Eerie Foreshadowing in Zelensky's "Servant of the People" Film
Looking back at what was said before the invasion, and what is happening now, raises questions that shouldn’t be ignored.
Unfortunately, this ended up being a prophecy.
Today marks the 4-year anniversary of Zelensky’s address to Ukrainians in which he dismissed Western intelligence that had been warning for months about an impending full-scale Russian invasion.
He urged people to calm down, said nothing would happen, and encouraged preparations for Victory Day — as well as May BBQs, when Ukrainians traditionally celebrate the coming of summer with a week of statutory holidays.
A while before that, in Zelensky’s "Servant of the People" TV series — where he played a simple school teacher from a small village who grew tired of corruption, ran for president, and got elected to fix the country — there was a scene that now feels unsettlingly literal.
This excerpt from "Servant of the People" shows President Holoborodko (literally translated as “Baldbeard”), played by Zelensky, coming home to find his father making a fire.
The original is in Russian. At the time, Zelensky publicly argued that language was irrelevant to state-building — a belief that shaped both his cultural messaging and early political posture.
Zelensky's character: "Hi Dad. You literally read my mind. I've been dreaming of having a BBQ the entire week."
Father: "Don't get your hopes up. This is a ritual fire."
Zelensky's character: "What do you mean?"
Father: "We're going to burn you, dummy. For turning us into primitive people. Now we cook over a fire, wash in the river, and live like we're in a cave. No water, no gas, no electricity."
As regular Ukrainians are braving -20°C winter temperatures with barely any heating, electricity, and often no running water, a Ukrainian regional government administration has just “donated” over $1M USD in taxpayers’ money to a charity fund run by Zelensky’s friend and fellow actor, Serhiy Prytula.
Charities typically fill gaps temporarily. There should not be a regular reliance on them. This prompted me to write this post — there are simply too many unanswered questions around this move.
Why couldn’t the government use the money directly to buy what was needed?
How was this decision made?
How did they choose which charity would receive the funds?
🚩 Furthermore, charities are frequently used worldwide as low-transparency financial vehicles.
⚠️ See the first comment for Serhiy Prytula’s shocking, passive-aggressive reaction to someone asking whether he keeps 20% of the money…
The question about the charity keeping 20% is reasonable - most charities do keep some of the funds to cover admin and fundraising fees. What is shocking is the passive-aggressive reaction of a prominent public figure linked to the current Ukrainian government.
Here's what he said:
"Does the government provide you with social assistance because of your diagnosis? I can clearly see you need it!"
