Соціологія війни: український контекст. Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. Серія: Соціологічні дослідження сучасного суспільства: методологія, теорія, методи. 2015. № 1148. Вип. 34. С. 30-34.

Дембіцький С., Злобіна О., Костенко Н. Українське суспільство в умовах війни. 2022 : колективна монографія / за ред. член.-кор. НАН України, д-ра філос. наук Є. Головахи, д-ра соц. наук С. Макеєва. Київ : Інститут соціології НАН України, 2022. 410 с.

Хобта С. В. Соціологія війни як завдання української соціології. Вісник Луганського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка: Педагогічні науки. 2016. № 5 (302). С.126-150.

Bittner R. Ressentiment. Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality. Essays on Nietzsche's «On the Genealogy of Morals». Philosophical traditions / ed. by R. Schacht. Berkeley : University of California Press, 1994. P. 127-138.

Kestnbaum M. The Sociology of War and the Military. Annual Review of Sociology. 2009. Vol. 35.

P.235-254.

Scheler М. Ressentiment. Das Ressentiment im Aufbau der Moralen / trans. by L. A. Coser. URL: https://hscif.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MaxScheler-Ressentiment.pdf (date of request: 29.04.2018).

Scruton R. Notes on the Sociology of War. The British Journal of Sociology. 1987. Vol. 38. № 3 (Sep.). P. 295-309.

References

Holovakha, E. Y., & Panyna, N. V. (1994). Sotsyalnoe bezumye: ystoryia, teoryia y sovremennaia

praktyka [Social Madness: History, Theory and Modern Practice]. Kyev: Abrys [in Russian].

Kysla, H., & Chernii, L. (2020). Metodolohichni pidkhody doslidzhennia fenomenu viiny

[Methodological approaches to follow the phenomenon of war]. ENPUIR - elektronnyi arkhiv

naukovykh publikatsii Ukrainskoho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni Mykhaila Drahomanova. 2020.

Retrieved from https://enpuir.npu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/38250 [in Ukrainian].

Rushchenko, I. (2017). Sotsiolohiia na viini [Sociology in war]. Ukrainskyi sotsiolohichnyi zhurnal, 12, 43-52 [in Ukrainian].

Trebin, M. P. (2015). Sotsiolohiia viiny: ukrainskyi kontekst [Sociology of war: Ukrainian context]. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V. N. Karazina. Seriia: Sotsiolohichni doslidzhennia suchasnoho suspilstva: metodolohiia, teoriia, metody, 1148, 34, 30-34 [in Ukrainian].

Dembitskyi, S., Zlobina, O., & Kostenko, N. (2022). Ukrainske suspilstvo v umovakh viiny [Ukrainian suspilstvo in the minds of war]. Kyiv: Instytut sotsiolohii NAN Ukrainy [in Ukrainian].

Khobta, S. V. (2016). Sotsiolohiia viiny yak zavdannia ukrainskoi sotsiolohii [Sociology of war as a head of Ukrainian sociology]. Visnyk Luhanskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka: Pedahohichni nauky, 5 (302), 126-150 [in Ukrainian].

Bittner, R. (1994). Ressentiment. Nietzsche, Genealogy, Morality. Essays on Nietzsche's «On the Genealogy of Morals». Philosophical traditions. Berkeley: University of California Press [in English].

Kestnbaum, M. (2009). The Sociology of War and the Military. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 235254 [in English].

Scheler М. Ressentiment. Das Ressentiment im Aufbau der Moralen (L. A. Coser, Trans). Retrieved from https://hscif.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/MaxScheler-Ressentiment.pdf [in English].

Scruton, R. (1987). Notes on the Sociology of War. The British Journal of Sociology, 38, 3, 295-309 [in English].

Размещено на Allbest.ru