Zelenskyy's perverse Western values

David Brooks was near tears on 'PBS NewsHour' over the way Trump and Vance treated Ukraine's doomed president on live TV. Brooks was so upset he even said Mr. Z was 'defending Western values.'

"War is the health of the state," said the great Randolph Bourne in the last days of WWI.

War is also the health of petty dictators like Ukraine's Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy.

The T-shirted president of Ukraine — a country that Russia tragically and unnecessarily invaded after decades of being provoked by American and European leaders who steadily pushed Nato’s borders eastward — had a bad day in the Oval Office on Friday.

Zelenskyy was humiliated and scolded by President Trump and JD Vance on live TV, and, of course, the entire liberal media, the Democrats in Congress, the Cheney Family neocons and what’s left of the Washington Warhawks tribe came to his defense like he was Thomas Jefferson reborn.

On the barely watched "PBS Newshour" -- which obviously will never die or balance its liberal tilt -- David Brooks of the New York Times and Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post were near tears because of what the Trump-Vance tag team did to poor brave little Mr. Z.

In his emotional rant about the decline of American greatness and its foreign war-making leaders, Brooks actually blurted out that Zelenskyy was defending Western values.

Really?

I know, as the great socialist Bourne told us so powerfully and clearly, that when a country goes to war the politicians or monarchs in power get a nice excuse to enact all kinds of oppressive laws, shut down the media and throw dissidents in jail.

All to protect the health of the state, of course.

Most American presidents did it to some degree during wars and other crises -- Lincoln to FDR to LBJ and the presidents in charge of the never-ending war on terror. So of course does Putin and his ilk.

But just as it is mindless and silly to call Trump a dictator or a Hitler 2.0, it's just as stupid to call Zelenskyy a defender of Western values.

Anyway, to find out how wrong and sloppy Brooks was, I thought I'd ask Perplexity.AI the hastily written question I've reprinted below.

It was garbled, but Perplexity's brain figured out what I was trying to say.

Its instant answer was pretty good -- a fair, point-by-point list of Zelenskyy's failures in the democracy and freedom department.

Just now, however, over at X I asked Grok AI the exact question, garble and all. And there's no comparison.

Grok is the clear winner. Here's the proof.

Below is the Question as sloppily typed and Grok's excellent Answer.

Someone who likes David Brooks should forward this to him.

The Zelenskyy Record, according to Grok

Question:

President Zelenskyy of Ukraine has been criticized for closing churches, shutting down media and outlawing political parties. What other criticism have been leveled against him for democracy harming in country.

Grok's answer

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine has faced a range of criticisms regarding actions perceived as undermining democracy in the country, particularly since the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. While some of these measures have been defended as necessary wartime responses, critics argue they reflect a broader trend of centralizing power and eroding democratic norms. Below is an overview of the criticisms, including those you mentioned and additional ones based on available information:

1. Closing Churches

Criticism: Zelenskyy has been accused of targeting the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), historically linked to the Moscow Patriarchate, by supporting measures to restrict its activities. In 2022, the Ukrainian government conducted raids on UOC sites, citing security concerns over alleged ties to Russia. Critics, including some domestic voices and international observers, argue this infringes on religious freedom and represents state overreach into spiritual matters.
Context: Supporters of the policy claim it’s a national security measure to counter Russian influence during wartime, but detractors see it as an authoritarian move to suppress a significant religious institution.

2. Shutting Down Media

Criticism: Zelenskyy has faced backlash for consolidating media under state control. In February 2022, he ordered major TV networks to merge into a single, state-run broadcast called "Telemarathon," and later signed a 2022 law granting the government authority to regulate all media, including print, broadcast, and digital platforms. Earlier, in 2021 (pre-invasion), he banned three TV channels linked to opposition figure Viktor Medvedchuk, accusing them of spreading Russian propaganda.
Context: Critics argue these actions stifle free speech and eliminate dissenting voices, pointing to the pre-war timing of some bans as evidence of political motives rather than pure security concerns. The European Federation of Journalists has called the media law incompatible with democratic standards.

3. Outlawing Political Parties

Criticism: In March 2022, Zelenskyy’s administration suspended 11 political parties deemed pro-Russian, including the Opposition Platform for Life, which held 10% of parliamentary seats. A subsequent May 2022 law formalized their ban. Critics contend this effectively turned Ukraine into a one-party state, undermining political pluralism—a cornerstone of democracy.
Context: The government justifies this as a wartime necessity to prevent collaboration with Russia, but opponents note the lack of judicial oversight and the broad scope of the bans, which included leftist and socialist parties not clearly tied to Moscow.

4. Suspension of Elections

Criticism: Zelenskyy has postponed presidential and parliamentary elections indefinitely, citing martial law imposed after the 2022 invasion. His term technically expired in May 2024, leading some to label him an illegitimate leader clinging to power. Opponents argue that other nations, including Ukraine itself during the 2014 conflict, have held elections during wartime, suggesting this is an excuse to avoid accountability.
Context: Zelenskyy maintains that wartime conditions—millions displaced, occupied territories, and soldiers at the front—make free and fair elections impossible. However, critics see this as a dangerous precedent for authoritarian drift.

5. Centralization of Power

Criticism: Observers have pointed to Zelenskyy’s reliance on a tight inner circle and his administration’s efforts to accrue power at the expense of other institutions. Examples include the firing of independent officials like the head of Ukrenergo (Ukraine’s energy grid operator) in 2024 and the dismissal of popular military commander Valery Zaluzhny in 2024, both seen as moves to eliminate potential rivals. A 2024 poll indicated over half of Ukrainians believe his office exerts excessive influence over state agencies, courts, and parliament.
Context: Defenders argue wartime demands decisive leadership, but critics say this personalization of power weakens checks and balances.

6. Suppression of Political Opponents

Criticism: Beyond banning parties, Zelenskyy has targeted individual rivals. In February 2025, he imposed sanctions on former President Petro Poroshenko, freezing his assets and limiting his political maneuverability. Poroshenko and others, like opposition MPs, have faced travel bans or legal actions, often accused of treason or corruption. Critics call these politically motivated attacks to silence dissent.
Context: The government frames these as anti-corruption or anti-collaboration measures, but the timing and targets suggest to some a strategy to neutralize opposition ahead of any future elections.

7. Restrictions on Civil Liberties

Criticism: Policies like expanded conscription, limits on workers’ rights to unionize (via a 2022 law), and travel restrictions on MPs have drawn ire for curbing individual freedoms. Opposition figures, such as Solomiia Bobrovska, have accused the government of using security pretexts to control parliament and stifle criticism.
Context: These measures are often tied to martial law, but their breadth and permanence fuel concerns about democratic backsliding.

8. Lack of Transparency and Corruption

Criticism: Despite promises to tackle corruption, Zelenskyy’s administration has been accused of tolerating it within his circle while cracking down on critics under anti-corruption guises. The 2023 dismissal of Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov amid procurement scandals highlighted persistent issues, with some arguing Zelenskyy prioritizes loyalty over accountability.
Context: Corruption has long plagued Ukraine, and wartime pressures may complicate reforms, but critics say Zelenskyy exploits this to consolidate power rather than address systemic issues.

Broader Perspective

Zelenskyy’s supporters argue that many of these actions are justified by the existential threat posed by Russia, drawing parallels to historical wartime leaders like Winston Churchill or Abraham Lincoln, who also curtailed liberties temporarily. However, detractors counter that Ukraine’s measures go beyond wartime norms—Lincoln, for instance, never canceled elections—and reflect a pre-existing tendency toward autocracy, evident in pre-2022 media bans. The shift in U.S. leadership under Donald Trump, who has criticized Zelenskyy and shown less interest in promoting democracy, has also emboldened these moves, according to some analysts, removing external pressure to uphold democratic standards.

In summary, beyond the closure of churches, media shutdowns, and party bans, Zelenskyy faces criticism for suspending elections, centralizing power, suppressing opponents, restricting liberties, and failing to curb corruption—all seen by critics as cumulatively harming Ukraine’s democratic fabric, especially under the prolonged strain of war. Whether these are temporary trade-offs or signs of deeper authoritarianism remains a point of fierce debate.