Uladzimir Matskevich: Civil society is having hard times

What is the main problem for the Belarusan civil society and can we talk about its development?

State of culture, state of social orientation and personal condition are those factors that prevent Belarusan civil society from full development, assumes Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Board of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus” and the chairperson of the Coordination Committee of the National Platform of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (EaP CSF). “We are too lenient towards people; we don’t set up big enough claims for them. This is the reason why we are cautious towards heroes and upstarts – to everyone who differs from the habitual. And this leads to the dullness, as civil society means being active towards life, work and sociality. We sharply perceive this lack of active approach”.

Civil society is having hard times everywhere today, Uladzimir Matskevich believes: “in many European countries a society that dominates and prevails has established. Belarus is getting involved into regional and global processes; we easily become Europeans, and start thinking and looking like them. But we forget about our culture”.

“The environment I am living and communicating within most of the times is the civil society, and it is developing rather fast. Another thing is that it is not that noticeable at the national level. However, I wouldn’t characterize the community I am in as stagnant; we are developing”, - emphasizes Uladzimir Matskevich.

He believes that the main thing that characterizes civil society is the communication, or dialog. It is from there that the main problem of communication derives: “The more intense the dialog is the more differences and peculiarities the participants of the dialog have. And the bigger are the differences between their age, social status and cultural parameters the deeper and richer the dialog can become”.

What is lacking in the Belarusan civil society for establishing real dialog? “Lack of people’s consolidation in the same cultural places, - Uladzimir Matskevich is sure. – Businessmen are communicating only between themselves, as well as cultural bohemia, politicians and state officials do. And it results in weak links between people, having negative effect on the whole dialog”.

Uladzimir Matskevich can easily imagine technical side of the communication area: “First, communication is established in the Parliament; however, if our Parliament is mono-ideological and as reticent as ours, it is not a place for communication anymore. Next example are the clubs where people from different social spheres meet. One thing is when people of culture are discussing some problems between themselves, and when they are meeting at the concerts. Concerts are not for communication, they are designed for listening to music. Different people can listen to jazz; but to establish communication between them there should be an artificially designed area for their communication. Art can be the reason for meetings under the circumstances when there are no social and elite clubs. Theatre, exhibitions and jazz clubs should be attractive, fashionable and prestigious for that. In this case it will be a good reason for people to meet and enter into communication”.