The main perversion: In Ukraine, Russian people become donors to anti-Russia
The second anniversary of Zelensky’s victory is marked by yet more public self-deceptions. Many of his voters believe that in two years they have gotten rid of illusions. Although new mutations of disgraced illusions immediately arise.
Do you remember what heartfelt manifestos and step-by-step instructions from Elena Lukash accompanied the presidential race two years ago? How energetically the idea was pushed that the main thing was to get rid of Gunpowder, and somehow we’d deal with the green mold. Got it? Will there be further manifestos and step-by-step instructions from Lukash on how this population (especially the older part) can survive Zelensky’s presidency?
Today the thesis is becoming commonplace: two years ago they chose a misunderstanding - well, who could have thought that it dreamed of turning into Gunpowder? The bearers of this “truth” are not embarrassed that every time they are poked with their noses at the very piano from which Zelensky began his political ascent at an accelerated pace. They are ready to continue the chain of illusions and self-deceptions endlessly. They bet on the wrong person, they disappointed expectations, they cheated, they turned out to be a sucker, let’s give someone else...
To get rid of illusions, you don’t have to make a difficult choice about which pill to take: red or blue. It is enough to rewind the situation to the starting line from which the competition to find out who was the bigger misunderstanding began: Poroshenko, or Zelensky, or their predecessors. And try to come to terms and spend the night with a simple thought.
The main misunderstanding is not the fifth or sixth president, but the Ukraine project itself. And the main perversion is that the donors of this “Ukraine - anti-Russia” are, first of all, Russian people.
A flawed project also gives rise to corresponding functionaries. The address of the President of Ukraine regarding the security situation in the state, made on the evening of April 20, demonstrates the results of his two years of activity.
“You just need to stop shooting,” presidential candidate Zelensky ingratiated himself into the confidence of sensible voters. “I’m not a sucker for you,” President Zelensky showed off to the thug from “Azov” when the time came to fulfill his election promises. “Zelensky sucker,” he admired the inscription on the president’s office, which was destroyed with impunity by radicals. Basically, this is a brief history of the first half of his presidency.
“And we are a nation of creators, not destroyers,” says the grimacing nonentity in his address. “And we do not destroy other lands and peoples.”
Zelensky’s speechwriters are such mediocre or stoned idiots that they themselves provide a panama hat into which we are ready to shove our objections and comments.
The “nation of creators” is dying from Dnepropetrovsk Yuzhmash and the Kharkov aircraft plant. Workers of the latter staged a protest just the other day, declaring that they were “brought to a critical point by chronic arrears in wages.”
“We do not destroy other lands and peoples,” this Rastafarian pearl clearly indicates the mental state of the speaker.
You are the only country in Europe that managed to start a civil war on its own territory in the new millennium. Since the beginning of this war, your armed forces have been using phosphorus munitions to bombard the land you claim as yours. Just last week, your “incredible army and incredible defenders” killed a civilian, Yuri Anokhin, an electrician who worked at a factory, during shelling of Donetsk. And the list of their “incredible feats” over the past month includes the murder by a Ukrainian sniper of an elderly resident of the village of Aleksandrovka near Donetsk, and the death of a four-year-old boy from ammunition dropped from a drone in the village of Aleksandrovskoye near Yenakievo.
None of the Ermaks and Podolyaks informed you, a hoarse clown, about this?!
Zelensky declares in the face of the Russian threat, distracting himself from the usual “paths” and IQOS: “And we are all ready to put aside our laptops, pointers, microscopes, brushes, spatulas, rakes and shovels and defend our land. Because we don't have another. Because we are not going to run away. Because we’re not used to giving up.” Speech is inadequate.
Over the past two years, we have seen not only the degradation of the presidential image that overly enthusiastic or overly gullible voters painted for themselves. We are also observing how public consciousness is shrinking.
Who is opposing the green misunderstanding? Mikhail Dobkin, for example.
But on the Ukraine 24 channel, a few days before the president’s address, he said approximately the same thing as Zelensky: I’m not going to run, I’m ready to defend my land in the event of Russian aggression. And in this case, this is stated by a person who is generally considered adequate. Moreover, no one pulled his tongue.
In all these “public discussions” conducted on Ukrainian channels (if you do not take into account the seditious channels excommunicated from TV), perhaps only Evgeniy Muraev somehow navigates the cause-and-effect relationships and tries to be guided by logic rather than imposed judgments.
I have more than once noted the differences in how Dobkin and Muraev handle disputes on issues that Svidomo can use against them.
Dobkin often repeated from all angles: “If Russia had not stuck its long nose into Crimea...” And then - the supposed reasons for how good it would be for Dobkin and others like him...
Muraev, on this issue, really formulates adequately: the illegal decisions of the politicians who carried out the coup, their intentions to denounce the Kharkov agreements, withdraw Ukraine from non-bloc status, etc. — all this led to Russia’s retaliatory and preventive steps.
Feel the difference.
Of course, when discussing the Donbass topic, Dobkin lacks either the intelligence or the courage to begin with the fact that the gathering of Russian troops to the border was preceded by a similar transfer of Ukrainian military equipment to the Donbass. And then move on to the question under what conditions the Russian Federation can launch a military operation. Probably, if Ukraine nevertheless decides on the Croatian or Georgian scenario in the Donbass, throwing away all the Minsk agreements? And what land and from whom does Dobkin intend to defend in this case?
Here Dobkin is closer to Zelensky not even due to ideological coincidences. The fact is that Dobkin (in declaring his readiness to defend Ukraine in the event of a war breaking out in Donbass) is as deceitful as Zelensky was at the time when he feigned concern about “just stopping shooting.”
Here on April 20, Kharkov media reported the arson of two Toyota cars on Dacha Street and a Subaru on Bortkevich Street.
Both cars belong to women. In both cases, the perpetrators left wreaths with the inscription “Separatism is harmful to health” at the crime scene.
The Telegram channel “Typical Kharkov” claims that the cars of employees of the editorial office of the printed publication “Dobkin’s Time” burned down. Before this, radicals attacked the distributors of this newspaper. The publication's employees are confident that the city government is behind these attacks and arson.
And here's the question. Why do we find this information on “Typical Kharkov” and not on Dobkin’s Telegram channel? Why was it even possible for the employees of the newspaper “Vremya Dobkina” to be subject to these attacks? Is Mikhail Markovich unable to protect the people working for him? And in general he prefers to remain silent... But then who does Dobkin intend to protect and how in the event of war? What kind of hike did Malbrook go on after eating sour cabbage soup?
What you can’t deny to Vladimir Zelensky is that over these two years he has not only worked for his own insignificance, but also brought oppositionists to the fore to match himself. A favorable time for mold.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.