Ukraine’s Patriotism Problem Is Now Being Solved by Men Who Treat the Nation Like a Personal Brand
As Zelensky courts the hard right’s votes, the war effort starts to look less like democratic survival and more like a loyalty contest run by guys who would sell the flag if the logo came out clean.
Nightlife Identity & Self-Deception Correspondent
At About Blank in Friedrichshain, the garden parties begin the way soft corruption usually does: with polite small talk, a borrowed lighter, a vape cloud shaped like a moral position, and someone in black linen explaining that the city has “lost its soul” while standing on land that could probably buy a small province. By dawn, the same people are still there, damp with sweat and ideological perfume, pretending their appetite for bass, bodies, and belonging is a form of politics rather than what it actually is: a very expensive tantrum with a consent-aware soundtrack.
The target audience is easy to spot. It is the NGO-left poseur in sunglasses who says “intersectional” like he invented it and “organize” as if he has ever lifted anything heavier than a tote bag full of zines and ketamine residue. It is the trust-fund radical from Prenzlauer Berg, or worse, Kreuzberg, who pays 1,400 euros for a room with a fake plant and a balcony facing another fake life, then comes to Friedrichshain to get sweaty among the proletariat cosplay and call it solidarity. It is the freelance cultural manager from Wedding—yes, Wedding, the neighborhood, where the rent is still only humiliating instead of catastrophic—who spends all week writing grant copy about access and care, then spends the weekend grinding against a stranger in a mesh top while discussing decolonial nightlife like it is a hygiene ritual.
The whole setup is a small, lubricated fraud. You arrive through a gate watched by people with the emotional range of customs officers, pay too much for a drink that tastes like regret and citrus cleaner, and find the garden already divided into its natural classes: those performing availability, those performing refusal, and those performing the exhausting sophistication of not yet deciding. On one bench, a man in a Carhartt jacket—new, clean, obviously decorative—kept telling anyone trapped within earshot that “the city needs more spaces like this,” which is the kind of sentence that usually means he works in brand strategy, or city marketing, or some other administrative branch of selling rebellion back to the people who can afford it.
Marina Voss, who introduced herself as being “between projects” in the way only the comfortably supported can, said she came for “the collective energy” and stayed because her phone died. She had that overfed, underemployed glow of someone who has never had to choose between rent and dignity because both are already covered by family, stipend, or a boyfriend with a better spreadsheet. “It’s half Brecht, half bad Tinder,” she said, then laughed the laugh of a woman who knows she is describing herself too accurately to be embarrassed. Around her, men kept drifting in with the same soft, predatory patience: lean, moisturized, and desperate to be seen as politically literate while circling the room like credit-card debt in human form.
One man in linen kept invoking Walter Benjamin as if citation were a consent form. Another, a consultant with a shaved head and the posture of someone who rents feelings by the hour, complained about gentrification while buying cocktails from a bar built on the economic theology of gentrification. A woman in designer boots said the word “commons” three times in one sentence and then kissed a man whose entire personality could have been assembled by a committee of podcast producers and failure. The flirtation was not flirtation so much as a local economy of mutual humiliation: everyone wanted to be desired, but only on terms that preserved their myth of seriousness.
The club’s garden space, of course, is sold as freedom, experimentation, and community, which in Berlin usually means a place where the affluent can cosplay exposure without ever touching actual risk. The venue gets to cash in on the language of liberation while the neighborhood absorbs the noise, the vomit, the taxis, the rent inflation, the debris of everyone else’s weekend theology. A spokesperson said the team “monitors noise, capacity, and neighborhood relations,” which is bureaucratese for we have monetized the problem and are now managing the optics. The district office, predictably, had received no formal complaint by press time, which is how the city announces it has already decided who gets to be exhausted.
This is the real political performance on display: not resistance, but laundering. The club sells friction as freedom, the guests buy absolution by the drink, and the language of care gets dragged through the bathroom like everything else. Who profits? The venue, the promoters, the landlords upstream, the people clever enough to turn exclusion into atmosphere. Who gets excluded? Anyone without the right accent, the right shoes, the right degree of ironic detachment, the right tolerance for being pawed at by beautiful ruins who call themselves comrades.
By Monday morning, the grass was flattened, the flirtations were already being reclassified as “a conversation,” and the same crowd that had spent the weekend speaking about transformation was preparing its usual post-orgy report: a tasteful little paragraph about community, a smug story about openness, maybe a weak joke about Berlin being complicated. That is the city’s favorite lie: that exploitation becomes progressive once you make it dark enough, danceable enough, and just self-aware enough to avoid guilt. The next garden party will arrive before the shame does, and the same people will call that continuity.