Ukrainian Identity in Heterogeneous European Collective Action

Keywords: identity; personality; phenomenon; "I"; "Other"; "between"; European identity; heterogeneous identity; Homo

The current conditions in which the world finds itself raise many questions related to the identity of people and collective security, which is manifested in collective action in relation to the "Other". It is difficult to disagree with this, since the presence of the "Other" in the conditions of globalization, as an existing fact, is not always positively perceived by both scientific circles and society as a whole. But taking into account the ambiguity of the understanding of the same processes in the scientific world, as well as resorting to the reflection of socio-historical and political progress, the chosen topic does not lose its relevance, but on the contrary takes on a different form, based on an epistemological-value approach that is subject to multifaceted influences. The current socio-cultural and geopolitical situation in which Ukraine is located requires a rethinking of identity issues precisely at the level of value orientations since the existing basis of identity due to historical and political processes has undergone considerable mythologizing. Mentioned above testifies that identity contributes to the formation of a new world, let's tentatively call it the "world of Europe", which corresponds, on the one hand, to the geographical concept of globalization, and on the other to the Charter of European Identity. The mentioned parties fully reflect the essence of transformational processes in most post-socialist European nations, which forms the content and orientation of the European heterogeneous identity.

Purpose

Research methodology. In order to cover the problem as objectively as possible, we used the following methods: historical - allowed us to consider the peculiarities of the formation of collective action, based on the realities of socio-political and state-building processes; the analytical method made it possible to focus on the influence of the geographical location of the country (society), the features of the formation of the "between" status and its influence, in general, on the identity and collective action of such societies; comparative, socio-geographical methods prompted consideration and study of issues of identity and the processes of formation of collective action from the ontological-geographic features of the location of the country (society); the behavioral method - taking into account geographical, political and social conditions, that is, based on the so-called external ones, made it possible to determine the internal beliefs and aspirations of society, which made it possible to determine the behavior of individuals in society and to influence identity and determine the vector of collective action. This method is used in this work as an epiphenomenon; the axiological method determined not only the essence of historical, social processes but also formed an image of identity and contributes to the formation of collective action. In particular, its use proves that identity is dynamic and, depending on the circumstances, can change and reorient itself. Thanks to the dialectical method, we traced the peculiarities of identity and collective action in the dynamics of the historical process and social development.

Statement of basic materials

Identity plays an important role in the life of every person in society. It is directly related to the formation and formation of "I". It is the identity that determines the socio-species structure and projects social development. After all, identification for a person in the process of his/her formation is a basic need that determines a person's belonging, not identity. During the formation of "I" there is a combination of "I1" + "I2" + "Other" = "WE". This process is complex and long-term, but it is precisely this process that gives you the opportunity to clearly understand your "I" and know yourself. We must understand that this process is not a process of identification, because during identification we can lose ourselves. This part is more about the opposite of the category difference. In most cases, such belonging is determined by value orientations, which enables a person to preserve the unity of his/her own "I" throughout his life, a sense of his/her own self-identity. But at the same time, we note that self-identity does not have a stable form, due to the fact that it is difficult to achieve because a person is constantly in search of herself/himself. However, the unconscious has a great influence on these searches. Because of this, we see identity in a possible combination of "I" - "We" based on value orientations, which will have a mosaic perception, and does not contribute to the creation of a single, universal whole, since identity is possible in relation to itself. This is exactly the T. Reid's (2002) position is. This identity is also called "individual" identity, which is what K. Jaspers (1996) is talking about (pp. 24-25). The understanding of identity offered by him is due to the fact that the sign of "I" is consciousness, which contributes to the process of conscious identity and helps to remain oneself regardless of the circumstances.

That is, identity as a social phenomenon, which is connected with the formation of the "I", is conditioned by certain circumstances, which can be conditionally divided into objective and subjective. Objective ones include, for example, geographic, time limits, etc. Being in a certain territory, a person tries to identify himself/herself with those social and political formations, groups that exist in this territory and are characteristic only of a certain period of historical time. Subjective includes knowledge and memory. Turning to these sides proves: identity in the most general plan is based on such coordinates as spatial, temporal, and mental. The combination of objective and subjective factors of identity within the specified coordinates contributes to its various forms. However, without going into great detail and definition of forms, let's consider value orientations, which reflect the inner essence of identity. Characterized identity contributes to the formation of collective identity and is one of its varieties within the European Union. In this context, it is worth turning to I. Kant (1966), who noted: "The fact that a person can have an idea about his/her own "I" infinitely elevates him/her above all other creatures living on earth. Due to this, it is a person, and due to the unity of consciousness, despite all the changes that may occur to it, it is one and the same person".

This proves that identity makes a person himself/herself and responsible.

As we know, identity is not a new phenomenon, but at each stage of social development it has certain features, and it became most noticeable in the conditions of globalization. When countries, which are actually different, perceive the "Other", unite around certain problems, and then this union forms a system of relationships. It is thanks to this approach that unions, multicultural associations, etc. are formed, and an example of this is the already mentioned European Union and not only. But at this stage of social development on a global scale, initially the economic, and eventually the political unification of various peoples and states based on common human and democratic values living in Europe unite to achieve peace and prosperity while preserving their national peculiarity, perhaps not so pronounced, but it is there.

The mentioned above prompts us to think about the model of European identity. Thus, H. Yavorska (2008) distinguishes three models of collective identity at the theoretical level: 1) "cultural", which interprets identity as a consequence of the action of ethnocultural factors formed during a long historical process (such as common historical heritage, common religion, common language); 2) "instrumental", in which identity is considered as the result of an economic or political calculation based on one's own interests and 3) "public" model, which considers identity as an entity based on agreements on the norms of political coexistence. The models proposed by the author are justified, but we also pay attention to the geographical features of the location of the countries that are part of this collective entity. Based on the very understanding of the European Union, a geographical link and those values that are characteristic of the society of the European continent are already established here. Given the fact that the societies of this continent are different in terms of political, economic, social, cultural, and other types of development, they are all united by the territory and values that they choose for themselves, around which they rally, and form collective action. That is, the fourth model is "geographic", and using the terminology of G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, "spatial-geographic". According to the researchers,

Geography does not simply provide the material of variable localities for history as a form. Like a landscape, it turns out to be a geography not on ly of nature but also of the mind. It separates history from cult, regularity, revealing the factor of randomness, which cannot be reduced to anything, destroyed. (Deleuze & Guattari, 2015, p. 121)

Continuing this idea, we can state the existence of an identity defined by the borders of the European Union. After all, borders are the first stage of any collective identity, as they mark the difference between internal and external, foreign and own, relatives and non-relatives, friends and enemies, culture and nature, enlightenment and barbarism (Bacik, 2002, p. 34).

Therefore, the indicated and supplemented theoretical models contribute to the possibility of the interaction of different things in one to create conditions for the perception of the "Other", because in this situation we can state that identity is equal only to ourselves, but at the same time - perceive the "Other". That is, the presence of the "Other" is a necessary condition for the formation of any identity, which will contribute to self-identification. It is the presence of the image of the "Other" that becomes the impetus and internal need for identity formation. The European identity formed within the borders of the European Union is a contractual entity that forms its own identity while preserving the national one. That is, national identity is woven into the so-called European one.

This is due to the fact that any subject is considered as a phenomenon, the uniqueness of the world, which chooses its life guidelines, which, in most cases, are value guidelines for further personal and civilizational progress. After all, identity, M. Castells (2010) notes, is a process through which a social actor gets to know himself and constructs meanings, mainly on the basis of a certain cultural property or a set of properties, in addition to a wider correlation with other social structures (p. 22).

We are convinced that the defined approach is important in the conditions of globalization. After all, the presence of national identity, which is present today in individual countries, globalization, European integration, is forced to submit to the challenge of value identity, and in order to preserve national uniqueness in a multicultural space, it must be universalized, adapted to the globalization culture. Only in this case will it retain its authenticity in the heterogeneous European community. However, this process is complicated for the post-Soviet countries by a number of factors, among which colonial dependence occupies an important place. In colonial societies, identity is based on myth and inferiority is formed. And, accordingly, the sociopolitical system tries, through historical memory, consciousness and values, to create a person who, regardless of the circumstances, identifies himself/herself not with values, but with that system and that quasi-ideal, socio-political system that colonial policy pursues.

In this regard, L. Nahorna (2002) in the monograph "National Identity in Ukraine" distinguishes three historical forms of identity - Russian-Ukrainian (Russians-Ukraine), "Little Russian" as dual (loyal attitude to the empire) and Soviet (non-national). Today, one more period is added - the European period. It is recognized as the definition of Ukraine in its status as an independent state. And this is facilitated by historical memory. After all, historical memory, O. Horenko (2011) notes, plays almost the main role in the process of identity formation (p. 257).

Within the framework of the first form, the theory of three "brotherly" peoples developed. But this is a separate history of the formation of Slavism, which has no relation in terms of identity to any peoples and nationalities. The state and the system have disappeared, and the identity has disappeared. Within the existing formations, new ones were formed that have nothing in common with their predecessors. Within the framework of the second form, there is an identification determined by existing empires, and perhaps this is precisely why empires do not exist for a long time because there is no internal identity within the boundaries of a great state. In empires, as well as in most states, identity is based on myths and non-acceptance of the "Other". Because the "Other" is the same identity that is implanted in a person. In this way, the issue of heterogeneity is leveled, which weakens the collective action of such socio-political formations. Examples of these processes are identification in states with authoritarian and totalitarian systems. In particular, R. Szporluk notes that by the 19th century. the people now known as "Ukrainians" took/reclaimed this name. Until that time, Ukrainians were called Ruthenians in Austria, Russians in Hungary, and Little Russians in the Russian Empire (Szporluk, 2000). Of course, it is difficult to agree with such a thesis, but based on the sometimes-mythologized realities of historical processes, Ukraine was considered a component of the colonialist states, but this does not mean that such a people did not exist.

Regarding the European period, we should note that the European identity, which has already formed and proves its existence in the society of the "between" status (Ukraine), occurs as a special, specific type of thinking, the foundations of which are a historical phenomenon, which is based on respect and mastery of democratic values. At the present stage, the European identity of the societies of the "between" status is a feature of the outlook on the world, on the basis of which the formation of European civilization takes place.

So, the given examples point to the circumstances affecting the identification processes, namely: the status of "between", which can be traced in the intercultural, inter-civilizational location of individual states and societies. As a rule, such societies identify themselves only with themselves or with neighboring state societies. The specified vector of identity is influenced by the instinct of self-preservation and survival, and identity is confused and not always defined, outlined.

During the entire period of its existence and formation, the people who are in the status of "between" identified themselves with the values that were characteristic of these people and lived in a certain territory. Such an identity created the conditions so that enslaved peoples through value determination got rid of colonial dependence in the 21st century, and individual peoples surpassed their colonizers in their development and awareness of their identity.

This indicates that the collective action of any social formations is dependent on identity, which appears as an internal motive of itself and can be oriented only on values. We are convinced that orientation to values contributes to the perception of the "Other" through self-reflection. The reinterpretation of one's own "I" thanks to the value-oriented "Other" is facilitated by the objectification of the "I" through one's own Ego. Only in this way can we talk about the heterogeneous identity of Ukrainian society in the European space. Note that in societies that adhere to democratic values, existing identities are always heterogeneous and inherently more complex than otherness in totalitarian or authoritarian systems. Heterogeneity in multicultural societies, adhering to ethical principles, acts as an instrument for the formation of collective action. And that is why the so-called European identity is more attractive to societies that are defining their future. The opinion of the modern French philosopher M. Crepon is a confirmation of this worldview. He notes, "There is no identity that defines itself other than through its relation to the multiple otherness's it inherits and to which it, therefore, belongs" (Crepon, 2011).

In this context, the question may arise: why exactly does the European Union correspond to the European identity? Let us note that: 1) after experiencing colonialist policy and preserving in historical memory the desire for the values of freedom, tolerance, humanity, love, truth, and justice, no nation will return to where it came from; 2) as noted by German researchers M. Jachtenfuchs and B. Kohler-Koch (2007), the European Union is only an institution that helps to improve the mechanism for solving common problems and conflicts, "The European Union is a normative political system that has a decisive influence on individual and collective life" (p. 29). The identified factors demonstrate the European Union as a large socio-political entity, the interaction of which is carried out thanks to value orientations that contribute to the preservation and support of various forms of group identity. That is, each element of this formation moves along its own trajectory, which is determined exclusively by ethical norms. That is, the idea of the European Union is conceptualized, according to N. Pelagesha (2008), thanks to identity and is realized through it (p. 66), based on the relevant values. Note that G. Brunn (2009) in one of his works noted that as a result, the unification of European nations within geographical boundaries occurred only after the creation of supranational European institutions. This was facilitated by the fact that after 1945 in Europe, the end of the dominance of the Nazi and fascist regimes and a reflection of the national identities of peoples took place, which led to the formation of a supranational identity (Besier, 2006), that is, the formation of a heterogeneous identity.

Having preserved in historical memory the values of freedom, love for truth, for life, etc., without losing faith in overcoming the colonial syndrome, in the modern era, having carried out reflections of the "I" in relation to the mythical "WE", the undefined but identical "Other", Ukrainian society started on the path of creating its own "I", which is identical only to the "I" in relation to the "Other". Such an identity will contribute to the creation of collective action in a heterogeneous European society. Values will play the bifurcation basis of the new possibilities of societies that have the status of "between". That is, the specified identity contributes to the formation of a "new" society - "we-Europeans", that is, a community that is guided in its activities by values of individual freedom, liberal economy, democratic principles, ethnoculturalism (Khashyieva, 2014). At the same time, we note that identity is not a constant phenomenon, but depends on a multitude of factors, among which V. Filipchuk (2013) singles out the geography of cultural areas, the historical boundaries of socio-political formations, the marginalization or nationalization of society, the transformation of any element of the sociocultural system, etc.

Discussion. Considering the multi-level theory and the importance of the issue of identity in human life, many researchers of various fields of knowledge addressed this issue, in particular, the theoretical understanding of the problem was made by E. Durkheim, E. Erikson, and S. Freud. In line with the anthropological tradition, identity is considered in the works of Ph. Aries and K. I.evi- Strauss. Equally important are the approaches related to the historical development of society, integration processes, and the formation of culture - the works of A. Toynbee and O. Spengler are devoted to this problem. In the context of identity phenomenology, the works of T. Adorno, J. Almond, E. Husserl, M. Scheler, and A. Schutz became no less important and valuable for our research. Based on the modern realities of socio-political, historical, religious, and economic processes, the problem of identity and formation, and reorientation of collective action was considered by L. Azy, Y. Harutyunyan, V. Yevtukh, O. Polishchuk, V. Mudrakov, and others. The phenomenon of identity in the process of formation of collective action in societies that have the status of "between" is considered by O. S. Polishchuk and O. V. Polishchuk. According to the authors, this status is a condition for the formation of Homo, which is tuned to Conatus essendi (trying to simply be), that is, survival and adaptation to imposed conditions. Scientists draw attention to the fact that a society whose collective action is aimed at development and life, focusing on such a value as freedom, will choose the path of civilization and will fight for it. This is caused by a person's desire for a life filled with dynamic changes, which cannot be said about societies that are in a totalitarian system (O. S. Polishchuk & O. V. Polishchuk, 2022). It is clear that if we are talking only about life, then identity as a phenomenon in this sense is not stable, it is oriented on values that can change depending on the circumstances. Such forced changes can be traced in transformational processes, they determine them. This is mentioned in the works of Z. Bauman, who considers identity-based precisely on the context of social transformations that contribute to the formation of a heterogeneous European civilization. After all, according to S. Huntington, civilization is the widest circle of cultural identification of people. As we can see, the researcher demonstrates the existence of both cultural identity and civilizational identity. But regardless of such separation, both identities are oriented towards values and carry the content of the entire spiritual heritage of any community.

As it becomes clear from the above discussions and areas of work related to identity, this topic is complex and has its relevance. In particular, its relevance is determined by the format of collective action and the basic elements that make it exist. The reviewed materials open considerable perspectives in the study of collective action, and identity, based on value guidelines.

Originality

The author proves the importance of values in the heterogeneous European identity and in the process of human development. This aims at the analysis of the identity role through the prism of globalization processes and the status of "between". It has been proven that identity determines the socio-species structure and is a basic need in the process of human development. The role of values in the process of the collective "We" formation is highlighted.

Conclusions

The above proves that there are several forms of identity, according to which certain types of identity are formed. This proves that identity is not a constant process, it changes due to certain circumstances, which can be reduced to such groups as social, political, economic, and religious, as well as formations - regional, local, civilizational, etc. As practice shows, the problem of identity is situational, but not always, and arises when the question of unification arises. In this context, it appears as a synthetic identity that contributes to the formation of a collective "I", and values play an important role in this process. It is thanks to them, as the socio-historical process shows, that the collective action of the European heterogeneous identity takes place. These processes are influenced by many factors: geographical, historical, mythological, etc.

REFERENCES

Bacik, G. (2002). A Discussion on Ethnic Identity. Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 7(1), 18-37. (in English)

Besier, G. (2006). .Das Europa der Diktaturen. Eine neue Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts. Munchen: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. (in German)

Brunn, G. (2009). Die Europaische Einigung von 1945 bis heute. Stuttgart: Verlag Philipp Reclam. (in German)

Castells, M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society (2nd ed.). Blackwell. (in English)

Crepon, M. (2011). Alterites de l'Europe (O. Yosypenko, Trans.). Kyiv: Ukrainian Center of Spiritual Culture. (in Ukrainian)

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2015). Qu'est-ce que la philosophie? (Y. Tarasiuk, Trans.). Lviv: Astroliabiia. (in Ukrainian)

Filipchuk, V. O. (2013). European identity: methodological interpretation approaches and content. Theory and practice of public administration, 3, 386-395. (in Ukrainian)

Horenko, O. M. (2011). Pragmatics of European Experience as a Methodological Historiography Issue. Kyiv: Institute of History of Ukraine. (in Ukrainian)

Jachtenfuchs, M., & Kohler-Koch, B. (2007). Regieren und Institutionenbildung. In M. Jachtenfuchs & B. Kohler- Koch (Eds.), Europaische Integration (M. Yakovliev, Trans., pp. 9-32). Kyiv: Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Publishing House. (in Ukrainian)

Jaspers, К. (1996). Die Schuldfrage: Von der politischen Haftung Deutschlands. Munchen. (in German)

Kant, I. (1966). Pro svidomosti samoho sebe. In Tvory (Vol. 6). Retrieved from http://weblib.pp.ua/soznanii- samogo-sebya-11660.html (in Ukrainian)

Khashyieva, L. V. (2014). European Identity as European Integration Factor: United Europe of Europe of Nations.

Theory and practice ofpublic administration, 3, 239-244. (in Ukrainian)

Nahorna, L. (2002). Natsionalna identychnist v Ukraini. Kyiv: IPiEND. (in Ukrainian)

Pelagesha, N. (2008). Ukraina u smyslovykh viinakh postmodernu: transformatsiia ukrainskoi natsionalnoi identychnosti v umovakh hlobalizatsii. Kyiv: National Institute for Strategic Studies. (in Ukrainian)

Polishchuk, O. S., & Polishchuk, O. V. (2022). Identity and collective action - system approach. Proceedings of the National Aviation University. Vol.: Philosophy. Cultural Studies, (2), 24-29. (in Ukrainian)

Reid, T. (2002). Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man: A Critical Edition (D. R. Brookes, Ed.). Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press. (in English)

Szporluk, R. (2000). Imperiia ta natsii (z istorychnoho dosvidu Ukrainy, Rosii, Polshchi ta Bilorusi). Kyiv: Dukh i Litera. (in Ukrainian)

Yavorska, H. M. (2008). Do problemy formuvannia yevropeiskoi identychnosti v Ukraini. Scientific notes of the I. F. Kuras Institute of politic and ethnic studies, 42, 269-277. (in Ukrainian)