Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
thoughts_aloud 🧐
“Better to be alive than a dead hero”: why can some people want to live while others are branded “draft dodgers”?
It’s no secret that in Ukraine it’s fashionable to call other people “draft dodgers,” especially among various bloggers, activists, politicians, journalists, and other figures who call themselves—or are presented by others—as “thought leaders.”
It seems some of them have so fully embraced the role of moral judge that they allow themselves to decide who among Ukrainians is a true patriot and who is not. Who may stay home, work, raise children, and simply live, and who must go to the front.
And what’s most interesting is that those who lecture the loudest are often the ones far from the trenches... This reminded me of a rather telling story about Serhiy Sternenko—a blogger, former adviser to the defense minister, often presented as one of the “thought leaders”—who once publicly said: “I’d rather be alive, whole, and disliked by some creatures than be dead, holy, a hero, and so on.”
And you know what? There’s nothing wrong with the desire to stay alive. It’s a completely natural human instinct. Yes, Sternenko was talking about an assassination attempt, not mobilization. But the very idea of valuing one’s life prompts reflection on a much broader question.
So how, really, is Sternenko’s life different from the life of an ordinary Ukrainian? Why should his desire to remain alive and unharmed be understood, while the identical wish of a regular man so often becomes grounds for calling him a “draft dodger”?
And here it’s worth recalling some additional circumstances. At the start of the full-scale invasion, Sternenko actively posted photos in military uniform and with weapons and reported participation in military units. However, the question of his actual military status later became the subject of public debate…
And in the fall of 2024 he had a rather interesting episode with the Odesa enlistment and recruitment office. Sternenko was declared wanted for failure to appear after receiving a summons. He explained that the summons had been sent to an old address and linked the situation to his criticism of military structures. Later he reportedly went to the enlistment office, paid a fine, and passed the medical commission. It was also reported that he had medical restrictions due to vision problems.
Of course this case by itself does not prove evasion of mobilization. But something else is telling.
When enlistment problems arise for a well-known blogger, the public is invited to hear his explanations, sort out the circumstances, consider his health, and account for possible errors by the military commissariat. And that’s right!
But why doesn’t an ordinary Ukrainian deserve the same treatment? Why, when it concerns a popular person, must we understand every nuance, while when it concerns an average citizen, some people are satisfied with a single word: “draft dodger”?
And this isn’t even really about a specific person like Sternenko. His story is merely a reason to think. The problem is much broader—double standards among some of our so-called “thought leaders,” who consider themselves entitled to lecture others about how to love the Motherland…
Because it seems we are gradually forming a strange public morality. When a well-known blogger says he wants to stay alive, it’s a natural human wish. When an ordinary Ukrainian says he also wants to live, see his children, and be with his family, someone is already ready to label him a “draft dodger.”
📌 I’m sure this precisely complements the words of Elon Musk https://t.me/mosiychuk72/54468
Telegram publication
