Quite the double standard, isn't it? Putin is systematically oppressing and imprisoning any relevant opposition and hasn't faced a free and fair election in 20 years, yet his democratic legitimization isn't questioned like Zelensky's.



Likewise, one commonly used argument regarding post-Maidan Ukraine is that its government was illegitimate and didn't reflect the "will of the Ukrainian people", and particularly that not even the 2014 elections cured this lack of legitimization because the people of the Donbass provinces didn't participate, so that the opposition to the pro-Western Maidan movement was robbed of its power base.
Well, guess what, one third of Ukraine's population has fled the country since 2022, so even if an election had taken place at the regular date in 2024, even that wouldn't have given Zelensky sufficient legitimacy according to this same logic.

May I also remind the thread of the fact that the UK didn't hold an election between 1935 and 1945? The ongoing war in the country caused the election which was regularly scheduled for 1940 to be delayed by a full 5 years, yet nobody in their right mind would claim that the UK ceased being a democracy, or that Churchill was an illegitimate leader because of it.

My question is what's wrong with a Ukraine election? If the election takes place after a ceasefire where people aren't intimidated from voting

If Zelenskyy is as well liked as the media says, he will be reelected

This post was edited by El1te on Feb 18 2025 07:57pm

Ukraine needs to hold new presidential and parliamentary elections asap once a peace agreement has been signed, no doubt about that. I would even argue that once an agreement has been negotiated, it should be confirmed by a referendum. This would also take the winds out of the sails of any radical ultranationalist groups trying to coup again the government, or spinning some sort of stab-in-the-back myth after the war.


All of these points are a different thrust, however, from the recent Russian talking point - which Trump seems to think has merit - about Zelensky not being a legitimate/legitimized negotiator for the Ukrainian side right now, during the upcoming negotiations.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Feb 18 2025 08:11pm

Isn't it? I think western media pretty much trumpets every opportunity to call Putin a dictator. All the loaded language that professional journalists are supposed to use to presume a neutral POV are thrown out the window and we go well beyond criticizing Putin for his repression and totalitarianism and step into questioning his legitimacy and whether Russians actually support him.

Its one of those 'two wrongs don't make a right' and one person being bad doesn't make the other good. Or equally bad, either.
At least Russians enjoy the benefit of a democracy at the federal level through their Duma and generally support Putin by a huge margin and have representation of all their citizens. Zelensky is claiming sovereignty over people who have been disenfranchised since the revolution, people over whom western Ukraine have never held any power or representation, and Zelensky does it without the trappings of democratic process at this point. Putin took a country that was historically an absolute shitshow of purges, massacres, repression and corruption and liberalized it to an extent with a relatively soft touch for locking up average citizens and pretty few and far between political assassinations instead of widespread mass killings. There's an honest question to be had about how our country's respective dials of repression started bouncing around after January 6th, because Putin was still locking up people in response to protests against him or being aided by western intelligence, but his courts were often lenient and doing catch and release for average russian chucklefucks who weren't major dissidents. We stuffed an entire prison complex with political prisoners for the crime of supporting Trump.

People should consider how Trump operates as it follows a pattern. Make large scale threats then scale down the ask and settle on some middle ground "deal". Tariffs is a good example.

During his first term he was constantly harping on about the Euros not spending enough on defense. Pulling out of NATO? Empty threat that everyone knew would not happen with an admin filled of neocons and a media fully neocon aligned. Biden was more than happy to keep us spending the lions share and asking for nothing from Europe.

Fast forward to today. If he wants to get the Euros to spend more, how does he accomplish it? Empty threats about leaving NATO again? lolno. Or how about try something that would cause them to panic and hold emergency meetings like holding meetings with Russia and getting a peace deal done without their input all of the sudden.

If he forces Europe to commit hundreds of billions to Ukraine it would be a massive win from his POV. He would get what he wanted 10 years ago, we pull back in funding and they replace us. I'm still not entirely convinced Trump is actually earnest about giving serious concessions to the Russians. He could be serious about a peace deal, he could be serious about cutting aid to Ukraine but simultaneously this could be a maneuver to force the Euros to spend something they've shirked literally for decades.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Feb 18 2025 08:39pm

I'd much rather have a dictator at the helm that deport everyone than have a liberal that bring in the whole 3rd world ruining what our ancestors built.

LOL.

Imagine the arrogance of the EU, believing that the US is required to include them in all talks with non-EU nations or they're "deciding European affairs".

Clowns. First they DEMAND that we arm and bankroll Ukraine, literally deciding European affairs, in a region of zero significance or benefit to the US. Then they scream because we stop funding a war that doesn't benefit us. Then they claim that we shouldn't conduct our own negotiations with a nation we are actively sanctioning to our own detriment, because Europe?

Incredible.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Feb 18 2025 08:51pm

you are right here.

ultimately the winds of change are blowing around Ukraine. I dont fully understand all the mechanisms the US has in western countries, I am assuming that USAID is only one finger of a hand, and the US has many hands. the point I am stressing here is, if Trump removes the mechanisms that the US has in countries like Ukraine, to make them, pliable, then what will force Ukraine to swallow this betrayal, because it is a betrayal (granted, a betrayal that was telegraphed even before the war started, noting this was Russia's red line).

If Ukraine refuses to accept the "deal" then we may be looking at a total defeat for Ukraine when the US pulls its money and troops out of Ukraine. That wont be pretty.

This post was edited by ferdia on Feb 19 2025 02:05am

You wouldn't be making unfounded accusations that Putin hasn't been freely elected, if the United States did not rig the 1996 Russian presidential election to get Yeltsin another term so the plunder under privatization could go on.
Putin is popular because he was the candidate that was supposed to continue the status quo for the oligarchs, but instead when he got in office he had a round table meeting where he gave them two options either they sign over their shares of the industries that got sold to them under privatization, or they go to the Gulag.
This was really popular with the Russian people who had seen no greener pastures after switching to a private enterprise economy that went nowhere through the 1990's
I don't question his ability to get re-elected by wide margins, we can look at other countries who have re-elected the same person, FDR in the United States got elected for four consecutive terms, Bibi Netanyahu has been Prime Minister of our shining Democratic ally Israel for the last 17 years.
Even The United States held elections during its civil war, and there are plenty of people saying Churchill was illegitimate and the cause of WW2.
Ultimately the people remaining in Ukraine need to be given a choice, even if its only those remaining in Western Ukraine.

This post was edited by PapaPsych on Feb 19 2025 02:54am

The ask was simply not to interfere in politics, not to sell out to foreign investors and stick to business only. Everybody except Khodorkovsky & Berezovsky agreed and kept their businesses. Many now quietly retired in Switzerland, Monaco, United States or Russia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semibankirschina

This post was edited by Malopox on Feb 19 2025 03:17am