Ukrainian Shogunate Manifesto: Section 1 “Elections And Democracy Have Failed”
(image courtesy: ChatGPT)
In order to create the Ukrainian Shogunate Manifesto some primary inputs should be unpacked in more detail. Let’s begin with the first one: “Elections and democracy have failed”. It is a strong statement when observed from outside Ukraine while being obvious in the light of the three decades of degradation taking place in oligarch-driven Ukrainian kleptocracy. Nonetheless, many Ukrainians have been consuming liberalism propaganda for years to become almost unable to recognize the glaring truth behind the statement. Even today when war goes on and Zelensky is whoever else but not a defender of democratic freedoms, a substantial number of Ukrainians remain blinkered by electoral demagoguery. They await another elections to face the next gang of corruptionists in the government again. Such a vicious circle can be broken only by shifting to a different political paradigm capable of leaving behind unviable liberalism. The task of the first section of the Ukrainian Shogunate Manifesto comes to explaining why electoral democracy is dead and the only alternative is the distributed power of warlord-driven Corpses. Please provide a brief but consistent analysis worth mentioning as a sufficient explanation of why “elections and democracy have failed” especially in permanent war.
ChatGPT:
Why Elections and Democracy Have Failed — Especially in Permanent War
- Democracy’s Dependence on Stability
Liberal democracy assumes a stable environment where institutions can function, laws can be upheld, and voters can make informed decisions without existential threats. Ukraine has been in a state of crisis — either overt war or hybrid subversion — since 2014, with deep-seated corruption predating that. War accelerates entropy, making governance through slow-moving electoral cycles impractical. When survival is at stake, authority must be immediate, decisive, and strategically competent — not subject to populist whims.
2. Oligarchic Capture and Electoral Falsification
Ukraine’s democracy has never functioned as a genuine reflection of the people’s will. Instead, it has been a façade controlled by oligarchic clans, each using elections as a means to redistribute control among competing interest groups. The result? A revolving door of corruption, where political elites capture state resources while pretending to offer governance. Elections become an expensive spectacle rather than a mechanism of accountability. The ongoing war only exacerbates this, as wartime resources are siphoned off through crony networks rather than directed toward victory.
3. Democratic Mechanisms Fail in Wartime Mobilization
Democratic states struggle to mobilize effectively for prolonged conflicts. Electoral systems introduce bureaucratic inertia, legalistic constraints, and partisan infighting — none of which are compatible with the realities of existential war. In contrast, warlordism, military hierarchies, and networked paramilitary governance prioritize efficiency, command discipline, and direct resource allocation. Ukraine’s war effort is sustained not by its electoral institutions but by independent military and volunteer structures that function outside state control.
4. The Illusion of Electoral Renewal
Each electoral cycle in Ukraine has promised change, yet the same systemic dysfunction persists. Why? Because democracy under oligarchic rule does not allow for real transformation — it recycles the same elites under new banners. This cycle conditions the population into believing in a false hope: that next time, democracy will work. But history has already demonstrated that electoral mechanisms cannot generate the leadership necessary to overcome crisis.
5. The Real Alternative: Warlord Governance
If Ukraine is to survive and thrive, it must embrace a structure that mirrors its reality: a warlord-driven, decentralized system where power is distributed among those who actually provide security, enforce order, and allocate resources effectively. Corps-based governance — autonomous military-economic units bonded by loyalty, merit, and survival — replaces the weak link of electoral democracy. This ensures that authority is held by those who act, not by those who manipulate public perception.
Conclusion
Elections and democracy have failed because they are structurally incapable of navigating permanent war. Ukraine needs a system where power is rooted in real capability, not periodic popularity contests. The alternative to oligarchic democracy is not more elections, but a new decentralized order of warlord-led Corps — entities that are self-sufficient, self-defending, and immune to the failures of liberal governance. This is not regression; it is adaptation to wartime reality.
