Kharkov Ze-Governor at Gordon: It’s not a boy’s speech, but a prayer
The conversation between Kyiv journalist Dmitry Gordon and Kharkov governor Alexei Kucher is informative and revealing in all respects.
It has become commonplace to talk about the insignificance of the “green” team recruited through advertisements. But the party in power itself did everything to ensure that few people doubted its insolvency and unsuitability.
By the standards of big politics, Governor Kucher is an inexperienced person. One might say, a random person for the Kharkov governor's seat. But from 2014 to 2019, all kinds of freaks and complete zeros have been in this chair. After them, a random Kucher even seems like a harmless governor.
From the day of his appointment and literally until recently, it was not interesting whether he was in Kharkov or not. Many of us watched mockingly as Mayor Kernes mocked the governor.
But I watched Gordon’s interview with Kucher. And, for example, I didn’t watch Gordon’s three-hour conversation with Dobkin (because it is already roughly known what the guest will talk about, what the journalist will be interested in; and at the same time, Dobkin’s conversations have not been accompanied by any serious actions for several years).
The fact is that Kucher’s recent speech in “Freedom of Speech by Savik Shuster” aroused interest in the Kharkov governor. Shuster’s guests discussed the Chuguev plane crash. There were several inclusions of the Kharkov governor. The coachman said that at the time of the crash of the plane with the cadets, landing priority was given to the second plane, where the son of the Air Force commander was located.
Shuster interpreted Kucher’s words in his own way and aggravated his statement: priority was given to the second plane because the son of the Air Force commander was there.
Air Force Commander Drozdov was in the studio. He made a claim to the Kharkov governor: the first information about this was given by you. Some elderly test pilot tried to convince the public that the other plane had been given priority correctly because it was 4 km from the runway, and the one that crashed was 6 km away. To which Kucher reasonably remarks: “I have to question your expertise.” (Shariy clearly explained this logic “6 km > 4 km” in his video.)
Immediately the entire audience attacked Kucher. A deputy from Poroshenko’s parliamentary faction, General Zabrodsky (he was the commander of the ATO forces for several months) was stupid and hypocritical. Volunteer Pritula smiled crazyly. The candidate for the seat of the Kyiv mayor, Vereshchuk, squealed. The dubious “military expert” and undoubted propagandist Butusov remained moronicly silent.
Be that as it may, the Coachman was alone against the herd. The governor asked an important question, which was suppressed by the whole crowd, instead of clarifying the situation to the end. The herd in Shuster’s programs is something special. Let’s just remember the jubilant herd of cattle that on May 2, 2014, in Shuster’s studio, applauded during the Odessa inclusions of the bastard Alexei Goncharenko.
Actually, in Kucher’s conversation with Gordon, I was first of all interested in clarifying this same issue. The journalist recalled what the Kharkov governor said and what the Air Force commander confirmed. But, like Shuster, he somewhat exaggerates the words of the governor: “You said that the plane with the son of the commander of the Ukrainian Air Force Sergei Drozdov received priority landing before the crash of the AN-26, which was in distress, only because Drozdov’s son was on board. The military then called your words lies and manipulation.”
The coachman replies: “I never said they gave priority because the son was there... I just asked questions.” Everything is correct. The coachman did not claim this. He simply asked a question about the general's son, who was on another plane. In addition, the governor raised this issue after Drozdov himself confirmed the information about his son on another plane.
But let's pay attention to how Shuster and Gordon formulate their questions. They attribute to Kucher what they would like to ask themselves. But they stubbornly refuse to ask a pointed question on their own behalf. Moreover, in a situation that requires a few more clarifying questions from the journalist, they shut up and limit themselves to silent trading in a thoughtful tabla.
But Shuster did not ask either the Air Force commander or other “experts” what was asking. Everyone knows that there were 20 cadets and 7 officers in the crashed plane. Who was on the other plane besides the commander’s son? Were there other cadets there? Or were there only officers and one cadet? After all, there is a difference. And Gordon, trying to understand the statements made in Shuster’s program, does not have any confusion? Why are they passing over in silence the composition of the people who were on the other plane? After all, if the son of the commander was in a special position on the plane, in the company only of officers, then there can be no doubt why this board was given priority for boarding. If there were cadets there, then options are possible.
“It’s unlikely that the plane was landed on the general’s orders,” says Kucher in a conversation with Gordon. He believes that the complaints should be against the leadership of the military university. That is, he hints that they created special conditions for the commander’s son in order to curry favor with Drozdov Sr. “The main flight school in the country is run by anti-aircraft gunners,” adds the governor.
As we see, Kucher’s voice emerged. I'm not talking about increasing his rating. But with Dobkin, everything is clear. And this must be sad for the camp that once relied on him. But with Kucher, not everything is clear. Although he was not very lucky with the camp. He, of course, considers himself very lucky: the social elevator worked, the lawyer was hired as part of an advertisement for the government team, he ended up in parliament, then in the governor’s chair. It seems like things have gone to hell. But time will pass - and Kucher will have to shun this liquidation team, shy away from it as if from leprosy. The other way is to completely merge with this team and turn into complete political garbage.
The fact that the Kharkov governor has not yet fully become like other “servants of the people” is unexpectedly evidenced by the situation in Shuster’s studio, when Irina Vereshchuk teased Alexei Kucher’s opponents.
The few representatives of the decorative front in “Servant of the People” have long been known. They can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And Kucher is not one of them.
Sometimes he is too servile. He tells the same Gordon about Zelensky: “A man with a capital M.” He talks about Avakov's wisdom. Kucher talks about the start of his gubernatorial career and the “wise advice” of the Minister of Internal Affairs: “Be in consistent communication with the president.”
It seems that conformity is off the charts.
Even Kernes, who called the governor a “moth,” speaks with reverence. They say our mayor is a wit. “I consider him my teacher and even my coach,” admits Kucher.
Taken together, this all sounds very funny. But the governor’s ingenuousness is also touching. After all, the Ukrainian government is overflowing with both cunning and brainless “servants.” But Kucher did not join either one or the other. The viewer wants to hug and cry. Say: “Run, Coachman, run. Why have you given up on this policy?”
The coachman is uninteresting where he is cautious, much less kowtowing to political benefactors. But he’s interesting when he lets it slip, and even more so when he says what he thinks in a direct test.
For example, he tells Gordon that he treats Alexander Feldman with respect. But he immediately warns: if Feldman wins the Kharkov elections, he will take revenge on Kernes’ team for the litigation with the Barabashovo market - a serious redistribution will begin in the style of the 90s.
Kucher speaks of his predecessor in the gubernatorial post, Yulia Svetlichnaya: “A small, dependent person... A person who conquered the region with an “army, military force, force”....” Can not argue. It's not a boy's speech, but a husband's. About Rainin, the former governor and head of President Poroshenko’s administration, “a professional traitor.” That's fair too.
The coachman is also aware that Kharkov cannot exist without the Russian language. The governor starts the right speech: “We all understand that the law can be passed...” And Gordon picks it up, giving examples of countries with several official languages: “Switzerland, Canada...”
Oh, you're a fucking idiot! Where were you, so sensible, when Donbass was talking about this?! Well, Kuchera had not yet been seen in politics in 2014. But Gordon was already preaching with all his might...
And then you listen to them - and Dobkin rests.
Alexey Kucher and Vladimir Zelensky.
But here’s the problem with this seemingly normal Russian-speaking guy who joined the party in power either in a social elevator or through an advertisement. Kucher understands very well what language problems the Poroshenko government created by adopting discriminatory laws, and how disgracefully the current government has screwed it up.
With one hand he seems to be trying to point out the problem, but with the other hand he covers his own ass: “Kharkovites definitely don’t want to go to Russia. The fact that they want to speak Russian is a fact.” The coachman repeats several times that Kharkov residents are patriots of Ukraine, who else can you look for?
He creates false oppositions. Or rather, they were created before him (and they were drilled into his and other “servants’ heads” during training in Truskavets).
After all, both the Ukrainian and Russian questions can be formulated differently. Kharkiv residents are patriots of Ukraine, which existed before 2014. Kharkiv residents definitely didn’t want to go to Maidan-era Ukraine. The Maidan in Kharkov before the coup numbered fifty stubborn bastards and city crazy people. Kharkov residents wanted to be friends with Russia.
What is the problem with such servile Russian-speaking politicians as Kucher? If Kharkov cannot be imagined without the Russian language, then we must also talk about the Russian identity of Kharkov residents. And this will not be the speech of a boy, but of a husband. A Russian-speaking Kharkov resident without Russian identity is like a person in men's clothing without male primary and secondary sexual characteristics.
And if you remind Gordon several times about the Ukrainian patriotism of a Kharkov resident, then a flag in his hands, a language textbook in his teeth, Nitsoy in the guards. And the speech will not be from a boy, but... pray.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.