Even though, at this moment, she is behind bars, she is, in truth, free. For in the practice of her life is contained a vibrant metaphor of the true meaning of freedom; that there are no physical bars or temporal exercises of power that can extinguish or take away the freedom of the human spirt that resides within the human soul.
Hers is an indomitable spirit of what it means to be human. A spirit which daily, and uncompromisingly, pines for the expression of its soul to be treated with dignity and respect. It is a spirt that wants to live the truth. It is a spirit that blatantly refuses to submit itself to injustice, especially the comedic expression of legal practice exemplified in today’s Muscovy. It is a spirit that says, ‘I am free and I will be free because I stand for the truth and what is right’. It is a spirit that loudly proclaims and practices the ideal, ‘The one who lives truth, lives in liberty because it is truth that sets one free’.
Nadia is a rebel, in practice and symbolically. A rebel in Camus’s sense, in that a humans natural state is to be in rebellion against unjust authority. She raises her middle finger in the cage provided by her disingenuous captors, not just in protest, but in active rebellion, for she is unwilling to accept the authority of a court whose practice is not in any way based on fairness.
In her rebellion, she affirms that hers is a prophetic voice, a voice that condemns the “legal” practice of today, while demanding that true justice, inspired by transcendent values, will become the accepted norm in the near future. She is impatient, as well we all are, with the “theatre of the absurd” or the aspect of a “show”. For her rebellious voice demands truth, and her life practice demonstrates her unwillingness to participate in a charade. Her rebellion is an act of condemnation in that it states that lies can no longer dominate the processes, discussions and deliberations in the treatment of a human being, or any human being. Most simply, she says, “No more”, and we with her together say, “Let us not just aspire to the rule of law, but let’s choose to live by it!”
Nadiya’s voice and life example must be seen as inconvenient, troublesome, problematic and bothersome and undesirable. Because her presence and attitude is a direct condemnation of totalitarian and authoritarian practice while demanding that all submit to the practise of being governed by the rule of law. Such a voice is a challenge to authoritarianism because it exposes the blatant abuse of power. But it is also a challenge to civil society to affirm that the rule of law must be the basis of international order and relations.
Nadiya is an example of what the theologian Paul Tillich meant when he suggested that the existential question for human beings is, “What does it mean to be?” The answer he suggested is within the individuals’ quest to answer the question, “Do you have the courage to be?”
Nadiya provides the answer, in her life, behavior, and in her voice. “I will speak, and live the truth because I refuse to live a lie. I will, therefore, stand and expose lies. I do this because I am free. I demand to be treated with dignity because I am human. And if so required, I will die. Because even in my death, I will forever be free.”
I imagine and wish for her presence on the Maidan in Kyiv. And as hundreds of thousands of people gather to welcome her, there will probably be many words spoken, but it is my hope that she will lead us in the proverbial raising of the middle finger towards Muscovy and those who support its authoritarian practices.
In essence, Nadiya’s voice is a continuation of the Voice of the Maidan. It is the voice of the Heavenly Hundred. It is the attitude of the Nation. But most importantly, it is the voice and action of what it means to be human as it challenges authoritarianism.
Yuri Polakiwsky is a writer who resides both in Toronto and Kyiv. He is the author of the book, “Ukraine- A Lament of a Promise” and a member of the “Association of Ukrainian Writers and Poets” in Kyiv.
