On March 3, 2021, a meeting was held from a series of unifying practices, which was devoted to the topic of traditions and their role in modern society in Kyrgyzstan. Three experts, Chinara Seidakhmatova, Shavkat Atakhanov and John Ali made reports on the topic.
Chinara S. dwelled on the difference in worldview in defining traditions, emphasizing the difference between scientific and people’s methods of thinking and the impossibility of their consensus. Chinara defined traditions as unwritten norms and rules used to build a social system. She highlighted the existence of a rigid vertical hierarchy in traditional society as the basis of order. A person in such a society did not exist as a separate person, but as an element of the system. Tolerance and other similar ideas have destroyed all kinds of hierarchy, according to the speaker, and have led to the modern crisis. The Manas pattern has been proposed as a possible harmonious model for the Kyrgyz community.
Ali D. made a report on the example of the Dungan culture and emphasized that the Dungan community now faces two major tasks: 1. to enter the modern society of the country without conflict, 2. to preserve their identity. He stressed that at this stage the state does not contribute to the solution of any of these tasks, especially the second. An example of teaching the Dungan language, its non-inclusion in social processes was identified as the most serious challenges. Ali D. emphasized that the Dungans have a concept of a network picture, which in meaning and function fully corresponds to the Manas pattern.
Shavkat Atakhanov from Osh in his message focused on the phenomenon of “export of traditions” and spoke about the process of reforming the previously agreed and established traditions of Uzbeks, about the dynamics of denial of “traditions of the fathers” by young generations, about intergenerational conflict on cultural and religious grounds, about lack of traditional authorities. Shavkat, as a “negative tradition”, cited the return of the “nationality” column in the modern Kyrgyz passport and shared a case from his personal experience, how this column created the basis for corruption schemes at the borders.
The discussion was attended by Maksat Chaki, Daniyar Mukambetov, Aida Aaly, Gulzat Bayalieva, Ernest Abdyzhaparov, Keeshbek Aitikeev, Talantaaly Bakchiev, Zhumagazy Sadyr uulu, Gulnara Aitpaeva. The group did not experience serious contradictions in the definition of traditions and more or less similar opinions were expressed here. However, it cannot be said that the group was able to develop an agreed understanding on the use of traditions at the present time. The main contradiction arose between the relationship between the concept of “titular nation” and “others”. Some participants believed that the use of such a term, the restoration of Kyrgyz traditions and the building of society on their basis will become a mechanism for establishing the “correct order”, which will be socially beneficial for all the peoples of the country. Others strongly objected and believed that highlighting the “nationality” column in the passport, highlighting the traditions of one, albeit the main and numerous people of the country, leads to increased social injustice, including in relation to this people itself.
