“Thousand of Zelensky”, or Why we pay for someone else’s populism

In Ukrainian politics, everything moves in circles. Surnames on Bankova, the composition of the government or parliament, or the number of zeros of the national debt may change, but the magic number “1000” invariably wanders the corridors of power like a ghost of Ukrainian populism. This year, citizens are offered another thousand for the fifth time.

It was once distributed by Prime Minister Tymoshenko as compensation for unreturned deposits of the Soviet Savings Bank. People still remember “Yula’s thousand” because of the queues at the post office, because only half of the depositors had enough money. In 2008, it was not a small amount – about 200 dollars.

On the eve of the 2012 elections, Yanukovych also gave out thousands. This performance was not as popular as Tymoshenko’s, and even after the financial crisis, the money depreciated somewhat — people received $125 each.

Advertising:

This year, Zelensky announced his intention to give away his third thousand. The first was paid for vaccination against Covid in 2021, the second – as winter support in 2024. Now they want to support Ukrainians again on the eve of winter – but they will give out 25 dollars each.

Shmyhal’s cabinet restrained Bankova’s “politico-technological creativity” for several years, because he understood elementary economics. Svyridenko’s government seems to have no safeguards and picks up every populist idea from the Office of the President. Instead of substantiating additional financing of Ukrzaliznytsia, the government offers Ukrainians a bonus of 3,000 km. This year’s “winter thousand” will not be able to soften Mindichgate.

Winter support is distributed not by the president, not by the government, not by the ruling party. These are budget funds accumulated from a number of social programs. That is, the government gives away taxpayers’ money. This is not social support, but an attempt to reduce reputational losses.

And every hryvnia that is distributed at the generosity auction is money that can be directed to other purposes. For example, in the 2026 budget, there is a significant deficit to compensate the salaries of the military, and there is also a lack of funds for the purchase of weapons.

If there is an intention to support Ukrainians who find themselves in difficult conditions, then the program could be targeted: for veterans, pensioners, IDPs. Because with the proposed approach, it will not be received by those who really need it. In fact, it is a competition between political interests and the needs of the most vulnerable groups, in which the former win.

Last year I did not take this thousand. I won’t take it now either. Not because I consider myself better than others, but because I know the value of money in the country. People collect money for drones, volunteers still cover needs that the state cannot cope with, the military is forced to spend their own money on renting housing or refueling cars.

I don’t need twenty-five dollars from the budget, which is based on the support of Western partners and taxes of Ukrainians working two jobs. There is no need for money that could be spent on the needs of the army.

As the political history of Ukraine shows, such populist “gifts” from politicians, which were obviously inspired by technologists or close advisers, have only a short-term effect. They do not work in the long term and will not provide significant political dividends in future elections. This has already happened more than once, and it has been proven that such tools do not work.

Instead, we as a society need to demand a different logic. The logic is not one-time gifts, but an honest conversation about what we can provide, who we support first and what are the real priorities of the country in the war.

Because there is no place for populism in a country that holds the front. There is only room for responsibility, and both the authorities and citizens.

Vita DumanskaHONEST movement

A column is a type of material that reflects exclusively the point of view of the author. It does not claim objectivity and comprehensive coverage of the topic in question. The point of view of the editors of “Economic Pravda” and “Ukrainian Pravda” may not coincide with the author’s point of view. The editors are not responsible for the reliability and interpretation of the given information and perform exclusively the role of a carrier.