Likewise, joining Russia means surrendering liberties and to some degree self-rule. (In part because Putin doesn’t actually allow opposition parties and representatives a chance to succeed.) So even the argument by “self-rule” that some apologias for secession are founded upon rings a bit hollow there to me.
Considering that Zelensky doesn't allow opposition parties or a free press, that's kind of a moot point:
https://news.yahoo.com/zelensky-nationalizes-tv-news-restricts-173820471.html
He's also a puppet installed by a foreign government (the U.S.). For three years Democrats tried to convince the country that Trump was a Russian puppet, and was therefore an illegitimate president. So... unlike Trump, Zelensky really IS a foreign-controlled puppet; why does he have any legitimacy?
Pretty sure my post referenced the secession movement prior to the start of Russia’s invasion primarily with that reasoning, where it would still be valid.
That said, even with twisted and undemocratic restrictions being placed on pro-Russian parties Ukraine still has a (now limited) democracy. Russia is pretty clearly in Putin’s pocket permanently until he dies, (which he may soon) at which point others within his regime inherit power autocratically. Zelensky has term limits, and there are elections, even if apparently liberty is being curtailed and to some degree full freedom of choice shat on.
Likewise, receiving some foreign aid in achieving a political position is not a crime, nor does it invalidate a win if direct ILLEGAL vote changing does not occur enough to shift who wins. The Democrats were full of shit and Trump argued even some degree of collusion would not be a crime. For the most part I agree. Having help winning does not make you any less the chosen leader of a democratic nation.
Also, I think it sketchy to conclude Zelensky is Joe Biden’s puppet. For a puppet he sure makes a whole lot of demands, and had been telling the US/NATO to stay out of things, not assemble on the border, and not escalate prior to the Russian invasion. Likewise, I have yet to see proof he takes direct orders in all things from the US government. Helping someone you think will be useful in their opinions get elected is not the same as actively suborning, puppeting, and ordering around a blank slate/foreign agent.
Again, too, I am not sure a simple majority vote for secession to autocracy that is against both the law and constitutional principles of liberty is legit. Even if it were somehow a majority vote within an area which I doubt it would be, without the majority support of each and every one of the municipalities that would be counted as “seceding”, seems kinda sketch. I also question a people’s right to oppress or choose autocracy via majority vote more generally, whether it be accession to Russian autocratic domination, or yes, also Zelensky’s weakening of the opposition via acquired war powers/popular support.
Also, on an unrelated note, Russia sabotaged Ukraine’s armaments decades in advance in preparation for invasion, and so to say Ukraine, which hadn’t even been accepted as a NATO candidate, was invaded purely to defend Russia seems dishonest to me. Especially given that Putin’s regime seemed to not want a big or solid democracy next to it in general, and his messaging seemed to see Ukraine as rightfully a part of Russia’s autocratic empire. Maybe clearer messaging that Ukraine would never be allowed to join NATO would have averted the attack, but I kinda doubt it.
Heck, even if that were the “reason”, Ukraine as the defender seems to me like the preferable side to support. Both because screw autocratic wars of expansion, and what the hell kind of precedent is the US setting if it totally abandons a country it promised to defend in exactly this situation, among other things. Including the precedent that would be set for China taking Taiwan with little consequence and actions of the like if the US had levied no sanctions.
I had more to say, but it’s getting late and I’ve kinda lost my train of thought.