The Belorussian Cyber Partisan also wants to turn Belorus in to a new Israel for the Western empire. She wants her country to become a tech hub, grow their economy and attract ‘skilled workers’, part of which is driven by defence contracts. She wants it to have a strong ethic identity based around fear, and victimisation by their neighbours who want to destroy them, and to serve as a buffer for the west against their enemies.
I don’t think it’s fair to say he’s advocated for apartheid based on this, just that he admires apartheid and wants to implement a police state. A lot of this article is also attributed to a Daniel Shapiro rather than Zelenskyy.
If you completely ignore all context, everything else I mentioned, and everything else Zelensky has said, sure. Zelensky has personally lauded the banning of political parties and human rights groups advocating for the rights and protections of ethnic Russians in Ukraine
Well I asked for reading material and what you sent me didn’t support the claim. You haven’t said anything else in this thread to establish and substantiate Zelenskyy advocating for apartheid. The article is also clear that it’s the author’s speculating and just following the trajectory. I’m not saying Zelenskyy and his government aren’t Nazis, I’m just asking for condemnation to be based on verifiable non-rescinded statements. Banning socialism and being against the people is bad enough. But publicly supporting apartheid is (I think…) going to turn public opinion against him in Europe. If it’s actually something he’s advocated I want it sourced and I want it heard by my fellow Europeans.
As a counterpoint to the narrative in the article: What else is a police state necessary to enforce? My suggestion is the suppression of communism.
That’s already happening in Ukraine, so it’s not what they are talking about. Also, apartheid is already in motion there too, since 2014 when they passed some bills against the russian minority and russian speaking Ukrainians. And their shock therapy especially endangerd Donbass. And they literally started to kill them when they protested. If that’s not apartheid then what it is. Zelensky is standing on a stance of victory in this war, which means Donbas would return to Ukraine - and they want to do what exactly with Donbas then? It will escalate like never before. Again, those are the people who even in middle of losing war make senseless terror strikes against civilians and even attacked Crimea.
That’s already happening in Ukraine, so it’s not what they are talking about.
I’m suggesting that that could be all there is. It doesn’t have to be more. It’s illegal now and enforced because there’s a war going, but how is enforcement going to look once the country is stable?
since 2014 when they passed some bills against the russian minority and russian speaking Ukrainians
Okay, so this is what I want to know more about please.
If that’s not apartheid then what it is.
Apartheid is legal, that’s the big difference I’m getting hung up on. All the defacto apartheid in the world is going to faze most liberals because 1) They’re usually racist themselves and 2) “It’s just retaliation for the war by lone wolfs and it’s blown out of proportion”. But legal apartheid is non-refutable (lol let’s go with harder to refute).
Donbas would return to Ukraine - and they want to do what exactly with Donbas then?
Kill (kill is being used a hyperbolic synonym to abuse) Russian citizens and collaborators where there is legal framework for saying they supported an illegal invasion by Russia. Even in the case where the legal wording allows discrimination against those in the east, it wouldn’t illicit as strong a response from the European public as if the legal wording mentioned ethnicity.
Again, those are the people who even in middle of losing war make senseless terror strikes against civilians and even attacked Crimea.
This feels like you’re trying to convince me that the Ukrainian regime is nazis. I’m already onboard with that. I’m only not onboard with the assertion by SovereignState that I have been shown evidence that Zelenskyy has talked about a legally enforced apartheid system.
I’m suggesting that that could be all there is. It doesn’t have to be more. It’s illegal now and enforced because there’s a war going, but how is enforcement going to look once the country is stable?
Please be real. Anticommunism is going in Ukraine since 1991, it goes HARD since 2014 to the point where old babushkas are dragged and convicted in courts for presenting soviet memorabilia including posting them on internet. If after the war the same clique remains ruling nothing will stop, it will most probably escalate.
Okay, so this is what I want to know more about please.
Just a minute of search and already three separate cases. And as you can see not even only Russians, Hungarians and Greeks are targeted too. They aren’t even solely antirussian, they are raging chauvinists. Shock therapy:
Kill (kill is being used a hyperbolic synonym to abuse) Russian citizens and collaborators
It’s not even hyperbolic. Ukraine is deploying deathsquads. For example in Bucha they literally murdered people wearing white armbands, which weren’t even collaborators, just neutral people wanting to live despite war. Now when Russians retreated from some land, Ukraine is openly stating it will purge it. Hard to say how much this is happening since reliable information is scarce and media are controlled.
it wouldn’t illicit as strong a response from the European public
West is spinning everything into proukrainian message or whitewashing it or silencing it, like the aforementioned Bucha massacre, massive amounts of neonazis in Ukraine military, apartheid law, blames Russia for attacks on Russians (!) or civilians in Donbas, rampant corruption etc etc. Zelensky could be personally slaughtering infants in center of Kiev and you would hear praises of it.
I would recommend digging a bit more, a small example how narration has changed:
I’m already onboard with that
Good. That clears some of what i already wrote above. Question is, why are you thinking the banderists neonazis won’t do what every other nazis in history had done, apartheid and persecution of minorities. Hell they even TELL you they will do things like one of the clearest cases of apartheid state, Israel, is doing.
I’m only not onboard with the assertion by SovereignState that I have been shown evidence that Zelenskyy has talked about a legally enforced apartheid system.
As i said before, that is already legally in place. They are just telling you it will be worse.
Please be real. Anticommunism is going in Ukraine since 1991, it goes HARD since 2014
But they still had two breakaway socialist republics. Shocktherapy will only exacerbate anti-government opinions. If the enforcement wasn’t strong enough before, then this war is a good excuse to strengthen it now.
Just a minute of search and already three separate cases.
But these aren’t based on non-alienable traits. The first one is refuted in the reply by the commission. The second is the most damning but still doesn’t point towards punishments for private use. The third source even says that Russian is allowed as an option, as long as the publication is fully accessible in Ukrainian. Other countries have similar laws. Over time, Russian language use might die out because of them but it’s not apartheid.
I’ve seen compelling evidence of planned and actively happening liberalisation. I’m onboard here as well. Abuse was meant to include murder, but also smaller abuses. I’m also not pretending the west’s propaganda isn’t overt. I’d like credible smoking-gun sources on apartheid in part to fight some of this propaganda.
Question is, why are you thinking the banderists neonazis won’t do what every other nazis in history had done, apartheid and persecution of minorities.
(De jure, because de facto persecution of minorities is happening) Because I think it would be unpopular in Europe and they want Europe’s support. Vigilantism can serve their needs fine. And I’m not even saying you’re wrong and it hasn’t happened, just that the evidence I’ve seen is ambiguous, and I requested unambiguous evidence.
If something is written in law that allows serious discrimination based on inalienable traits, then that can be broadcast and change the narrative about the regime. A hundred photos of nazis is only just that. One hundred photos. They have 40M people, so it’s squishy. (Yes I understand that there were 800000 Euromaiden protestors standing side by side with Nazi flag carriers) But legal code isn’t squishy. Statements by Zelenskyy aren’t squishy.
Where can I read more about this?
The Belorussian Cyber Partisan also wants to turn Belorus in to a new Israel for the Western empire. She wants her country to become a tech hub, grow their economy and attract ‘skilled workers’, part of which is driven by defence contracts. She wants it to have a strong ethic identity based around fear, and victimisation by their neighbours who want to destroy them, and to serve as a buffer for the west against their enemies.
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/09/17/zelensky-nato-ukraine-big-israel/
I don’t think it’s fair to say he’s advocated for apartheid based on this, just that he admires apartheid and wants to implement a police state. A lot of this article is also attributed to a Daniel Shapiro rather than Zelenskyy.
If you completely ignore all context, everything else I mentioned, and everything else Zelensky has said, sure. Zelensky has personally lauded the banning of political parties and human rights groups advocating for the rights and protections of ethnic Russians in Ukraine
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/russia-ukraine-zelensky-big-israel-moscow-nervous-why
This article goes into more detail.
Well I asked for reading material and what you sent me didn’t support the claim. You haven’t said anything else in this thread to establish and substantiate Zelenskyy advocating for apartheid. The article is also clear that it’s the author’s speculating and just following the trajectory. I’m not saying Zelenskyy and his government aren’t Nazis, I’m just asking for condemnation to be based on verifiable non-rescinded statements. Banning socialism and being against the people is bad enough. But publicly supporting apartheid is (I think…) going to turn public opinion against him in Europe. If it’s actually something he’s advocated I want it sourced and I want it heard by my fellow Europeans.
As a counterpoint to the narrative in the article: What else is a police state necessary to enforce? My suggestion is the suppression of communism.
That’s already happening in Ukraine, so it’s not what they are talking about. Also, apartheid is already in motion there too, since 2014 when they passed some bills against the russian minority and russian speaking Ukrainians. And their shock therapy especially endangerd Donbass. And they literally started to kill them when they protested. If that’s not apartheid then what it is. Zelensky is standing on a stance of victory in this war, which means Donbas would return to Ukraine - and they want to do what exactly with Donbas then? It will escalate like never before. Again, those are the people who even in middle of losing war make senseless terror strikes against civilians and even attacked Crimea.
I’m suggesting that that could be all there is. It doesn’t have to be more. It’s illegal now and enforced because there’s a war going, but how is enforcement going to look once the country is stable?
Okay, so this is what I want to know more about please.
Apartheid is legal, that’s the big difference I’m getting hung up on. All the defacto apartheid in the world is going to faze most liberals because 1) They’re usually racist themselves and 2) “It’s just retaliation for the war by lone wolfs and it’s blown out of proportion”. But legal apartheid is non-refutable (lol let’s go with harder to refute).
Kill (kill is being used a hyperbolic synonym to abuse) Russian citizens and collaborators where there is legal framework for saying they supported an illegal invasion by Russia. Even in the case where the legal wording allows discrimination against those in the east, it wouldn’t illicit as strong a response from the European public as if the legal wording mentioned ethnicity.
This feels like you’re trying to convince me that the Ukrainian regime is nazis. I’m already onboard with that. I’m only not onboard with the assertion by SovereignState that I have been shown evidence that Zelenskyy has talked about a legally enforced apartheid system.
Please be real. Anticommunism is going in Ukraine since 1991, it goes HARD since 2014 to the point where old babushkas are dragged and convicted in courts for presenting soviet memorabilia including posting them on internet. If after the war the same clique remains ruling nothing will stop, it will most probably escalate.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2014-010539_EN.html?redirect
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210401-new-law-stokes-ukraine-language-tensions
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/01/19/new-language-requirement-raises-concerns-ukraine
Just a minute of search and already three separate cases. And as you can see not even only Russians, Hungarians and Greeks are targeted too. They aren’t even solely antirussian, they are raging chauvinists. Shock therapy:
https://mronline.org/2022/08/01/west-prepares-to-plunder-post-war-ukraine-with-neoli
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/economics-of-disintegration-in-ukraine/
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-is-ripe-for-shock-doctrine/
https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-24/ukraine-supplement/states-of-shock/
As seen above, it is legal.
It’s not even hyperbolic. Ukraine is deploying deathsquads. For example in Bucha they literally murdered people wearing white armbands, which weren’t even collaborators, just neutral people wanting to live despite war. Now when Russians retreated from some land, Ukraine is openly stating it will purge it. Hard to say how much this is happening since reliable information is scarce and media are controlled.
West is spinning everything into proukrainian message or whitewashing it or silencing it, like the aforementioned Bucha massacre, massive amounts of neonazis in Ukraine military, apartheid law, blames Russia for attacks on Russians (!) or civilians in Donbas, rampant corruption etc etc. Zelensky could be personally slaughtering infants in center of Kiev and you would hear praises of it.
I would recommend digging a bit more, a small example how narration has changed:
Good. That clears some of what i already wrote above. Question is, why are you thinking the banderists neonazis won’t do what every other nazis in history had done, apartheid and persecution of minorities. Hell they even TELL you they will do things like one of the clearest cases of apartheid state, Israel, is doing.
As i said before, that is already legally in place. They are just telling you it will be worse.
But they still had two breakaway socialist republics. Shocktherapy will only exacerbate anti-government opinions. If the enforcement wasn’t strong enough before, then this war is a good excuse to strengthen it now.
But these aren’t based on non-alienable traits. The first one is refuted in the reply by the commission. The second is the most damning but still doesn’t point towards punishments for private use. The third source even says that Russian is allowed as an option, as long as the publication is fully accessible in Ukrainian. Other countries have similar laws. Over time, Russian language use might die out because of them but it’s not apartheid.
I’ve seen compelling evidence of planned and actively happening liberalisation. I’m onboard here as well. Abuse was meant to include murder, but also smaller abuses. I’m also not pretending the west’s propaganda isn’t overt. I’d like credible smoking-gun sources on apartheid in part to fight some of this propaganda.
(De jure, because de facto persecution of minorities is happening) Because I think it would be unpopular in Europe and they want Europe’s support. Vigilantism can serve their needs fine. And I’m not even saying you’re wrong and it hasn’t happened, just that the evidence I’ve seen is ambiguous, and I requested unambiguous evidence.
If something is written in law that allows serious discrimination based on inalienable traits, then that can be broadcast and change the narrative about the regime. A hundred photos of nazis is only just that. One hundred photos. They have 40M people, so it’s squishy. (Yes I understand that there were 800000 Euromaiden protestors standing side by side with Nazi flag carriers) But legal code isn’t squishy. Statements by Zelenskyy aren’t squishy.