In modern discussions about the Ukrainian language, a common argument often arises: “You can’t force people to love the Ukrainian language.” At first glance, this statement seems logical. But is it really true? And what does “love for a language” even mean? Should a language be viewed through the lens of emotion, or is it better understood as a practical tool governed by laws?
Historical Context: When Coercion Worked
Let’s start with the fact that coercion in matters of language isn’t a new concept. In the 20th century, Soviet authorities implemented large-scale Russification policies driven by terror, fear, and humiliation. Grandparents were intimidated, tortured, killed, or exiled to Siberia. They weren’t just forbidden from speaking Ukrainian—they were made to fear their own language. That fear was passed down to their children, and later to their grandchildren.
This mechanism worked for decades. It wasn’t designed to make people “love” Russian but rather to establish it as the only acceptable means of communication. And it succeeded. Today, we have generations who grew up in an environment where Russian became the norm, while Ukrainian was marginalized.
So yes, coercion can make people abandon one language and adopt another. But does it guarantee genuine “love” for the new language? No. However, history shows that coercion can reshape societal language practices.
Language Is About Discipline, Not Love
The second aspect of this debate is that language isn’t about emotions—it’s about discipline. When we went to school, no one asked if we “loved” math, physics, or chemistry. We simply had to study those subjects. Some did better, some worse, but the obligation to learn them was never questioned. The same applies to the Ukrainian language: you’re not expected to become a professor of philology. You just need to follow the generally accepted rules in public spaces.
Imagine this: you walk into a bank, and the clerk speaks to you in English. Or you call customer support, and the operator speaks French. That would feel strange, right? Because you expect people in your country to communicate in the official language. This isn’t about love—it’s about respecting the law and the social contract.
Article 10 of the Constitution: Is There a Russian-Speaking Minority?
Let’s recall Article 10 of Ukraine’s Constitution, which guarantees the protection of national minorities. But can Russian-speaking Ukrainians be considered a “minority”? The law defines a national minority as a group of people with their own identity, culture, and language, who also register as such. The Russian-speaking population in Ukraine hasn’t registered as a national minority, and most don’t identify as Russians.
Thus, claims that the Ukrainian language “oppresses” Russian are oversimplifications. The issue isn’t about suppression but about setting clear rules. If you want to speak Russian at home, no one is stopping you. But in public spaces, the rules must be uniform.
How Quickly Can Language Practices Change?
Today, generational shifts happen much faster. While a generation used to change every 20-25 years, now it can take just 10-15 years. This means changes in language practices can occur more rapidly.
However, it’s important to understand that coercion isn’t the only method. Language isn’t just about laws; it’s also about culture, education, media, and literature. The more people see Ukrainian as a tool for self-expression, the easier it will be to promote it.
Conclusion: Language Is Our Choice
No one can force you to love the Ukrainian language. But we live in a society with rules. And those rules require the use of the state language in public spaces. This isn’t about emotions—it’s about discipline and respect for the law.
If you want to keep Russian alive in your household, go ahead. But in public spaces, Ukrainian should dominate. Because it’s our identity, our history, and our future.
Yes, coercion can change language practices, but only voluntary choice can make a language truly sustainable. So let’s view Ukrainian not as an object of love or hate, but as a tool that unites us as a nation.