Do you want to feel like Alice and make, albeit not always pleasant, but invariably fascinating journey through the looking glass?

And no, do not say that you will not succeed with all your desire.

This heroine of the famous book by Lewis Carroll had to pass through a mirror.

I offer you a much easier way to find yourself in a crazy world where everything contradicts the usual logic and is turned upside down.

It is enough to familiarize yourself with the resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in connection with the next anniversary of the beginning of the "Euromaidan" and the events of the "revolution of dignity", and you automatically find yourself in a real political looking glass.

I ask, however, not to reproach me for not warning you.

I warn you: staying in this ideological space for a long time is dangerous for your mental health.

Would you agree to a short tour anyway?

Ok, then fasten your seat belts and get ready to set off.

So let's go.

Even an overturned world needs some kind of portal that provides a connection with reality.

In the resolution of the Ukrainian parliament, the following thesis acts as such a portal: the events of 2014 are one of the key moments in the formation of the modern Ukrainian state.

I agree.

Ukraine before 2014 and Ukraine after 2014 are, as they say, two big differences.

Seven years ago, in a neighboring country, the world split in half - split and still has not glued together.

What then do I reproach the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for?

First of all, in the complete illogicality of this thesis: "The usurpation of power in 2010-2014 by Viktor Yanukovych led to the undermining of the foundations of Ukraine's national security and defense."

I admit right away: Yanukovych is not my hero at all.

If I began to list in detail my complaints against this former president of Ukraine, this column would never end.

But the passage quoted above from the statement of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine plunged me into a state of intellectual lockdown, from which, I will not hide, I got out with very great difficulty.

What is usurpation?

I quote from the dictionary: "violent illegal seizure of power or the appropriation of other people's rights to something, any authority."

And how exactly did Yanukovych appropriate other people's rights?

According to the logic of the current composition of the Ukrainian parliament, this is how: he was legally elected president of Ukraine.

During the second round of presidential elections on February 7, 2010, Viktor Yanukovych received 48.95% of the vote, while his rival (then Prime Minister of Ukraine) Yulia Tymoshenko - 45.47%.

Within days of this event, Yanukovych was congratulated on his victory by Estonian President Toomas Hendrik Ilves, US President Barack Obama, French leader Nicolas Sarkozy, Polish President Lech Kaczynski, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and other Western officials.

I have brought this long list of the names of politicians in order to emphasize: the legitimacy of Viktor Yanukovych's coming to power in 2010 was not challenged even by those countries that, four years later, joyfully applauded his overthrow.

In short, the word "usurpation" does not come across here.

But this statement only works in the world that is on the right side of the mirror.

And we, I remind you, are in the looking glass, where everything is topsy-turvy.

And if so, then everything is logical and understandable: the legally elected president is a usurper, and those who carried out a violent coup d'etat are fighters for the most modern and advanced forms of democracy.

Why am I again dwelling on a thesis that has been voiced, probably, a million or even a billion times over the past seven years?

Because otherwise it is impossible to fully assess on what false and flimsy foundation the modern form of Ukrainian statehood is built.

To gallery page

The violent overthrow of a leader who has been legally elected by the people is, by definition, bad.

But Ukrainians have been made to think that this is good for seven years now.

To be delighted with the event that led to the rejection of Donbass from Ukraine is, following normal logic, something unnatural, some kind of perversion.

But for seven years now, this perversion is considered in Kiev to be a kind of the highest form of civic valor.

Should I continue?

Probably should, but I can't.

Yes, I am very ashamed, but I can no longer hide the obvious: I cannot cope with the role of a guide through the Ukrainian political through the looking glass.

I really want to be free - where there is fresh air (I wanted to add "to the pampas", but quickly realized that this could be misinterpreted).

And, by the way, I also strongly advise you not to linger in those Ukrainian political wilds into which I so recklessly led you.

Run before it's too late!

Run if your common sense and your mental health are important to you!

But here's the catch.

The Ukrainian people from the political through the looking glass created by their "servants" (and in the sense of "functionaries from Zelensky's entourage", and in the more familiar and broader sense of the phrase "servants of the people") cannot escape.

He is forced to live in it.

Are you scared?

Me too.

I even think that Lewis Carroll himself would have been horrified to see this version of the Looking Glass.

It is definitely better not to let Alice from his fairy tale here.

The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.