Inspiration cannot triumph without criticism. For inspiration is like the tonic in a musical composition — the main, stable note, the center of the tonality, of action. Criticism is the subdominant, a chord that creates tension and leads toward the dominant, and then resolves back to the tonic.

In public life, the sense that you are being heard and can influence the world around you is immensely valuable. You don’t feel like a pawn on the chessboard of politics. My hero today — a soldier, analyst, volunteer, blogger, and psychologist — is Oleksiy Arestovych. But today, I would like to examine his primary, often overlooked calling: that of a critic of fate.

Attitudes toward critics have shifted throughout history, depending on socio-political contexts and cultural traditions.

In Ancient Greece and Rome, criticism was perceived as a natural extension of philosophical and theatrical discourse. Philosophers like Socrates often faced harsh criticism, which sometimes led to trials — as it did in Socrates’ case.

In antiquity, criticism was valued for its role in improving social relations. For instance: is our democracy and our value system not under threat?

But what do today’s critics offer us? Is their criticism truly fertile, without the slightest trace of arrogance?

Throughout the history of literature and politics, critics have often been associated with left-wing ideologies, especially during periods of social change — many famous critics and writers supported progressive ideas. Karl Marx and the renowned Frankfurt School of neo-Marxists come to mind. However, criticism comes in many forms and can arise from various political directions. Thus, the “left-leaning” nature of criticism is more of a trend than a rule.

Roger Scruton (1944–2020), a British philosopher, was a central figure in the modern right-wing conservative intellectual movement. His works shaped debates on the role........

© Eurasia Review