Fun Farm and Ukrainian Choice

To whom are we ready to delegate the protection of our rights and freedoms in the third year of the war?

Today I had an interesting conversation with my family and friends about the elections. The thoughts and clichés are familiar from the past. War does not teach. I must admit that I succumbed to emotions, and this understandably resulted in the need to write at least an article on our common topic.

“The president must be a strong businessman!” ™ This belief dates back to Soviet times, when the right to run a business belonged only to the one and only infallible party. The General Secretary was supposed to be the manager. The General Secretary. He was the boss. The rest of us didn’t have to bother with management, because those who did left for cooler latitudes. Probably, to avoid the heat. Nowadays, our times are not so much Soviet, but in such discussions, the body begins to feel the persistent taste of 19 kopecks of ice cream, familiar from childhood.

So, ladies and gentlemen! Make yourself comfortable, make yourself some coffee or tea ™grandpa Svyryd, and let’s think together about who the President should be.

The main role of the president of our country is what? I quote Wikipedia:

Article 102 of the Constitution of Ukraine stipulates that the President of Ukraine is the guarantor of state sovereignty, territorial integrity of Ukraine, observance of the Constitution of Ukraine, human and civil rights and freedoms.

What is the role of the President as defined in the Constitution? A leader and protector. Not a businessman. By the way. We already had a good manager. He raked all other farms under the rug to become an even better manager. And he wanted to bow down to the Russian tsar, because he was not a leader or a defender, but a good manager. And by and large, nothing bad can be blamed on him: he behaved like a good manager. He collected everything that came his way and multiplied his wealth. This is the role, the vocation, the dharma of an economic manager. Everything is fair. What we chose, we got.

“But no. The president should be a good businessman.“(tm) Because the economy is important. It’s an interesting logic. According to this logic, the president should build the economy, and what about the rest? We have a businessman president now. And we have a businessman in the Parliament. What does a businessman do? He buys and sells. He makes money. Nothing personal, just business. What can the parliament sell? Laws, and ultimately, the country. It can also buy. Theoretically. But this is about another parliament and another president.

Under what conditions does a businessman serve the common good? By giving a certain share of what he has created and acquired for common purposes. And to make it harmonious for him and for everyone, his activities are regulated by a whole system of laws that are written like military regulations, with sweat and blood. Take a closer look at the laws of different countries. Maybe I’m wrong, but the largest part of the system of laws is created for them, the businessmen. The foundations of the welfare of society.

Businessmen are the basis of the welfare of society only when their activities are regulated by a harmonious system of rules and laws. If they are not regulated, we have wild capitalism, or, let’s say, corruption. Because businessmen are in the position of defenders.

And finally,“He is suitable because he has not tarnished himself.” ™ This is the evolution of the criteria for selecting leaders of an entire nation.

That is why I return to the role of the President. This is the role of a leader – a protector, a kshatriya role. A leader for the people and a leader in international relations. A defender of rights and freedoms, of the rules of life written down in the Constitution, so that we don’t forget. But there is one “but”. Just one. Everyone knows that attack is the best way to defend yourself. And if the defender turns into a jailer or an aggressor, we get a barracks, a military dictatorship. Pinochet, Hitler, Stalin (according to Grandpa Trotsky’s orders). They all wanted to build something good. Only the overheads were too high. According to the overheads themselves, because it was millions of human lives. That’s some fucking political economy, isn’t it?

That’s why the role of the leader, the defender, is regulated. The Constitution and laws. Although, I see, they are much less than for businessmen (the latter are proud of the scope of the legal framework). The oath of allegiance of a US citizen sounds very interesting. What they promise to protect:

…I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic…

They swear to defend the Constitution and the laws as the supreme principles of society. Notice: not the people, not the President, but the principles.

When choosing a President, choose someone who will protect the principles of society. In our country, in our society, the principles are distorted, the Constitution departs from the principles of justice and democracy in the most important moments, but this will be corrected. The main thing, in my opinion, is to choose a leader who is ready and able to defend your rights, freedom and justice. The economy is run by the masters, the businessmen. They are doing a great job.

P.S. About the title of this article. Funny farm. I thought about asking who are the citizens of a country whose president is a born farmer? But for some reason I changed my mind. After all, who knows who will read this, who lives nearby. And I have a speech to give at the party meeting soon…