Discussions, post-mortems, analysis, inflated egos, and all that jazz.

Yes, you can influence anyone, but the question is, what are the goals?

Not anyone, but only those who are dissatisfied with their material situation.

But in any case, these were good intentions.

And how do you know that they were good? Perhaps the executors had good intentions, but I'm not so sure about the clients. In fact, I'm quite sure the opposite is true.

The main argument is the language law, passed the day after Yanukovych was overthrown. The basics of any revolution are that immediately after seizing power, you need to reconcile with everyone you can. Yes, you can argue again later, but at first, while there is confusion and the new government is still unstable, you need to minimize possible threats.

Even if radical Westerners, planning to make Ukraine a mono-lingual state, had seized power, they would still have waited with this law until the situation calmed down.

Therefore, the goal of the revolution was not simply a change of power, but the creation of a conflict - either with Russia or with the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine. I don't see any other reasonable explanation for the appearance of this law at the specified time. Well, there is another possible explanation: "they're just idiots," but you can explain too much that way, so let's not.

And since in that situation such a conflict would clearly harm the state (as it ultimately did), it means that this decision was made by people whose goals were clearly not good for Ukraine.

But the goals of our "brothers" are darkness. And the destabilization that was happening then, and that continues now, is darkness. And how did you want it? That we would be destabilized while you just sat around doing nothing? That won't work.

I didn't understand this paragraph at all. What "brothers"? What destabilization? :)