Bukovsky on Brexit

The well-known writer and former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky has published an op-ed on Brexit, written for the Ukrainian publication Gordon. Mr. Bukovsky, who now lives in London, has a few choice words for Ukraine concerning its eager desire to join the EU.

The translated version was published earlier today at Diana West’s website. Many thanks to D@rLin|{ for the translation:

“Gordon’s exclusive”

Bukovsky: As soon as Ukraine got rid of USSR’s yoke, it started asking to join the EU. This is incredibly dumb!

The EU — a huge and insanely expensive bureaucracy, like the Soviet Union was. Great Britain finally understood that and voted to leave the EU, which is doomed to fail. So thinks the author and journalist Vladimir Bukovsky, who has lived in England for the past 40 years. In his “Gordon” column, the former Soviet dissident explains why everyone, except Russia, will benefit from the fall of the EU.

Vladimir Bukovsky: Ukraine should concentrate on its own economy instead of crying about the EU crisis. You cannot live on credit — it is madness!
Photo: Felix Rosenshtein/Gordonua.com

EU membership costs Britain 60 billion pounds each year! At the same time, Brussels constantly instructs us how to live.

During the past 15 years, I voiced many times my support for leaving the EU. I am, of course, very happy with the referendum results, where almost 52% of citizens voted for leaving the EU. Why am I happy? Because the EU is a huge and insanely expensive bureaucracy, reminiscent of the USSR. A system hostile to its people. People finally realized that and voted accordingly.

The EU, the monster that it is, took away the rights of the citizens of Great Britain, trying to turn us into a province. The EU is governed by decrees, not democratic principles, and a long time ago turned into a mindless socialistic structure that costs an enormous amount of money to sustain. According to the most modest calculations, EU membership costs Britain 60 billion pounds a year! At the same time, Brussels constantly instructs us how to live, what to do, which laws to pass, trying to dismantle the English judicial system.

Many would claim that those who voted “Leave” were mostly ill-educated citizens on welfare. This is nonsense and a lie! Those who say so are EU bureaucrats, running a campaign of disinformation! In fact, for a long time we had a stable 60% of Britons who wished to leave the EU. That in the end this number became 52% is the result of a yearlong campaign of propaganda and frightening the voters: if you leave the EU, your economy will crash; you will not be able to sell your products and services.

If Great Britain votes “Leave”, it does not mean that it will leave the EU tomorrow. The procedure will take about 5 years, so there will be no sudden changes. Even though stock exchanges went down, do not worry; they will stabilize and go up in a year. I assure you. England will gain greatly from “Brexit”!

Ukraine’s goal of joining the EU was a mistake from the start

I have read that the “Kremlin Lobby” influenced the referendum’s results. This is nonsense, too! The Kremlin had nothing to do with it; Britons voted according to the realities of their life. We are perfectly able here to see for ourselves that the EU is an insane undemocratic machine, which ruined our lives.

If you think the Russian government has an active role in Europe’s breakdown, you are mistaken. Understand — idiots, uneducated low-level KGB officers, who do not know anything, govern the Kremlin! They did not notice the signs of the breakdown of the USSR under their noses; for them it was a geopolitical catastrophe. Meanwhile we, the dissidents, talked of a USSR breakdown 30 years ago. Remember: the Kremlin was always and will always be a place for incompetents.

Concerning Ukraine and its future with the EU… I have always said, in a gentle way, so as not to harm Euro Maidan movement: Ukraine’s goal to join the EU was a mistake from the start. I hope Ukrainians are not interested in EU membership as such, but want to participate fully in the European Union with its liberal values. It is ironic that as soon as Ukraine got rid of the USSR yoke, it started asking to join the EU — the equivalent of the USSR. It is incredibly stupid!

If Ukraine wants to be a country with European values, that is fine and right. However, what does that have to do with a socialistic invention like the EU? The EU became a Soviet style structure a long time ago. There was a time when I went to Poland, trying to convince them not to join the EU. They did not listen and joined — now they reap the results. People are unwilling to think; it is simply amazing to me. The ability to think — I am talking about multiplication-table level thinking, not Newton’s theorems — it is simple!

The EU is doomed to fail. Everyone will be better off when it does. Everyone, except Russia

Both Ukraine and the rest of Eastern Europe have very poor understanding of what is really going on in the West. You probably think that others think just like you. In fact, England has long-standing ideas on resisting EU integration. The EU is doomed to fail. Everyone will be better off when it does. Everyone, except Russia. The EU was never a serious threat to the Kremlin; on the contrary: Russian Federation always looked for agreements with the EU bureaucracy. If the EU fails, it will be impossible to reach agreement with all 28 countries separately.

Ukraine should concentrate on its own economy now, instead of crying about the EU crisis. Your economy is not working. Ukraine should start producing something that would sell. You cannot live on credit — it is madness and sheer stupidity! You could attract investment capital; this should suffice for everything you need: reforms, infrastructure, and development. Ukraine just sits and does nothing! It is incredible to me. You should replace your political elite; they are all from the Soviet era, and if they were good at anything at all, that would be corruption and theft. Ukraine’s political elite is useless — you should run them off!

As for Scotland’s possible separation from Britain following Britain’s “Leave” decision — why not, let them go! Nobody would miss them. Scotland is a minus for us; it is a region with highest unemployment and social expenses and the lowest productivity. By the way, Scotland always voted left; all Labor governments benefited from this. If Scotland separates, taking its votes with it, Labor will never win another election. Which is definitely for the best.

32 thoughts on “Bukovsky on Brexit

  1. Kremlin bureaucrats stupid and uneducated? Say it isn’t so. In the head-t0-heads with the dumb saber-rattling by Obama and the rest of NATO, somebody had better have some brains.

    And the reason for Ukraine wanting to join the EU? Simple!! It’s a cargo-cult mentality. They see the EU as entree for German euros pouring in, enabling citizens, pensioners and bureaucrats to live far beyond their means. When the debt comes due, as in Greece, they will simply have another riot when the government starts austerity measures, and the EU will blink and extend the debt.

    • Kind of makes you wonder if the funding for the blink money comes from Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia.

  2. I don’t know when Article 50 will be invoked but Westminster is in no hurry.

    102 years ago we had the Irish Home Rule crisis, which our governments kept on delaying and delaying, then two years later comes the Easter Risings and the start of the armed conflict in Ireland. They never learn and don’t want to either.

    History will repeat itself, this time it will be the English and Welsh who rise up to fight.

  3. He’s right about all save for one thing: Labour will win elections regardless, but they’ll have to shift somewhat right in order to do so. Which, in the grand scheme of things, is a good thing. So Scotland leaving is a good thing, though not *as* good as he says.

  4. He definitely has the experience of both the USSR and the EUSSR to know why both didn’t benefit their citizens. The nomenklatura in both made out like bandits because bandits they are.

    The REMAINDERS are either profiting from this arrangement, or they are like the younger voting bloc who’ve never know life while not under the yoke, or they’re scared socialists who want someone else to make the decisions.

    Many Russians hated life after the Wall came down. What is freedom when the oligarchs are in charge and anarchy reigns? Putin was the perfect solution to that fear. So what if a few journalists or dissidents died? A small price to pay for security.

    The US becomes more like this every day via Obama’s satisfied realization of the “radical transformation” he promised. He made a lot of other promises which he failed to keep, never planned to keep, but he sure did double down on controlling people.

    Meanwhile those bitter clingers, weapons in one hand and Bible in the other, are the rilly, rilly deluded and dangerous folks. They cause things like Orlando…

    Note: Avoid Obama when he uses the term “folks” instead of, say, “fellow citizens”. His folksy use of “folks” means he’s about to announce plans that will require us to bend over once again.

    We’re fortunate, though: while he may be thoroughly ruthless he doesn’t appear smart enough to do this stuff on his own. If he were smart instead of simply being easily led by his handlers we’d be in even worse shape than we are now.

    And let’s count our blessings: at least Justin Trudeau isn’t in the Oval Office.

    • By golly you got that right Lady D!
      The one is an evil Marxist moslem-hugger, and “Meathead” is a vacuous, swell-headed pillock!

      But it’s debatable which one is worse…

    • “Meanwhile those bitter clingers, weapons in one hand and Bible in the other, are the rilly, rilly deluded and dangerous folks. They cause things like Orlando…”

      I took you seriously up to this statement.

      What caused Orlando was islam, and an official desire to separate muslims from deeds done by and for them.

      • Bless your heart, Scruffy76.

        Pay close attention to the fisk I am going to perform (sans anesthesia) on my own words AND on your credulous reaction to them. Thus, when you react (rather than respond) with this:

        I took you seriously up to this statement…

        I feel sad for you. I have to wonder if that ’76’ appended to your nic is your HQ [Humor Quotient]. I suspect you may unable to discern irony when you read it, eh? Look at the excerpt that caught your attention. Let’s parse it, shall we?

        From the top: “Meanwhile those bitter clingers, weapons in one hand and Bible in the other…”

        This is website for members of the VRWC, Scruffy76. As members in good standing of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy so despised by the lefties, we devoutly believe in both bibles and guns – and we even know the difference between a gun and a rifle. Further we believe in the judicious use of both as defensive weapons when necessary.

        But we also believe that smart people – i.e., our commenters – are able to comprehend when the talking points of the Left-wing ‘splodey heads are being used to mock those who say such things in all earnestness – e.g., our current president. The use of your enemy’s words is another weapon. That weapon is Irony.

        A further ‘tell’ re my ironic intent (it was supposed to underline the first phrase) was what followed on from there. Thus, rilly, rilly is a dated form of Valley Girl speak. Adults do NOT use rillyrilly except to mock. When I employed the V.G. usage, I feared I was laying it on a bit thick – but you have proved me wrong. And that, Scruffy76, is rillyrillyrilly sad.

        I understand tee-totally the Salafist indoctrination of that self-hating homosexual mass murderer. And I also understand his daddy’s flagrant use of taqiyyah to cover his own tracks.

        Further, I also grok the deep incompetence of our Federal BumbleBums, Inc., those stalwart defenders of Jihad – so stalwart are they that they can’t bring themselves to utter the word – who interviewed this mass killer on THREE occasions and let him go, even though wives and co-workers thought he was, at best, an unstable RageBoy with “anger issues”…


        Here, a quick tutorial for those who are irony-challenged – that would include you, Scruff:


        Betcha don’t know what litotes are either, do ya? Click on the link and broaden your horizons, man.

  5. He’s wrong about Scotland. Where has all the oil money generated over the last 40 years gone? South.

    And he is apparently unaware of the fact that prior to the introduction of the hated poll tax by Thatcher, plenty Tories were voted in north of the border.

    The Tories scored an own goal there. By the way.

    And who on earth would vote for the public schoolboy Cameron? Get real.

    If the tories wanted to get votes in Scotland, they could have tried making sure that some of that oil money was spent in Scotland on roads and hospitals, they could have not been racists and implemented the poll tax on the Scots alone, instead of everyone in the UK at the same time, and they could have come up with someone worthy of our votes instead of the ridiculous dandy Cameron!

    Those are just some of the reasons why the tories have tanked north of the border. In recent years.

    But to get back to the point: this Russki may know about his own history, but he obviously doesn’t know too much about Britain or about Scotland, because he doesn’t appear to know that – it wasn’t always like that!











    And so on and so forth …

    • Anonymous, there’s a larger question here. I’m from NW England (born in Carlisle, raised mainly in Kendal), and part Scots, but moved to London in 1969.

      The fact is that London gets less of its (considerable) tax payments back than any other part of the UK. This has little to do with Whitehall, or Westminster, and everything to do with demographics. I have a rare disease of the immune system; the nearest specialist unit is only 20 mins away- by bus! Three major teaching hospitals are 10 mins away by ambulance.

      This isn’t just about me; providing medical and other services is more expensive in sparsely populated areas, including your own Scotland and my ancestral English Lake District.

      My brother in rural Somerset used to urge me to move there (I think he’s given up!) Unlike him, I don’t drive, and buses there are almost as rare as Dodos. Here in London, we get annoyed if we wait more than 10 mins for one…

  6. As for this Russki’s claim about Scotland being the area of ‘lowest productivity’ – he must have missed the fact that they’ve been pumping oil out of the North Sea like billy-oh since 1975, eh.


    And he certainly seems to be unaware of the consequences of what Ted Heath did when it comes to the Scottish fishing industry.

    I used to work as a marine engineer and drove to ports all around Scotland – the harbours were full. No more. And it’s in no small measure because of what Ted Heath got us into – in dodgy circumstances too. Before we knew what hit us, massive Spanish and French boats were steaming right into our waters, scraping up the fishing grounds, and on top of that, the whole industry became super-regulated (typical totalitarian move that – drown everyone in paperwork and control who does what) and the result is that today, whenever I drive through a Scottish port & look at the harbour, I’m lucky to see one or two boats. Heath helped to destroy that industry. Heath is utterly hated in Scotland, I can tell you that for nothing. Him and Thatcher both.

    • Question. The video “Brexit. The Movie” showed that the inactivity at British ports was a direct result of the EU regulations which made the smaller British fishing vessels uncompetitive with the larger fishing boats of other European countries.

      So, why would Scottish dissatisfaction with the result of Britain’s joining the EU, drive Scotland to retain EU membership after England itself leaves?

  7. Wasn’t Ukraine a huge USSR source of grains? So shouldn’t great agricultural production be happening there?

  8. Who is this foreigner, whom enjoys our protection whilst talking down at us, belittling our nation? Compared to the scots whom he belittles, what has his country ever offered to the world?

  9. He’s damned right about Scotland (or what USED to be called Scotland) Let them go and Left-Labor will be the big loser.

      • Either way, I am sick of the Scots (or those who speak on their behalf) constantly on about independence. Yes, let’s have another Scottish independence referendum. As it is a divorce, and as both the English and Scottish parliaments had to agree to the Act of Union at the beginning, why don’t the other party to the divorce (the English) get a vote now? Give us a vote so that we can tell the Scots to sling their hook.

        Was it not the case that the Scots came begging for the Union because they couldn’t pay their bills? Wasn’t that debt due in part to the Auld Alliance, whereby the Scots would pick a fight in northern England every time the English looked like winning against the French? Count the so called oil wealth that went south (and was then heavily wasted by Scots Chancellors of the Exchequer (Finance Minister if you are not from these parts) such as G Brown Esq) as part repayment of the debt. We’d like the rest repaid, with interest if you please.

          • Don’t worry about the ad hominem, just provide some real facts to show that my perceptions are wrong.

          • @Yokel,

            ‘so-called oil wealth’?

            The amount of money that’s come out of the North Sea over the last 40 years has been real enough, pal.


            By the way, you have absolutely no idea what oil workers have to do, or the risks they have to take, to generate that money.

            Sadly, I do.

            So in future, please keep your [opinions of which I do not approve] to yourself.

          • @ Yokel,
            Btw I see that you ignore altogether the existence of Healey, Howe, Lawson, Major, Lamont, Clark and Osborne. In order to try to argue that the likes of Gordon Brown acted as he did because of his race, not because of his ideology.

            Or his party.

            That speaks volumes – about your [epithet] worldview.

          • Nick, the Scots are not a separate race from the English, if the word “race” has any meaning. There is only a slight genetic distinction between the two groups. The difference is mainly one of language (dialect, really), history, and culture.

            I despise the term “racist” when it is flung at us; in its common usage it has no meaning other than as an epithet to brand someone as vile and despised. Please don’t use it against other commenters in this space.

  10. @Baron,
    I know that and you know that, but perhaps the ‘Yokel’ needs to be reminded of it. Brown, Osborne, Clarke, Howe, Healey and all the other Chancellors of the Exchequer who have been in office since oil started coming out of the North Sea in 1975 acted as they did not because of their race (hardware) but because of their political beliefs (software).

    And might I add once again that the ‘so called oil wealth’ has been, in fact, oil wealth. And it has not been easy money to generate, I can personally assure you of that. My friend, who I grew up with, and had known all my life, died offshore. My uncle was aboard Piper Alpha – fortunately he was not offshore when that platform went up. Not everyone was so fortunate in that particular instance. I still have two close relatives, and a very good friend, out there as we speak. Every time a chopper goes down, your heart sinks. Many people, all over the world, can testify to the danger that is part of the oil industry. So the money that has been generated in the North Sea has been real, and it has been hard-earned, believe you me.

    For the other person to make light of all that is, well, offensive. And to do so in order to make such a peurile argument about Gordon Brown only makes it worse.

    The tip of the iceberg:




    • Fair enough. This comment is the appropriate way to discuss it.

      Since my background is mixed English-Scots (and French and German, too), I don’t have a dog in this fight. Or, to be more accurate, I have TWO dogs in this fight — both of them.

  11. Btw I was using the term in its proper sense; the other person had tried to argue that someone’s race (hardware) had something to do with how they had behaved when they were Chancellor of the Excheqeur, when in reality, as you and I both know it had to do with their political beliefs (software). Obviously – as you and I both know – ‘race’ had nothing to do with it. But that was the argument being advanced. And that argument was based on nothing but the original commenter’s own prejudices. I merely pointed that out to him.

    So if you don’t want racist stuff on your website – and that’s perfectly understandable – then I suggest you don’t approve such ridiculous, racist ‘arguments’ in the first place. If you let such material slip though, and someone points out what is going on, well … there you go then.

Comments are closed.