Collective memory as a factor of civil society activation

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

COLLECTIVE MEMORY AS A FACTOR OF CIVIL SOCIETY ACTIVATION

Batrymenko O., Tkach O., Vasko S.

Annotation

collective memory civil society

The article examines collective memory as a factor in the activation of civil society. Theoretical and methodological approaches to the interpretation of collective memory and to the interpretation of civil society are considered. Correlation analysis between the two categories at the theoretical and applied levels was carried out.

Civil society is a comprehensive phenomenon that reflects the social state of development in the broadest sense, but can be defined through the prism of sociological (as a social structure), regulatory and political science (as non-governmental organizations), legal and legal approaches (as the realization of civil rights), and as well as the methodology of social constructivism (civil society exists in context and through communication).

As a result of the absolutization of the role ofpublic organizations and rational theories, scientists focus less attention on the study of irrational factors, however, the latter are able to influence social activity on a larger scale. In particular, it has been proven that collective memory activates civil society as a result of constructing national identity, contributing to the formation and preservation of legitimate social norms. Through collective memory, the level of national consciousness and civic responsibility increases, and therefore conditions are created for civic activity, which ultimately leads to the institutionalization and progress of civil society.

Collective memory, unlike historical memory, does not falsify the past, therefore the demands articulated by civil society through the memory of the consequences of certain events are the needs of the public, which forces this public to implement its activities expediently, effectively, institutionalized and for the public good.

It is substantiated that the relevance of the study of collective memory is extremely important for Ukraine in the conditions of martial law, because the modern social state is characterized by significant irrational factors.

Keywords: collective memory, civil society, national identity, public organizations, social groups, public, charitable organizations, social norms

Анотація

Батрименко О. В., Ткач О. І., Васько С. О. Колективна пам'ять як фактор діяльності громадянського суспільства

У статті розглядається колективна пам 'ять як чинник активізації громадянського суспільства. Розглядаються теоретико-методологічні підходи до інтерпретації колективної пам 'яті та до інтерпретації громадянського суспільства. Проведено кореляційний аналіз між двома категоріями на теоретичному та прикладному рівнях.

Громадянське суспільство - комплексне явище, яке відображає суспільний стан розвитку в найширшому розумінні, але може бути визначене крізь призму соціологічного (як соціальна структура), нормативно-політологічного (як неурядові організації), правового та правового підходів. (як реалізація громадянських прав), а також методологія соціального конструктивізму (громадянське суспільство існує в контексті та через комунікацію).

Внаслідок абсолютизації ролі громадських організацій і раціональних теорій науковці менше уваги приділяють вивченню ірраціональних факторів, проте останні здатні впливати на суспільну діяльність у більших масштабах. Зокрема, доведено, що колективна пам'ять активізує громадянське суспільство внаслідок конструювання національної ідентичності, сприяючи формуванню та збереженню легітимних соціальних норм. Через колективну пам'ять підвищується рівень національної свідомості та громадянської відповідальності, а отже, створюються умови для громадянської активності, що зрештою призводить до інституалізації та поступу громадянського суспільства.

Колективна пам'ять, на відміну від історичної, не фальсифікує минуле, тому вимоги, які артикулює громадянське суспільство через пам'ять про наслідки тих чи інших подій, є потребами громадськості, яка змушує цю громадськість здійснювати свою діяльність доцільно, ефективно, інституціоналізовано та для суспільного блага. Обґрунтовано, що актуальність дослідження колективної пам'яті є надзвичайно важливою для України в умовах воєнного стану, оскільки сучасний соціальний стан характеризується значними ірраціональними факторами.

Ключові слова: колективна пам'ять, громадянське суспільство, національна ідентичність, громадські організації, соціальні групи, громадськість, благодійні організації, соціальні норми.

Introduction

In recent decades, memorial studies have acquired a new meaning in the scientific community. In particular, in Ukrainian practice, the concepts of "historical memory", "cultural memory", "social memory", "historical trauma" etc. are being understood. In view of this, it is possible to single out at least two aspects related to the problems of scientific research.

First, in the Ukrainian discourse, a certain substitution of concepts is often outlined, because collective memory represents a somewhat different phenomenon from historical memory. Secondly, researching exclusively through the prism of historical processes or institutionalism, scientists do not focus their attention on important issues of human existence and the phenomenon of memory in such a form, which is represented by the phenomenon of collective memory. Therefore, certain key elements of the phenomenon of collective memory remain outside the research field, which requires an appropriate change [1, р.23].

After all, collective memory, as a significant component of public consciousness, is able to determine important social and political processes, in particular, to activate the effective functioning of civil society, which is especially relevant for Ukraine in the conditions of martial law. It is obvious that the feeling of collective trauma forces Ukrainian society to show more and more solidarity and, as a result, there is an improvement in civil progress.

The purpose of the article is to study collective memory as an activating factor of civil society. With this in mind, a number of tasks should be implemented: to distinguish theoretical and methodological approaches to the interpretation of collective memory and to the interpretation of civil society, as well as to analyze the correlation between these phenomena at both the theoretical and applied levels in order to determine in what form collective memory activates civil society. The article applies an interdisciplinary approach and uses general scientific methods.

Analysis of recent research and publications

From among Western scientists who studied collective memory can be singled out: E. Durkheim and M. Albwachs (founders of the phenomenon), K. Jung (psychoanalytic approach), F. Bartlett (reconstruction of memories), P. Nore (objectification of collective memory ), Y. Assman (types of memory), J. Pennebaker and B. Baneisik (empirical studies), M. Pollyak (memory under the totalitarian regime). Among Ukrainian scientists: O. Kis (social states), V. Babka (memorial policy), A. Kyridon (formation of Ukrainian memorial studies), Yu. Shapoval (Ukrainian collective memory), V. Barana (phenomenon of nostalgia) and others.

Reviewing the literature devoted to civil society, we should mention: A. Tocqueville (civil society in the form of large-scale interaction of socio-cultural factors), T. Parsons (civil society as a social community), Y. Habermas (communicative aspects in the context of civil society) and others. Among Ukrainian scientists, we should mention: V. Tsvikha (special attention paid to the analysis of trade unions), A. Karasia (civil society in classical and non-classical theories), O. Tkacha (factors of institutionalization of civil society), Kolodiy (systemic level, socio-cultural aspects) and others.

They devoted their works to the study of collective memory and memorial policy V. Artyukh, O. Boyko, D. Vedeneev, O. Volyaniuk, V. Vyatrovych, I. Hyrych, Ya. Hrytsak, Yu. Zernii, A. Kyridon, V. Kryvosheya, Musienko, L. Nagorna, V. Ohienko, Yu. Opalko, V. Soldatenko, S. Troyan, Yu. Shaigorodskyi, Yu. Shapoval and other researchers.

The object is society as a whole or its separate groups (social, ethnic, territorial, linguistic, etc.). At the same time, it is necessary to single out the targets, the transformation of which is aimed at the memorial policy: public opinion, patriotic feelings, public will, historical memory, national consciousness and identity. The purpose of these practices is to form and consolidate in society a model of historical memory and management of collective historical consciousness for the purpose of realizing the tasks of the political system. With the help of historical politics, a variety of interests can be realized: harmonious and antagonistic, progressive, conservative and reactionary, permanent and temporary, stable and unstable, general and private [14].

Constructivism - it group theory in psychology, sociology, philosophy, in whose is emphasized idea constructive nature knowledge, language and cultural and historical conditioning of knowledge and understanding of the world with the help of individual constructs; idea constructive alternativeism (pluralities ways conceptualization events) and pluralism the truth Central idea this approach - idea about knowledge not as about reflection and representation, and how about the active construction of the image of recognizable objects and events in consciousness subject (Ulanovsky, 2008).

In general terms, positivism is connected with realistic ontology (recognition of a single objective reality for which exist true true way understanding), objectivist epistemology, which leans on mostly on quantitative methodology. Supporters positivism share ideals value-neutral, apolitical research, and the main goal is seen in the explanation, prediction and control over the phenomena that are studied Constructivism, on the contrary, is built on relativistic ontology (recognition plural local socio-cultural realities), subjectivist epistemology, mainly qualitative methodology, he haunts purpose social critics, reflections and social transformations.

Research constructivists brought to changes priorities in social psychological research, to the transition from experimental epistemology to social of epistemology and the emergence of the constructivist paradigm, which combines constructivism, social constructionism and radical constructivism

Constructivist theories include the theory of personal constructs by J. Kelly, the radical constructivism of E. von Glaserfeld, the theory of auto-poiesis by Maturan - Varel, genetic epistemology J. Piaget. Also as constructivist you can consider cultural and historical theory L. Vygotsky, symbolic interactionism J. Mida, sociological phenomenology A. Shyuts and theory social designing Berger - Lukman. On opinion, to this list you can to add version constructivist psychology - psychosemantic approach.

Social constructionism is a more radical view of personality problems, consciousness mental processes and structures, which avoids recognition their objective reality and urges to analysis languages, discourse, microsocial processes and relationship cultural practitioner, in within the framework whose these "structures" and "processes" are recognized valid Social constructionism appeared in the 1970s as a reformist approach in social psychology and now is considered most influential in metatheories social of science Him representatives are K. Gergen, R. Harre and J. Shotter; discursive psychology is related J. Potter and M. Weatherell, and also low narrative theory.

Despite certain differences, these two directions have a lot in common. Both share ideas about the constructed and social nature of knowledge and do not perceive claims empirical science on fundamentally.

Presenting main material

The phenomenon of collective memory can be understood through the prism of psychoanalytical, functional approaches and the methodology of social constructivism.

The psychoanalytical approach was initiated by K. Jung's work "Psychology of the Unconscious", in which the scientist for the first time distinguishes between the individual and the collective unconscious, emphasizing that the collective unconscious is separate from the individual, since its essence is universal and comprehensive, capable of penetrating all dimensions of being. According to K. Jung, the supraindividual unconscious arises from the hereditary structure of the brain and represents an unlimit ed repository for numerous myths, motives, images, human ideas or archetypes capable of re -formation and functioning.

The modern, psychoanalytical approach is represented by the implementation of a considerable number of studies of collective memory. Specialists analyze the formation and preservation of collective memories as a result of basic cognitive processes, as well as how these memories are subjectively presented in each of the members of a social group. It is worth noting that collective memory can be defined through the prism of the most common socio-psychological theory: the more psychologically an object is distant from a person, the more abstract its representation is. The essence of collective memory lies precisely in the fact that the event is close enough, and therefore ideas about it, in particular memories, are not abstract (History and collective 2023) [1].

V. Babka determined that political subjects, among which institutionalized and non -institutionalized ones can be distinguished, implement the policy. Non -institutionalized include social movements and individual public figures. Political scientist O. Volyaniuk gives a list of institutionalized subjects of memory policy according to the specifics of their activities and subordination, dividing them into governmental and non-governmental ones. The government institutions that are subjects of the formation of public memory include: Ministry of Education and Science; Ministry of Culture and Tourism; official (government) press; Ukrainian Institute of National Memory.

Among non-state (non-governmental) institutes and public organizations, the researcher singles out several groups: Organizations created by direct participants of events, eyewitnesses, victims. They are carriers of tragic memory, therefore, accordingly, their purpose is to preserve and honor the memory of "trauma". Such organizations include: unions of former prisoners of concentration camps and those repressed; organizations of victims and participants in hostilities; public formations of ethnic minorities that at one time suffered forced deportation and expulsion from their native lands; organizations concerned with the consequences of environmental disasters of the past.

Volodymir Babka determined that civil associations advocating the preservation and restoration of traditions, which can be classified as bearers of heroic memory. Their purpose is to preserve, return, restore past customs, norms and models of behavior, organization, etc. They include: organizations of a military nature (Cossack formations, knightly orders, etc.), organizations of a socio-political nature (communist, monarchist, anarchist, etc.), organizations of an elitist nature (noble associations); organizations of a religious and ethical nature.

Volyanyuk O. Ya. identified scientific and cultural and educational organizations, the purpose of which is the study and popularization of knowledge about the past: research organizations, cultural and educational associations; societies whose activities are aimed at the preservation and restoration of historical and cultural monuments [15].

Opalko Yu.V defined a criterion based on the degree of priority of public organizations: it is possible to classify memory policies along with other activities into those that: specialize in this work (or it is the main one for them); engage in a type of activity along with other projects; from time to time participate in the implementation of memory policy tasks [13].

Scientists also study the ways in which individuals connect their lives with events of national significance. To explain the aspect of collectivity, psychoanalysts often use the category of "extended mind", according to which any objects are able to function as part of a single mind that is not limited to the surface of human skin. Ultimately, the psychoanalytical approach represents the analysis of collective memory in two forms: a "top-down" approach, within which current collective memories are explained through the study and interpretation of cognitive processes; "bottom-up", according to which specific cognitive processes are first determined, which subsequently form and preserve collective memory. In addition, the "top-down" approach, unlike the oppositional one, usually focuses its attention on those memories that have large-scale social significance.

M. Halbwachs, a theorist of the French sociological school, is considered the founder of the phenomenon of collective memory. His works "Collective and Historical Memory" and "Social Frames of Memory" pioneered the functional approach. It was M. Halbwachs who introduced the term "collective memory" into scientific circulation [6].

According to the theoretical works of the scientist, individual and collective memory are different in nature, although this does not deny that they can be mutually penetrating. Individual consciousness and the presence of personal experience is a prerequisite for the existence of a collective level, since collective memories can be layered on individual ones. However, collective memory is based on its own laws. There is a so-called artificial environment that consists of collective time, space and history. This environment is external to the individual conscious, but at the same time is able to encompass the consciousness of each individual. Functioning within this environment, each of the individuals seems to lose their own identity, and their personal impressions begin to interact [7].

The distinction between individual memory and collective memory also lies in the framework by which they are limited. Individual memory has spatial and temporal frameworks, and collective memory has social ones. Every individual, being socialized, is forced to interact with the social space, and it is this space that acts as a frame for personal memories. The past and impersonal memories related to the social group with which the interaction took place are remembered through the prism of one's own experience and represent the phenomenon of collective memory. It is important that the memory is fixed usually in two cases: either if the event is characterized by a strong impression, or if the event is expedient for the institutional needs of the social group. Therefore, if there is no impression or axiological characteristic, the frame of memory will be empty, and it will be impossible to remember the event. This is the most important difference between collective memory and historical memory, because it is not enough to remember only a historical fact, there must be an irrational element and a personal impression, which, in the end, would make the memory stick in the memory. Accordingly, collective memory can be characterized as a living history that exists simultaneously with a written history. But the latter is reduced only to clear facts, dates and chronology of events.

Among other distinctions between historical memory and collective memory, in accordance with the views of M. Halbwachs, it is worth highlighting that historical memory is holistic in nature, considers groups from an external dimension, is characterized by a long period of time, is oriented towards the fixation of changes, the search for differences and analysis of dynamic processes [8].

Instead, the bearers of collective memory are social groups, each of which represents its own unique history. In collective memory, groups are considered from an internal dimension, and the basis is taken for the period of time during which the social group exists, which usually corresponds to the average length of human life. Collective memory does not go beyond the boundaries of the group in which it functions, and the forgetting of certain memories occurs with the disappearance of those social groups that previously preserved the memory. The most important thing is that collective memory focuses on the search for persistent homogenous features, which enables the birth of a group identity. Identity provides the foundation for a group's existence, and group uniqueness and identity are contrasted with the characteristics of other groups.

On the other hand, each new social group relies on the experience of the previous ones, so each epoch, due to the existence of the phenomenon of collective memory, is able to preserve this social relationship. Therefore, collective memory is the basis for the integrity, stability, consolidation of social groups and preservation of social norms.

It is also necessary to consider the phenomenon of collective memory through the prism of the methodology of social constructivism. From this point of view, collective memory is always contextually determined, because no memories are able to appear abstractly outside the context of socio-historical conditions. In particular, we should mention the thorough work of M. Halbwachs "Social frameworks of memory", in which the scientist examines states separated from any interpersonal interaction. M. Halbwachs singled out several such conditions: dreams and communicative disorders, as a result of which the individual does not succumb to the most important thesis of social constructivism that reality is constructed with t he help of language. Considering that dreams are a part of exclusively individual consciousness, and communicative disorders involve inclusion, collective memory is a socially constructed phenomenon, because memories are always characterized by interactivity.

Within the framework of social constructivism, the study of the impact of communications on collective memory is very important, since it is communication that can construct new memories, strengthen current ones or, on the contrary, cause forgetting. And, most importantly, collective memories contain a significant irrational component. On the one hand, there is an emotional component that contributes to ensuring the reproduction and stability of memories, on the other hand, there is an axiological component that involves the desire to support only legitimate aspects of group identity.

Therefore, collective memory is a multifaceted and complex socio-psychological phenomenon, which is characterized by an emotional and valuable component, contextual conditioning, interactivity, and also plays an important role in the genesis and development of group identity, group consolidation, and improvement of social progress due to the provision of relationships connection between different generations. The mentioned phenomenon is completely opposite to the concept of "historical memory", the carrier of collective memory is various social groups, each of which relies on its own memories, and therefore collective memory, unlike historical memory, does not have inherent integrity, however, it is characterized by organicity, representing the fact that the memories of the event are not presented abstractly and not remotely.

Understanding the concept of civil society, a number of approaches to interpretation should also be distinguished: sociological, regulatory and political science, jurisprudence, as well as the methodology of social constructivism.

According to the sociological approach, civil society is interpreted as a social structure of spontaneous self-expression of free individuals and public organizations independent of state influence.

From another point of view, the normative-political approach, which is most often presented in political science, considers civil society through the prism of the functioning of non -governmental organizations that are outside of state intervention, but represent the purpose of leading society and embody the so -called "third sector".

Instead, the legal-legal approach interprets civil society as a set of institutions and public organizations independent of the state, which enable active influence on the political process and the realization of civil and political rights.

Considering civil society from the standpoint of social constructivism methodology, it is worth emphasizing that the mentioned phenomenon is also always contextually determined. This is determined by the fact that in philosophical understanding, civil society is interpreted through the category of freedom, so the latter can be realized exclusively depending on socio-historical conditions. Similarly, civil society is a socially constructed phenomenon and is also characterized by interactivity, because the basis for the functioning of civil society is interpersonal communication and people, as a result of certain interactions, a semiotic system, discursive practices and narratives are formed.

It is important to emphasize that in modern approaches to the analysis of civil society, there is an absolutization of the role of public organizations, in particular non -governmental and non-profit organizations, but the devaluation of the essence of the socio-historical context and the interaction of sociocultural factors does not allow to fully understand the category of civil society, which represents a comprehensive phenomenon, and therefore is not limited exclusively to public organizations, social and economic spheres, or the sphere that is not regulated by the state. The emergence and institutionalization of civil society does not occur abstractly, but simultaneously with the improvement of other spheres of the political system. This is determined by the fact that both civil society and collective memory expressed in memorial politics are immanent in the political system.

So, civil society is a complex and all-encompassing phenomenon that can be analyzed through the prism of narrow specificity (public organizations, social structures, a network of relations between institutions and actors independent of state intervention), but in a broader approach it reflects the state of social development, a set of institutions inherent in society and institutions, the degree of adherence to democratic values and the cultural state of society.

There are many different aspects in which the correlation at the theoretical level between collective memory and civil society can be traced.

We should start with the fact that any memory, in particular collective memory, forms the basis for reflections, therefore, it is capable of being transformed into experience. The presence of social experience leads to the meaningful filling of public opinion, which articulates, in view of the mention of certain events and the consequences of these events, new requirements, thereby demonstrating civic responsibility. This, obviously, leads to an increase in the level of social consciousness and contributes to the institutionalization of civil society. In this form, collective memory performs its functions, in particular, preserving the memory of the past, or directs the social vector in favor of repeating a certain event, or, on the contrary, warns against actualization. Therefore, it is the possibilities of memory that form the instruction or anti-instruction for the activities of citizens.

Given that civil society is usually viewed through the prism of the category of freedom, it should be noted that this alone is not enough. We seek freedom only on the condition that we remember the consequences of not being free. The realities of collective oppression, colonialism and the role of the object force one to achieve subjectivity and make one realize that freedom is the highest value. So, we can talk about collective memory as a determinant of the genesis of civil society.

It is worth noting that quite often civil society is defined through the lens of M. Olson's theory of collective action, which is based on the fact that people are rational and therefore able to calculate their benefits and costs in the process of social activity. In our opinion, this is absolutely not the case. Social irrationality has already been absolutely proven, on the one hand, this irrational aspect is determined precisely by the existence of collective memory, on the other hand, it is precisely this that is capable of pushing society to action: at least, if society was governed exclusively by rational factors and would be as it is depicted by M.Olson, Ukraine would not have so many fallen heroes, since wartime, when counted, never guarantees that the benefits can exceed the costs. This is also characteristic of relevant Ukrainian civil society organizations, whose large-scale activities are recorded not only in the rear regions.

Making a decision in favor of something that can destroy human life shows that civil society is characterized by a deeper content than a simple rational calculation of benefits and costs. Of course, we can and will talk about the fact that morality plays a significant role, which the author of the theory of collective actions did not fully consider. Foreign scientists in their empirical studies came to the conclusion that moral obligation serves as a determinant of participation regardless of the subjective perception of risk. But even if morality is correlated with profit, we will lose the intrinsic value of morality as such. So, civil society is not only about rationalism, and irrationality is ensured by the fact that collective memory is a component of so cial consciousness [9, р.287].

It is the collective memory that makes it possible to construct the desired future due to the fact that the acquired experience gradually forms the value system of society, clear axiological criteria appear, morality, expedient norms, principles and desired institutions begin to play a high role. At the same time, civil society can be viewed through the prism of moral and ethical categories, according to which citizens share certain values, stand in solidarity and consolidate, ensuring the achievement of the common good. In the end, civil society appears as the embodiment of the highest dimension of civil values, in particular liberal democracy, which determines the existence of the phenomenon of collective memory, since only the experience formed as a result of memory is capable of generating a value system and creating conditions for its observance. Outside of civil society, society remains, the worldview level of which is limited by narrow patterns and concern exclusively for narrow-group and self-interested interests [11, р.446].

On the other hand, memory not only contributes to the genesis of appropriate norms, but also ensures their preservation, because thanks to collective memory, the axiological system is able to be preserved through the passage of time and the change of generations, which guarantees the continuity of civil development.

The most important thing is that collective memory forms identity, in particular, national identity. It is obvious that without national identity, the functioning of civil society is impossible, since only the feeling of belonging to the nation guarantees the effectiveness of interaction. Without a national identity, any sense of achieving freedom and the common good is nullified, because if there is no nation, then there is no one to share the achievement of the goal with. Y. Habermas tried to deny this argument, proposing the concept of "constitutional patriotism". As the Ukrainian scientist A. Karas observes: "However, even "constitutional patriotism" is not and cannot be patriotism of an abstract imagination, because the constitution is always closely related to the definition of the theoretical and national reference" (Волянюк О.). In his monograph "Philosophy of civil society in classical and non-classical interpretations", the scientist also cites the relevant statement of E. Shils: "If modern Germans did not have the feeling that the present and past generations are equal members of German society, then 12 years of National Socialist tyranny and The Holocaust would not be a moral problem for them... If all that is called "being German" only applied to the Constitution of Germany, then the whole past could be erased" [15, р.122].

The correlation on a practical level between collective memory and civil society is undeniable. It is worth considering the fact formed as a result of the Russian-Ukrainian fUll-scale war. According to official sources: "The number of registered BOs in 2022 was 6,367 organizations (indicator in 2021 - 830) against 2,760 registered NGOs (indicator in 2021 - 4,360)" [4]. Therefore, there is a significant increase in charitable organizations caused by the collective tragedy of wartime. The correlation process should be considered in more detail.

The war and its derivative aspects, forming a collective trauma, are always fixed in the collective memory, because a significant personal impression and an emotional and valuable component are preserved. For current society, war is not an abstract concept, psychologically this object is not distant and memories of it are organic. As a result, an excessively emotionally charged collective memory, firstly, serves as a foundation for the entire nation, consolidating society, and secondly, strengthens national identity [12, р.439].

In addition, there are precedents in the Ukrainian discourse, in particular memories of the danger of becoming an object and losing national identity. Scientists include protest movements and the Revolution of Dignity as factors of the institutionalization of Ukrainian civil society. Remembering this precedent, it should also be noted that there have already been cases of significant civic activity and mobilization, when civil society institutions are activated as a result of memory: the volunteer movement and public organizations.

So, thanks to the collective memory, the Ukrainian civil society already had a reference point and an instruction for actions. It is absolutely obvious why such extensive institutionalization of civil society organizations took place, and in a coordinated and solidarized manner. In particular, the national identity, the rise in the level of social consciousness, the axiological system formed and the mobilization potential caused by the phenomenon of collective memory determined the chosen vector of developm ent.

Conclusions

So, collective memory is a complex socio-psychological phenomenon that is part of social consciousness, and can be understood through the prism of psychoanalytic (memories are organic, because the event that is remembered is close to the subject), function al approaches (collective memory is based on its own laws and limited by social frameworks) and the methodology of social constructivism (collective memories are constructed socially and depending on the context). At the same time, it was found that collective and historical memory are fundamentally different concepts, since historical events are events that can be understood over an extremely long period of time, and collective memories tend to be equal to the average length of human life. Collective memory is organic and alive, but history is facts and dates.

Civil society is a comprehensive phenomenon that reflects the social state of development in the broadest sense, but can be defined through the prism of sociological (as a social structure), regulatory and political science (as non-governmental organizations), legal and legal approaches (as the realization of civil rights), and as well as the methodology of social constructivism (civil society exists in context and through communication).

As a result of the absolutization of the role of public organizations and rational theories, scientists focus less attention on the study of irrational factors, however, the latter are able to influence social activity on a larger scale. In particular, it has been proven that collective memory activates civil society as a result of constructing national identity, contributing to the formation and preservation of legitimate social norms. Through collective memory, the level of national consciousness and civic responsibility increases, and therefore conditions are created for civic activity, which ultimately leads to the institutionalization and progress of civil society.

Collective memory, unlike historical memory, does not falsify the past, therefore the demands articulated by civil society through the memory of the consequences of certain events are the needs of the public, which forces this public to implement its activities expediently, effectively, institutionalized and for the public good.

This is evidenced by the Ukrainian practice of civil society creation, reflected in the growth of civil society organizations. The increase of characteristic institutions is caused by significant socio-political processes, filled with emotional and value components, therefore, it was the collective memory that led to the improvement of the civil society of Ukraine: the deployment of an unprecedented volunteer movement and an increase in the number of charitable organizations.

References

1. Nagorna, L. (2012). History and collective memory. Scientific notes of the Institute of Political and Ethnonational Studies named after I. F. Kuras NAS of Ukraine. Issue 2. P. 6-27.

2. Karas, A. (2003). Philosophy of civil society in classical theories and non-classical interpretations: [monograph]. Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Lviv. national University named after Ivan Franko. - Kyiv; Lviv: Ed. center of LNU named after Ivan Franko. 519 p.

3. Kyridon, A.M. (2010). The construct "collective memory" in the focus of time: theoretical discourse. Slavic discourse: Collection science. Rivne: RIS KSU. P. 65-71.

4. Political system of Ukraine: constitutional model and political practices (2023): monograph / col. author: G. I. Zelenko (director, scientific editor) and others. Kyiv: IPi&D named after I. F. Kuras NAS of Ukraine. 536 p.

5. Tkach, O. I. (2017). Formation and development of volunteering as an institution of civil society. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University. Politology. Issue 1. P. 34-38.

6. Halbwachs, M. (1925/1992). About collective memory. [L.A. Kozer, Ed. and trans.] Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

7. Halbwaks, M. (2007). Social frames of memory / Trans. with Fr. and introduction article by S.N. Zenkin M.: Novoe izdatelstvo. 348 p.

8. Halbwachs, M. (1950/1980). Collective memory. [M. Douglas, Ed.] New York: Harper & Row.

9. Jung, K.G. (2010). Psychology of the unconscious / Trans. with English - 2nd edition, Moscow: "Kogito-Center". 352 p.

10. Karl-Dieter, Opp. (2001). Collective Political Action. A Research Program and Some of Its Results. Analyze & Critique Volume 23 Issue 1. S. 1-20.

11. Mete Sefa Uysal, Yasemin Gulsum Acar, Jose-Manuel Sabucedo, Huseyin Cakal (2022). `To Participate or Not to Participate, That's the Question': The Role of Moral Obligation and Different Risk Perceptions on Collective Action. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, Vol. 10(2), 445-459.

12. William, Hirst, Jeremy, K. Yamashiro, & Alin, Coman (2018). Collective Memory from a Psychological Perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Volume 22, Issue 5, 438-451.

13. Opalko, Yu.V. (2009). Interaction of public organizations with state authorities in the implementation of the state policy of memory / Yuriy Volodymyrovych Opalko // Strategic priorities. No. 3. P. 42-49.

14. Volyanyuk, O.Ya. (2013). Public memory and politics: The art of the possible. K.: SE "NVC "Prioritety". 172 p.

15. Volyanyuk O. Ya. (2009). Public formations in the field of politics of memory of modern Ukraine. Education of the region: political science, psychology, communications. No. 3. P.122 - 126.

Размещено на Allbest.ru