"Elections right now are a tsunami for the state that will split Ukraine," Zelensky told journalists.
  • kingofras@lemmy.worldEnglish
    321·
    23 days ago

    This is a difficult tossup. Volodymyr knows we’re in a world where autocrats fabricate whatever narratives to cling on to power, like Benji, Donny, Vladdy, Modi, Xi, so you can understand some people see that he benefits from sustaining the war so he too can hold onto power.

    On the other side of that argument is that even if he were to organise elections, that would be like opening a honey jar right next to a wasp nest. Given what St Petersburg has been able to poll off with Maga and Brexit, the time for elections may be over. I had a different opinion a few years ago, but in times of war (and ecocidal collapse) humans are so preoccupied with survival that they historically tend to just trust a strongman. They don’t tend to be fantastic or great, but in the case of Zelenskyy, I would still place him in the good category.

    • groet@feddit.orgEnglish
      7·
      22 days ago

      On big problem is also this: many of the strongman started by being “good” before turning “evil”.

      They often bring actually change in a rigid and locked down situation. And often people have tangible benefits as a result. That’s why the autocrats often have broad support in the population. They actually helped them 20 years ago. People remember the good things of the past and ignore the terrible things of the present.

      I really don’t want to be in his position and I don’t know how to defend an election against Russian propaganda without severely limiting freedom of speech/press.

      • omgboom@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        22 days ago

        Name one autocrat that was a good person before taking power, just because I’m curious

        • groet@feddit.orgEnglish
          2·
          22 days ago

          I very deliberately put good in quotes.

          His tenure consisted of economic recovery from the economic crisis of 2001, the start of EU membership negotiations, and the reduction of military influence on politics. In late 2012, his government began peace negotiations with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) to end the Kurdish–Turkish conflict, negotiations which ended three years later. […] Erdoğan’s presidency has been marked by democratic backsliding and a shift towards authoritarianism.

          Mugabe’s administration expanded healthcare and education. […] Pursuing decolonisation, Mugabe emphasised the redistribution of land controlled by white farmers to landless blacks; […] He was praised as a revolutionary hero of the African liberation struggle who helped free Zimbabwe from British colonialism, imperialism, and white minority rule. Critics accused Mugabe of being a dictator responsible for economic mismanagement and widespread corruption and human rights abuses, including anti-white racism, crimes against humanity, and genocide.

          Often “good” just means “ended the (civil) war (by killing lot of the opposing side), thus bringing economic stability and growth while rebuilding infrastructure and (propagandised) education.”

        • GraniteM@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          21 days ago

          “Good person” might be a stretch, but plenty of autocrats come to power in situations where people’s real needs are not being met, and they are able to present a plausible-enough case that they ought to be given extraordinary powers in order to provide for them. Whether it’s a good person looking to sweep away a corrupt old system or a prospective dictator looking for a way to exploit vulnerability, the pathway can be much the same.