“It is here that we must acknowledge the immense value of liberalism, which since its inception during the Enlightenment has sought to instill in us a radical distinction between the religious and political order, as well as the necessity of constructing the art of governance independently of God’s law…”

— Sir Roger Scruton, How to Be a Conservative

Political order constructs laws in response to the needs of the people. It appeals to empirical experience, where, for example, discrimination can only apply to scientifically established and indisputable categories, such as sex, race or types of physical limitations. Yet the scope of such law ends where the philosophical field of identity begins. 

The vast forms and principles of self-identification do not allow the law to protect them from discrimination, as they represent, in some sense, a form of frivolous law-making or law-demanding, which is more akin to a childlike prerogative.

A very recent incident occurred in August 2025 in Ukraine, when the Ukrainian Catholic University (UCU) refused to accommodate the daughters of a Ukrainian filmmaker in its dormitory because of a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer (LGBTQ) flag in an Instagram post.

This triggered widespread debates online, with some accusing the university of discrimination. Another part of Ukrainian society defended the university, arguing that it was not involved in any discrimination. From their perspective, the university was merely protecting its values without violating any financial or other agreements.

The universality of the liberal imperative

Philosophically, it is interesting that in this case of the Ukrainian Catholic University’s reaction to the LGBTQ flag incident, classical liberal political law, according to Scruton, protects the right to act in accordance with the philosophical convictions of a religious organization, shielding it from activists’ ideology with religious features. Thus, this demonstrates the universality of liberal law, as discussed by Scruton. In a philosophical sense, his interpretation could be called an absolutist imperative.

This example illustrates an important principle in Scruton’s interpretation of liberalism — the principle of historical universalism, which states that some concepts have universal application. Law is committed to protecting religious communities from the dictates of activists’ ideology, just as it once historically protected society from the dictates of religion. And herein lies the paradoxical power of liberalism: its impartial universalism becomes an imperative, safeguarding the freedom even of those against whom it was historically directed.

How did it all end in Ukraine?

Since the conflict gained public attention, the university’s rectorate issued an apology, attributing the blame to communication failures regarding the conflict:

We wish to express our regret that the right words and appropriate steps to find an optimal solution and the method of communicating it were not found. The result was disappointment and bitterness for a talented young individual who had been admitted to the cultural studies program and whom we wanted to see as a student at UCU. We apologize — we sincerely apologize.

Here, we enter a broader and more debatable topic: the role of communication in classical liberal law. The liberal principle of universalism is not automatic; this is its main flaw. When human pride dismisses the heartfelt calls to understand the other side, reason begins to rationalize its position, creating an illusion of the only correct stance. Then the conflict spills into social media and the press, and the aggrieved party’s emotional tension increasingly collides with pride, making rational resolution nearly impossible, as it would require personal moral courage.

The resolution of the dormitory and UCU values case demonstrates the transparency of this situation — the filmmaker’s daughter withdrew her documents and declined admission.

The role of communication in classical liberal law

Classical liberal law was shaped and began its struggle within the frameworks of personal interaction and public discourse. But the world of social networks added another dimension — an online platform of validation. Conflicts like the one described above function as a form of strict social selection, which accelerates their path to public awareness.

Internet users choosing a stance “for LGBTQ” or “for UCU” gain not only recognition from supporters and a sense of community against the opposing group, but also an illusion of creation — publishing their group’s thoughts in their own words, often contributing nothing fundamentally new. 

While the first two issues — advocacy and belonging — often engage ordinary users, the problem of creation concerns influencers more. Often, this is simply a joke about the situation or a weak argument for one’s own group. These factors are key to the problem of a rational approach and dialogue between parties, often pushing the conflict toward a political form.

Once a conflict acquires a political dimension, it becomes difficult to resolve within the framework of official law. It goes beyond legal boundaries and becomes a discussion about values. Those supporting the LGBTQ community demand state punishment for the university. 

However, under Ukrainian law, the conflict does not qualify as a case of discrimination. Supporters of the filmmaker’s position aim to deliberately politicize the conflict, appealing to the values of democracy. They seek to insert LGBTQ issues into antidiscrimination legislation, thus threatening classical liberal law with the overlay of personal self-identification by nontraditional communities.

Modern liberalism, in the conservative view, still protects society’s values. But a grateful society must fulfill its duty — to safeguard it from the reactionary haste of the modern world. Developing analytical thinking helps people escape the trap of superficial judgments and become less dependent on rapidly forming group opinions. 

While it is impossible to eliminate these problems completely, strengthening critical thinking and conscious choice will protect the law from politicization and preserve the depth of democracy.

“The idea that we must be modern while defending the past, and creative while defending traditions, had a profound influence on me and over time shaped my political views…”

— Sir Roger Scruton, How to Be a Conservative

[Zania Morgan edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.