[aaus-list] Of russophiles and scholars

tdurbak at verizon.net tdurbak at verizon.net
Thu Sep 11 23:22:16 EDT 2008 

It appears to me that some of the writers are confusing two things: 
suppport of Russia's anti-Ukrainian politics and disagreement about the 
causes and results of the events in Georgia.  Surely people can disagree 
about the latter without being accused of being anti-Ukrainian.  Just 
because a writer believes that Georgia acted irresponsibly does not mean 
that s/he supports Putin or his anti-Ukrainian politics.  Similarly, 
vigorously opposing the politics of the current US administration does 
not make one anti-American.  And, certainly, there is no need to call 
people names because one disagrees with their politics.
Tatiana Durbak

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at  7:13 PM, Walter R Iwaskiw wrote:

Dr. Sorokowski is right that russophilia should not disqualify one from 
participating in the AAUS list and that "[t]he only russophiles that 
should be excluded are those that deny the very existence of Ukraine and 
thus the validity of Ukrainian studies as such."

What should be done, though, in the case of a participant who uses (or 
abuses) the list routinely to propagate the policies of a Russian prime 
minister who has told the U.S. president that "Ukraine is 'not even a 
real state,' that much of its territory was 'given away' by Russia, and 
that it would 'cease to exist as a state' if it dared join NATO"? *

Walter Iwaskiw
Library of Congress (whose views he does not represent)

* http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122100831438617621.html 
<http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122100831438617621.html>

>>> "Sorokowski, Andrew (ENRD)" <Andrew.Sorokowski at usdoj.gov> 9/11/2008 
>>> 12:11 PM >>>
  <http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122100831438617621.html>
I was under the impression that this is a list for scholars dedicated to 
Ukrainian Studies, not an association of patriotic Ukrainian scholars. 
Therefore, russophilia should not disqualify one from participating -- 
any more than polonophilia or germanophilia or americophilia -- provided 
that one does support Ukrainian studies. We all have our biases; the 
issue is whether we can control them and be truthful and reasonably 
objective. In the academic world even (or especially) being a 
Ukrainophile can disqualify you from a job in Ukrainian studies if it 
interferes with your scholarly integrity. The only russophiles that 
should be excluded are those that deny the very existence of Ukraine and 
thus the validity of Ukrainian studies as such.
Andrew Sorokowski
US Department of Justice   (whose views he does not represent)

___________________________________

 From: aaus-list-bounces at ukrainianstudies.org 
[mailto:aaus-list-bounces at ukrainianstudies.org] On Behalf Of OSD
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:12 AM
To: solar75wind at gmail.com; chumache at illinois.edu; dsfd at unimelb.edu.au
Cc: ukrainians at yahoogroups.com; aaus-list at ukrainianstudies.org
Subject: [aaus-list] VG, F-D:biased

Yes, sounds like someone just threw a tantrum.  But I'm sure you 
wouldn't call it that.
In fact, Dr Fewdewytsch-Dickson, scholars can in fact pillory articles 
by anyone without lengthy counter-argument if the proposer of such 
articles has displayed consistent skewed/ biased patterns of thoughts, 
such as Mr Gorbach (Vuhdeem), and the article proposed again is shown to 
be a biased/ skewed piece, meant not to stimulate an objective 
discussion, as Mr Gorbach claims, but to simply ensure that his point of 
view is consistently represented, without accepting any 
counter--argument.  An example is Mr Gorbach's glee at telling the world 
that Georgia used mines first instead of trying to start an objective 
discussion on that topic and how the human rights of our Russian 
neighbors have deteriorated under the regime of Ras-Putin.
So, in fact, it is you and Vadim that are biased and skewed since 
anytime anyone raises an objection to the obviously russophillic tone of 
his emails, he, then you, jump in and accuse people of being unscholarly 
and biased.  In fact, it seems as if the two of you are in cahoots 
(perhaps you are kohutyky?) .
To the Ukrainians on this chain, do not remove yourselves from the 
email.  That has been the pattern of Ukrainians in the past.  Are we 
scholars first and then Ukrainians?  I think not since if that were the 
case, we would simply be members of our academic organizations rather 
than this one.  I propose that we are of Ukrainian heritage first then 
scholars second and as such we should encourage objective debate but not 
fall away from defending our point of view, our culture, our language 
and yes, in fact our native country's multi-pluralistic cultures but not 
at the expense of russophilic goading.
Russophilic kohutyky should be engaged in discussion, challenged and a 
positive outcome would be ideal. But in the face of consistent lies (yes 
lies, Vadim states he is not russophillic, that he is objective, but I 
point to his body of work of emails and see not one shred of evidence of 
his claims), russophillic goaders must be addressed as a topic by the 
governing board of this email chain.   Seeing such persistent disregard 
of the guidance of what should be posted by one or two kohutyky and the 
non-action of this board is confusing.
With all due respect,
Dr. Oleh Denysyk
Director, Analytics, Organ Transplantation/ Oncology
RLI Laboratories




-----Original Message-----
 From: "Daria Fedewytsch-Dickson" [dsfd at unimelb.edu.au]
Date: 09/10/2008 10:35 PM
To: "Vadim" , chumache at illinois.edu
CC: "ukrainians" , "aaus"
Subject: RE: [aaus-list] Rep. Rohrabacher (R-CA): Russia was right,U.S. 
was
wrong on Georgia


Just so. I am astounded that scholars should pillory articles proposed 
by Mr Gorbach.

They are serious and challenging.

They can also be countered by anyone willing to put in the critical 
muscle. Otherwise, merely complaining of bias without counter-argument 
is tantrum-throwing.

D.

-----Original Message-----
 From: aaus-list-bounces at ukrainianstudies.org on behalf of Vadim
Sent: Wed 9/10/2008 4:23 PM
To: chumache at illinois.edu
Cc: ukrainians; aaus
Subject: Re: [aaus-list] Rep. Rohrabacher (R-CA): Russia was right,U.S. 
was wrong on Georgia

I am not pro-Russian. I am pro-ethical and an advocate for critical
thinking and balanced analysis.

V.Gorbach


On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 9:45 PM,  <chumache at illinois.edu> wrote:
> Dear Vadim,
> Would you please consider stopping this kind of political activism on 
> behalf of Mr. Putin and K?
> Rep. Dana Rohrabacher's comments  may be worth to read about some day 
> in the future, but I have serious doubts that AAUS members should 
> suffer from this sort of the internet spam.
> V. Chumachenko UIUC
>
_______________________________________________
aaus-list mailing list
aaus-list at ukrainianstudies.org
http://www.brama.com/mailman/listinfo/aaus-list 
<http://www.brama.com/mailman/listinfo/aaus-list>

___________________________________

    GREClick here for the ultimate preparation for your GRE test.Click 
here for more information 
<http://tagline.excite.com/fc/JkJQPTgKKjRKeQO4EkC72jIeMp4AgmE9DhXXWEfqmS90hkRVePcN7J/>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
aaus-list mailing list
aaus-list at ukrainianstudies.org <mailto:aaus-list at ukrainianstudies.org>   
<mailto:aaus-list at ukrainianstudies.org>
http://www.brama.com/mailman/listinfo/aaus-list 
<http://www.brama.com/mailman/listinfo/aaus-list>   
<http://www.brama.com/mailman/listinfo/aaus-list>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.brama.com/pipermail/aaus-list/attachments/20080911/2256a70f/attachment.html

More information about the aaus-list mailing list