The main markers of social perception of private owners by the Ukrainian population are the content of private property and the form of personal involvement of private owners in production. The research objective was to analyse the social perceptions determinants of private owners of enterprises and land. Using the data of a sociological survey conducted by the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine in August 2019, private owners’ social perceptions of the production means with different forms of management were analysed: small enterprises, large enterprises, land cultivated by the owner’s family, land cultivated by hired workers. The owners of small enterprises and the owners of land cultivated by their families enjoy greater sympathy among the Ukrainian population than owners of large enterprises and owners of land cultivated by hired workers. However, even in the case of the last two categories of private owners, positive feelings outweigh negative ones. The methods of binary logistic regression used in this research, reveal that the social perceptions of the private owners of the production means are largely consistent with social status, an ability to adapt to a market economy, and relevant value-ideological beliefs. The negative perception of private owners depends on the type of production means. In particular, respondents’ negative feelings about large enterprises owners and landowners who use hired labour are determined by the support of a planned economy and the rejection of liberal values. The impact of an external locus of control of the respondents became decisive in the negative perception of small business owners. Negative feelings about landowners who cultivate the land themselves are evident in respondents with low levels of education. Positive feelings in all cases are conditioned by the respondents’ support of liberal and mixed type of economy, their positive perception of liberal values, adaptability to market conditions, high level of education and wealthy financial situation. Neutral feelings towards private owners of all categories are evident among respondents who are undecided about the type of economy.

Recently, in many countries around the world there is a coming to power of political forces that differ from established political actors. The concept of «populism» is used when charismatic leaders and their parties offer the population to overcome existing socio-economic problems through simple, non-institutional solutions. Although these politicians and parties may differ in ideological rhetoric, they all have common features. The scientific literature indicates that several populist ideas are universal for most modern societies, which find a response among the electorate: people-centrism, anti-elitism and homogeneity of the people. In Western, established societies, there is support for right-wing populist parties. This is due to the dissatisfaction of the population with the changes caused by globalization. The processes of deindustrialization, informatization and the influx of migrants have intensified competition in the labor market. However, the decisive factor in supporting populism in Western European countries was the reaction of the once dominant sections of the population to changing values. The displacement of familiar norms of life infuriates people with traditional class identities. In contrast, in the post-communist societies of Central and Eastern Europe, in addition to the challenges of globalization, corruption and economic regulation have been added. Populist orientations in Eastern European societies are largely driven by factors related to socio-economic status and national identity. These conclusions are important for the study of populist orientations in Ukrainian society.

The article analyzes the oligarchization phenomenon of political power in Ukraine as a system of control by owners of large capital over state institutions. The formation of powerful national capital was facilitated by public opinion’s unacceptability of attracting foreign capital and the monetary form of privatization of state-owned enterprises. The negative attitude of the population to the consequences of privatization was used by the oligarchs to block institutional reforms, which led to the spread of corruption and manual methods of property redistribution. The collection of oligarchic rent from the profits of state-owned enterprises became an additional resource for the enrichment of large owners. The dependence of the state on the oligarchs was ensured by their total control over the sectors of the economy that provided the majority of revenues to the state budget. The oligarchs’ ownership of key mass media allowed them to manipulate public opinion, which blocked reform initiatives of the civil sector. This was facilitated by the socio-political division of Ukrainian society regarding the ways of the country's development. The decrease in the influence of large owners on the political life of Ukraine became possible due to the limitation of their mass media influence and the decline of their economic base under the conditions of the Russian-Ukrainian war. The process of de-oligarchization of political power in Ukraine is facilitated by the growth of social unity and trust in state institutions, the increase in the influence of the civil sector, and the economic support of Western countries.

No abstract