The Mind of Zelensky By Richard Miller (London)

President Zelensky of Ukraine is being held up by the Western chattering class as a hero, apparently not merely for his wonderous dancing performances in heels, which is, given that company, good reason to be suspicious. Zelensky did say that the West should launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike upon Russia, but later his aids walked back from that, saying he was mistranslated, which is bs. Clearly this dude would be open to a full-on nuclear war, he does not see beyond his own corrupt homeland. French social psychologist Charles Rojzman has caused a storm by questioning the mental stability of Zelensky, as detailed below. I agree, but I think the same objections can be made to Putin as well, and most Western leaders; the rule of psychopaths. Biden of course, leads the charge in the mental decline stakes, seeking out dead people, and frequently shaking the hands of invisible, non-existent people. It is a frightening, mad, mad world world, indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_a_Mad,_Mad,_Mad,_Mad_World

https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/french-social-psychologist-says-hes

“French social psychologist, Charles Rojzman, wrote an article in French magazine, Causer, questioning the mental state of President Zelensky.

Before I discuss this article, if you are triggered by the opening paragraph then ask yourself, why shouldn’t the mental state of any leader be examined? Let alone one who has the ability to cause a third world war. Biden, Putin, Truss, Zelensky, once you are leader of a powerful nation, I think it is fair game that your mental state is continually analysed.

Charles Rojzman, according to Wikipedia, is a French social psychologist, author and international leader in mediating racial, ethnic and intercultural conflicts throughout the world. He is the creator of a methods, Transformational Social Therapy (TST), which has been applied to resolving intergroup violence and conflicts in France, Rwanda, Chechnya, Israel and elsewhere.

Is his article he references Zelensky’s speech after the annexation of four regions of Ukraine to Russia. During the speech, Zelensky called for pre-emptive strikes on Russia, words which have the potential to escalate the war into nuclear mutual destruction. He also warned Russians, “you will be killed one by one as scapegoats” so long as Putin is in power.

Rojzman says the megalomaniacal extremism of Zelensky, supported by Ursula Von De Leyen, should be denunciated.

To wage war against an invader, an aggressor, a nationalist autocrat, yes, but to say publicly that "Russian elites of all levels will be killed one by one as scapegoats" and to demand the involvement of the whole world in this fratricidal war, is to reveal a singular morbidity and a narcissistic megalomania, that of an actor who has found the role of his life, encouraged by a geopolitics of international rivalries and an air of the times conducive to collective madness.

A narcissistic megalomaniac; an actor who has found the role of his life - strong words and if true, ones that should be of concern to everyone.

Royzman continues by saying that he is more afraid of Zelensky than Putin and more than all of the “far-right” combined.

With Putin and Orban, among others, we know who we are dealing with and everyone can decide, according to his own vision of the world, what he thinks of their actions and intentions, but how can we not see people like Zelensky for who they are?

One must reread Eric Fromm and his book ‘La passion de détruire, anatomie de la destruction’ to understand these personalities who, under the guise of liberating or emancipating intentions and the fight against oppression, want to go to the end of their narcissistic will, even if it means sacrificing common humanity. In spite of the qualities that allow them to access power and to keep it, the men and the women politicians are not always spared by one form or the other of neurosis or even mental illness.

He says it’s possible to have doubts about the whole affair while deploring the dead and wounded. All the great powers are waging this war according to their own interests (or rather those of their ruling elites), he says. Their stubborn refusal to reach negotiations or compromise may cause a world catastrophe.

As has been increasingly evident, debate has become impossible without stigmatisation or demonization. Royzman says “one must choose sides and risk losing friends, personal and professional relationships, members of one’s own family… doubt must be dismissed, equated with conspiracy or replaced by another conspiracy. Not only is civilised discussion impossible, but the normal aggressiveness of genuine debate is replace by hatred. Differences are advocated as a source of wealth and added value, but differences of opinion are forbidden. We refute but we do not discuss. As if everyone is supposed to have the truth. The facts themselves are looked at through clouded glasses of competing ideologies. When they are known and they are not always, they are replaced by propaganda.”

It’s hard to argue with much of what Royzman says. Why can’t we discuss the mental state of a man with the power to drag the world into a nuclear war? Anyone in his situation, with a country being destroyed by war, would be under incredible pressure, so even more reason to assess whether he is still capable of making logical and sound decisions.

Looking at his past, he has clearly always loved the limelight. Some might say that the narcissistic characteristics that Royzman has identified have always been there. Combining this with positions of extreme power and the ability to change the history of the world, would make a dangerous leader.

Then there are the unsubstantiated rumours of his drug taking.

Zelensky himself posted a strange video in April which was quickly deleted in the morning. Again, the stresses of war are understandable and were used to downplay this video, but nobody wants the stresses of war to lead to the wrong, irreversible, catastrophic decisions.

It should come as a given that anyone who reaches positions of power should have their backgrounds, morality, ethics and mental health examined. We constantly do this to Putin so why not to the man on the other side of the war? A few years ago, this was still the case (i.e. Pandora papers revealing Zelensky’s dodgy dealings). Unfortunately, now, with extreme polarity of debate, anybody questioning Zelensky is labelled as pro-Russian, so nobody wants to go there. Asking questions does not equal taking a side in the war. Not liking or agreeing with a leader does not mean you like or agree with the leader of the other side.

Now, more than ever, is the time to question the man capable of dragging the world into a nuclear war. Everything from his upbringing to his use of drugs should be put on the table to examine. Hopefully, after a thorough examination he turns out to be the hero many make him out to be. But, if he turns out to be mentally unstable, whether as part of his personality or due to the stresses of war, then this information needs to be made public.”