The following is Metropolitan Luke’s answer to a question posed on the Ukrainian web resource Pravlife.info concerning the modern nature of persecutions now taking place on all fronts against the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
I think that right now we should not place ourselves in harm’s way, because in modern social science a new name has arisen for analogous processes—cancel culture (boycott culture, cancelling people, and others). The only thing that distinguishes this phenomenon from persecution as we are accustomed to thinking of it is the absence of the mass destruction of people—although in the case of church seizures, we see that the raiders do not limit their use of physical violence against people in our Church.
Just look around. Our times are such that even the sad saying that “a man is a wolf to another man” [or, it’s a dog-eat-dog world] has long ceased to be an objective description of certain interpersonal relations. Modern man has trampled underfoot all possible and impossible taboos. Hatred has become a norm; even more than that—those who do not want to hate are condemned. Revenge even between some Christians has all but ceased to evoke any natural revulsion.
Participation in trolling attacks in social media, for example, is now an everyday affair. But what of trolling—in the so-called civilized world there exists and is even cultivated the phenomenon of dehumanization, which is hard to compare with anything else. Humaneness is frankly superfluous, the world disdains it as a sort of relic of the past. In conditions where competition lies at the foundation of human interrelations, humaneness becomes an obstacle to success. And it’s much easier to fight with an opponent, especially an enemy, if you condition yourself to not see him as human. Unfortunately, we can see that there are such disseminators and bearers of this culture even in our religious milieu.
Cancel culture touches every person who has an opposing viewpoint, and any such person can become the object of aggression from online mobs. Their main goal is to speculate in scandals and to spread toxicity. It is also a very effective means of manipulation. It divides people into “us” and “them”.
“Cancelling” an object means publicly condemning him, trying to boycott him in the media, and generally removing him from public space, demanding his liquidation.
This “culture” has replaced the “culture of dialogue”. Undoubtedly, simply “shutting the mouth” of an opponent is much easier than trying to understand his point of view and engaging in discussion, or seeking a compromise.
An uncompromising “cancellation” with no right to self-explanation is conducted not only in order to condemn the object, but also in order to earn the respect of those who side with this “cancellation”.
Cancel culture is an instrument of the mob. And a mob itself can be controlled, often deprived of the ability to critically make sense of what is happening and to analyze the essence of events.
The front men at the wheel of the process are always those who have the most resources.
Unfortunately, we can state that today it is the representatives of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church who are being subjected to cancellation. This means that the Christian truths they preach are becoming irritating and unacceptable to modern Ukrainian society. Endless cancellations are snowballing and forming people who are not capable of looking at those unlike themselves with any goodwill, not capable of accepting anyone other than themselves.
Now, due to the accessibility of information technology, clip-thinking, various cognitive distortions, and problems with memory and attention span, people very readily and emotionally receive information, and so it’s easier to influence them.
We have observed how in the information sphere three main emotions are exploited: fear, humiliation, and hope. Fear of losing one’s status in society, humiliation because this is happening, and hope that this status will again be restored. Within the framework of exploiting these three emotions, those who are trying to destroy the UOC are fully and concretely declaring their aim of religious opposition.
From the speeches of those who hate the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) or see it as the source of their earthly troubles, a clear agenda emerges—to exploit nationalism and patriotism, creating an internal division of “us versus them.” And we see how this works: even now, there is segregation into so-called “Ukrainian” and “Moscow” believers, the “correct” and the “schismatics,” even within the UOC itself.
This process occurs as follows: a group of people—whether a majority or a minority—defines the boundaries of “norms”, proclaims themselves as proud bearers of these norms, and everyone else automatically becomes “disturbers of the peace”. This principle underpins the operations of social media communities of varying degrees of radicalism.
Next, the target is isolated using media tools and digital technologies. For example, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) is portrayed in all media and social networks in no other way than as a hostile organization, with no mention of the good deeds it performs.
The deepest level of “cancellation” happens in the realms of history and culture, where much is rewritten to conform with the patterns of cancel culture. The presence of the UOC is entirely removed from historical sources, films, and books. For instance, during a performance of Natalka Poltavka1 at the Zaporozhie theater, one character asks, “Is that deacon from the Moscow Patriarchate?”
The fundamental element of cancel culture is public shaming. This is one of the oldest of practices, which has been used throughout the history of mankind. If someone does not correspond to the current political expediency, then societal censure is the best way to “put him in his place.” The cancelled individual becomes a scapegoat. He is used as an example of what will happen to anyone who displays the same behavior.
The so-called scapegoat often becomes an element that strengthens the unity of opposition groups, who then as a united front speak publicly against him, as we say here, “Who are we friends against?” One example is that all the members of the All-Ukrainian parliament of churches and religious organizations are coming out against the UOC. These formerly competing groups are now unified in a general outburst against what in their opinion deserves the greatest condemnation.
Cancel culture is taking off like a chain reaction. Ideas pass from person to person and grow in geometric progression. Due to the lowering of empathy and tolerance with regards to others, society is heading into decline. Moreover, it is practically impossible to stop the process of cancellation after its active phase, just as it’s impossible to stop an avalanche. The growth of digital technology makes it possible for a local boycott to expand into global persecution. Any idea can be spread through the internet in a moment.
This process weakens the authorities’ monopoly on violence. If in law there exists an understanding of the presumption of innocence, and according to it people cannot be punished without thorough proof of guilt, then a mob of activists is an unknown concept. Groups can form within it who will cancel people left and right with the aid of firearms. But that the government cannot completely control the situation is a clear sign of degradation. One example is the seizure of the cathedral in Cherkasy.
The attempt to completely cancel a whole portion of society is fraught with the danger of a huge schism in society in the future. And this will be yet another component on the path to the deterioration and self-destruction of the Ukrainian nation.
Communication is taking on the character of ultimatums, and the condemned side has no right to its own voice. Communication will be possible when people begin to conduct discussions, in our case, based on canons and the Church’s experience and not political expediency. Moreover, all participants should have the right to their own voice, the right to express their own opinion, and the right to be, not overpowered, but heard.
