LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (02/09/03)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Freedom of expression should be welcomed

Dear Editor:

Recently published exchanges of reader opinion about matters of interest to the Ukrainian American community should be welcomed by all of us - especially by those who remember an earlier time in another place where free expression was not possible. As American citizens, we should embrace and celebrate these and all other freedoms fought and struggled for by our immigrant predecessors.

In the marketplace of ideas, not all opinions will be received or accepted with the same enthusiasm, but even unpopular opinion deserves a forum and hearing. Even those reader opinions that demand more editorial control by Svoboda and The Ukrainian Weekly - more censorship - deserve expression and publication so that their serious implications may be scrutinized in the bright sunlight of free and independent reflection.

As exiles from a totalitarian regime to a free society, many of us still have much to learn about what freedom means and what it is good for. Some of us don't yet understand that the continuing viability of our ethnic community depends upon the free flow of ideas, opinions and viewpoints, and their open debate and discussion. And both Svoboda and The Ukrainian Weekly, and other free press, occupy pivotal positions as a venue in transmitting and fostering this flow of ideas and views, and their discussion. We should not, I suggest, ask newspaper editors to adopt an official party line or to publish only material perceived to be consistent with prevailing views of the readership. One of the reasons most of us are here is because we learned how wrong that was - and counter-productive.

We also need to learn to accept and even welcome constructive criticism. As a community of ethnics intensely interested in the fate of our motherland, we should be looking for new ideas, new agendas, new energy, new people in leadership positions and new directions. We should welcome constructive criticism that helps us examine our shortcomings and sharpen the focus of our objectives - instead of reacting defensively to thoughtful commentary of a critical character about Ukraine or the Ukrainian American diaspora. We might learn something important if we spent more time listening to the audience and less time preaching to the choir.

Finally, we need to become more disciplined in our reception of constructive criticism. We seem too inclined to shoot the messengers instead of receiving the message. It is unnecessary to personalize differences of opinion by attacking critics, challenging the purity of their blood or doubting their patriotism. Those who take the time and effort to prepare thoughtful commentary and take a stand and go public with it - putting themselves on the firing line - usually do so because they care about our community's direction and about improving Ukraine's public image. Their criticisms are not intended to diminish or destroy, but to build and improve.

(Although I don't intend to initiate a credentials contest, your readers should know that both Jaroslawa (Slava) Johnson and I have been intensely involved with business and cultural matters in Ukraine for the past 12 years; neither one of us is inclined to toot our own horns, but we both have made a considerable personal and professional investment in U.S.-Ukraine relationships over these many years).

Individuals who don't care about any of this generally don't involve themselves with such events or similar programs devoted to enhancing Ukraine's positive achievements; often they are persons who leave the ethnic community altogether, attending an occasional banquet now and then. And these persons generally are not interested in how the community can learn from its prior experience or what it can do to avoid repeating past mistakes, or even in how the community can begin to work together more successfully in the future by tapping the best ideas and benefitting from informed criticism.

The Ukrainian American diaspora could and should play an important and positive role in advancing awareness of Ukraine's rich natural, cultural and human resources. And the Ukrainian Institute of America is to be commended for taking its unprecedented, pro-active, forward-looking stance toward this objective. But much remains to be done. We can only do that if we become somewhat less defensive and not so thin-skinned with feelings too easily hurt - if work harder to accept and encourage the open and free expression and exchange of opinion among ourselves, welcome thoughtful and constructive criticism, and be willing to learn from the past, which always is the prologue to the future.

Marta Farion
Chicago

Dr. Kuropas deserves apology from writer

Dear Editor:

I always enjoy reading Dr. Myron B. Kuropas' "Faces and Places," I may not agree with them, but his articles are always thought-provoking and educational. However, I am intrigued by some who criticize the articles, unfortunately these critical letters provide little fact but a lot of digressions.

I have read Dr. Bohdan Vitvitsky's work on the famine and I know he has a Ph.D in philosophy and a law degree, I consider him a friend. However his critical letter in The Weekly dated (December 15, 2002) has prompted me to respond to his response.

It appears that Dr. Vitvitsky is a left-winger. I only say that from the tone of his letter - I don't actually know. Dr. Vitvitsky states that Dr. Kuropas has his "right-wing rants." Reading it seems that a "rant" is approving of President George W. Bush and his policies. I think most people would agree that President Bush was underestimated and that this contributed to the democrats acting arrogant and condescending (please review the three presidential debates).

Dr. Vitvitsky they connects the "right-wing rants" with how the administration "mistreats" Ukraine. Here is a reality check: Ukraine is run by a bunch of Communists yearning for the old-style Soviet empire. While other countries are moving forward with economic initiatives, Ukraine is crawling back to Moscow.

Dr. Vitvitsky states that the current administration is "fawning" over Russia. The U.S. is not fawning over anybody, we are fighting a war against terrorism.This administration is acting with purpose, and commitment, and has a national policy against terrorism.

Dr. Vitvitsky, I would "give it a rest" (to use his words) and rethink the article. Also, an apology to Dr. Kuropas would be appropriate.

Roman G. Golash
Palatine, Ill.

| Home Page |