17. The Revolution of Dignity: A Space for Dialogue and Multiple Perspectives

Activity objective

To explore the complexity of the Revolution of Dignity by examining issues that can be interpreted in different ways and do not lend themselves to simple answers.

To encourage participants to develop and support their arguments about the key events of the Revolution of Dignity through critical reflection and dialogue.

To foster informed civic engagement by creating a safe space for active listening, respectful dialogue, and the exploration of diverse perspectives.

Expected learning results

The participants will:
recognize the complexity of controversial issues and the diversity of interpretations of historical events;
provide substantiated arguments about the main events of the Revolution of Dignity;
practice active listening and demonstrate respect for opinions that differ from their own;
articulate and justify their own views on complex social and political issues;
recognize that changing one’s opinion in response to convincing arguments is a sign of critical thinking rather than weakness;
appreciate the value of open dialogue and a diversity of perspectives as essential elements of a democratic society.

Description of the activity

Participants study a range of statements about the Revolution of Dignity and examine different viewpoints before presenting their own. The activity develops critical thinking, the ability to construct and support arguments, and the willingness to consider alternative viewpoints. 

1. Divide the participants into pairs. Then ask them to arrange themselves in two circles—an inner circle and an outer circle, standing face-to-face.  Encourage the participants to spread out around the room, leaving enough space for each pair to talk comfortably without disturbing the others.
2. Explain that you will read discussion statements. For each statement, the participants in the outer circle argue in its favor, while those in the inner circle argue against it. Allow one minute (or up to two or three minutes, if needed) to prepare arguments, followed by one minute for discussion.
3. Read the statements one by one. Choose five to seven items from the list below, or adapt the selection to suit your group’s age and experience. Give the participants a minute to think of arguments before inviting them to exchange views with their partner. If you wish, signal halfway through the discussion (for example, after 30 seconds) so that both participants have an equal opportunity to speak. It may be helpful to begin with a simple example to help participants become familiar with the format before moving on to more challenging topics. For example: “School students and university students should focus on their education rather than taking an interest in politics or participating in protests.” Alternatively, you may choose a warm-up statement on an entirely different topic that is likely to engage the group. 
4. Once participants have discussed all the statements, introduce the second part of the activity. Divide the room into two parts (you can use masking tape to do it) and explain that participants will now have a foot debate. Those who agree with a statement should stand on one side of the line, while those who disagree should stand on the other (you can also place signs reading Agree and Disagree on the corresponding sides). The farther participants stand from the line, the more they agree or disagree. Standing on the line indicates that they are undecided.  Read each statement aloud and invite several participants to explain their position. The participants are free to move during the discussion if they find another person’s argument persuasive, signaling that their views have changed.
5. Read the first statement from the list. Once the participants have taken their places in the room, ask 1–2 representatives from each side to explain their choice. Emphasize that during the discussion, it is both possible and encouraged to change one’s position if someone’s arguments are convincing. As a moderator, remember to ask who has changed their point of view following our discussion. It doesn’t have to be a radical change; perhaps it’s just half a step toward greater or lesser conviction.
6. Once the discussion of all planned statements is complete, ask the group to sit in a circle to summarize the discussion (reflection)

List of Statements

1. Even if the Association Agreement with the EU had been signed in 2013 without any protests, Russia would still have launched a hybrid war against Ukraine to prevent its escape from the Russian sphere of influence.
2. Performances, songs, and artworks created during the Revolution of Dignity were nothing more than entertainment and had no impact whatsoever on the course of events.
3. In any physical confrontation between protesters and law enforcement, the blame always lies with the latter, as they hold the authority and possess weapons.
4. Social media and independent online broadcasts (live streams) played a more significant role in the Maidan’s victory than the speeches of opposition politicians at the time.
5. The large-scale “Leninopad” (Lenin monuments falling) and the renaming of streets, which began during the Revolution of Dignity, were untimely and merely diverted public attention from urgent economic reforms.
6. The Revolution of Dignity reinforced the Ukrainian language as a key marker of patriotism, thereby diminishing the role and visibility of Russian-speaking citizens in the protest movement’s public narrative.
7. The fact that more than a decade later, most of those who organized and carried out the shootings on the Maidan have still not been brought to justice highlights the continuing failure to uphold the core values and ideals of the Revolution of Dignity.
8. The Revolution of Dignity fostered a so-called syndrome of exaggerated expectations among Ukrainians, causing society to take an excessively critical view of any legitimate government, thereby preventing the country’s stable development.
9. The Revolution of Dignity led to a change in political leadership but did not dismantle the oligarchic and clan-based system of state governance.
10. The economic crisis and devaluation of the hryvnia (Ukraine’s national currency) in 2014–2015 were a direct consequence of the instability caused by the Maidan, rather than the policies of the previous regime.
11. Without the financial, organizational, and lobbying efforts of the Ukrainian diaspora, the Maidan would not have been able to maintain its momentum.
12. The involvement of right-wing organizations, particularly Pravyi Sektor (The Right Sector), damaged Ukraine’s international image and provided the Kremlin with a powerful tool for its information war.

Reflection

Tips for teachers/ educators

Your role is that of a facilitator, not a judge. Your role is to moderate the process, not to act as the final authority. Refrain from expressing your views or evaluating the participants’ answers. The discussion and the process of developing and exchanging arguments are far more important than arriving at a final “correct” answer.

Create a safe space. Before starting the exercise, establish some rules for a respectful discussion. Emphasize that participants are free to express their views, as long as they do not undermine others’ dignity. Remind participants of a key principle of democratic dialogue: “We criticize ideas and arguments, not people.”

Ensure that all viewpoints receive equal consideration. Invite participants with different perspectives to share their views, but do not pressure anyone to contribute. If one person dominates the discussion, thank them for their contribution and invite others to join in: “It would be interesting to hear from those who haven’t spoken yet.”

Pace and time management. Avoid devoting too much time to any one statement—the recommended time is up to five minutes per statement. This will help maintain participants’ engagement and attention throughout the activity.

Encourage confidence and independent thinking. Emphasize that changing one’s position in response to convincing arguments is a sign of critical thinking, not weakness or conformism. If someone stands alone or is in a minority, thank them for the courage to have their independent opinion. Do not allow the group to pressure the minority.

Required materials

• A room or other area large enough for participants to move around freely;
• Masking tape (it is optional because you can divide the room into two parts by simply drawing a line);
• Sheets of paper with the phrases “I agree” and “I disagree” printed or clearly written on them (optional);
• A list of statements (these can be displayed on a slide so that participants have time to read them). It is important that these statements appear one after another, rather than all at once);
• Chairs for everyone to sit on during the reflection session

Authors/Copyright

Lesia Yurchyshyn, Novopechersk school-lyceum of levels I – III, and Chrystyna Chushak, the European Wergeland Center.