- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #2,761
Complete nonsense. Shariy was one of Zelensky's competitors for the presidency, then after Zelensky came to power he banned his party. It was a move against a political competitor using the power of the government apparatus once Zelensky was in power. Check the dates of the relevant events before arguing about their meaning. So after the '14 uprising Shariy and his movement wasn't banned. But Zelensky comes to power and he is. And let's be clear, if you ban any political party that the government deems to be "potentially hostile" you don't really have a democracy. What you're left with then is what Putin called a "sovereign democracy" and what I call an authoritarian oligarchy given the larger context here present.Once there is a violent uprising of military scale, there is no question anymore to let potentially hostile parties agitating freely. And sometimes non-hostile parties can be victim.
It's not good. But that's how it happens.
EDIT: To clarify, what I mean is that if you ban "any", as in any party the government feels like banning because they're declared "potentially hostile". I don't mean banning a single party immediately destroys democracy. And we're not talking about one party in the case of Ukraine. We're talking about a thorough sanitizing of the political space.
Last edited: