Ukraine's State Defence and Security Council Turchinow against the LGBT propaganda

Last week, Oleksandr Turchinov - a Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine - released an article against attempts to impose a "gender ideology" on Ukrainians by a ultural-marxist lobby groups. In particular, in his statement Turchinov harshly criticized so-called "Commissioner for Gender Policy" Katerina Levchenko, who called on the SBU to fight against those Ukrainians who support traditional values.

The very fact that such a controversial post as a Commissioner for Gender Policy shall be remunerated by ordinary Ukrainian taxpayers is quite outrageous, taking into account the society's relation to the "gender policy" as so. Talking about the "authorized commissioner" - Kateryna Levchenko - this person is an open homosexual and a longtime leader of the modern-feminist movement, who hasn't passed an election procedure, has no support in society and whose "projects" number only few participants.

It is extremely important to analyze the reaction the Turchinov's statement triggered among the cultural marxists and those who support them - that is local liberal media. Indeed, in these reactions, we see an interesting and new statement for Ukraine's media space - "the language of hostility," or "hate speech." Earlier, this term had been used rarely. 

Appearance of the "hate speech" phrase in Ukrainian media space is quite a disturbing sign, considering the Western experience, where it has been using as against any person, who opposes the extreme-liberal status quo. Whether it is a termination of a TV presenter from one of Canada's top TV broadcasters due to the one's tweet against same-sex marriages; of a dismissal of an Australian just because of an avatar in support of traditional family values; or thousands of other similar cases (and this is not an exaggeration: enter Google's query " hate speech LGBT "and you will see thousands of examples of censorship) - the scheme is always the same.

A relevant opinion sounded and mass media denounce its author as a supporter of "language of hostility." The author becomes an outcast. He is fired, censored, disappears from the public sphere at all. There is no formal detention, but it not necessary at all. After all, any punishment of a famous person frightens millions from similar behavior. This is control through fear.

"Is there any language of hostility in the words of Turchinov?" - ask liberals, Soros grants consumers from the Hromadske TV; "Of course, there is," - corresponds the "Institute of Mass Information," which wants to decide for/instead Ukrainians, what sort of information can be considered "correct" and what is not.

Then the Amnesty International follows this line and actually determinated Turchinov's article as an unconstitutional, that is, illegal: "Turchinov's words violate not only international conventions and international norms, but also violate the Constitution of Ukraine, which provides for the protection of the rights of citizens and the protection of equality." Next, the Hromadske hints that a criminal responsibility for the "language of hostility" has already been provided in Ukraine: a fine of 3400 to 8500 hryvnias or restraint of liberty for up to 5 years.

Other media circulate an open letter to Poroshenko in which its authors urges the president to "react" to the article by Turchinov. Dozens of organizations have signed up to this letter, including: International Renaissance Foundation (Soros), Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, and a number of freaky cultural-marxist organisations like the Kyivpride.

The supporters of "freedom of speech" have already reported about the first "triumph of democracy": on the  Internet edition Turchinov was deprived of his posts and removed from the list of authors.

And now let's think. All this fuss has grown around a plain text on behalf of Turchinov himself on his personal blog. Not on a government site. Not on behalf of the National Security and Defense Council. Not on behalf of the Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine's Parliament). Due to Turchinov's own opinion, number of the country's largest media and international foundations are threatened him with fines, imprisonment and demand dismissal.

And if it happens now in Ukraine, where the LGBT initiatives have almost no support in the society, I fear to imagine what we can expect for in nearest 10 years.

The summary of our reflections is disappointing: in our time, the media and "non-governmental organizations" (and those who stand behind them) more influence the processes in society than officials.

However, the situation around liberal totalitarian manifestations is aggravated with each passing day, which gives us a new field for the game and unexpected allies. Our task is to wisely take advantage of the situation and make every effort to ensure that the liberal obscurantists in our country do not have any ground under their feet.