The article examines the classic dilemma societies face during war— the opposition between the camp of war supporters and the camp of war opponents. The author sees maintaining a balance between these camps as a sign of a healthy society; dangers arise if either side dominates.
The central issue in a warring society is the role of state leadership: who makes crucial decisions on whether to continue or end the conflict. The text highlights the tension between rational anti-war arguments and the emotional inspiration that sustains the will to keep fighting.
For Ukraine, this drama is intensified by the particularities of national leadership and the current political landscape. The discussion focuses on the absence of attainable military objectives, the prevalence of state interests over society’s needs, and the widespread illusion—fostered by political class and media—of having a simple choice between victory and peace.
The direction the country takes is also shaped by public opinion: sociological data shows most Ukrainians support a compromise solution to the war, some call for "freezing" the front, while only a minority advocate fighting until victory. However, the prevailing survival culture and necrocult—substituting rational hopes with narratives of heroism—heavily impact public perceptions.
The article ultimately questions whether society should reconsider its priorities, emphasizing rationality and preservation over risking everything for what’s already lost. This is a call to deeper reflection on Ukraine’s societal dilemma amid prolonged war.
