Group Nominations as an Instrument of Electoral Struggle: Ukrainian Discourse of 2019 Parliamentary Elections

  • Dmytro Boyko V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
  • Ruslan Zaporozhchenko V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
  • Artem Lytovchenko V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
  • Oksana Nekhaienko V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
  • Daria Yashkina V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University
Keywords: electoral process, group nominations, social cleavages, discourse analysis


The authors work within the framework of political sociology using interdisciplinary methodology. The article presents the results of a sociological analysis of the functions of group nominations in the electoral struggle in divided societies. The empirical basis of the article is the author's study of the electoral discourse based on the material of the parliamentary elections in Ukraine in 2019, carried out within the framework of the ARDU international research project, as well as a mass poll conducted within the framework of the same project. The authors investigate the electoral struggle as a factor and s reflection of macrosocial processes, relying on a combined theoretical and metho­dological foundation: the sociology of cleavages, social constructivism, and critical discourse analysis. The results of the analysis of the pre-election discourse and a mass survey of the adult population of Ukraine show the relationship between discursive group nominations and objective social cleavages. The division of society into conflict groups is used as a discursive tool for segmentation of the electoral audience, as well as for the consolidation and deepening of existing social divisions. Authors conclude that there is the interrelation between discursive group nominations and objective social cleavages. Group nominations (re) produce a macrosocial split of a complex, regional and ideological nature, which receives a technological dimension in the electoral discourse.


Bourdieu, P. (2005). Sociology of social space. Transl.from French by N. A. Shmatko. Moscow: Aleteya. 288 p.

Brubaker, R. (2012). Ethnicity Without Groups. Transl. from English by I. B. Borisova. Moscow: Publisher’s House HSE. 418 p.

Dublikash, T., Litovchenko, A., Muradyan, E., Nikulin, V. (2015). Radicalism in ideologies and practices of support of integrative and disintegrative projects in divided societies. Methodology, theory and practice of sociological analysis of contemporary society, 21, 38–45.

Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis and critical policy studies. Critical policy studies. Vancouver, 7, No 2, 177–197.

Fairclough, N. (2001). The dialectics of discourse. Textus, XIV(2), 231–242.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. 264 p.

Lipset, S. & Rokkan, S. (1967). Party systems and voter alignments: cross-national perspectives. New York: Free Press. 554 p.

Lytovchenko, A. (2004). The “discourse” category in sociological using. Methodology, theory and practice of socio-logical analysis of contemporary society, 137–139. Retrieved September 10, 2021 from http://school.sociology.

Lytovchenko, A., Boiko, D., Yashkina, D and Jørn Holm-Hansen (2021). The Discourse of Moderation and Cohesion as an Effective Electoral Tool: Sluha Narodu in Ukraine’s 2019 Parliamentary Campaign in Aasland, Aadne, Kropp, Sabine, eds. The Accommodation of Regional and Ethno-cultural Diversity in Ukraine. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. P. 111–142.

Lytovchenko, A., Muradyan, O. (2015). Social and Political Preconditions for Regional Divisions in Ukraine. Sociological studies of contemporary society: methodology, theory, methods. P. 90–100. Retrieved September 10, 2021 from