The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "David Lane"
 All Comments / On "David Lane"
    The Guardian published an adulatory feature on “The Women Fighting on the Frontline in Ukraine”. One of the women profiled was “Anaconda”, fighting in the Aidar Battalion bankrolled by Igor Kolomoisky: Anaconda was photographed in combat dress resolutely holding an assault rifle in front of a rather decrepit van. The caption read: As reported by...
  • […] and                                            http://www.unz.com/plee/ukraine-is-chockablock-with-fascist-formations-better-deal-with-it/                                                                  […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Glossy
    During the Soviet period an honest ranking of Moscow State University, for example something based on the faculty's contributions to hard science, would have been very high, probably in the top ten worldwide. Unfortunately science was defunded throughout the former USSR in the 1990s, the amount of scientific work decreased enormously and a lot of the top talent fled to the West. So an honest ranking of MSU must have come down substantially. All the way to #129? Maybe, maybe not. I don't really have a good feel for that.

    Speaking as someone who evaluated technology transfer opportunities for the Russian Academy of Sciences I have to say that the scientific and technical attainment was very poor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jonathan Revusky
    "Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries?"

    You need to educate yourself, dude. The ethnic Russians in the Donbass are most certainly not occupying somebody else's country. They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.

    The reason these places are in this artificial country called Ukraine is because, administratively, they were part of the Ukrainian SSR, which was simply an administrative division within the Soviet Union.

    “They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.”

    No. They arrived in the 1870′s to work for John Hughes, a Welsh ironmaster, except for a few around Lughansk who were recruited a few years earlier by a Scottish ironmaster.

    The surrounding countryside was thinly inhabitated until the early 19th Century due to a lack of surface water for draught animals. Little Russian speaking “Cossacks” were the main inhabitants.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Seamus Padraig
    It depends how you define 'Ukrainian'. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930's.

    They were however Little Russian. Ukraine is a moderate part of the Little Russian dialect area.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] March 12 According to this site, the Guardian has done another of its Orwellian “silent revisions” with this article. […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] by Anatoly Karlin at the Unz Review […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Priss Factor
    "So… Jews aren’t white people?"

    There are whites and non-whites(blacks, Asians, etc).

    Jews are anti-whites.

    Boy, I guess someone failed intro to logic, didn’t they?

    According to your first statement, there are two kinds of people: white people and non-white people. This would require that Jews fall into one of these two kinds, being people as they are. Since you state that non-whites are “blacks, Asians, etc.,” one would logically conclude that Jews are white — with the exception of the very small minority of Jews who happen to be black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falash_Mura).

    Except then you introduce the idea of Jews being “anti-white.” This must mean they are either self-hating whites (according to you) or that they, in fact, not what at all. So which is it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:
    @Andrew E. Mathis
    So... Jews aren't white people?

    “So… Jews aren’t white people?”

    There are whites and non-whites(blacks, Asians, etc).

    Jews are anti-whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Boy, I guess someone failed intro to logic, didn't they?

    According to your first statement, there are two kinds of people: white people and non-white people. This would require that Jews fall into one of these two kinds, being people as they are. Since you state that non-whites are "blacks, Asians, etc.," one would logically conclude that Jews are white -- with the exception of the very small minority of Jews who happen to be black (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falash_Mura).

    Except then you introduce the idea of Jews being "anti-white." This must mean they are either self-hating whites (according to you) or that they, in fact, not what at all. So which is it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tom
    How about this: "No one gives a s$#%^ about your sensibilities over the use of "the Jews".

    I'll make a deal with you:

    We'll collectively stop using the phrase "the Jews" in the sense that it offends you (when it means "bad Jews"!) and will only use it in the sense that you undoubtedly approve (namely "good Jews"!) when prominent, mainstream media Jews stop commonly using the term "White privilege" or even "White people" except when they mean "good White people!".

    Fair?

    So… Jews aren’t white people?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "So… Jews aren’t white people?"

    There are whites and non-whites(blacks, Asians, etc).

    Jews are anti-whites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jimbojones
    "I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine."
    It's called WWII.

    Can you even lucidly explain why WWII occurred? You have no right to your consternation over fascists if you can’t well-explain the reasoning behind it. Pro-tip: Nazis bad! Jews good! …won’t cut it. Also, your reasoning falls apart if you merely invoke the Holocaust. Why? Because you are essentially telling us that murder is the reason why fascists are a cause for consternation. If that is the case, then every warring government on the planet, to include the USA, the USSR, and Israel would be on exactly the same footing as the Nazis. It goes beyond… and the only two believable reasons left are Jew fetishism and/or leftism. Neither is going to win you many arguments on this side of the political spectrum

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    Really. How nice for you. I think you would be a lot better off removing the phrase "the Jews" in the sense you're using it from your vocabulary. Just sayin'.

    How about this: “No one gives a s$#%^ about your sensibilities over the use of “the Jews”.

    I’ll make a deal with you:

    We’ll collectively stop using the phrase “the Jews” in the sense that it offends you (when it means “bad Jews”!) and will only use it in the sense that you undoubtedly approve (namely “good Jews”!) when prominent, mainstream media Jews stop commonly using the term “White privilege” or even “White people” except when they mean “good White people!”.

    Fair?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    So... Jews aren't white people?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • First, this article is confusingly formatted. Pictures and text are printed twice. Moreover, I lose track of when we are reading Lee, The Guardian, or someone else. Editors need to give this article their attention.

    In response to the text that I could make sense of, until it gets completely muddled, I have only this to say:

    If fascism is the only ideology working for the interests of Ukrainians and their cultural survival, and if other PC politics such as democracy fail them over and over again or otherwise leave them vulnerable to hostile enemies, then why is fascism a problem? It isn’t explained why fascism is a de facto enemy. If minorities are scared, then they can retreat to their homelands where many of them can enjoy proto-fascist governments of their own. I don’t buy into the assumption of a shared morality that dictates that fascism is a problem.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "...in pre-nationalist times..."

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English, Minin and Pozharsky were Russian nationalists fighting Poles, Themistocles was a Greek nationalist fighting Persians, etc. And most religious conflicts were, as now, ethnic conflicts in disguise.

    "And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. "

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus' in any of the original Rus' lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning - as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    "Tatar was the court language. "

    I've seen Ivan IV's letters to Kurbsky. I don't remember any Turkic words in them. I don't think there's a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that - medieval aristocracies weren't generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    "It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization."

    In the 12th to the 14th centuries the areas that were close to the steppes became increasingly unsafe because of nomadic raids. Large numbers of people fled them into the northeastern forests. Political power followed the population movements. First Vladimir became important, then Moscow and Tver fought it out for the leadership role of the new center of the Russian population. The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I'm talking about the kind of state that can't be split among the ruler's sons, the kind that's bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family's finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    The Tatars never created such a real state. In fact they split up into lots of little khan-ships in the usual medieval fashion, which were picked off by a centralized Russia one by one. So this idea that the strong, centralized Russian state was a Tatar legacy is false.

    "In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude."

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: "According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons - the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east."

    Couldn't be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It's implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I'd look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea. Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    "Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. "

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label - Scandinavian raiders in the east - ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, "Rus" became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state. And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    "I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. "

    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    “…in pre-nationalist times…”

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English,

    This is too funny. Is there no 18th-19th century nationalist fairytale you won’t believe? Of course Joan of Arc was not a nationalist, she was turned into one by modern French mythmakers. Neither was she a feminist. Or a Marxist class warrior. Those things didn’t exist in her time.

    http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/peasant-girl-to-battlefield-commander

    “Although nationalism later played a large role in conflicts between France and England, at that time it was not much of a factor. The histories of the two countries had been inseparable since 1066 when the Normans conquered England. The rulers of England had been Normans, and French was the language of the English court…. There are other erroneous ideas about Joan: that she was a nationalist, a heroine of the working classes, an early revolutionary toppling the old feudal order.”

    “And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. “

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus’ in any of the original Rus’ lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning – as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    1. The issue isn’t the word but its meaning. There was never a break between usage of Roman in Romania, Switzerland, and the city of Rome from ancient times but that does not mean that the Romanian, Romansh ethnic groups, and people from Rome, are one nation.
    2. You are trying to force modern nationalist myths upon other peoples and other time periods. You are trying to turn people such as Orthodox Rus Polish patriots/bitter enemies of Moscow, 10th century Kiev-based Viking chieftains who slaughtered Slavs who disobeyed them, 18th century Galicians who wouldn’t understand the Russian speech if they heard it, into “Russians” because modern Russians still use the same or similar word to describe themselves. This is ahistorical and absurd.

    “Tatar was the court language. “

    I’ve seen Ivan IV’s letters to Kurbsky. I don’t remember any Turkic words in them. I don’t think there’s a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that – medieval aristocracies weren’t generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    I think Vernadsky is more of an expert om this topic than you or I, and he claimed that Tatar was the court language in the time of Vasyly II. He also claims that many Russian noblemen adopted Tatar surnames (for example, a member of the Veliamanov family adopted the Turkic name “Aksak” and his descendents were the Aksakovs)[10] Many Russian boyar (noble) families traced their descent from the Mongols or Tatars, including Veliaminov-Zernov, Godunov, Arseniev, Bakhmetev, Bulgakov (descendents of Bulgak), and Chaadaev (descendents of Genghis Khan’s son Jagatay). In a survey of Russian noble families of the 17th century, over 15% of the Russian noble families had Tatar or Oriental origins. Russia’s mestnichestvo hierarchy, postal road network (based on Mongolian ortoo system, known in Russian as “yam”, hence the terms yamshchik, Yamskoy Prikaz, etc.), census, fiscal system, and military organization also had Tatar-Mongol model.

    “It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization.”
    The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Don’t minimize. Greater power was directly related to greater loyalty to and collaboration with the Tatar overlords. Those princes who were not as loyal or close to the Tatars, and not as successful in providing tribute to them, lost out to those who were. This “natural selection” resulted in Russia having the most Tatar-centric and efficient rulers possible.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I’m talking about the kind of state that can’t be split among the ruler’s sons, the kind that’s bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family’s finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    *Guffaw* Russia was much closer to Tatars than to the Renaissance. Tatar masters weren’t interested in a centralized state themselves, they wanted efficient servants who could collect tribute for them. Those who were most efficient and loyal were rewarded. This is what inspired centralization – not some Renaissance zeitgeist from far away lands that Russians had little contact with. Those who were more servile, more efficient and more centralized were rewarded at the expense of those who were less so. In this way, ironically, the Tatars fostered the creation of a state unified and efficient enough to eventually overthrow them.

    “In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude.”

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: “According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons – the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east.”

    Couldn’t be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It’s implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I’d look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea.

    Did medieval Poles refer to them themselves as Poles or as Lechs? Because old Arabic and Rus sources describe them as Lechs or Liakhs, their country as Lechistan. Polans were just one of several Lechitic tribes. Polish Reinaissance cultural figure Jan Kocjhanowski claims Lechs was the original name for Poles.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lechia

    Regarding Poles, There are interesting quotes from primary sources in this article:

    http://www.karam.org.tr/Makaleler/1980138237_shapira.pdf

    Poles believed that they were descended from Sarmatians. We now know Sarmatians were Indo-European, but at that time (16ht century) it was assumed they were Turkic people. Accordingly, 16th century Poles believed they were descended from Turks, while their serfs were Slavs and that Slavs were an inherently servile and backward people. Rus from those lands, like other Poles (in the 16th century understanding of that term) had the same assumptions. The Polish Rus believed that like other Poles, they too were descended from Turks – either Khazars, or that the word Rus was derived from the Alanic tribe of Roxolans. In this way Rus Poles asserted their equality with other Poles. Here is a direct quote from Pylyp Orlyks’s Constitution “the valiant and ancient Cossack people, formerly called Khazar, was at first exalted by immortal glory … so much so that the Eastern Emperor … joined his son in matrimony to the daughter of the Khagan, that is to say, the Cossack prince”; “… the Orthodox faith of the Eastern confession, with which the valiant Cossack people was enlightened under the rule of Khazar princes by the Apostolic See of Constantinople …”; “whereas the people formerly known as the Khazars and later called Cossacks trace their genealogical origin to the powerful and invincible Goths … and join together that Cossack people by the deepest ties of affectionate affinity to the Crimean state …”

    Note that despite this Turkic romanticism the Cossack constitution was written in Latin, the language of all educated Poles, including Rus Poles such as the Cossacks. The Moscow rulers despite their Byzantine pretensions were the ones actually using Tatar as a court language (though this was well before the 16th century).

    Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    Why your obsession with lefty historians? The fact that nationalism is a modern phenomenon is stated by Toynbee – hardly a leftist – and John Lukacs – also, hardly a lefty. Among others. It’s just the mainstream consensus.

    “Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. “

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label – Scandinavian raiders in the east – ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, “Rus” became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state.

    Good, There is a glimmer of hope. So you will describe Helga, the Scandinavian queen in Kiev who slaughtered the Slavic Drevlian tribe for killing her Scandinavian husband Ingvar when he was trying to force tribute from them, not as a Russian, but a Rus? What about their 100% Scandinavian son, called Sviatoslav, who was tutored by the Varangian Asmud? And his 100% Scandinavian son Vladimir, who lived in his historical Scandinavian homeland for awhile before seizing the Novgorod throne with Swedish and Norwegian troops he gathered while living with his relatives there? Was he a Russian? How about Jarizleifr (Yaroslav the Wise), about whom much is written in Scandinavian sagas, the son of Scandinavian Vladimir and vladimir’s Scandinavian wife Ragnhild, who like his father seized the throne with Varangian mercenaries. Jarizleifer married Ingegerd Olofsdottor, Swedish princes. Guess what language they spoke at home? Was he a Russian, according to you?

    Are you starting to get an idea of how silly 19th century nationalist mythology can be? Ukrianians and Russians arguing over Kieven Rus is as silly as Afro-Cubans and Guatemalan Indians arguing over who is a Conquistador. Even more silly, because the Afro-Cubans and central American Indians at least speak Spanish. Neither Ukrainians nor Russians even speak Norse.

    And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    The “state” was a loosely run trading monopoly of Vikings that controlled various Slavic and Finnic (in what is now Russia) tribes. These Vikings assimilated with the locals at most 100 years before the state fell apart. Vladimir Monomakh was the first Rus ruler who wasn’t a full-blooded Scandinavian. He was also the second-last ruler of unified Rus. The various local tribes adopted the name Rus but diverged, while keeping the old name. I’ve given you a taste of what the Rus of Poland were like. You really think those people were Russians – that is, the same nation as the Slav-Finn mestizos of Moscow – because they all referred to themselves with a word deriving from Rus?

    “I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. “
    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    When it stoops to the level of Russian nationalist history by, for example, claiming that Kieven Rus was Ukrainian as Russian mythmakers pretend it is Russian – I agree. There was a lot of revisionism going around in the 19th century.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • excuse me, not Mark Lane but David Lane. show how much I admire the David of the Lanes. Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • As a White Nationalist and around similar, I almost never hear the name Mark Lane.

    Cherry picking the convenient, I will not say rotten, cherry with which to taint a whole new bucket of fruit half a world away, this is the argument of a partisan or partizan. Commies and Nazis, Puhleese.

    The election results in Ukraine tell the tale if anything does. Also, soldiers, if volunteers, are the most committed.

    Why cannot we get a simple fact based analysis of who’s who instead of all this history chatter, which while, relevant, does not advance our understanding of the true nature of the various forces, both military and secular, if it does not directly relate …

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Joe Walker
    But aren't the Ukrainians looking for help from outsiders because of what the Russians are doing?

    What do you mean by “the Ukrainians”? Some of “the Ukrainians” are pro-Russian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”
    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing.
     
    The simplest explanation is probably the correct one. Two peoples diverged over the centuries, but in pre-nationalist times they didn’t think about identities and simply used their centuries-old names, despite having developed different languages, histories, even genetics over the centuries (all markers of different “nations.”)

    This is a much more realistic and simple explanation than yours – that because some modern Slav-Finn mestizos from an isolated northeastern corner of Rus still call themselves Russians, everyone else who used that word belongs to the same nation as they do. That an 18th century Galician, or a 10th century Viking chieftain in Kiev, or a 16th century Rus Polish general who devoted his life to fighting Muscovites (Konstanty Ostrogski, google him up), are all Russians.

    This phenomenon btw isn’t limited to Russians and Ukrainians. Consider the Romanians of the Balkans and the Romansh people of Switzerland, or the people of Rome. By your logic all these people would be Romanians – just like a Galician referring to himself as a Rusyn was a Russian.


    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “
    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared.
     
    Russians are indeed very confused; you are a perfect example. And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. Russia is not Rus, as Romania is not Rome. For purpose of clarity and to avoid silly mistakes and confusion, Russia and Rus ought to be differentiated, just as Romania and Rome are, and are differentiated in the English language and by English-language historians. For ideological reasons Russians seek to blur the distinctions, no reason for others to play their silly game.

    There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.
     
    Mythology about Mongol non-impact and no clean break. Mongols had no impact on genetics in general, but had a huge impact on the political culture. According to Vernadsky, 15% of Russian elite families had Mongol-Tatar origins. Tatar was the court language. Etc. Etc. Entire Mongol yoke was a period of “natural selection” during which those princes closest to the Mongols were elevated and those who resisted them were destroyed. It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization. The fact that it held onto the old name doesn’t mean it wasn’t a new entity.

    Secondly, whether break was sudden and clean or, gradual and slow, is irrelevant. The break is there.


    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?
    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
     
    This is the sort of guess that someone believing in the fairytale about a 1000 year old Russian nation would make.

    Nation was Polish, people were Rus. One could be a member of the Polish nation (as this term was originally used) while also being a Rus. Why? Because Rus meant the descendants of the old Rus state; it didn’t mean only Russian.


    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”
    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.
     
    Of modern Polish identity constructed in the 18th-19th century, yes. But in the original meaning of the word, of course not. Indeed, as the word was originally used, a Pole could be an Orthodox Rusyn nobleman but would not be a Catholic Polish-speaking peasant. In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude. How odd it would be for a 17th century noble Pole to be told that some peasants on his lands are Poles too because they speak the Polish language and are Catholics!

    Consider Kostyantin Ostrogsky. He was a Rurikid prince, Orthodox patron of churches and monasteries, and fierce Polish (original not modern term) patriot who commanded Polish forces in wars against Moscow. Or Adam Kysl, Orthodox nobleman who represented the Polish state in negotiations with Khmelnytsky. Or Petro Sahaidachny, Orthodox Galician Rus nobleman who slaughtered Muscovites during the Polish campaign in Moscow. Etc. etc. All of these were Orthodox, all were Poles as this word was originally understood. Yet you would laughably call them Russians because Rus. Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. Because Rus, right? Because the word magically confers Russian identity upon all who used it, right?


    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”
    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes!
     
    These people were not on the margins, they were the pillars of society. Many of them were descendants of Rurik, and as such were much more real Rus than any Russian Slav. And they were from the heartland of the original, real Rus – the Kiev region.

    I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. You are trying to be a revolutionary. Invent a 1000 year history for Russia, like some blacks claiming Egypt. Playing games with language as if doing so will change reality – the strategy of political correctness. Maybe this legacy of reinvention and living in fantasy made Russia susceptible to Bolshevism?
    You know who is on the margins? – Some people descended from a far-off backwater of the old Rus state, Slavic-Finnish mestizos, claiming that everyone who ever used the term Rus is one of their nation – a Russian.

    “…in pre-nationalist times…”

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English, Minin and Pozharsky were Russian nationalists fighting Poles, Themistocles was a Greek nationalist fighting Persians, etc. And most religious conflicts were, as now, ethnic conflicts in disguise.

    “And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. “

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus’ in any of the original Rus’ lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning – as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    “Tatar was the court language. “

    I’ve seen Ivan IV’s letters to Kurbsky. I don’t remember any Turkic words in them. I don’t think there’s a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that – medieval aristocracies weren’t generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    “It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization.”

    In the 12th to the 14th centuries the areas that were close to the steppes became increasingly unsafe because of nomadic raids. Large numbers of people fled them into the northeastern forests. Political power followed the population movements. First Vladimir became important, then Moscow and Tver fought it out for the leadership role of the new center of the Russian population. The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I’m talking about the kind of state that can’t be split among the ruler’s sons, the kind that’s bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family’s finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    The Tatars never created such a real state. In fact they split up into lots of little khan-ships in the usual medieval fashion, which were picked off by a centralized Russia one by one. So this idea that the strong, centralized Russian state was a Tatar legacy is false.

    “In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude.”

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: “According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons – the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east.”

    Couldn’t be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It’s implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I’d look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea. Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    “Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. “

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label – Scandinavian raiders in the east – ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, “Rus” became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state. And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    “I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. “

    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    “…in pre-nationalist times…”

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English,
     

    This is too funny. Is there no 18th-19th century nationalist fairytale you won't believe? Of course Joan of Arc was not a nationalist, she was turned into one by modern French mythmakers. Neither was she a feminist. Or a Marxist class warrior. Those things didn't exist in her time.

    http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/peasant-girl-to-battlefield-commander

    “Although nationalism later played a large role in conflicts between France and England, at that time it was not much of a factor. The histories of the two countries had been inseparable since 1066 when the Normans conquered England. The rulers of England had been Normans, and French was the language of the English court…. There are other erroneous ideas about Joan: that she was a nationalist, a heroine of the working classes, an early revolutionary toppling the old feudal order.”


    “And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. “

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus’ in any of the original Rus’ lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning – as something strictly or primarily medieval.
     

    1. The issue isn’t the word but its meaning. There was never a break between usage of Roman in Romania, Switzerland, and the city of Rome from ancient times but that does not mean that the Romanian, Romansh ethnic groups, and people from Rome, are one nation.
    2. You are trying to force modern nationalist myths upon other peoples and other time periods. You are trying to turn people such as Orthodox Rus Polish patriots/bitter enemies of Moscow, 10th century Kiev-based Viking chieftains who slaughtered Slavs who disobeyed them, 18th century Galicians who wouldn’t understand the Russian speech if they heard it, into “Russians” because modern Russians still use the same or similar word to describe themselves. This is ahistorical and absurd.

    “Tatar was the court language. “

    I’ve seen Ivan IV’s letters to Kurbsky. I don’t remember any Turkic words in them. I don’t think there’s a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that – medieval aristocracies weren’t generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.
     

    I think Vernadsky is more of an expert om this topic than you or I, and he claimed that Tatar was the court language in the time of Vasyly II. He also claims that many Russian noblemen adopted Tatar surnames (for example, a member of the Veliamanov family adopted the Turkic name "Aksak" and his descendents were the Aksakovs)[10] Many Russian boyar (noble) families traced their descent from the Mongols or Tatars, including Veliaminov-Zernov, Godunov, Arseniev, Bakhmetev, Bulgakov (descendents of Bulgak), and Chaadaev (descendents of Genghis Khan's son Jagatay). In a survey of Russian noble families of the 17th century, over 15% of the Russian noble families had Tatar or Oriental origins. Russia's mestnichestvo hierarchy, postal road network (based on Mongolian ortoo system, known in Russian as "yam", hence the terms yamshchik, Yamskoy Prikaz, etc.), census, fiscal system, and military organization also had Tatar-Mongol model.

    “It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization.”
    The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.
     
    Don’t minimize. Greater power was directly related to greater loyalty to and collaboration with the Tatar overlords. Those princes who were not as loyal or close to the Tatars, and not as successful in providing tribute to them, lost out to those who were. This “natural selection” resulted in Russia having the most Tatar-centric and efficient rulers possible.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I’m talking about the kind of state that can’t be split among the ruler’s sons, the kind that’s bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family’s finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.
     
    *Guffaw* Russia was much closer to Tatars than to the Renaissance. Tatar masters weren’t interested in a centralized state themselves, they wanted efficient servants who could collect tribute for them. Those who were most efficient and loyal were rewarded. This is what inspired centralization – not some Renaissance zeitgeist from far away lands that Russians had little contact with. Those who were more servile, more efficient and more centralized were rewarded at the expense of those who were less so. In this way, ironically, the Tatars fostered the creation of a state unified and efficient enough to eventually overthrow them.

    “In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude.”

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: “According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons – the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east.”

    Couldn’t be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It’s implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I’d look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea.
     

    Did medieval Poles refer to them themselves as Poles or as Lechs? Because old Arabic and Rus sources describe them as Lechs or Liakhs, their country as Lechistan. Polans were just one of several Lechitic tribes. Polish Reinaissance cultural figure Jan Kocjhanowski claims Lechs was the original name for Poles.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lechia

    Regarding Poles, There are interesting quotes from primary sources in this article:
    http://www.karam.org.tr/Makaleler/1980138237_shapira.pdf

    Poles believed that they were descended from Sarmatians. We now know Sarmatians were Indo-European, but at that time (16ht century) it was assumed they were Turkic people. Accordingly, 16th century Poles believed they were descended from Turks, while their serfs were Slavs and that Slavs were an inherently servile and backward people. Rus from those lands, like other Poles (in the 16th century understanding of that term) had the same assumptions. The Polish Rus believed that like other Poles, they too were descended from Turks - either Khazars, or that the word Rus was derived from the Alanic tribe of Roxolans. In this way Rus Poles asserted their equality with other Poles. Here is a direct quote from Pylyp Orlyks’s Constitution “the valiant and ancient Cossack people, formerly called Khazar, was at first exalted by immortal glory … so much so that the Eastern Emperor … joined his son in matrimony to the daughter of the Khagan, that is to say, the Cossack prince"; "… the Orthodox faith of the Eastern confession, with which the valiant Cossack people was enlightened under the rule of Khazar princes by the Apostolic See of Constantinople …"; "whereas the people formerly known as the Khazars and later called Cossacks trace their genealogical origin to the powerful and invincible Goths … and join together that Cossack people by the deepest ties of affectionate affinity to the Crimean state …"

    Note that despite this Turkic romanticism the Cossack constitution was written in Latin, the language of all educated Poles, including Rus Poles such as the Cossacks. The Moscow rulers despite their Byzantine pretensions were the ones actually using Tatar as a court language (though this was well before the 16th century).


    Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?
     
    Why your obsession with lefty historians? The fact that nationalism is a modern phenomenon is stated by Toynbee – hardly a leftist – and John Lukacs - also, hardly a lefty. Among others. It’s just the mainstream consensus.

    “Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. “

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label – Scandinavian raiders in the east – ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, “Rus” became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state.
     

    Good, There is a glimmer of hope. So you will describe Helga, the Scandinavian queen in Kiev who slaughtered the Slavic Drevlian tribe for killing her Scandinavian husband Ingvar when he was trying to force tribute from them, not as a Russian, but a Rus? What about their 100% Scandinavian son, called Sviatoslav, who was tutored by the Varangian Asmud? And his 100% Scandinavian son Vladimir, who lived in his historical Scandinavian homeland for awhile before seizing the Novgorod throne with Swedish and Norwegian troops he gathered while living with his relatives there? Was he a Russian? How about Jarizleifr (Yaroslav the Wise), about whom much is written in Scandinavian sagas, the son of Scandinavian Vladimir and vladimir’s Scandinavian wife Ragnhild, who like his father seized the throne with Varangian mercenaries. Jarizleifer married Ingegerd Olofsdottor, Swedish princes. Guess what language they spoke at home? Was he a Russian, according to you?

    Are you starting to get an idea of how silly 19th century nationalist mythology can be? Ukrianians and Russians arguing over Kieven Rus is as silly as Afro-Cubans and Guatemalan Indians arguing over who is a Conquistador. Even more silly, because the Afro-Cubans and central American Indians at least speak Spanish. Neither Ukrainians nor Russians even speak Norse.


    And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.
     
    The “state” was a loosely run trading monopoly of Vikings that controlled various Slavic and Finnic (in what is now Russia) tribes. These Vikings assimilated with the locals at most 100 years before the state fell apart. Vladimir Monomakh was the first Rus ruler who wasn’t a full-blooded Scandinavian. He was also the second-last ruler of unified Rus. The various local tribes adopted the name Rus but diverged, while keeping the old name. I’ve given you a taste of what the Rus of Poland were like. You really think those people were Russians – that is, the same nation as the Slav-Finn mestizos of Moscow - because they all referred to themselves with a word deriving from Rus?

    “I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. “
    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.
     
    When it stoops to the level of Russian nationalist history by, for example, claiming that Kieven Rus was Ukrainian as Russian mythmakers pretend it is Russian – I agree. There was a lot of revisionism going around in the 19th century.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing."

    Sure it does. Why shouldn't we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam's Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing. Tautology, but it has to be said.

    "Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus?"

    Yes. Both the Moscovite and Polish-Lithuanian claims had basis in the facts-on-the-ground sense and occasionally in the legal sense (descent and inheritance). After the election of Godunov and then Mikhail Romanov as czars Moscow even lost the genealogical basis for its claims. Which ended up not mattering.

    "Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. "

    But it shouldn't be. Russians aren't confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus'. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared. There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren't culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus' lands. Continuity was maintained.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    This is exactly like the race-doesn't-exist nonsense. In linguistics there's a similarly false assertion that all languages are equally complex. They aren't.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?

    I'm guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    "So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background"

    I'm under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    "today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav."

    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You're trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn't exist because there are mulattoes! And then you turn around and criticize others for leftism, the Soviet mindset, etc. People always had ethnic, national identities, and there was always some uncertainty at the margins. The fact that there is no non-arbitrary way to say where yellow ends and green begins doesn't mean that there are no colors or that it's wrong to think in terms of colors.

    "Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation."

    The wiki on Von Herberstein's book mentioned that he defined Russians as the people speaking a Slavic tongue and practicing Greek-rite Christianity. He then defined Russia geographically. Since he didn't know any genetics, what else could you possibly expect him to have said on this topic?

    Yes, Bulgarians and Serbs speak Slavic tongues and practice Greek-rite Christianity. But they never lived where he paced Russia, so he obviously did not mean them.

    "There was a region identified as Rus. "

    Von Herberstein used the word Russia. Letter for letter. If I remember correctly, the Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus already wrote Ρωσία (Rosia) in 945 AD. Are you assuming that the -ia ending is modern, that 10th, 11th, 12th, century Russians didn't use it? If so, you're wrong. There was a gradual increase in the use of the -ia form over the centuries, but both were always used.

    "It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word."

    There was never any clean break, no matter what revisionary 19th and 20th century Ukrainian nationalists wanted to think.

    "Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.”"

    If the newness of your national identity displeases you, blame 19th century Ukrainian nationalists. The Russian identity which they rejected was a thousand years old.

    "an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves)"

    This is actually true. See, you CAN occasionally get in touch with reality. Just not about your own identity's founding myths.

    "In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things."

    First, they were dishonest. I described how above. Second, the transfer of the Rus label from Scandinavian tribute-takers to Slavic tribute-payers is pretty easy to understand. At some point around 1000 AD the flow of Scandinavian raiders stopped. Not just in eastern Europe, but everywhere. For an unknown internal reason they just stopped raiding abroad. The Viking Age came to an end. After that point the Scandinavians left behind in Rus' assimilated into the local population through intermarriage. Their language disappeared. But the political entity which they founded endured. And the mass of the people living within that political entity gradually adopted the entity's name - Rus'.

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”
    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing.

    The simplest explanation is probably the correct one. Two peoples diverged over the centuries, but in pre-nationalist times they didn’t think about identities and simply used their centuries-old names, despite having developed different languages, histories, even genetics over the centuries (all markers of different “nations.”)

    This is a much more realistic and simple explanation than yours – that because some modern Slav-Finn mestizos from an isolated northeastern corner of Rus still call themselves Russians, everyone else who used that word belongs to the same nation as they do. That an 18th century Galician, or a 10th century Viking chieftain in Kiev, or a 16th century Rus Polish general who devoted his life to fighting Muscovites (Konstanty Ostrogski, google him up), are all Russians.

    This phenomenon btw isn’t limited to Russians and Ukrainians. Consider the Romanians of the Balkans and the Romansh people of Switzerland, or the people of Rome. By your logic all these people would be Romanians – just like a Galician referring to himself as a Rusyn was a Russian.

    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “
    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared.

    Russians are indeed very confused; you are a perfect example. And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. Russia is not Rus, as Romania is not Rome. For purpose of clarity and to avoid silly mistakes and confusion, Russia and Rus ought to be differentiated, just as Romania and Rome are, and are differentiated in the English language and by English-language historians. For ideological reasons Russians seek to blur the distinctions, no reason for others to play their silly game.

    There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.

    Mythology about Mongol non-impact and no clean break. Mongols had no impact on genetics in general, but had a huge impact on the political culture. According to Vernadsky, 15% of Russian elite families had Mongol-Tatar origins. Tatar was the court language. Etc. Etc. Entire Mongol yoke was a period of “natural selection” during which those princes closest to the Mongols were elevated and those who resisted them were destroyed. It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization. The fact that it held onto the old name doesn’t mean it wasn’t a new entity.

    Secondly, whether break was sudden and clean or, gradual and slow, is irrelevant. The break is there.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?
    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    This is the sort of guess that someone believing in the fairytale about a 1000 year old Russian nation would make.

    Nation was Polish, people were Rus. One could be a member of the Polish nation (as this term was originally used) while also being a Rus. Why? Because Rus meant the descendants of the old Rus state; it didn’t mean only Russian.

    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”
    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    Of modern Polish identity constructed in the 18th-19th century, yes. But in the original meaning of the word, of course not. Indeed, as the word was originally used, a Pole could be an Orthodox Rusyn nobleman but would not be a Catholic Polish-speaking peasant. In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude. How odd it would be for a 17th century noble Pole to be told that some peasants on his lands are Poles too because they speak the Polish language and are Catholics!

    Consider Kostyantin Ostrogsky. He was a Rurikid prince, Orthodox patron of churches and monasteries, and fierce Polish (original not modern term) patriot who commanded Polish forces in wars against Moscow. Or Adam Kysl, Orthodox nobleman who represented the Polish state in negotiations with Khmelnytsky. Or Petro Sahaidachny, Orthodox Galician Rus nobleman who slaughtered Muscovites during the Polish campaign in Moscow. Etc. etc. All of these were Orthodox, all were Poles as this word was originally understood. Yet you would laughably call them Russians because Rus. Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. Because Rus, right? Because the word magically confers Russian identity upon all who used it, right?

    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”
    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes!

    These people were not on the margins, they were the pillars of society. Many of them were descendants of Rurik, and as such were much more real Rus than any Russian Slav. And they were from the heartland of the original, real Rus – the Kiev region.

    I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. You are trying to be a revolutionary. Invent a 1000 year history for Russia, like some blacks claiming Egypt. Playing games with language as if doing so will change reality – the strategy of political correctness. Maybe this legacy of reinvention and living in fantasy made Russia susceptible to Bolshevism?
    You know who is on the margins? – Some people descended from a far-off backwater of the old Rus state, Slavic-Finnish mestizos, claiming that everyone who ever used the term Rus is one of their nation – a Russian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "...in pre-nationalist times..."

    There were never any pre-nationalist times. Jeanne of Ark was a French nationalist fighting the English, Minin and Pozharsky were Russian nationalists fighting Poles, Themistocles was a Greek nationalist fighting Persians, etc. And most religious conflicts were, as now, ethnic conflicts in disguise.

    "And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. "

    There was never any break in the usage of the word Rus' in any of the original Rus' lands until Ukrainian nationalists showed up in the 19th century. No one ever had to revive that word in Moscow because it never disappeared there. Ukrainian nationalists are the ones who are trying to give it a new meaning - as something strictly or primarily medieval.

    "Tatar was the court language. "

    I've seen Ivan IV's letters to Kurbsky. I don't remember any Turkic words in them. I don't think there's a lot of written evidence for how the Moscovite aristocracy spoke before that - medieval aristocracies weren't generally bookish. Most of the written material was produced by the church and most of it was in the Russian recension of Church Slavonic.

    "It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization."

    In the 12th to the 14th centuries the areas that were close to the steppes became increasingly unsafe because of nomadic raids. Large numbers of people fled them into the northeastern forests. Political power followed the population movements. First Vladimir became important, then Moscow and Tver fought it out for the leadership role of the new center of the Russian population. The Tatars influenced the outcome of the Moscow-Tver conflict and they were one of the threats from which the people fled to the northeast in the first place, so yes, they were involved in these processes.

    Some would tell you that the strong, centralized nature of the Moscovite state after Ivan III was a Tatar legacy. But the Tatars never created such a state themselves. I'm talking about the kind of state that can't be split among the ruler's sons, the kind that's bigger than any person or family, the kind whose finances are separate from the ruling family's finances. Ivan III and his descendants created such a state in Moscow at the same time that such states were being created in England, Spain and France. There was a European-wide revival of real states after the medieval interlude. It was really a part of the Renaissance, because the Roman Empire was a real state by this definition, while medieval, feudal polities were not.

    The Tatars never created such a real state. In fact they split up into lots of little khan-ships in the usual medieval fashion, which were picked off by a centralized Russia one by one. So this idea that the strong, centralized Russian state was a Tatar legacy is false.

    "In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude."

    You could call the Lech, Czech and Rus story a national idea too and it runs completely counter to what you described above. From the English Wikipedia: "According to Wielkopolska Chronicle (13th century), Slavs are descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth, the son of Noah. He had three sons - the oldest Lech, the Rus and the youngest Čech, who have decided to settle west, north and east."

    Couldn't be more opposite to your retelling of the Sarmatian idea. The progenitor of Poles is described as a Slav, and a brother of Czech and Rus. It's implied that Polishness is based on common descent. From a man named Lech. If I had more time, I'd look up the primary materials on the Sarmatian idea. Was it really phrased the way that you describe it at the time or was it made to look like that by modern lefty-univeralist historians trying to argue that descent-based nationalisms are new and temporary and not an inborn feature of humanity?

    "Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. "

    No. The current definition of Russianness could only be born and was only born after the earlier bearers of the Rus label - Scandinavian raiders in the east - ceased to exist as a separate group. After they got assimilated into the Slavic population, "Rus" became exclusively the name of the state which they founded. Not of a real, modern state as described above, but of a typical medieval state. And then the people of that state gradually started identifying with the name of the state. But that would not have happened if a separate group of original Rus, the Varangians, remained in the region.

    "I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. "

    Ukrainian nationalist history is revisionist history.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Joe Walker
    I guess it all depends on what you mean by "some". What you see as "some" may look like a lot to others. Personally, I think the Jews would be a lot better off looking at their own behavior rather than blaming everything on evil gentiles.

    Really. How nice for you. I think you would be a lot better off removing the phrase “the Jews” in the sense you’re using it from your vocabulary. Just sayin’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom
    How about this: "No one gives a s$#%^ about your sensibilities over the use of "the Jews".

    I'll make a deal with you:

    We'll collectively stop using the phrase "the Jews" in the sense that it offends you (when it means "bad Jews"!) and will only use it in the sense that you undoubtedly approve (namely "good Jews"!) when prominent, mainstream media Jews stop commonly using the term "White privilege" or even "White people" except when they mean "good White people!".

    Fair?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jonathan Revusky
    "Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries?"

    You need to educate yourself, dude. The ethnic Russians in the Donbass are most certainly not occupying somebody else's country. They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.

    The reason these places are in this artificial country called Ukraine is because, administratively, they were part of the Ukrainian SSR, which was simply an administrative division within the Soviet Union.

    Are you also denying that the Ukrainians exist or just their country?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    Well, gee, maybe it does. But then I guess you'd have to ask yourself whether the behavior is "Jewish." Drawing a conclusion about whole groups of people based on the actions of some is a little bit, well, idiotic.

    I guess it all depends on what you mean by “some”. What you see as “some” may look like a lot to others. Personally, I think the Jews would be a lot better off looking at their own behavior rather than blaming everything on evil gentiles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Really. How nice for you. I think you would be a lot better off removing the phrase "the Jews" in the sense you're using it from your vocabulary. Just sayin'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    Well the Ukrainians are asking for money, arms, and help from non-Ukrainians. They shouldn't beg for help from other people if they don't want any input or influence from other people.

    But aren’t the Ukrainians looking for help from outsiders because of what the Russians are doing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What do you mean by "the Ukrainians"? Some of "the Ukrainians" are pro-Russian.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Ukraine Is Chockablock with Fascist Formations; Better Deal with It”

    Not terribly dissimilar to Washington DC then.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings.
     
    The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing. You are repeating your fundamental mistake again, confusing labels for the actual people.

    Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus? Even if he was - as in the case of Michal Wisniowiecki - a descendent of Rurik?

    Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. For similar reasons Rusyns are referred to as such (or as Ruthenians) rather than as Russians.

    And we don't called Romanians Romans in the English language even though in the Romanian language the terms are quite similar.

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms.
     
    People differentiated themselves by language but nationalism and nations as they are used today are modern inventions. This is the general consensus among modern scholars:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    For example, do you think that for example the term "gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus" is applicable in the modern understanding of the word "nation?" From a modern national perspective, was an Orthodox Rurukid nobleman such as Konstanty Ostrogsky a "Pole"? He certainly was in the original use of the term. So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background (what we now call Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian) from the Polish Commonwealth; today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav. Polish nation-builders in the late 18th/early 19th century used the old term for something new.

    I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century.
     
    Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation - the topic of this conversation.

    There was a region identified as Rus. It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.
     
    Silly games with words is suggesting that because two different peoples use the same or similar words for themselves, they must be the same people because the self-identification is the same. So Rusyns from Galicia are the same nation as Russky from Moscow, Romani are the same nation as Romans, etc. Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an "older nation."

    An even sillier game is to apply the modern meaning of this word to long-gone peoples. So by playing these silly games pre-19th century Galicians become "Russians." As do 10th century Scandinavian overlords in Kiev. And Julius Caser could be a "Romanian."

    In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”

    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing. Tautology, but it has to be said.

    “Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus?”

    Yes. Both the Moscovite and Polish-Lithuanian claims had basis in the facts-on-the-ground sense and occasionally in the legal sense (descent and inheritance). After the election of Godunov and then Mikhail Romanov as czars Moscow even lost the genealogical basis for its claims. Which ended up not mattering.

    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “

    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared. There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    This is exactly like the race-doesn’t-exist nonsense. In linguistics there’s a similarly false assertion that all languages are equally complex. They aren’t.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?

    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”

    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”

    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes! And then you turn around and criticize others for leftism, the Soviet mindset, etc. People always had ethnic, national identities, and there was always some uncertainty at the margins. The fact that there is no non-arbitrary way to say where yellow ends and green begins doesn’t mean that there are no colors or that it’s wrong to think in terms of colors.

    “Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation.”

    The wiki on Von Herberstein’s book mentioned that he defined Russians as the people speaking a Slavic tongue and practicing Greek-rite Christianity. He then defined Russia geographically. Since he didn’t know any genetics, what else could you possibly expect him to have said on this topic?

    Yes, Bulgarians and Serbs speak Slavic tongues and practice Greek-rite Christianity. But they never lived where he paced Russia, so he obviously did not mean them.

    “There was a region identified as Rus. “

    Von Herberstein used the word Russia. Letter for letter. If I remember correctly, the Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus already wrote Ρωσία (Rosia) in 945 AD. Are you assuming that the -ia ending is modern, that 10th, 11th, 12th, century Russians didn’t use it? If so, you’re wrong. There was a gradual increase in the use of the -ia form over the centuries, but both were always used.

    “It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.”

    There was never any clean break, no matter what revisionary 19th and 20th century Ukrainian nationalists wanted to think.

    “Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.””

    If the newness of your national identity displeases you, blame 19th century Ukrainian nationalists. The Russian identity which they rejected was a thousand years old.

    “an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves)”

    This is actually true. See, you CAN occasionally get in touch with reality. Just not about your own identity’s founding myths.

    “In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.”

    First, they were dishonest. I described how above. Second, the transfer of the Rus label from Scandinavian tribute-takers to Slavic tribute-payers is pretty easy to understand. At some point around 1000 AD the flow of Scandinavian raiders stopped. Not just in eastern Europe, but everywhere. For an unknown internal reason they just stopped raiding abroad. The Viking Age came to an end. After that point the Scandinavians left behind in Rus’ assimilated into the local population through intermarriage. Their language disappeared. But the political entity which they founded endured. And the mass of the people living within that political entity gradually adopted the entity’s name – Rus’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    “The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing.”
    Sure it does. Why shouldn’t we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam’s Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing.
     
    The simplest explanation is probably the correct one. Two peoples diverged over the centuries, but in pre-nationalist times they didn’t think about identities and simply used their centuries-old names, despite having developed different languages, histories, even genetics over the centuries (all markers of different “nations.”)

    This is a much more realistic and simple explanation than yours – that because some modern Slav-Finn mestizos from an isolated northeastern corner of Rus still call themselves Russians, everyone else who used that word belongs to the same nation as they do. That an 18th century Galician, or a 10th century Viking chieftain in Kiev, or a 16th century Rus Polish general who devoted his life to fighting Muscovites (Konstanty Ostrogski, google him up), are all Russians.

    This phenomenon btw isn’t limited to Russians and Ukrainians. Consider the Romanians of the Balkans and the Romansh people of Switzerland, or the people of Rome. By your logic all these people would be Romanians – just like a Galician referring to himself as a Rusyn was a Russian.


    “Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. “
    But it shouldn’t be. Russians aren’t confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus’. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared.
     
    Russians are indeed very confused; you are a perfect example. And they are confused precisely because they gave a new meaning to an archaic word. Russia is not Rus, as Romania is not Rome. For purpose of clarity and to avoid silly mistakes and confusion, Russia and Rus ought to be differentiated, just as Romania and Rome are, and are differentiated in the English language and by English-language historians. For ideological reasons Russians seek to blur the distinctions, no reason for others to play their silly game.

    There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren’t culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus’ lands. Continuity was maintained.
     
    Mythology about Mongol non-impact and no clean break. Mongols had no impact on genetics in general, but had a huge impact on the political culture. According to Vernadsky, 15% of Russian elite families had Mongol-Tatar origins. Tatar was the court language. Etc. Etc. Entire Mongol yoke was a period of “natural selection” during which those princes closest to the Mongols were elevated and those who resisted them were destroyed. It’s how a tiny unknown principality, Moscow, became the basis for the new civilization. The fact that it held onto the old name doesn’t mean it wasn’t a new entity.

    Secondly, whether break was sudden and clean or, gradual and slow, is irrelevant. The break is there.


    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?
    I’m guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
     
    This is the sort of guess that someone believing in the fairytale about a 1000 year old Russian nation would make.

    Nation was Polish, people were Rus. One could be a member of the Polish nation (as this term was originally used) while also being a Rus. Why? Because Rus meant the descendants of the old Rus state; it didn’t mean only Russian.


    “So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background”
    I’m under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.
     
    Of modern Polish identity constructed in the 18th-19th century, yes. But in the original meaning of the word, of course not. Indeed, as the word was originally used, a Pole could be an Orthodox Rusyn nobleman but would not be a Catholic Polish-speaking peasant. In fact the “national idea” of original Poles was that they were descendants of Sarmatians while the peasants were a different people, Slavs, and Slavs were only good for servitude. How odd it would be for a 17th century noble Pole to be told that some peasants on his lands are Poles too because they speak the Polish language and are Catholics!

    Consider Kostyantin Ostrogsky. He was a Rurikid prince, Orthodox patron of churches and monasteries, and fierce Polish (original not modern term) patriot who commanded Polish forces in wars against Moscow. Or Adam Kysl, Orthodox nobleman who represented the Polish state in negotiations with Khmelnytsky. Or Petro Sahaidachny, Orthodox Galician Rus nobleman who slaughtered Muscovites during the Polish campaign in Moscow. Etc. etc. All of these were Orthodox, all were Poles as this word was originally understood. Yet you would laughably call them Russians because Rus. Just as you would laughably call a Scandinavian chieftain from Kiev who slaughtered Slavs or sold them to the Arabs as slaves – a Russian. Because Rus, right? Because the word magically confers Russian identity upon all who used it, right?


    “today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav.”
    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You’re trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn’t exist because there are mulattoes!
     
    These people were not on the margins, they were the pillars of society. Many of them were descendants of Rurik, and as such were much more real Rus than any Russian Slav. And they were from the heartland of the original, real Rus – the Kiev region.

    I am being a traditionalist – mindful of the original meanings of terms. You are trying to be a revolutionary. Invent a 1000 year history for Russia, like some blacks claiming Egypt. Playing games with language as if doing so will change reality – the strategy of political correctness. Maybe this legacy of reinvention and living in fantasy made Russia susceptible to Bolshevism?
    You know who is on the margins? – Some people descended from a far-off backwater of the old Rus state, Slavic-Finnish mestizos, claiming that everyone who ever used the term Rus is one of their nation – a Russian.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    The number of scientific publications per 10k people in the Ukraine by region:

    http://www.trust.ua/files/photo/source/0000043454-nauka-ukraina.jpg

    Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa and Sumy (surprise to me) are on top. The southeast does better than the rest of the country except for Kiev. Of the 6 lowest-ranked regions 5 are in western Ukraine, 1 is in central Ukraine, 0 are in the southeastern half of the Ukraine.

    1. Do you have a source for the map?

    2. Note that 2 of the 3 Galician oblasts are shaded the same as Ukraine other than Kiev, Kharkiv, Odessa and Sumy. The same as Dinpropetrovsk, Donetsk, etc. The one light Galician province actually includes parts of Volynia, so neither of the two pure Galician areas are not least contributors.

    3. I remember that Yanukovich had multiple publications and wonder if factors other than intellectual output may be relevant here.

    4. Remember this is one data point, and it doesn’t even support you that strongly. Recall that Lviv oblast has 3rd highest % of university-educated population, Lviv has 2 of the top 20 universities, surpassing all cities other than Kiev and Kharkiv (despite being smaller than some of the ones it surpasses). Galicia has produced the world’s #2 chess player and #4 female chess player. Lviv is Ukraine’s per capita IT outsourcing leader.

    http://outsourcing-ukraine.org/2012/01/03/regional-structure-ukraines-it-outsourcing-industry/

    So, in summary, you are simply wrong about Galicia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "Casualty lists of identified people by origin:"

    These seem like official numbers from the Ukrainian government. Unfortunately the real numbers are many times higher. An overall figure of 10 times higher wouldn't surprise me. I don't know if the real numbers would break down in the same way that these extremely partial numbers do. I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    Sure, but reluctance to join a corrupt Soviet-led force isn’t the same as reluctance to fight. As we see, at least official casualties show Lviv providing much more than its share of people who have died for their country.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.”

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.

    Was the USSR noted for its military competence, historically? It almost got itself conquered by a nation with less than half its population and a fraction of its territory, at an enormous and horrific price. It had trouble with little Finland, fought Poland to a draw (!). It did worse in Afghanistan than the USA did. Russia not long after the USSR struggled with little Chechnya.

    Russia’s military is doing much better now, after it has left the Soviet legacy behind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.
     
    That's one data point. The ones you ignore are:

    1. Lviv-oblast with third highest % of people with university-level education in Ukraine.
    2. Lviv with 2 of Ukraine's top 20 universities, making it the country's #3 university town, behind only Kiev and Kharkiv. And ahead of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Odessa. All ofthese have higher populations than Lviv.
    3. Two chess grandmasters, including a guy who was ranked #2 in the world for awhile.

    Another one I didn't add, is that Lviv is the country's #2 IT outsourcing center. #1 per capita (Kiev hax more such jobs, but Lviv has more per population).

    As for your data point, the western Ukrainian oblasts with few per capita publications are not Lviv's Galicia. They are non-Galician regions and thus irrelevant to this discussion.


    they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.
     
    Casualty lists of identified people by origin:

    http://memorybook.org.ua/indexfile/statistic.htm

    More people from Lviv oblast have sacrificed their lives than from any other oblast other than Dnipropetrovsk. And since as we know Galicians are avoiding the regular military, these are volunteers.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?
     
    In 1918-1919 Galician troops were able to hold off Poland for about 9 months, without any real outside help. This was the same Poland that fought the Soviets to a draw. They threw the Poles back during the Chortkiv offensive, before literally running out of bullets.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Ukrainian_War

    Galician troops fought bravely in the Brody pocket during World War II:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)#Brody

    And in Austria:

    From 1 April until the end of the war, with a strength of 14,000 combat troops and 8,000 soldiers in a Training and Replacement Regiment, the division fought against the Red Army in the region of Graz in Austria[29] where in early April it seized the castle and village of Gleichenberg from Soviet forces (including elite Soviet airborne troops from the 3rd Guards Airborne Division) during a counterattack and on 15 April repulsed a Soviet counterattack. Due to his performance during the battles surrounding Gleichenberg, Waffen-Obersturmführer Ostap Czuczkewycz was awarded the Iron Cross, 1st class.[31] The Division suffered heavy casualties while in Austria, with an estimated 1,600 killed or wounded.[32]

    You are an intelligent man glossy, but make epic mistakes with respect to Galicia. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

    “Casualty lists of identified people by origin:”

    These seem like official numbers from the Ukrainian government. Unfortunately the real numbers are many times higher. An overall figure of 10 times higher wouldn’t surprise me. I don’t know if the real numbers would break down in the same way that these extremely partial numbers do. I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.
     
    Sure, but reluctance to join a corrupt Soviet-led force isn't the same as reluctance to fight. As we see, at least official casualties show Lviv providing much more than its share of people who have died for their country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    So you've just cherry-picked some quotes. I'm sure that a lot of the victims of Zaporozhian Cossack raids had negative things to say about them throughout the centuries. I could dredge that up, but that would be boring and stupid.

    I didn’t cherry-pick quotes and my purpose wasn’t to make fun of Russians. I pointed out that Europeans, themselves, who visited these areas that both called themselves something like Rus, saw the areas as completely different. What is now called Ukrainian Rus was European, familiar – what is now called Russia was not.

    Can you find some quotes by foreign people in those times who saw Ukrainians as the same as Russians (not geographically)?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings. Neither the term Rus nor the term Russia was ever more Great Russian or more Little Russian than the other. The -ia form was for centuries considered more bookish because it originally came from Greek - that was the entire extant of the difference.

    "When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation."

    We've talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms. I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century. You ignored it and just plowed on with your "national identities were invented in the 19th century" line. Your current national identity was indeed invented in the 19th century. Most were not.

    The Greco-Persian wars were all about national identity. I just mentioned the Holy Roman Empire, which was actually called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation ("natio" in Latin) from the 15th century on.

    "They used to call themselves Lytvyns."

    They also called themselves Russians and White Russians. The official language of the principality of Lithuania was always called Russian.

    "The silly confusion of Rus and Russia"

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both "Rus" and "Russia" were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus' sounds more folksy because of that.

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings.

    The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing. You are repeating your fundamental mistake again, confusing labels for the actual people.

    Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus? Even if he was – as in the case of Michal Wisniowiecki – a descendent of Rurik?

    Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. For similar reasons Rusyns are referred to as such (or as Ruthenians) rather than as Russians.

    And we don’t called Romanians Romans in the English language even though in the Romanian language the terms are quite similar.

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms.

    People differentiated themselves by language but nationalism and nations as they are used today are modern inventions. This is the general consensus among modern scholars:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?” From a modern national perspective, was an Orthodox Rurukid nobleman such as Konstanty Ostrogsky a “Pole”? He certainly was in the original use of the term. So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background (what we now call Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian) from the Polish Commonwealth; today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav. Polish nation-builders in the late 18th/early 19th century used the old term for something new.

    I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century.

    Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation.

    There was a region identified as Rus. It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.

    Silly games with words is suggesting that because two different peoples use the same or similar words for themselves, they must be the same people because the self-identification is the same. So Rusyns from Galicia are the same nation as Russky from Moscow, Romani are the same nation as Romans, etc. Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.”

    An even sillier game is to apply the modern meaning of this word to long-gone peoples. So by playing these silly games pre-19th century Galicians become “Russians.” As do 10th century Scandinavian overlords in Kiev. And Julius Caser could be a “Romanian.”

    In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing."

    Sure it does. Why shouldn't we trust the people of those times to tell us honestly who they thought they were? If they used these terms interchangeably (and yes, they did), then Occam's Razor suggests to us that they thought that they meant the same thing. Tautology, but it has to be said.

    "Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus?"

    Yes. Both the Moscovite and Polish-Lithuanian claims had basis in the facts-on-the-ground sense and occasionally in the legal sense (descent and inheritance). After the election of Godunov and then Mikhail Romanov as czars Moscow even lost the genealogical basis for its claims. Which ended up not mattering.

    "Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. "

    But it shouldn't be. Russians aren't confused by that because they never stopped using the word Rus'. It became less common with time, but it never disappeared. There was never any sort of a clean break. The Mongols killed a lot of people and collected a lot of treasure, but they weren't culturally, genetically or linguistically influential, not in the Rus' lands. Continuity was maintained.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    This is exactly like the race-doesn't-exist nonsense. In linguistics there's a similarly false assertion that all languages are equally complex. They aren't.

    For example, do you think that for example the term “gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus” is applicable in the modern understanding of the word “nation?

    I'm guessing that this described Russian people who lived in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    "So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background"

    I'm under the impression that Catholicism was always an important feature of Polish identity.

    "today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav."

    I think it always mostly meant that. And Catholic of course. You're trying to exploit uncertainty at the margins, at the borders of identities, in the leftist fashion. Race doesn't exist because there are mulattoes! And then you turn around and criticize others for leftism, the Soviet mindset, etc. People always had ethnic, national identities, and there was always some uncertainty at the margins. The fact that there is no non-arbitrary way to say where yellow ends and green begins doesn't mean that there are no colors or that it's wrong to think in terms of colors.

    "Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation – the topic of this conversation."

    The wiki on Von Herberstein's book mentioned that he defined Russians as the people speaking a Slavic tongue and practicing Greek-rite Christianity. He then defined Russia geographically. Since he didn't know any genetics, what else could you possibly expect him to have said on this topic?

    Yes, Bulgarians and Serbs speak Slavic tongues and practice Greek-rite Christianity. But they never lived where he paced Russia, so he obviously did not mean them.

    "There was a region identified as Rus. "

    Von Herberstein used the word Russia. Letter for letter. If I remember correctly, the Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus already wrote Ρωσία (Rosia) in 945 AD. Are you assuming that the -ia ending is modern, that 10th, 11th, 12th, century Russians didn't use it? If so, you're wrong. There was a gradual increase in the use of the -ia form over the centuries, but both were always used.

    "It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word."

    There was never any clean break, no matter what revisionary 19th and 20th century Ukrainian nationalists wanted to think.

    "Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an “older nation.”"

    If the newness of your national identity displeases you, blame 19th century Ukrainian nationalists. The Russian identity which they rejected was a thousand years old.

    "an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves)"

    This is actually true. See, you CAN occasionally get in touch with reality. Just not about your own identity's founding myths.

    "In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things."

    First, they were dishonest. I described how above. Second, the transfer of the Rus label from Scandinavian tribute-takers to Slavic tribute-payers is pretty easy to understand. At some point around 1000 AD the flow of Scandinavian raiders stopped. Not just in eastern Europe, but everywhere. For an unknown internal reason they just stopped raiding abroad. The Viking Age came to an end. After that point the Scandinavians left behind in Rus' assimilated into the local population through intermarriage. Their language disappeared. But the political entity which they founded endured. And the mass of the people living within that political entity gradually adopted the entity's name - Rus'.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    No, I don't concede that Galicians' per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians' or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It's pretty damning.

    "they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions "

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I'm assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    "and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan "

    That's because they didn't expect the leaders of the Maidan movement to hire snipers in order to create martyrs.

    "In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. "

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians?

    I have a negative attitude to everyone whom I blame for starting this war. The neocons, the oligarchs (both heavily Jewish groups, and I'm Jewish myself) and the west Ukrainian nationalists.

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.

    That’s one data point. The ones you ignore are:

    1. Lviv-oblast with third highest % of people with university-level education in Ukraine.
    2. Lviv with 2 of Ukraine’s top 20 universities, making it the country’s #3 university town, behind only Kiev and Kharkiv. And ahead of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Odessa. All ofthese have higher populations than Lviv.
    3. Two chess grandmasters, including a guy who was ranked #2 in the world for awhile.

    Another one I didn’t add, is that Lviv is the country’s #2 IT outsourcing center. #1 per capita (Kiev hax more such jobs, but Lviv has more per population).

    As for your data point, the western Ukrainian oblasts with few per capita publications are not Lviv’s Galicia. They are non-Galician regions and thus irrelevant to this discussion.

    they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    Casualty lists of identified people by origin:

    http://memorybook.org.ua/indexfile/statistic.htm

    More people from Lviv oblast have sacrificed their lives than from any other oblast other than Dnipropetrovsk. And since as we know Galicians are avoiding the regular military, these are volunteers.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    In 1918-1919 Galician troops were able to hold off Poland for about 9 months, without any real outside help. This was the same Poland that fought the Soviets to a draw. They threw the Poles back during the Chortkiv offensive, before literally running out of bullets.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Ukrainian_War

    Galician troops fought bravely in the Brody pocket during World War II:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)#Brody

    And in Austria:

    From 1 April until the end of the war, with a strength of 14,000 combat troops and 8,000 soldiers in a Training and Replacement Regiment, the division fought against the Red Army in the region of Graz in Austria[29] where in early April it seized the castle and village of Gleichenberg from Soviet forces (including elite Soviet airborne troops from the 3rd Guards Airborne Division) during a counterattack and on 15 April repulsed a Soviet counterattack. Due to his performance during the battles surrounding Gleichenberg, Waffen-Obersturmführer Ostap Czuczkewycz was awarded the Iron Cross, 1st class.[31] The Division suffered heavy casualties while in Austria, with an estimated 1,600 killed or wounded.[32]

    You are an intelligent man glossy, but make epic mistakes with respect to Galicia. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "Casualty lists of identified people by origin:"

    These seem like official numbers from the Ukrainian government. Unfortunately the real numbers are many times higher. An overall figure of 10 times higher wouldn't surprise me. I don't know if the real numbers would break down in the same way that these extremely partial numbers do. I know however that Biryukov, an adviser to Poroshenko, has said that West Ukrainians are avoiding the draft in greater numbers than other kinds of Ukrainians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    Never mind labels. foreign visitors were keenly aware of the differences between people of what is now Ukraine and those of what is now Russia. They saw Ukrainians as fellow-Europeans and Russians are foreign savages:

    A French diplomat, Jean Baluse, whose memoirs are in the National Library in Paris, on Mazepa:

    "At his court he has two German doctors, with whom he converses in their tongue; to the Italian masters of whom there are several in the castle, he speaks in the Italian language. I spoke with the master of Ukraine in the Latin language, inasmuch he assured me that he was not very fluent in French...I do not know if this statement of his concealed a special motive, for I myself saw French and Dutch newspapers in his study."

    The German Friedrich Weber in 1720 about the son of Hetman Apostol:

    "Although he was never abroad, he speaks fluently Latin, French, Italian, German, Russian and Polish..."

    Danish envoy in Moscow Jul Just, 1709-1712:

    "Although at the present time the Russians in their conduct are trying to emulate in monkey fashion the other nations, and though they don French attire and in their external appearance they appear more civilized, inwardly, however, there sits a cholop"

    "The tsar's entourage behaved without conscience and shame; they shouted, whistled, belched, spat, berated each other, and even shamelessly spat in the faces of decent people"

    Just described how all of the teachers at the Moscow gymnasium were either Ukrainians or Byelorussians ("Orthodox from Poland").

    Cultural level of the Russian leaders (contrast this with the descriptions of Mazepa above):

    "Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write. Chancellor Golovkin knew no language but Russian; not a single one of the tsar's dignitaries could speak Latin, with the exception of Musin-Pushkin, who was fluent in that language. Even Tsar Peter, whose 'enlightenment' was widely known, spoke only one Western European language, namely Dutch, and even here the tsar had difficulty in making himself understood."

    Just contrasts this with Ukraine:

    "The inhabitants of the Chernihiv province, as well as the entire population of kozak Ukraine, are known for their politeness and cleanliness, dressing neatly and keeping their homes immaculately clean."

    "Korolevets is a big town...the streets are beautiful, such as I never saw in Russia; the buildings are stately, strong and clean and are along the streets as in Denmark..."

    The envoy visited many Ukrainian dignitaries, all of whom he found to be extremely learned and educated. The ordinary monks in the Pecherska Lavra spoke fluently with him in Latin. He was greatly surprised to see the Ukrainian peasants in many villages going to church with prayer books, indicating that they were literate.

    In Podolia, in Nemyriv, "the meanest building was much cleaner than the most sumptuous palace in Moscow".

    An English author, Joseph Marshall, compared Ukrainian villages to those of England or Flanders. "The race of the Ukraine are civilized people and the best husbandmen in the Russian empire."

    :::::::::::::::::::

    I think to a certain extent this doesn't reflect Russian ugliness or something like that, but the fact that these Europeans felt "at home" in Ukraine and in a foreign place in Russia. Before political correctness, this meant praise for other European places and scorn for non-European ones as full of savages.

    So you’ve just cherry-picked some quotes. I’m sure that a lot of the victims of Zaporozhian Cossack raids had negative things to say about them throughout the centuries. I could dredge that up, but that would be boring and stupid.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    I didn't cherry-pick quotes and my purpose wasn't to make fun of Russians. I pointed out that Europeans, themselves, who visited these areas that both called themselves something like Rus, saw the areas as completely different. What is now called Ukrainian Rus was European, familiar - what is now called Russia was not.

    Can you find some quotes by foreign people in those times who saw Ukrainians as the same as Russians (not geographically)?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia. There was a defunct state Rus, out of which emerged Ukraine and Russia. To say that Ukrainians once considered themselves Rus does not mean they once considered themselves to be Russians. No more than the fact that people living Italy once considered themselves to be Romans, means that they had once thought of themselves as Romanians.

    When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation. So Ukrainians had to choose something else. A similar thing happened to Belarussians. They used to call themselves Lytvyns, but Lithuanians claimed that name for themselves first, so they had to choose a new one.

    The silly confusion of Rus and Russia leads to ahistorical claims about Ukraine always being part of "Russia" or being more Russian than it is Western. I imagine that in a parallel universe, if Romania had somehow become a world power capable of conquering all of southern Europe, Romanian nationalists would be making similar arguments about Romans and Italians. Italy was always Romania for 2000 years!

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings. Neither the term Rus nor the term Russia was ever more Great Russian or more Little Russian than the other. The -ia form was for centuries considered more bookish because it originally came from Greek – that was the entire extant of the difference.

    “When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation.”

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms. I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century. You ignored it and just plowed on with your “national identities were invented in the 19th century” line. Your current national identity was indeed invented in the 19th century. Most were not.

    The Greco-Persian wars were all about national identity. I just mentioned the Holy Roman Empire, which was actually called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation (“natio” in Latin) from the 15th century on.

    “They used to call themselves Lytvyns.”

    They also called themselves Russians and White Russians. The official language of the principality of Lithuania was always called Russian.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings.
     
    The fact that both terms were used interchangeably does not mean that Rus and Russia were or are the same thing. You are repeating your fundamental mistake again, confusing labels for the actual people.

    Would you call a Polish king a Russian king because he claimed to be sovereign of Rus? Even if he was - as in the case of Michal Wisniowiecki - a descendent of Rurik?

    Rus is usually used in English order to denote that this is a different from thing from Russia. For similar reasons Rusyns are referred to as such (or as Ruthenians) rather than as Russians.

    And we don't called Romanians Romans in the English language even though in the Romanian language the terms are quite similar.

    We’ve talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms.
     
    People differentiated themselves by language but nationalism and nations as they are used today are modern inventions. This is the general consensus among modern scholars:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#Modernist_interpretation

    For example, do you think that for example the term "gente Ruthenus, natione Polonus" is applicable in the modern understanding of the word "nation?" From a modern national perspective, was an Orthodox Rurukid nobleman such as Konstanty Ostrogsky a "Pole"? He certainly was in the original use of the term. So once a Pole was a nobleman of any faith or background (what we now call Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian, Lithuanian) from the Polish Commonwealth; today that word means something very different: a Polish-speaking western Slav. Polish nation-builders in the late 18th/early 19th century used the old term for something new.

    I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century.
     
    Your quotation dealt with geographic regions with no implication of any sort of united common people, or nation - the topic of this conversation.

    There was a region identified as Rus. It was not Russia, in the modern meaning of that word.

    “The silly confusion of Rus and Russia”

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both “Rus” and “Russia” were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus’ sounds more folksy because of that.
     
    Silly games with words is suggesting that because two different peoples use the same or similar words for themselves, they must be the same people because the self-identification is the same. So Rusyns from Galicia are the same nation as Russky from Moscow, Romani are the same nation as Romans, etc. Or because Russky from Moscow use an older word (that originally applied to Scandinavian conquerors and sellers of Slavic slaves) they are somehow an "older nation."

    An even sillier game is to apply the modern meaning of this word to long-gone peoples. So by playing these silly games pre-19th century Galicians become "Russians." As do 10th century Scandinavian overlords in Kiev. And Julius Caser could be a "Romanian."

    In coming up with a new self-identification, Ukrainian nation-builders were actually more honest than Russian or Polish ones, who stole names originally meaning different things.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    So Glossy - no comment on Galicia's educational achievements and its supposed intelligence? Do you concede that you were wrong there?

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians.
     
    Why do you believe Galicians have lower levels of altruism?

    Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.
     
    Although Galicians have been less likely to join the ex-Soviet army, they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan (although contrary to some pro-Russian narratives a majority of Maidan were local Kiev people, about 30% were Galicians).

    In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. This state had 1/2 the population of modern Donbas, which is not close to mobilizing 100,000 people.

    Modern Galicia has a much more developed civic society and local volunteerism than other parts of Ukraine.

    I think that it's more about Galician lack of trust for Soviet-inherited national authority, rather than lack of altruism or patriotism.

    I wonder - why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians? Go to Lviv, and visit villages outside Lviv, to see for yourself. compare these areas to rural Russian ones, or to similar-size Russian cities.

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.

    “they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    “and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan “

    That’s because they didn’t expect the leaders of the Maidan movement to hire snipers in order to create martyrs.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians?

    I have a negative attitude to everyone whom I blame for starting this war. The neocons, the oligarchs (both heavily Jewish groups, and I’m Jewish myself) and the west Ukrainian nationalists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    No, I don’t concede that Galicians’ per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians’ or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It’s pretty damning.
     
    That's one data point. The ones you ignore are:

    1. Lviv-oblast with third highest % of people with university-level education in Ukraine.
    2. Lviv with 2 of Ukraine's top 20 universities, making it the country's #3 university town, behind only Kiev and Kharkiv. And ahead of Donetsk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Odessa. All ofthese have higher populations than Lviv.
    3. Two chess grandmasters, including a guy who was ranked #2 in the world for awhile.

    Another one I didn't add, is that Lviv is the country's #2 IT outsourcing center. #1 per capita (Kiev hax more such jobs, but Lviv has more per population).

    As for your data point, the western Ukrainian oblasts with few per capita publications are not Lviv's Galicia. They are non-Galician regions and thus irrelevant to this discussion.


    they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions “

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I’m assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.
     
    Casualty lists of identified people by origin:

    http://memorybook.org.ua/indexfile/statistic.htm

    More people from Lviv oblast have sacrificed their lives than from any other oblast other than Dnipropetrovsk. And since as we know Galicians are avoiding the regular military, these are volunteers.

    “In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. “

    What military actions did those troops participate in?
     
    In 1918-1919 Galician troops were able to hold off Poland for about 9 months, without any real outside help. This was the same Poland that fought the Soviets to a draw. They threw the Poles back during the Chortkiv offensive, before literally running out of bullets.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Ukrainian_War

    Galician troops fought bravely in the Brody pocket during World War II:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Galician)#Brody

    And in Austria:

    From 1 April until the end of the war, with a strength of 14,000 combat troops and 8,000 soldiers in a Training and Replacement Regiment, the division fought against the Red Army in the region of Graz in Austria[29] where in early April it seized the castle and village of Gleichenberg from Soviet forces (including elite Soviet airborne troops from the 3rd Guards Airborne Division) during a counterattack and on 15 April repulsed a Soviet counterattack. Due to his performance during the battles surrounding Gleichenberg, Waffen-Obersturmführer Ostap Czuczkewycz was awarded the Iron Cross, 1st class.[31] The Division suffered heavy casualties while in Austria, with an estimated 1,600 killed or wounded.[32]

    You are an intelligent man glossy, but make epic mistakes with respect to Galicia. Perhaps you should ask yourself why.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.
     
    It's more like 45% vs. 45%. I don't have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.
     
    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn't the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.
     
    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals - not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself "Rome."

    I got interested in the original of Von Herberstein’s opus. He wrote it in Latin:

    http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost16/Sigismundus/sig_co01.html

    And here’s an English translation of the passage defining Russia:

    http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtfxtx&fileName=txg/g340002190a//mtfxtxg340002190a.db&recNum=178&itemLink=r%3Fintldl%2Fmtfront%3A%40field%28NUMBER%2B%40od1%28mtfxtx%2Bg340002190a%29%29&linkText=0

    It starts with the words

    “Russia extends near to the Sarmatian mountains, up to a short distance from Cracow.”

    The original Latin: “Caeterum Russia montes Sarmaticos haud longea Cracovia attingit:”

    Not even Ruthenia. Russia. He goes on for a while about geography.

    Later, on page 6 of the English translation:

    “Of the princes who now rule over Russia the first is the Grand Duke of Moscow, who holds the greater part of it; the second is the Grand Duke of Lithuania; the third is the King of Poland, who now is sovereign both of Poland and Lithuania.”

    The original:

    “Principum qui nunc Russiae imperant, primus est, Magnus dux Moscovuiae, qui maiorem eius partem obtinet: secundus, magnus dux Lithvuaniae: tertius est rex Poloniae, qui nunc & Poloniae & Lithvuaniae praeest.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Russkiy (Russian) is simply an adjective from Rus'. Until 19th-century Ukrainian nationalists redefined things in an ahistorical way, no one would have see any difference between "Russians" and "Rus people". Moskals was a Little Russian nickname for Great Russians.

    A representative example of a pre-modern definition of Russia and Russians is contained in Von Herberstein's Notes on Moscovite Affairs. As quoted in the Wikipedia:

    "К отличительным особенностям русских (потомков Яфета) он относил славянское наречие и христианство греческого обряда. Собственно Россией он называл территорию между Сарматскими горами, рекой Ра и Северным морем. Россией владеют три царя: московский, литовский и польский. "

    "He held the distinguishing characteristics of Russians (descendants of Yaphet) to be Slavic speech and Greek-rite Christianity. He called Russia proper the territory between the Sarmatian mountains, the river Ra and the Northern Sea. Russia is owned by three czars: the Moscovite, Lithuanian and Polish ones."

    The Sarmatian mountains are the Carpathians, the Ra is the Volga and the Northern Sea is the Arctic Ocean. Von Herberstein was an ethnically German Catholic from what is now Slovenia. He visited Russia as a diplomat for the Holy Roman Emperor in 1517 and 1526.

    At that time and for a long time afterwards both the Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland claimed to be the rightful rulers of all Rus'. Rus' was seen as the lands of the original, medieval Rus' state plus any lands to which the people of that state spread after it split up. The Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland considered themelves to be the lawful heirs of that entire legacy and each other temporary, illegal usurpers of parts of it. In today's terms they were both for a united Rus', just under their own, not their rival's leadership. The parts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that are now in Belarus and the Ukraine were called Russia and the local language Russian by Polish officialdom. The locals called themselves and their language Russian.

    Never mind labels. foreign visitors were keenly aware of the differences between people of what is now Ukraine and those of what is now Russia. They saw Ukrainians as fellow-Europeans and Russians are foreign savages:

    A French diplomat, Jean Baluse, whose memoirs are in the National Library in Paris, on Mazepa:

    “At his court he has two German doctors, with whom he converses in their tongue; to the Italian masters of whom there are several in the castle, he speaks in the Italian language. I spoke with the master of Ukraine in the Latin language, inasmuch he assured me that he was not very fluent in French…I do not know if this statement of his concealed a special motive, for I myself saw French and Dutch newspapers in his study.”

    The German Friedrich Weber in 1720 about the son of Hetman Apostol:

    “Although he was never abroad, he speaks fluently Latin, French, Italian, German, Russian and Polish…”

    Danish envoy in Moscow Jul Just, 1709-1712:

    “Although at the present time the Russians in their conduct are trying to emulate in monkey fashion the other nations, and though they don French attire and in their external appearance they appear more civilized, inwardly, however, there sits a cholop”

    “The tsar’s entourage behaved without conscience and shame; they shouted, whistled, belched, spat, berated each other, and even shamelessly spat in the faces of decent people”

    Just described how all of the teachers at the Moscow gymnasium were either Ukrainians or Byelorussians (“Orthodox from Poland”).

    Cultural level of the Russian leaders (contrast this with the descriptions of Mazepa above):

    “Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write. Chancellor Golovkin knew no language but Russian; not a single one of the tsar’s dignitaries could speak Latin, with the exception of Musin-Pushkin, who was fluent in that language. Even Tsar Peter, whose ‘enlightenment’ was widely known, spoke only one Western European language, namely Dutch, and even here the tsar had difficulty in making himself understood.”

    Just contrasts this with Ukraine:

    “The inhabitants of the Chernihiv province, as well as the entire population of kozak Ukraine, are known for their politeness and cleanliness, dressing neatly and keeping their homes immaculately clean.”

    “Korolevets is a big town…the streets are beautiful, such as I never saw in Russia; the buildings are stately, strong and clean and are along the streets as in Denmark…”

    The envoy visited many Ukrainian dignitaries, all of whom he found to be extremely learned and educated. The ordinary monks in the Pecherska Lavra spoke fluently with him in Latin. He was greatly surprised to see the Ukrainian peasants in many villages going to church with prayer books, indicating that they were literate.

    In Podolia, in Nemyriv, “the meanest building was much cleaner than the most sumptuous palace in Moscow”.

    An English author, Joseph Marshall, compared Ukrainian villages to those of England or Flanders. “The race of the Ukraine are civilized people and the best husbandmen in the Russian empire.”

    :::::::::::::::::::

    I think to a certain extent this doesn’t reflect Russian ugliness or something like that, but the fact that these Europeans felt “at home” in Ukraine and in a foreign place in Russia. Before political correctness, this meant praise for other European places and scorn for non-European ones as full of savages.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    So you've just cherry-picked some quotes. I'm sure that a lot of the victims of Zaporozhian Cossack raids had negative things to say about them throughout the centuries. I could dredge that up, but that would be boring and stupid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Russkiy (Russian) is simply an adjective from Rus'. Until 19th-century Ukrainian nationalists redefined things in an ahistorical way, no one would have see any difference between "Russians" and "Rus people". Moskals was a Little Russian nickname for Great Russians.

    A representative example of a pre-modern definition of Russia and Russians is contained in Von Herberstein's Notes on Moscovite Affairs. As quoted in the Wikipedia:

    "К отличительным особенностям русских (потомков Яфета) он относил славянское наречие и христианство греческого обряда. Собственно Россией он называл территорию между Сарматскими горами, рекой Ра и Северным морем. Россией владеют три царя: московский, литовский и польский. "

    "He held the distinguishing characteristics of Russians (descendants of Yaphet) to be Slavic speech and Greek-rite Christianity. He called Russia proper the territory between the Sarmatian mountains, the river Ra and the Northern Sea. Russia is owned by three czars: the Moscovite, Lithuanian and Polish ones."

    The Sarmatian mountains are the Carpathians, the Ra is the Volga and the Northern Sea is the Arctic Ocean. Von Herberstein was an ethnically German Catholic from what is now Slovenia. He visited Russia as a diplomat for the Holy Roman Emperor in 1517 and 1526.

    At that time and for a long time afterwards both the Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland claimed to be the rightful rulers of all Rus'. Rus' was seen as the lands of the original, medieval Rus' state plus any lands to which the people of that state spread after it split up. The Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland considered themelves to be the lawful heirs of that entire legacy and each other temporary, illegal usurpers of parts of it. In today's terms they were both for a united Rus', just under their own, not their rival's leadership. The parts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that are now in Belarus and the Ukraine were called Russia and the local language Russian by Polish officialdom. The locals called themselves and their language Russian.

    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia. There was a defunct state Rus, out of which emerged Ukraine and Russia. To say that Ukrainians once considered themselves Rus does not mean they once considered themselves to be Russians. No more than the fact that people living Italy once considered themselves to be Romans, means that they had once thought of themselves as Romanians.

    When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation. So Ukrainians had to choose something else. A similar thing happened to Belarussians. They used to call themselves Lytvyns, but Lithuanians claimed that name for themselves first, so they had to choose a new one.

    The silly confusion of Rus and Russia leads to ahistorical claims about Ukraine always being part of “Russia” or being more Russian than it is Western. I imagine that in a parallel universe, if Romania had somehow become a world power capable of conquering all of southern Europe, Romanian nationalists would be making similar arguments about Romans and Italians. Italy was always Romania for 2000 years!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia.

    Both terms were used a lot throughout the last 1,000 years both in currently Russian and currently Ukrainian territories. And in currently Belorussians too of course. Moscovite rulers called themselves the sovereigns of all Rus for many centuries. As did Polish kings. Neither the term Rus nor the term Russia was ever more Great Russian or more Little Russian than the other. The -ia form was for centuries considered more bookish because it originally came from Greek - that was the entire extant of the difference.

    "When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation."

    We've talked about this before. National identities are as old as history. They literally pop up at the start of the written record, about 4,500 years ago in Mesopotamia, where Sumerians distinguished themselves from Accadians. There was an increase in nationalism in Europe after the French Revolution. But there were always nations and nationalisms. I quoted to you something written by a Westerner, a representative of the Holy Roman Emperor, about Russian national identity in the 16th century. You ignored it and just plowed on with your "national identities were invented in the 19th century" line. Your current national identity was indeed invented in the 19th century. Most were not.

    The Greco-Persian wars were all about national identity. I just mentioned the Holy Roman Empire, which was actually called the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation ("natio" in Latin) from the 15th century on.

    "They used to call themselves Lytvyns."

    They also called themselves Russians and White Russians. The official language of the principality of Lithuania was always called Russian.

    "The silly confusion of Rus and Russia"

    You are the one who is playing silly games with words. Both "Rus" and "Russia" were used in Moscow throughout its history. Both were used in what is now the Ukraine throughout its history. The only difference between these terms is the level of folksiness/bookishness attached to them. The -ia ending originally came from Greek, which seemed more literary and learned to people in the past. Still does. Rus' sounds more folksy because of that.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    From 1366 to 1772 Lvov was a part of an administrative unit called województwo ruskie in Polish and palatinatus russiae in Latin. Literally the Russian province.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenian_Voivodeship

    The wiki on Francisk Scarina, a native of Polotsk in modern Belarus reproduces the title page of his Bible translation:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francysk_Skaryna

    The first words are "Biblia Ruska", "The Russian Bible".

    Here's a wiki on the "Ruska Tryitsa" (the Russian Triad) established by a group of Galician poets in the 1830s:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_literature#The_.22Ruska_Triytsia.22_and_Western_Ukrainian_national_revival

    There's lots and lots of that sort of stuff.

    You are confusing Rus with Russia again. It’s like translating Roman into Romanian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. "

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians. Altruism is related to trust in strangers, non-relatives. In many cultures people are only able to trust their relatives. Large organizations like armies and government bureaucracies are ineffective in such cultures. East Ukrainians have Russian levels of altruism and trust in strangers. Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they're less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    This hunch of mine is supported by the existence of a stereotype of far west Ukrainians as being more nepotistic when in power than other types of Ukrainians.

    "Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. "

    I was making a comparison between western and eastern Ukraine.

    So Glossy – no comment on Galicia’s educational achievements and its supposed intelligence? Do you concede that you were wrong there?

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians.

    Why do you believe Galicians have lower levels of altruism?

    Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    Although Galicians have been less likely to join the ex-Soviet army, they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan (although contrary to some pro-Russian narratives a majority of Maidan were local Kiev people, about 30% were Galicians).

    In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. This state had 1/2 the population of modern Donbas, which is not close to mobilizing 100,000 people.

    Modern Galicia has a much more developed civic society and local volunteerism than other parts of Ukraine.

    I think that it’s more about Galician lack of trust for Soviet-inherited national authority, rather than lack of altruism or patriotism.

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians? Go to Lviv, and visit villages outside Lviv, to see for yourself. compare these areas to rural Russian ones, or to similar-size Russian cities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    No, I don't concede that Galicians' per capita intellectual achievements are on par with those of Eastern Ukrainians' or of Russians. Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a map of scientific papers per 100,000 people by regions of the Ukraine. It's pretty damning.

    "they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions "

    Can you support that assertion with any references to data? These death squads have geographic names: Donbass, Azov, Aidar (the name of a river in the Lugansk region), etc. I'm assuming that recruiting tends to occur in the regions for which they were named.

    "and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan "

    That's because they didn't expect the leaders of the Maidan movement to hire snipers in order to create martyrs.

    "In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. "

    What military actions did those troops participate in?

    I wonder – why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians?

    I have a negative attitude to everyone whom I blame for starting this war. The neocons, the oligarchs (both heavily Jewish groups, and I'm Jewish myself) and the west Ukrainian nationalists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “for some reason, Russia seems to have always been dysfunctional”

    And part of that dysfunction is the hysterical and firmly held belief that the only reason a country would want to get away from their sphere of influence is because they’ve been taken over by Nazis….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @fnn
    Russia is definitely the lesser of the evils:

    http://blog.jim.com/war/nazis-are-commies-and-commies-are-progressives/#comment-933563


    The Russian Orthodox opposes homosexuality, opposes mass illegal immigration of colored people. The Russian Orthodox Church declares feminism a mortal sin. Can one imagine any Christian Church in America daring to say that? The Russian Orthodox Church opposes abortion and single motherhood. Christian Churches in the west can only oppose abortion by valorizing single motherhood as good and heroic. The proposition that women with children must submit to and obey the father of those children is unthinkable and unspeakable in Western Christianity...The Russian Orthodox Church in the US and Europe is mighty quiet on gays, fatherless children, etc.
     
    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-orthodox-church-and-russian-politics

    ... the passage of a 1997 national law, restricting certain religious organizations from carrying out missionary work in the Russian Federation, was considered a political victory for the Orthodox Church, whose leadership lobbied the government heavily for the legislation. Additionally, according to Papkova, “the presence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous” starting in 1995. The speaker cited images of Orthodox priests blessing new buildings, military installations, and construction sites throughout Russia as examples of the Church’s presence in everyday life. The Patriarch also conferred his blessing on each new president, further highlighting the growing public presence of the Church.
     
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/395624/coming-clash-civilizations-andrew-stuttaford

    In his fire-breathing speech to the Duma in March when he announced Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Putin included not just venerable KGB classics like warnings about the Western Fifth Column and “national traitors,” but also paeans to explicit Russian ethnic nationalism buttressed by Orthodox mysticism, with citations of saints from millennia past. This was the culmination of years of increasingly unsubtle hints from Putin and his inner circle that what ideologically motivates this Kremlin is the KGB cult unified with Russian Orthodoxy. Behind the Chekist sword and shield lurks the Third Rome, forming a potent and, to many Russians, plausible worldview. That this take on the planet and its politics is intensely anti-Western needs to be stated clearly…
     

    1997 national law… That was during the reign of the US darling Yeltsin: “Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin (1 February 1931 – 23 April 2007) was a Russian politician and the first President of the Russian Federation, serving from 1991 to 1999.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    This would all be very impressive if Russia didn't have the world's highest abortion rate, highest murder rate among white people, and churchgoing rates equal to that of Sweden.

    In terms of actual behaviors such as abortion, going to church, not getting divorced, etc. Europe's leader is probably Poland.

    Guess which country is an enemy of Russia?

    For some reason, Russia seems to have always been dysfunctional. The latest of many who have commented on this:

    http://romaninukraine.com/russia-the-white-people-who-failed/

    Why is it, that throughout their history, at every opportunity, Russians consistently make the wrong decision? What is it that Russians incorrectly intuit about the world? Why do they have the lowest trust most corrupt nation of all the white peoples? Why is it that Russians are the one white people who have failed.

    If any people was ever incapable of self government, it’s Russians. If any people was less capable of governing others. It’s the Russians. What is it about the Russian character that causes them to consistently fail? What metaphysical assumption about the nature of man and his relationship to the world is so flawed that unless tightly bound to europe they contribute nothing to legacy of white people? Why is it that western peoples have dragged the entire world out of ignorance mysticism sickness and poverty, while russians try consistently to reverse the trend by dragging those white people near them into their failed civilization?

    Why is it that Russians have nothing to offer the world other than corruption, violence, fear and poverty?

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Curt Doolittle
    Kiev

    Forget moral equivalency. Go with the facts. Russians have the market on corruption, brutality, oppression, and have destroyed every white nation that they have touched with their corruption. And murdered more of their own people than any white people in history. Russians have nothing constructive to offer the world, and everything they do causes suffering.

    Russians yet again had the opportunity to act as the military and resource wing of the european peoples. To expand their influence across the top one third of the globe. But rather than join the western miracle, and correct it’s weakness, Russians choose to yet again double down on corruption, violence, predation, and the spread of their corrupt culture.

    The only moral objective for white people is to remove Russians from self determination, and the conquest and oppression of others, the same way we forcibly civilized other nations.

    Russians are the only white people who failed. And they seek to drag other white people into their failure with them.

    Russians abandoned their opportunity at restoring aristocracy, and forming the aristocratic class of white civilization in order to expand their corrupt and predatory failed culture to a few hundred kilometers to the east. Never was a decision was more short sighted, and foolish.

    What is it about Russian genes, culture, values or perceptions that causes them to make the wrong decisions, always, and everywhere, at every opportunity? Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Never has a people had greater fortune than a weak civilization to it’s west, a collapsing hegemonic empire across the seas, and nearly infinite resource wealth, and geographic space. Not since england mastered the seas, has a numerically small people had the opportunity to expand through commerce and trade, including the trade of military protection, across so much of the earth’s surface. Russia could have led the world through resources, military hegemony, and commerce.

    But they chose to expand corruption and poverty instead.

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.
     
    It's more like 45% vs. 45%. I don't have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.
     
    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn't the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.
     
    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals - not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself "Rome."

    From 1366 to 1772 Lvov was a part of an administrative unit called województwo ruskie in Polish and palatinatus russiae in Latin. Literally the Russian province.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenian_Voivodeship

    The wiki on Francisk Scarina, a native of Polotsk in modern Belarus reproduces the title page of his Bible translation:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francysk_Skaryna

    The first words are “Biblia Ruska”, “The Russian Bible”.

    Here’s a wiki on the “Ruska Tryitsa” (the Russian Triad) established by a group of Galician poets in the 1830s:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_literature#The_.22Ruska_Triytsia.22_and_Western_Ukrainian_national_revival

    There’s lots and lots of that sort of stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    You are confusing Rus with Russia again. It's like translating Roman into Romanian.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.
     
    It's more like 45% vs. 45%. I don't have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.
     
    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn't the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.
     
    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals - not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself "Rome."

    “Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Russkiy (Russian) is simply an adjective from Rus’. Until 19th-century Ukrainian nationalists redefined things in an ahistorical way, no one would have see any difference between “Russians” and “Rus people”. Moskals was a Little Russian nickname for Great Russians.

    A representative example of a pre-modern definition of Russia and Russians is contained in Von Herberstein’s Notes on Moscovite Affairs. As quoted in the Wikipedia:

    “К отличительным особенностям русских (потомков Яфета) он относил славянское наречие и христианство греческого обряда. Собственно Россией он называл территорию между Сарматскими горами, рекой Ра и Северным морем. Россией владеют три царя: московский, литовский и польский. “

    “He held the distinguishing characteristics of Russians (descendants of Yaphet) to be Slavic speech and Greek-rite Christianity. He called Russia proper the territory between the Sarmatian mountains, the river Ra and the Northern Sea. Russia is owned by three czars: the Moscovite, Lithuanian and Polish ones.”

    The Sarmatian mountains are the Carpathians, the Ra is the Volga and the Northern Sea is the Arctic Ocean. Von Herberstein was an ethnically German Catholic from what is now Slovenia. He visited Russia as a diplomat for the Holy Roman Emperor in 1517 and 1526.

    At that time and for a long time afterwards both the Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland claimed to be the rightful rulers of all Rus’. Rus’ was seen as the lands of the original, medieval Rus’ state plus any lands to which the people of that state spread after it split up. The Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland considered themelves to be the lawful heirs of that entire legacy and each other temporary, illegal usurpers of parts of it. In today’s terms they were both for a united Rus’, just under their own, not their rival’s leadership. The parts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that are now in Belarus and the Ukraine were called Russia and the local language Russian by Polish officialdom. The locals called themselves and their language Russian.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Again, you are equating Rus and Russia. There was a defunct state Rus, out of which emerged Ukraine and Russia. To say that Ukrainians once considered themselves Rus does not mean they once considered themselves to be Russians. No more than the fact that people living Italy once considered themselves to be Romans, means that they had once thought of themselves as Romanians.

    When all of thee modern national identities were constructed in the 19th century, Russians had a head start and coopted the old name Rus for their nation. So Ukrainians had to choose something else. A similar thing happened to Belarussians. They used to call themselves Lytvyns, but Lithuanians claimed that name for themselves first, so they had to choose a new one.

    The silly confusion of Rus and Russia leads to ahistorical claims about Ukraine always being part of "Russia" or being more Russian than it is Western. I imagine that in a parallel universe, if Romania had somehow become a world power capable of conquering all of southern Europe, Romanian nationalists would be making similar arguments about Romans and Italians. Italy was always Romania for 2000 years!
    , @AP
    Never mind labels. foreign visitors were keenly aware of the differences between people of what is now Ukraine and those of what is now Russia. They saw Ukrainians as fellow-Europeans and Russians are foreign savages:

    A French diplomat, Jean Baluse, whose memoirs are in the National Library in Paris, on Mazepa:

    "At his court he has two German doctors, with whom he converses in their tongue; to the Italian masters of whom there are several in the castle, he speaks in the Italian language. I spoke with the master of Ukraine in the Latin language, inasmuch he assured me that he was not very fluent in French...I do not know if this statement of his concealed a special motive, for I myself saw French and Dutch newspapers in his study."

    The German Friedrich Weber in 1720 about the son of Hetman Apostol:

    "Although he was never abroad, he speaks fluently Latin, French, Italian, German, Russian and Polish..."

    Danish envoy in Moscow Jul Just, 1709-1712:

    "Although at the present time the Russians in their conduct are trying to emulate in monkey fashion the other nations, and though they don French attire and in their external appearance they appear more civilized, inwardly, however, there sits a cholop"

    "The tsar's entourage behaved without conscience and shame; they shouted, whistled, belched, spat, berated each other, and even shamelessly spat in the faces of decent people"

    Just described how all of the teachers at the Moscow gymnasium were either Ukrainians or Byelorussians ("Orthodox from Poland").

    Cultural level of the Russian leaders (contrast this with the descriptions of Mazepa above):

    "Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write. Chancellor Golovkin knew no language but Russian; not a single one of the tsar's dignitaries could speak Latin, with the exception of Musin-Pushkin, who was fluent in that language. Even Tsar Peter, whose 'enlightenment' was widely known, spoke only one Western European language, namely Dutch, and even here the tsar had difficulty in making himself understood."

    Just contrasts this with Ukraine:

    "The inhabitants of the Chernihiv province, as well as the entire population of kozak Ukraine, are known for their politeness and cleanliness, dressing neatly and keeping their homes immaculately clean."

    "Korolevets is a big town...the streets are beautiful, such as I never saw in Russia; the buildings are stately, strong and clean and are along the streets as in Denmark..."

    The envoy visited many Ukrainian dignitaries, all of whom he found to be extremely learned and educated. The ordinary monks in the Pecherska Lavra spoke fluently with him in Latin. He was greatly surprised to see the Ukrainian peasants in many villages going to church with prayer books, indicating that they were literate.

    In Podolia, in Nemyriv, "the meanest building was much cleaner than the most sumptuous palace in Moscow".

    An English author, Joseph Marshall, compared Ukrainian villages to those of England or Flanders. "The race of the Ukraine are civilized people and the best husbandmen in the Russian empire."

    :::::::::::::::::::

    I think to a certain extent this doesn't reflect Russian ugliness or something like that, but the fact that these Europeans felt "at home" in Ukraine and in a foreign place in Russia. Before political correctness, this meant praise for other European places and scorn for non-European ones as full of savages.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting
     
    .

    Not necessarily. They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as "their own." There are many stories about Ukrainian officers giving away plans to the pro-Russians, getting Ukrainian soldiers killed. Under such circumstances it is understandable for many people to avoid being placed under such command.

    Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. Obviously that's not true. Thus, something other patriotism or lack of it explains the difficulty in mobilization.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background.
     
    Galicia has Slovakia's population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. As for cultural or scientific figures, there is this guy, my relative:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B9,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    Opera singer Solomiya Krushelnytska, who saved Madame Butterfly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomiya_Krushelnytska

    Two chess grandmasters are from Galicia.

    Vassily Ivanchuk, ranked as high as #2 in the world

    Anna Muzychuk, female chess grandmaster, ranked #4 in the world

    The writer Leopold Sacher-Masoch was half-Galician.

    Ruslana who won Eurovision is Galician.

    Ivasiuk was well-known in the USSR. He was from neighboring Chernivtsi. Andy Warhol was a Carpatho-Rusyn.

    Historically Galicia's wealth surpassed that of both the Balkans and of Russia. It was, actually, similar to that of Slovakia. A comparison of per capita incomes in 1890:

    Britain $6,228
    Austria $3,005
    Bohemia $2,513
    Transylvania $1,956
    Galicia $1,947.
    Eastern Hungary (Slovakia) $1,824

    Balkans:

    Bulgaria $1,670
    Greece $1,550
    Serbia $1,295

    Russia's, btw, was $1,550. Significantly lower than Galicia's.

    I don't know about altruism, but Galicia's crime rate is the lowest in Ukraine, it's life expectancy is the highest. This is true of urban Lviv (which is larger than several non-Galician cities such as Luhansk) as well as of rural areas.

    As an educational center Lviv is in third place in Ukraine, with two universities in the top 20, one in the top 10. It is also the oblast with the third highest % of university-educated people in Ukraine.

    Eastern Ukraine is richer because it has export commodities such as coal. If that equals intelligence, than west Africans and Venezualans must be quite intelligent.

    Genetically Ukrainians are closest to Belarussians, and then to Slovaks. They are actually closer to Slovaks than they are to Russians.

    Essentially, your claim that Galicia has Balkan-level IQ is just silly and based on ignorant but common stereotypes by Russians.

    Given populations, histories, historical incomes, an independent Galicia would have resembled Slovakia more than any Balkan nation.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist.
     
    Nope. As we have seen, Lviv oblast is one the most educated regions of Ukraine. And it is the most nationalistic.

    “They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.”

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.
     
    Was the USSR noted for its military competence, historically? It almost got itself conquered by a nation with less than half its population and a fraction of its territory, at an enormous and horrific price. It had trouble with little Finland, fought Poland to a draw (!). It did worse in Afghanistan than the USA did. Russia not long after the USSR struggled with little Chechnya.

    Russia's military is doing much better now, after it has left the Soviet legacy behind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting
     
    .

    Not necessarily. They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as "their own." There are many stories about Ukrainian officers giving away plans to the pro-Russians, getting Ukrainian soldiers killed. Under such circumstances it is understandable for many people to avoid being placed under such command.

    Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. Obviously that's not true. Thus, something other patriotism or lack of it explains the difficulty in mobilization.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background.
     
    Galicia has Slovakia's population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. As for cultural or scientific figures, there is this guy, my relative:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B9,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    Opera singer Solomiya Krushelnytska, who saved Madame Butterfly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomiya_Krushelnytska

    Two chess grandmasters are from Galicia.

    Vassily Ivanchuk, ranked as high as #2 in the world

    Anna Muzychuk, female chess grandmaster, ranked #4 in the world

    The writer Leopold Sacher-Masoch was half-Galician.

    Ruslana who won Eurovision is Galician.

    Ivasiuk was well-known in the USSR. He was from neighboring Chernivtsi. Andy Warhol was a Carpatho-Rusyn.

    Historically Galicia's wealth surpassed that of both the Balkans and of Russia. It was, actually, similar to that of Slovakia. A comparison of per capita incomes in 1890:

    Britain $6,228
    Austria $3,005
    Bohemia $2,513
    Transylvania $1,956
    Galicia $1,947.
    Eastern Hungary (Slovakia) $1,824

    Balkans:

    Bulgaria $1,670
    Greece $1,550
    Serbia $1,295

    Russia's, btw, was $1,550. Significantly lower than Galicia's.

    I don't know about altruism, but Galicia's crime rate is the lowest in Ukraine, it's life expectancy is the highest. This is true of urban Lviv (which is larger than several non-Galician cities such as Luhansk) as well as of rural areas.

    As an educational center Lviv is in third place in Ukraine, with two universities in the top 20, one in the top 10. It is also the oblast with the third highest % of university-educated people in Ukraine.

    Eastern Ukraine is richer because it has export commodities such as coal. If that equals intelligence, than west Africans and Venezualans must be quite intelligent.

    Genetically Ukrainians are closest to Belarussians, and then to Slovaks. They are actually closer to Slovaks than they are to Russians.

    Essentially, your claim that Galicia has Balkan-level IQ is just silly and based on ignorant but common stereotypes by Russians.

    Given populations, histories, historical incomes, an independent Galicia would have resembled Slovakia more than any Balkan nation.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist.
     
    Nope. As we have seen, Lviv oblast is one the most educated regions of Ukraine. And it is the most nationalistic.

    “Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. “

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians. Altruism is related to trust in strangers, non-relatives. In many cultures people are only able to trust their relatives. Large organizations like armies and government bureaucracies are ineffective in such cultures. East Ukrainians have Russian levels of altruism and trust in strangers. Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    This hunch of mine is supported by the existence of a stereotype of far west Ukrainians as being more nepotistic when in power than other types of Ukrainians.

    “Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. ”

    I was making a comparison between western and eastern Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    So Glossy - no comment on Galicia's educational achievements and its supposed intelligence? Do you concede that you were wrong there?

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians.
     
    Why do you believe Galicians have lower levels of altruism?

    Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they’re less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.
     
    Although Galicians have been less likely to join the ex-Soviet army, they have been more likely to join volunteer battalions and were more likely to travel to Kiev to get involved in Maidan (although contrary to some pro-Russian narratives a majority of Maidan were local Kiev people, about 30% were Galicians).

    In 1918 when Galicia had its own state, it mobilized over 100,000 troops. This state had 1/2 the population of modern Donbas, which is not close to mobilizing 100,000 people.

    Modern Galicia has a much more developed civic society and local volunteerism than other parts of Ukraine.

    I think that it's more about Galician lack of trust for Soviet-inherited national authority, rather than lack of altruism or patriotism.

    I wonder - why your (proven) unrealistic negative attitude towards Galicians? Go to Lviv, and visit villages outside Lviv, to see for yourself. compare these areas to rural Russian ones, or to similar-size Russian cities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’ve always found this map somewhat interesting:

    I guess it illustrates this Russian moral and intellectual superiority that everyone is talking about, and it is some sort of indicator of what a great Christian nation Novorussia will be. They will certainly crush all those decadent pro-gay Zionist capitalist Nazi extremists from Western Ukraine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    I answered my question. MGU is ranked #129. Phystek is ranked #861! Bauman #1340!

    University of Kentucky is ranked #110.

    University of alabama is #364.

    Cleveland State University is # 770.

    So that puts Lviv's ranking in perspective.

    If Lviv is so bad, then MGU and Phystek are worse than the University of Kentucky and Alabama and Cleveland State University are better Phystek.

    Meanwhile Lviv University students came in 13th place in a programming competition, tied with Carnegie Mellon and beating MIT:

    http://www.abtosoftware.com/news/lviv-national-ivan-franko-university-ranked-13th-at-the-international-collegiate-programming-contest

    During the Soviet period an honest ranking of Moscow State University, for example something based on the faculty’s contributions to hard science, would have been very high, probably in the top ten worldwide. Unfortunately science was defunded throughout the former USSR in the 1990s, the amount of scientific work decreased enormously and a lot of the top talent fled to the West. So an honest ranking of MSU must have come down substantially. All the way to #129? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t really have a good feel for that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Speaking as someone who evaluated technology transfer opportunities for the Russian Academy of Sciences I have to say that the scientific and technical attainment was very poor.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @AP
    That's just international reputations, and most people in the world simply don't know about Ukraine.

    Where is MGU in the ranking and what American universities are ranked higher? Do you believe that?

    I answered my question. MGU is ranked #129. Phystek is ranked #861! Bauman #1340!

    University of Kentucky is ranked #110.

    University of alabama is #364.

    Cleveland State University is # 770.

    So that puts Lviv’s ranking in perspective.

    If Lviv is so bad, then MGU and Phystek are worse than the University of Kentucky and Alabama and Cleveland State University are better Phystek.

    Meanwhile Lviv University students came in 13th place in a programming competition, tied with Carnegie Mellon and beating MIT:

    http://www.abtosoftware.com/news/lviv-national-ivan-franko-university-ranked-13th-at-the-international-collegiate-programming-contest

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    During the Soviet period an honest ranking of Moscow State University, for example something based on the faculty's contributions to hard science, would have been very high, probably in the top ten worldwide. Unfortunately science was defunded throughout the former USSR in the 1990s, the amount of scientific work decreased enormously and a lot of the top talent fled to the West. So an honest ranking of MSU must have come down substantially. All the way to #129? Maybe, maybe not. I don't really have a good feel for that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @fnn
    Russia is definitely the lesser of the evils:

    http://blog.jim.com/war/nazis-are-commies-and-commies-are-progressives/#comment-933563


    The Russian Orthodox opposes homosexuality, opposes mass illegal immigration of colored people. The Russian Orthodox Church declares feminism a mortal sin. Can one imagine any Christian Church in America daring to say that? The Russian Orthodox Church opposes abortion and single motherhood. Christian Churches in the west can only oppose abortion by valorizing single motherhood as good and heroic. The proposition that women with children must submit to and obey the father of those children is unthinkable and unspeakable in Western Christianity...The Russian Orthodox Church in the US and Europe is mighty quiet on gays, fatherless children, etc.
     
    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-orthodox-church-and-russian-politics

    ... the passage of a 1997 national law, restricting certain religious organizations from carrying out missionary work in the Russian Federation, was considered a political victory for the Orthodox Church, whose leadership lobbied the government heavily for the legislation. Additionally, according to Papkova, “the presence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous” starting in 1995. The speaker cited images of Orthodox priests blessing new buildings, military installations, and construction sites throughout Russia as examples of the Church’s presence in everyday life. The Patriarch also conferred his blessing on each new president, further highlighting the growing public presence of the Church.
     
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/395624/coming-clash-civilizations-andrew-stuttaford

    In his fire-breathing speech to the Duma in March when he announced Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Putin included not just venerable KGB classics like warnings about the Western Fifth Column and “national traitors,” but also paeans to explicit Russian ethnic nationalism buttressed by Orthodox mysticism, with citations of saints from millennia past. This was the culmination of years of increasingly unsubtle hints from Putin and his inner circle that what ideologically motivates this Kremlin is the KGB cult unified with Russian Orthodoxy. Behind the Chekist sword and shield lurks the Third Rome, forming a potent and, to many Russians, plausible worldview. That this take on the planet and its politics is intensely anti-Western needs to be stated clearly…
     

    This would all be very impressive if Russia didn’t have the world’s highest abortion rate, highest murder rate among white people, and churchgoing rates equal to that of Sweden.

    In terms of actual behaviors such as abortion, going to church, not getting divorced, etc. Europe’s leader is probably Poland.

    Guess which country is an enemy of Russia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    For some reason, Russia seems to have always been dysfunctional. The latest of many who have commented on this:

    http://romaninukraine.com/russia-the-white-people-who-failed/

    Why is it, that throughout their history, at every opportunity, Russians consistently make the wrong decision? What is it that Russians incorrectly intuit about the world? Why do they have the lowest trust most corrupt nation of all the white peoples? Why is it that Russians are the one white people who have failed.

    If any people was ever incapable of self government, it’s Russians. If any people was less capable of governing others. It’s the Russians. What is it about the Russian character that causes them to consistently fail? What metaphysical assumption about the nature of man and his relationship to the world is so flawed that unless tightly bound to europe they contribute nothing to legacy of white people? Why is it that western peoples have dragged the entire world out of ignorance mysticism sickness and poverty, while russians try consistently to reverse the trend by dragging those white people near them into their failed civilization?

    Why is it that Russians have nothing to offer the world other than corruption, violence, fear and poverty?

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Curt Doolittle
    Kiev

    Forget moral equivalency. Go with the facts. Russians have the market on corruption, brutality, oppression, and have destroyed every white nation that they have touched with their corruption. And murdered more of their own people than any white people in history. Russians have nothing constructive to offer the world, and everything they do causes suffering.

    Russians yet again had the opportunity to act as the military and resource wing of the european peoples. To expand their influence across the top one third of the globe. But rather than join the western miracle, and correct it’s weakness, Russians choose to yet again double down on corruption, violence, predation, and the spread of their corrupt culture.

    The only moral objective for white people is to remove Russians from self determination, and the conquest and oppression of others, the same way we forcibly civilized other nations.

    Russians are the only white people who failed. And they seek to drag other white people into their failure with them.

    Russians abandoned their opportunity at restoring aristocracy, and forming the aristocratic class of white civilization in order to expand their corrupt and predatory failed culture to a few hundred kilometers to the east. Never was a decision was more short sighted, and foolish.

    What is it about Russian genes, culture, values or perceptions that causes them to make the wrong decisions, always, and everywhere, at every opportunity? Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?

    Never has a people had greater fortune than a weak civilization to it’s west, a collapsing hegemonic empire across the seas, and nearly infinite resource wealth, and geographic space. Not since england mastered the seas, has a numerically small people had the opportunity to expand through commerce and trade, including the trade of military protection, across so much of the earth’s surface. Russia could have led the world through resources, military hegemony, and commerce.

    But they chose to expand corruption and poverty instead.

    Why are Russians the only white people who have failed?
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    Another piece of info: the top university in Lvov is, according to that ranking, the 1,934th best university in the world.

    That’s just international reputations, and most people in the world simply don’t know about Ukraine.

    Where is MGU in the ranking and what American universities are ranked higher? Do you believe that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    I answered my question. MGU is ranked #129. Phystek is ranked #861! Bauman #1340!

    University of Kentucky is ranked #110.

    University of alabama is #364.

    Cleveland State University is # 770.

    So that puts Lviv's ranking in perspective.

    If Lviv is so bad, then MGU and Phystek are worse than the University of Kentucky and Alabama and Cleveland State University are better Phystek.

    Meanwhile Lviv University students came in 13th place in a programming competition, tied with Carnegie Mellon and beating MIT:

    http://www.abtosoftware.com/news/lviv-national-ivan-franko-university-ranked-13th-at-the-international-collegiate-programming-contest
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta's message about the war, then the junta wouldn't have so many problems with military recruiting. If I remember correctly, about 3 million Ukrainians served in WWII, a large majority of them on the Soviet side. After 4 mobilization campaigns in which the junta was free to conscript men against their will, Kiev could only field 60k to 70k troops in the war zone.

    The junta calls the Donbass War a new Patriotic War, drawing a parallel with WWII. 3 million and 70 thousand - that's the difference between that rhetoric and reality. Enormous masses of people, including my grandfather and several of my grandparents' siblings, wanted to defend the USSR in the 1940s. Why do so few want to defend a united Ukraine? I have my answers to that question, but I'm curious to see yours. The junta says that the Ukraine is being devoured by an Evil Empire. Yet it could only force 70k men to risk their lives to save it.

    As for Western Ukraine's potential, you're delusional. You're blinded by patriotism. As are most humans. And in some ways that's healthy. But there's also this thing out there called objective reality. And some people are even interested in it.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background. There were no West Ukrainian Gogols, Chekhovs or Korolyovs. Forget world-famous: almost none of the intellectual and artistic figures famous in the Russosphere are of West Ukrainian background either. Yes, I'm aware of Okean Elzy. It's boring, whiney, tackily-sentimental pop music.

    I can't stop following this war, partly because it's the first war of my lifetime to occur in a place that doesn't seem exotic to me. It's both tragedy and history, and I would really, really like to know how all of this will end. And I read stuff produced by both sides, because you have to do that if you want to understand the conflict. It's typical of the East-West difference in the Ukraine that there's nothing interesting being written about the war in Ukrainian. I've looked. Everything of any interest or originality on the pro-Kiev side is of course written in Russian.

    There is a stereotype in the Ukraine and in the Russosphere in general that Carpathian natives are more likely than others to bring in their extended families when they get to any kind of power. There is a well-known trade-off between family solidarity and societal solidarity.

    Would a state composed entirely of that kind of people be viable? Sure. Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, etc. are muddling through. It would just be far less successful than most European states.

    In opinion polls Western Ukraine is the most anti-Russian part of the Ukraine and Galicia is the most anti-Russian part of Western Ukriane. But of course (and who would have doubted it?) Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians. This was admitted by the junta itself in the person of an adviser to Poroshenko named Yuriy Biriukov. The junta has to fight Russian-speaking separatism with Russian-speaking troops. Because Ukrainian-speakers aren't altruistic enough to want risk their lives for the Ukraine or for anything larger than their families.

    And here's the junta's biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist. Russophobia is concentrated in the third-worldish parts of the Ukriane. Altruism and competence are concentrated in the less Russophobic parts. This goes a long way to explain the 70k figure with which I started this comment.

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting

    .

    Not necessarily. They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.” There are many stories about Ukrainian officers giving away plans to the pro-Russians, getting Ukrainian soldiers killed. Under such circumstances it is understandable for many people to avoid being placed under such command.

    Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. Obviously that’s not true. Thus, something other patriotism or lack of it explains the difficulty in mobilization.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background.

    Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. As for cultural or scientific figures, there is this guy, my relative:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B9,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    Opera singer Solomiya Krushelnytska, who saved Madame Butterfly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomiya_Krushelnytska

    Two chess grandmasters are from Galicia.

    Vassily Ivanchuk, ranked as high as #2 in the world

    Anna Muzychuk, female chess grandmaster, ranked #4 in the world

    The writer Leopold Sacher-Masoch was half-Galician.

    Ruslana who won Eurovision is Galician.

    Ivasiuk was well-known in the USSR. He was from neighboring Chernivtsi. Andy Warhol was a Carpatho-Rusyn.

    Historically Galicia’s wealth surpassed that of both the Balkans and of Russia. It was, actually, similar to that of Slovakia. A comparison of per capita incomes in 1890:

    Britain $6,228
    Austria $3,005
    Bohemia $2,513
    Transylvania $1,956
    Galicia $1,947.
    Eastern Hungary (Slovakia) $1,824

    Balkans:

    Bulgaria $1,670
    Greece $1,550
    Serbia $1,295

    Russia’s, btw, was $1,550. Significantly lower than Galicia’s.

    I don’t know about altruism, but Galicia’s crime rate is the lowest in Ukraine, it’s life expectancy is the highest. This is true of urban Lviv (which is larger than several non-Galician cities such as Luhansk) as well as of rural areas.

    As an educational center Lviv is in third place in Ukraine, with two universities in the top 20, one in the top 10. It is also the oblast with the third highest % of university-educated people in Ukraine.

    Eastern Ukraine is richer because it has export commodities such as coal. If that equals intelligence, than west Africans and Venezualans must be quite intelligent.

    Genetically Ukrainians are closest to Belarussians, and then to Slovaks. They are actually closer to Slovaks than they are to Russians.

    Essentially, your claim that Galicia has Balkan-level IQ is just silly and based on ignorant but common stereotypes by Russians.

    Given populations, histories, historical incomes, an independent Galicia would have resembled Slovakia more than any Balkan nation.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist.

    Nope. As we have seen, Lviv oblast is one the most educated regions of Ukraine. And it is the most nationalistic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. "

    As I explained elsewhere in this thread, I think that Galicians are more likely than other types of Ukrainians to dodge the draft because they have lower levels of altruism than other kinds of Ukrainians. Altruism is related to trust in strangers, non-relatives. In many cultures people are only able to trust their relatives. Large organizations like armies and government bureaucracies are ineffective in such cultures. East Ukrainians have Russian levels of altruism and trust in strangers. Galicians have lower, Balkan levels of that stuff. So they're less willing to sacrifice for things larger than their families, things like their country.

    This hunch of mine is supported by the existence of a stereotype of far west Ukrainians as being more nepotistic when in power than other types of Ukrainians.

    "Galicia has Slovakia’s population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. "

    I was making a comparison between western and eastern Ukraine.
    , @Glossy
    "They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as “their own.”

    Thank God that the Ukrainian military leadership did not retain Soviet levels of competence. If it did, Novorossia would have been defeated in a few weeks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jimbojones
    "Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side."
    Really? What's your definition of a "Russian propagandist website"? Wait, I know - any website that does not agree with your chauvinist views.
    Who needs Russian propaganda, when we have a reputable English-language magazine like Counterpunch? You can check Counterpunch's background and their cred, and then go and read all about the Ukrainian Nazi psychos.

    More than that, many people are intelligent enough to connect the dots. Ukraine used to have a democratically elected president. He was corrupt, but hey - they chose him! Then there was an armed coup, and democracy in Ukraine died.
    Then the junta decided to ban Russian, which was the language that people in "Eastern Ukraine" have spoken for many centuries. Those people's grandfathers paid dearly in blood and sweat to destroy the Nazi beast. Their reaction was predictable.
    People who tried to pay careful attention also noticed that Putin was preoccupied with his Olympic Games at Sochi while the Ukraine crisis unfolded a year ago. The entire affair caught him off-guard. Accusations of Russian grand-designs regarding the events in Kiev are laughable.
    None of this requires "Russian propaganda" to be understood.

    With friends like the ones it has, Ukraine hardly needs any enemies. Since NATO pushed forward the Nazi coup last year, Ukraine's economy has collapsed, its territorial integrity has been violated, its army has been routed, and its population has been totally demoralized. Russia has hardly done anything to damage its western neighbor - it merely requested its due payments for its gas; accepted Crimea back into the fold (in consequence of a referendum as legitimate as the one in Kosovo); and watched as the rebel militias smashed their enemy (likely with the help of at least military intelligence). From a realistic political viewpoint, the Kremlin has hardly had any choice in any of these matters.
    There will be another revolution in Ukraine soon - the population is reaching its breaking point. As they say, for every revolution there is a counter-revolution. Yats the Rat and Pornoshenko know that, and are making their getaway plans. Here's hoping that democracy, peace, and development return to Ukraine, and this time of lunacy ends soon.

    Russia is definitely the lesser of the evils:

    http://blog.jim.com/war/nazis-are-commies-and-commies-are-progressives/#comment-933563

    The Russian Orthodox opposes homosexuality, opposes mass illegal immigration of colored people. The Russian Orthodox Church declares feminism a mortal sin. Can one imagine any Christian Church in America daring to say that? The Russian Orthodox Church opposes abortion and single motherhood. Christian Churches in the west can only oppose abortion by valorizing single motherhood as good and heroic. The proposition that women with children must submit to and obey the father of those children is unthinkable and unspeakable in Western Christianity…The Russian Orthodox Church in the US and Europe is mighty quiet on gays, fatherless children, etc.

    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-orthodox-church-and-russian-politics

    … the passage of a 1997 national law, restricting certain religious organizations from carrying out missionary work in the Russian Federation, was considered a political victory for the Orthodox Church, whose leadership lobbied the government heavily for the legislation. Additionally, according to Papkova, “the presence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous” starting in 1995. The speaker cited images of Orthodox priests blessing new buildings, military installations, and construction sites throughout Russia as examples of the Church’s presence in everyday life. The Patriarch also conferred his blessing on each new president, further highlighting the growing public presence of the Church.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/395624/coming-clash-civilizations-andrew-stuttaford

    In his fire-breathing speech to the Duma in March when he announced Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Putin included not just venerable KGB classics like warnings about the Western Fifth Column and “national traitors,” but also paeans to explicit Russian ethnic nationalism buttressed by Orthodox mysticism, with citations of saints from millennia past. This was the culmination of years of increasingly unsubtle hints from Putin and his inner circle that what ideologically motivates this Kremlin is the KGB cult unified with Russian Orthodoxy. Behind the Chekist sword and shield lurks the Third Rome, forming a potent and, to many Russians, plausible worldview. That this take on the planet and its politics is intensely anti-Western needs to be stated clearly…

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    This would all be very impressive if Russia didn't have the world's highest abortion rate, highest murder rate among white people, and churchgoing rates equal to that of Sweden.

    In terms of actual behaviors such as abortion, going to church, not getting divorced, etc. Europe's leader is probably Poland.

    Guess which country is an enemy of Russia?
    , @annamaria
    1997 national law... That was during the reign of the US darling Yeltsin: "Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin (1 February 1931 – 23 April 2007) was a Russian politician and the first President of the Russian Federation, serving from 1991 to 1999." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • photo of 2 ukrainian deputies, from Svoboda

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000)"

    Lots of organizations rank universities. I don't have time today to look at all the worldwide ranking systems, but this is the first one that I found that does neat summaries by country:

    http://www.webometrics.info/en/Europe/Ukraine

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman' and Chernovtsy.

    Kiev has the advantage of being the capital, but Kharkov doesn't, and you're still safely behind it, even if the difference in the two cities' populations is taken into account.

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman’ and Chernovtsy.

    So according to your ranking Lviv with 2 universities in the top 20, is the third most educated area in Ukraine, after Kiev and Kharkiv. It beats Odessa, Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk despite those cities having larger populations.

    Here is more data that supports the observation above:

    http://pollotenchegg.livejournal.com/39945.html

    % of population with university-level education. Kiev city (39.1%), Sevastopol City (lots of naval officers?) 32%, Kharkiv oblast (29.1%), and Lviv oblast (23.3%). Odessa is not far behind Lviv, with 23%.

    Note: the least educated region in Ukraine is Chernivtsi, with only 14.4% It is in western Ukraine. But it is not Galicia, but the region of Bukovyna.

    I suspect you are confusing non-Galician regions of Ukraine with Galicia, and attributing characteristics of those regions to Galicia. Yet, the highly educated population of Lviv is the most nationalistic one in western Ukraine also.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @Glossy
    "Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea."

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian. The Russian and Ukrainian languages are about a million times closer to each other than Japanese and Korean are to each other. The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch. The same goes for non-linguistic aspects of culture.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans. The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive only appeared in Little Russian intellectual circles in the 19th century. It only spread among ordinary Ukrainians in the 20th century. And the primary instrument of that spread was Soviet propaganda.

    In contrast, Japanese and Korean identities have been mutually exclusive since records have been kept, i.e. for considerably more than 1000 years.

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.

    It’s more like 45% vs. 45%. I don’t have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.

    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn’t the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.

    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals – not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself “Rome.”

    Russkiy (Russian) is simply an adjective from Rus'. Until 19th-century Ukrainian nationalists redefined things in an ahistorical way, no one would have see any difference between "Russians" and "Rus people". Moskals was a Little Russian nickname for Great Russians.

    A representative example of a pre-modern definition of Russia and Russians is contained in Von Herberstein's Notes on Moscovite Affairs. As quoted in the Wikipedia:

    "К отличительным особенностям русских (потомков Яфета) он относил славянское наречие и христианство греческого обряда. Собственно Россией он называл территорию между Сарматскими горами, рекой Ра и Северным морем. Россией владеют три царя: московский, литовский и польский. "

    "He held the distinguishing characteristics of Russians (descendants of Yaphet) to be Slavic speech and Greek-rite Christianity. He called Russia proper the territory between the Sarmatian mountains, the river Ra and the Northern Sea. Russia is owned by three czars: the Moscovite, Lithuanian and Polish ones."

    The Sarmatian mountains are the Carpathians, the Ra is the Volga and the Northern Sea is the Arctic Ocean. Von Herberstein was an ethnically German Catholic from what is now Slovenia. He visited Russia as a diplomat for the Holy Roman Emperor in 1517 and 1526.

    At that time and for a long time afterwards both the Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland claimed to be the rightful rulers of all Rus'. Rus' was seen as the lands of the original, medieval Rus' state plus any lands to which the people of that state spread after it split up. The Moscovite czars and the kings of Poland considered themelves to be the lawful heirs of that entire legacy and each other temporary, illegal usurpers of parts of it. In today's terms they were both for a united Rus', just under their own, not their rival's leadership. The parts of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth that are now in Belarus and the Ukraine were called Russia and the local language Russian by Polish officialdom. The locals called themselves and their language Russian.

    , @Glossy
    From 1366 to 1772 Lvov was a part of an administrative unit called województwo ruskie in Polish and palatinatus russiae in Latin. Literally the Russian province.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenian_Voivodeship

    The wiki on Francisk Scarina, a native of Polotsk in modern Belarus reproduces the title page of his Bible translation:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francysk_Skaryna

    The first words are "Biblia Ruska", "The Russian Bible".

    Here's a wiki on the "Ruska Tryitsa" (the Russian Triad) established by a group of Galician poets in the 1830s:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_literature#The_.22Ruska_Triytsia.22_and_Western_Ukrainian_national_revival

    There's lots and lots of that sort of stuff.
    , @Glossy
    I got interested in the original of Von Herberstein's opus. He wrote it in Latin:

    http://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost16/Sigismundus/sig_co01.html

    And here's an English translation of the passage defining Russia:

    http://international.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=mtfxtx&fileName=txg/g340002190a//mtfxtxg340002190a.db&recNum=178&itemLink=r%3Fintldl%2Fmtfront%3A%40field%28NUMBER%2B%40od1%28mtfxtx%2Bg340002190a%29%29&linkText=0

    It starts with the words

    "Russia extends near to the Sarmatian mountains, up to a short distance from Cracow."

    The original Latin: "Caeterum Russia montes Sarmaticos haud longea Cracovia attingit:"

    Not even Ruthenia. Russia. He goes on for a while about geography.

    Later, on page 6 of the English translation:

    "Of the princes who now rule over Russia the first is the Grand Duke of Moscow, who holds the greater part of it; the second is the Grand Duke of Lithuania; the third is the King of Poland, who now is sovereign both of Poland and Lithuania."

    The original:

    "Principum qui nunc Russiae imperant, primus est, Magnus dux Moscovuiae, qui maiorem eius partem obtinet: secundus, magnus dux Lithvuaniae: tertius est rex Poloniae, qui nunc & Poloniae & Lithvuaniae praeest."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • STRATFOR’s George Friedman talks for the Chicago Council of Global Affairs.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaL5wCY99l8&feature=youtu.be

    Some of the main points re the Lee paper: The imperial plans and actions are directed to maintaining control of the seas and air. The US has been directly involved in the military actions in Ukraine. For the Russians, NATO in Ukraine represents an existential threat; they want at least a neutral Ukraine.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Joe Walker
    Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people's countries? It is not as if Russia is exactly over crowded.

    “Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries?”

    You need to educate yourself, dude. The ethnic Russians in the Donbass are most certainly not occupying somebody else’s country. They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.

    The reason these places are in this artificial country called Ukraine is because, administratively, they were part of the Ukrainian SSR, which was simply an administrative division within the Soviet Union.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Walker
    Are you also denying that the Ukrainians exist or just their country?
    , @Philip Owen
    "They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed."

    No. They arrived in the 1870's to work for John Hughes, a Welsh ironmaster, except for a few around Lughansk who were recruited a few years earlier by a Scottish ironmaster.

    The surrounding countryside was thinly inhabitated until the early 19th Century due to a lack of surface water for draught animals. Little Russian speaking "Cossacks" were the main inhabitants.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonym
    Politics makes strange bedfellows.

    Yes, who would have thought, heavily Jewish neoconservative support of their client Ukraine, even though strong neofascist elements were evident at the Maidan. My how the incovenient truths get swept away. And no, Victoria Nuland, I am not a Russian troll.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cliff Arroyo
    annamarina, I hope you're being well paid for your spamming this thread with tired Putinoid propaganda.

    It looks as if you perceive any disagreement with your idealogical standing as propaganda. Do you have any facts to refute my posts? Their main theme is the tragic dissonance between “never again” and the indecency of the US support for neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine. The moral problems of Zionism go beyond Ukrainian borders:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/13/israel-against-the-jews/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Mar 13, 2015 Ukraine: Coup, Corruption and Catastrophe

    Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange org joins us to discuss the devastation of Ukraine that has been wrought by decades of corruption, colour revolution, debt slavery and war. We talk about how Ukraine arrived at this spot and the possible way forward.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The Holocaust racket:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • annamarina, I hope you’re being well paid for your spamming this thread with tired Putinoid propaganda.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    It looks as if you perceive any disagreement with your idealogical standing as propaganda. Do you have any facts to refute my posts? Their main theme is the tragic dissonance between "never again" and the indecency of the US support for neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine. The moral problems of Zionism go beyond Ukrainian borders:
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/03/13/israel-against-the-jews/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    You forgot to mention aliens, a resurrected Elvis, and the exiles from Atlantis alongside the Zionists and others in on the neo-Nazi conspiracy.

    Meanwhile in the real world, there are several hundred, perhaps even a thousand or two, neo-Nazis out of the tens of thousands fighting in eastern Ukraine against pro-Russian forces that include their own neo-Nazis. One can hope the pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian neo-Nazis harm each other and leave others alone.

    Since when the unholy union (well documented) of the Zionist Nuland with neo-Nazis in Kiev government has entered the plane of mythical aliens and Atlantis? If you are irritated by the mention of this union, should not your irritation be rather directed toward the Zionist scoundrels that have been defacing the memory of victims of Nazism in Ukraine? Take a quick look at the information on Babi Yar:
    “large ravine on the northern edge of the city of Kiev in Ukraine, the site of a mass grave of victims, mostly Jews, whom Nazi German SS squads killed between 1941 and 1943. After the initial massacre of Jews, Babi Yar remained in use as an execution site for Soviet prisoners of war and for Roma (Gypsies) as well as for Jews. Soviet accounts after the war speak of 100,000 dead. The true number may never be known.”
    or the Nikolaev massacre: “The Nikolaev Massacre was a massacre which resulted in the deaths of 35,782 Soviet citizens, most of whom were Jews, during World War II, on September 16–30, 1941. It took place in and around the city of Nikolaev and the neighboring city of Kherson in the southern Ukraine.”
    These and other atrocities have become the ground for the famous “Never Again” that is a symbol of the numerous Holocaust Museums worldwide.
    Mr. Kolomoisky, the financier of neo-Nazis is Ukraine is not “a resurrected Elvis” and “exile from Atlantis.” He is an Israeli citizen. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan, her war-mongering husband Robert Kagan and such are quite adept at squealing about anti-Semitism, yet they have been fantastically effective in resurrecting Nazism in Europe. And don’t even try to accuse the critics of Kolomoisky and Kagans of anti-Semitism, since the Zionism has become the main tool of destroying the noble traditions of Judaism.
    Hillel: “That which is hateful to you, do not unto another: This is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary — [and now] go study.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Glossy
    "Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea."

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian. The Russian and Ukrainian languages are about a million times closer to each other than Japanese and Korean are to each other. The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch. The same goes for non-linguistic aspects of culture.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans. The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive only appeared in Little Russian intellectual circles in the 19th century. It only spread among ordinary Ukrainians in the 20th century. And the primary instrument of that spread was Soviet propaganda.

    In contrast, Japanese and Korean identities have been mutually exclusive since records have been kept, i.e. for considerably more than 1000 years.

    “The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive…”

    This should read “The idea that Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Russian ideantities are mutually exclusive…”

    Until the 20th century the Little Russian and Great Russian identities were considered by most of their bearers to be two subsets of the Russian identity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Glossy
    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta's message about the war, then the junta wouldn't have so many problems with military recruiting. If I remember correctly, about 3 million Ukrainians served in WWII, a large majority of them on the Soviet side. After 4 mobilization campaigns in which the junta was free to conscript men against their will, Kiev could only field 60k to 70k troops in the war zone.

    The junta calls the Donbass War a new Patriotic War, drawing a parallel with WWII. 3 million and 70 thousand - that's the difference between that rhetoric and reality. Enormous masses of people, including my grandfather and several of my grandparents' siblings, wanted to defend the USSR in the 1940s. Why do so few want to defend a united Ukraine? I have my answers to that question, but I'm curious to see yours. The junta says that the Ukraine is being devoured by an Evil Empire. Yet it could only force 70k men to risk their lives to save it.

    As for Western Ukraine's potential, you're delusional. You're blinded by patriotism. As are most humans. And in some ways that's healthy. But there's also this thing out there called objective reality. And some people are even interested in it.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background. There were no West Ukrainian Gogols, Chekhovs or Korolyovs. Forget world-famous: almost none of the intellectual and artistic figures famous in the Russosphere are of West Ukrainian background either. Yes, I'm aware of Okean Elzy. It's boring, whiney, tackily-sentimental pop music.

    I can't stop following this war, partly because it's the first war of my lifetime to occur in a place that doesn't seem exotic to me. It's both tragedy and history, and I would really, really like to know how all of this will end. And I read stuff produced by both sides, because you have to do that if you want to understand the conflict. It's typical of the East-West difference in the Ukraine that there's nothing interesting being written about the war in Ukrainian. I've looked. Everything of any interest or originality on the pro-Kiev side is of course written in Russian.

    There is a stereotype in the Ukraine and in the Russosphere in general that Carpathian natives are more likely than others to bring in their extended families when they get to any kind of power. There is a well-known trade-off between family solidarity and societal solidarity.

    Would a state composed entirely of that kind of people be viable? Sure. Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, etc. are muddling through. It would just be far less successful than most European states.

    In opinion polls Western Ukraine is the most anti-Russian part of the Ukraine and Galicia is the most anti-Russian part of Western Ukriane. But of course (and who would have doubted it?) Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians. This was admitted by the junta itself in the person of an adviser to Poroshenko named Yuriy Biriukov. The junta has to fight Russian-speaking separatism with Russian-speaking troops. Because Ukrainian-speakers aren't altruistic enough to want risk their lives for the Ukraine or for anything larger than their families.

    And here's the junta's biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist. Russophobia is concentrated in the third-worldish parts of the Ukriane. Altruism and competence are concentrated in the less Russophobic parts. This goes a long way to explain the 70k figure with which I started this comment.

    Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians

    Maybe that’s because they don’t care to fight on behalf of kleptocratic oligarchs who don’t have their best interests at heart. Give them credit for realizing that. They wouldn’t be fighting on behalf of their country but as puppet troops of the regime who seems to be carrying out the schemes of the US. Shooting at other citizens of Ukraine may not be something they care to do. In a case like this it’s more patriotic not to go.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @map
    "It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930′s."

    What sort of reasoning is this? How would you define "Bulgarian", "Pole", "Lithuanian", "Chechen", "Georgian", etc.? Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.

    Furthermore, large numbers of Russians lived in these areas as well. Does that mean that wherever a Russian is Russia? I suppose the US should just kick back and allow Cuba to annex South Florida because a lot of Cubans live there.

    And Texas was only made part of America in the 1840's. So what?

    Russians stayed in Ukraine because they liked plundering it, not because it is some native soil of theirs.

    “Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.”

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian. The Russian and Ukrainian languages are about a million times closer to each other than Japanese and Korean are to each other. The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch. The same goes for non-linguistic aspects of culture.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans. The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive only appeared in Little Russian intellectual circles in the 19th century. It only spread among ordinary Ukrainians in the 20th century. And the primary instrument of that spread was Soviet propaganda.

    In contrast, Japanese and Korean identities have been mutually exclusive since records have been kept, i.e. for considerably more than 1000 years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive..."

    This should read "The idea that Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Russian ideantities are mutually exclusive..."

    Until the 20th century the Little Russian and Great Russian identities were considered by most of their bearers to be two subsets of the Russian identity.
    , @AP

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian.
     
    It's more like 45% vs. 45%. I don't have time to find the link to the massive study with 10,000s of people interviewed now.

    The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch.
     
    More like Spanish and Italian, closer than German and Dutch. Interestingly, in terms of pure vocabulary, Ukrainian is closer to Polish than to Russian:

    https://elms.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/lexical-distance-among-languages-of-europe/

    Of course, this isn't the same as comprehensibility, that involves grammar structure and pronunciation. Those things bring Ukrainian closer to Russian in spite of having more words in common with Polish.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans.
     
    Nonsense. They defined themselves as Rus people, not as Russians (who were Moskals - not necessarily an insulting term to them). Saying they defined themselves as a subset of Russians would be like saying that Romanians defined themselves as a subset of Italians, had Italy decided to name itself "Rome."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It has been widely known for some time that the SPLC is a corrupt and deceptive organization.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tomi
    If Jews aren't concerned about Ukrainian fascists then I don't know why should we be. Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side. For example, among fighters on separatist side there are veterans of Bosnian War, Russians and Serbs, who worked with Ratko Mladić who is currently on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Then there are all kind of Russian mobsters, nostalgic Stalinists and members of Russian far-right and nationalist organizations. But of course, they are not fascists so there is no mention of them in Russian antifascist media.

    Also, to make things more comedic, Russian government supports all kinds of far right and neofascist parties in European Union, such as Hungarian Jobbik or Bulgarian Attack. Some of them openly - they were guests of Russian government officials etc. - others were revealed to secretly receive financial support by Wikileaks documents. I suppose that they receive support only because they are anti-EU, and Russia is trying to weaken European Union in order to reoccupy eastern countries - but it is unbelievably hypocritical and cynical to constantly criticize Ukraine and the West for doing something that Russia is already doing for years. Sure, Russia will save us from fascism...

    Considering how many Eastern Europeans and Germans were murdered, raped and robbed by Russian antifascists in the last century I don't really see in which way is this Russian type of antifascism better than fascism itself. If some Ukrainians want to wave flags with Black Suns and Wolfsangels that's their business. If they commit war crimes they should be punished, but I don't understand all this paranoia. Ukraine is not becoming totalitarian or Nazi, this political extremism is completely minor, and I don't really see anything significant happening there.

    “Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side.”
    Really? What’s your definition of a “Russian propagandist website”? Wait, I know – any website that does not agree with your chauvinist views.
    Who needs Russian propaganda, when we have a reputable English-language magazine like Counterpunch? You can check Counterpunch’s background and their cred, and then go and read all about the Ukrainian Nazi psychos.

    More than that, many people are intelligent enough to connect the dots. Ukraine used to have a democratically elected president. He was corrupt, but hey – they chose him! Then there was an armed coup, and democracy in Ukraine died.
    Then the junta decided to ban Russian, which was the language that people in “Eastern Ukraine” have spoken for many centuries. Those people’s grandfathers paid dearly in blood and sweat to destroy the Nazi beast. Their reaction was predictable.
    People who tried to pay careful attention also noticed that Putin was preoccupied with his Olympic Games at Sochi while the Ukraine crisis unfolded a year ago. The entire affair caught him off-guard. Accusations of Russian grand-designs regarding the events in Kiev are laughable.
    None of this requires “Russian propaganda” to be understood.

    With friends like the ones it has, Ukraine hardly needs any enemies. Since NATO pushed forward the Nazi coup last year, Ukraine’s economy has collapsed, its territorial integrity has been violated, its army has been routed, and its population has been totally demoralized. Russia has hardly done anything to damage its western neighbor – it merely requested its due payments for its gas; accepted Crimea back into the fold (in consequence of a referendum as legitimate as the one in Kosovo); and watched as the rebel militias smashed their enemy (likely with the help of at least military intelligence). From a realistic political viewpoint, the Kremlin has hardly had any choice in any of these matters.
    There will be another revolution in Ukraine soon – the population is reaching its breaking point. As they say, for every revolution there is a counter-revolution. Yats the Rat and Pornoshenko know that, and are making their getaway plans. Here’s hoping that democracy, peace, and development return to Ukraine, and this time of lunacy ends soon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Russia is definitely the lesser of the evils:

    http://blog.jim.com/war/nazis-are-commies-and-commies-are-progressives/#comment-933563


    The Russian Orthodox opposes homosexuality, opposes mass illegal immigration of colored people. The Russian Orthodox Church declares feminism a mortal sin. Can one imagine any Christian Church in America daring to say that? The Russian Orthodox Church opposes abortion and single motherhood. Christian Churches in the west can only oppose abortion by valorizing single motherhood as good and heroic. The proposition that women with children must submit to and obey the father of those children is unthinkable and unspeakable in Western Christianity...The Russian Orthodox Church in the US and Europe is mighty quiet on gays, fatherless children, etc.
     
    http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/the-orthodox-church-and-russian-politics

    ... the passage of a 1997 national law, restricting certain religious organizations from carrying out missionary work in the Russian Federation, was considered a political victory for the Orthodox Church, whose leadership lobbied the government heavily for the legislation. Additionally, according to Papkova, “the presence of the Russian Orthodox Church was ubiquitous” starting in 1995. The speaker cited images of Orthodox priests blessing new buildings, military installations, and construction sites throughout Russia as examples of the Church’s presence in everyday life. The Patriarch also conferred his blessing on each new president, further highlighting the growing public presence of the Church.
     
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/395624/coming-clash-civilizations-andrew-stuttaford

    In his fire-breathing speech to the Duma in March when he announced Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Putin included not just venerable KGB classics like warnings about the Western Fifth Column and “national traitors,” but also paeans to explicit Russian ethnic nationalism buttressed by Orthodox mysticism, with citations of saints from millennia past. This was the culmination of years of increasingly unsubtle hints from Putin and his inner circle that what ideologically motivates this Kremlin is the KGB cult unified with Russian Orthodoxy. Behind the Chekist sword and shield lurks the Third Rome, forming a potent and, to many Russians, plausible worldview. That this take on the planet and its politics is intensely anti-Western needs to be stated clearly…
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Glossy
    "a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000)"

    Lots of organizations rank universities. I don't have time today to look at all the worldwide ranking systems, but this is the first one that I found that does neat summaries by country:

    http://www.webometrics.info/en/Europe/Ukraine

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman' and Chernovtsy.

    Kiev has the advantage of being the capital, but Kharkov doesn't, and you're still safely behind it, even if the difference in the two cities' populations is taken into account.

    The number of scientific publications per 10k people in the Ukraine by region:

    Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa and Sumy (surprise to me) are on top. The southeast does better than the rest of the country except for Kiev. Of the 6 lowest-ranked regions 5 are in western Ukraine, 1 is in central Ukraine, 0 are in the southeastern half of the Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    1. Do you have a source for the map?

    2. Note that 2 of the 3 Galician oblasts are shaded the same as Ukraine other than Kiev, Kharkiv, Odessa and Sumy. The same as Dinpropetrovsk, Donetsk, etc. The one light Galician province actually includes parts of Volynia, so neither of the two pure Galician areas are not least contributors.

    3. I remember that Yanukovich had multiple publications and wonder if factors other than intellectual output may be relevant here.

    4. Remember this is one data point, and it doesn't even support you that strongly. Recall that Lviv oblast has 3rd highest % of university-educated population, Lviv has 2 of the top 20 universities, surpassing all cities other than Kiev and Kharkiv (despite being smaller than some of the ones it surpasses). Galicia has produced the world's #2 chess player and #4 female chess player. Lviv is Ukraine's per capita IT outsourcing leader.

    http://outsourcing-ukraine.org/2012/01/03/regional-structure-ukraines-it-outsourcing-industry/

    So, in summary, you are simply wrong about Galicia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Seamus Padraig
    It depends how you define 'Ukrainian'. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930's.

    “It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930′s.”

    What sort of reasoning is this? How would you define “Bulgarian”, “Pole”, “Lithuanian”, “Chechen”, “Georgian”, etc.? Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.

    Furthermore, large numbers of Russians lived in these areas as well. Does that mean that wherever a Russian is Russia? I suppose the US should just kick back and allow Cuba to annex South Florida because a lot of Cubans live there.

    And Texas was only made part of America in the 1840′s. So what?

    Russians stayed in Ukraine because they liked plundering it, not because it is some native soil of theirs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    "Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea."

    Roughly 70% of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian at home, roughly 30% speak Ukrainian. The Russian and Ukrainian languages are about a million times closer to each other than Japanese and Korean are to each other. The difference is more like the one between Spanish and Portuguese or between German and Dutch. The same goes for non-linguistic aspects of culture.

    For most of the last 1,000 years most of the ancestors of the current population of the Ukraine defined themselves as a subset of Russians in the same way that Bavarians, for example, still define themselves as a subset of Germans. The idea that the Little Russian (aka Ukrainian) and Great Russian identities are mutually exclusive only appeared in Little Russian intellectual circles in the 19th century. It only spread among ordinary Ukrainians in the 20th century. And the primary instrument of that spread was Soviet propaganda.

    In contrast, Japanese and Korean identities have been mutually exclusive since records have been kept, i.e. for considerably more than 1000 years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Glossy
    "a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000)"

    Lots of organizations rank universities. I don't have time today to look at all the worldwide ranking systems, but this is the first one that I found that does neat summaries by country:

    http://www.webometrics.info/en/Europe/Ukraine

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman' and Chernovtsy.

    Kiev has the advantage of being the capital, but Kharkov doesn't, and you're still safely behind it, even if the difference in the two cities' populations is taken into account.

    Another piece of info: the top university in Lvov is, according to that ranking, the 1,934th best university in the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    That's just international reputations, and most people in the world simply don't know about Ukraine.

    Where is MGU in the ranking and what American universities are ranked higher? Do you believe that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Any chance the western part of Ukraine could gain it’s independence since apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles? Would a small state like that be viable?
     
    Recent events have shown that Ukraine's West and Center are fairly strongly united, and the South is coming along also. The idea of separating western Ukraine from the rest of the country, in order to contain anti-Russian nationalism, was a good one (from a pro-Russian perspective) a few decades ago, and may have even worked in 1990, but it's much too late for that now. Note that most of these modern far right Ukrainian nationalists such as Yarosh are not even from western Ukraine.

    Had western Ukraine become its own country in 1990 it would have had a population of about 10 million, a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000), gas deposits sufficient to cover all domestic use, and would have been quite viable. But it didn't want this, as its ideology wasn't local but national.

    “a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000)”

    Lots of organizations rank universities. I don’t have time today to look at all the worldwide ranking systems, but this is the first one that I found that does neat summaries by country:

    http://www.webometrics.info/en/Europe/Ukraine

    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman’ and Chernovtsy.

    Kiev has the advantage of being the capital, but Kharkov doesn’t, and you’re still safely behind it, even if the difference in the two cities’ populations is taken into account.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Glossy
    Another piece of info: the top university in Lvov is, according to that ranking, the 1,934th best university in the world.
    , @Glossy
    The number of scientific publications per 10k people in the Ukraine by region:

    http://www.trust.ua/files/photo/source/0000043454-nauka-ukraina.jpg

    Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa and Sumy (surprise to me) are on top. The southeast does better than the rest of the country except for Kiev. Of the 6 lowest-ranked regions 5 are in western Ukraine, 1 is in central Ukraine, 0 are in the southeastern half of the Ukraine.

    , @AP
    According to that ranking the top 20 Ukrainian universities are located, respectively, in Kiev, Kharkov, Kiev, Kharkov, the Crimea (which was Ukrainian at the time), Sumy, Kiev, Lvov (8th place), Kiev, Odessa, Lvov (11th place), Dnepropetrovsk, Kiev, Kharkov, Donetsk, Poltava, Donetsk, Kharkov, Uman’ and Chernovtsy.

    So according to your ranking Lviv with 2 universities in the top 20, is the third most educated area in Ukraine, after Kiev and Kharkiv. It beats Odessa, Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk despite those cities having larger populations.

    Here is more data that supports the observation above:

    http://pollotenchegg.livejournal.com/39945.html

    % of population with university-level education. Kiev city (39.1%), Sevastopol City (lots of naval officers?) 32%, Kharkiv oblast (29.1%), and Lviv oblast (23.3%). Odessa is not far behind Lviv, with 23%.

    Note: the least educated region in Ukraine is Chernivtsi, with only 14.4% It is in western Ukraine. But it is not Galicia, but the region of Bukovyna.

    I suspect you are confusing non-Galician regions of Ukraine with Galicia, and attributing characteristics of those regions to Galicia. Yet, the highly educated population of Lviv is the most nationalistic one in western Ukraine also.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Judging from some of the comments lately, I think the white nationalist internet neckbeards are beginning to move from being pro-Russia and anti-Israel to anti-Russia and pro-Israel. Interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    Any chance the western part of Ukraine could gain it’s independence since apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles? Would a small state like that be viable?
     
    Recent events have shown that Ukraine's West and Center are fairly strongly united, and the South is coming along also. The idea of separating western Ukraine from the rest of the country, in order to contain anti-Russian nationalism, was a good one (from a pro-Russian perspective) a few decades ago, and may have even worked in 1990, but it's much too late for that now. Note that most of these modern far right Ukrainian nationalists such as Yarosh are not even from western Ukraine.

    Had western Ukraine become its own country in 1990 it would have had a population of about 10 million, a large educated city (Lviv, population 900,000), gas deposits sufficient to cover all domestic use, and would have been quite viable. But it didn't want this, as its ideology wasn't local but national.

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting. If I remember correctly, about 3 million Ukrainians served in WWII, a large majority of them on the Soviet side. After 4 mobilization campaigns in which the junta was free to conscript men against their will, Kiev could only field 60k to 70k troops in the war zone.

    The junta calls the Donbass War a new Patriotic War, drawing a parallel with WWII. 3 million and 70 thousand – that’s the difference between that rhetoric and reality. Enormous masses of people, including my grandfather and several of my grandparents’ siblings, wanted to defend the USSR in the 1940s. Why do so few want to defend a united Ukraine? I have my answers to that question, but I’m curious to see yours. The junta says that the Ukraine is being devoured by an Evil Empire. Yet it could only force 70k men to risk their lives to save it.

    As for Western Ukraine’s potential, you’re delusional. You’re blinded by patriotism. As are most humans. And in some ways that’s healthy. But there’s also this thing out there called objective reality. And some people are even interested in it.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background. There were no West Ukrainian Gogols, Chekhovs or Korolyovs. Forget world-famous: almost none of the intellectual and artistic figures famous in the Russosphere are of West Ukrainian background either. Yes, I’m aware of Okean Elzy. It’s boring, whiney, tackily-sentimental pop music.

    I can’t stop following this war, partly because it’s the first war of my lifetime to occur in a place that doesn’t seem exotic to me. It’s both tragedy and history, and I would really, really like to know how all of this will end. And I read stuff produced by both sides, because you have to do that if you want to understand the conflict. It’s typical of the East-West difference in the Ukraine that there’s nothing interesting being written about the war in Ukrainian. I’ve looked. Everything of any interest or originality on the pro-Kiev side is of course written in Russian.

    There is a stereotype in the Ukraine and in the Russosphere in general that Carpathian natives are more likely than others to bring in their extended families when they get to any kind of power. There is a well-known trade-off between family solidarity and societal solidarity.

    Would a state composed entirely of that kind of people be viable? Sure. Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, etc. are muddling through. It would just be far less successful than most European states.

    In opinion polls Western Ukraine is the most anti-Russian part of the Ukraine and Galicia is the most anti-Russian part of Western Ukriane. But of course (and who would have doubted it?) Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians. This was admitted by the junta itself in the person of an adviser to Poroshenko named Yuriy Biriukov. The junta has to fight Russian-speaking separatism with Russian-speaking troops. Because Ukrainian-speakers aren’t altruistic enough to want risk their lives for the Ukraine or for anything larger than their families.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist. Russophobia is concentrated in the third-worldish parts of the Ukriane. Altruism and competence are concentrated in the less Russophobic parts. This goes a long way to explain the 70k figure with which I started this comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    Galicians are more likely to evade the draft than other Ukrainians
     
    Maybe that's because they don't care to fight on behalf of kleptocratic oligarchs who don't have their best interests at heart. Give them credit for realizing that. They wouldn't be fighting on behalf of their country but as puppet troops of the regime who seems to be carrying out the schemes of the US. Shooting at other citizens of Ukraine may not be something they care to do. In a case like this it's more patriotic not to go.
    , @AP

    If most of the Ukraine was strongly united against Novorossia and Russia, if most Ukrainians had bought the junta’s message about the war, then the junta wouldn’t have so many problems with military recruiting
     
    .

    Not necessarily. They view the current Ukrainian military leadership as chock full of corrupt Soviet holdovers, of questionable loyalty and competence, not as "their own." There are many stories about Ukrainian officers giving away plans to the pro-Russians, getting Ukrainian soldiers killed. Under such circumstances it is understandable for many people to avoid being placed under such command.

    Some of the biggest draft dodgers are Galicians. If your logic is correct, this means Galicia is the least patriotic or most pro-Russian part of Ukraine. Obviously that's not true. Thus, something other patriotism or lack of it explains the difficulty in mobilization.

    The Balkans are the least European part of Europe. The mean IQs of Balkan countries revolve around 90. Like their Balkan neighbors, Galicians are poor, culturally unaccomplished and less altruistic than most Europeans or Russians. Galicia is far poorer than the Ukriane in general. None of the world-famous cultural and scientific figures who came from what is now the Ukraine were of West Ukrainian background.
     
    Galicia has Slovakia's population, and you demand a comparison to Russia. As for cultural or scientific figures, there is this guy, my relative:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8E%D0%B9,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%9F%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    Opera singer Solomiya Krushelnytska, who saved Madame Butterfly:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomiya_Krushelnytska

    Two chess grandmasters are from Galicia.

    Vassily Ivanchuk, ranked as high as #2 in the world

    Anna Muzychuk, female chess grandmaster, ranked #4 in the world

    The writer Leopold Sacher-Masoch was half-Galician.

    Ruslana who won Eurovision is Galician.

    Ivasiuk was well-known in the USSR. He was from neighboring Chernivtsi. Andy Warhol was a Carpatho-Rusyn.

    Historically Galicia's wealth surpassed that of both the Balkans and of Russia. It was, actually, similar to that of Slovakia. A comparison of per capita incomes in 1890:

    Britain $6,228
    Austria $3,005
    Bohemia $2,513
    Transylvania $1,956
    Galicia $1,947.
    Eastern Hungary (Slovakia) $1,824

    Balkans:

    Bulgaria $1,670
    Greece $1,550
    Serbia $1,295

    Russia's, btw, was $1,550. Significantly lower than Galicia's.

    I don't know about altruism, but Galicia's crime rate is the lowest in Ukraine, it's life expectancy is the highest. This is true of urban Lviv (which is larger than several non-Galician cities such as Luhansk) as well as of rural areas.

    As an educational center Lviv is in third place in Ukraine, with two universities in the top 20, one in the top 10. It is also the oblast with the third highest % of university-educated people in Ukraine.

    Eastern Ukraine is richer because it has export commodities such as coal. If that equals intelligence, than west Africans and Venezualans must be quite intelligent.

    Genetically Ukrainians are closest to Belarussians, and then to Slovaks. They are actually closer to Slovaks than they are to Russians.

    Essentially, your claim that Galicia has Balkan-level IQ is just silly and based on ignorant but common stereotypes by Russians.

    Given populations, histories, historical incomes, an independent Galicia would have resembled Slovakia more than any Balkan nation.

    And here’s the junta’s biggest problem: the more altruistic, the smarter, the more technically competent a potential recruit, the less likely he is to be a Ukrainian nationalist.
     
    Nope. As we have seen, Lviv oblast is one the most educated regions of Ukraine. And it is the most nationalistic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Joe Walker
    Maybe the reason why so many people hate the Jews has to do with Jewish behavior?

    Well, gee, maybe it does. But then I guess you’d have to ask yourself whether the behavior is “Jewish.” Drawing a conclusion about whole groups of people based on the actions of some is a little bit, well, idiotic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Walker
    I guess it all depends on what you mean by "some". What you see as "some" may look like a lot to others. Personally, I think the Jews would be a lot better off looking at their own behavior rather than blaming everything on evil gentiles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If Jews aren’t concerned about Ukrainian fascists then I don’t know why should we be. Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side. For example, among fighters on separatist side there are veterans of Bosnian War, Russians and Serbs, who worked with Ratko Mladić who is currently on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Then there are all kind of Russian mobsters, nostalgic Stalinists and members of Russian far-right and nationalist organizations. But of course, they are not fascists so there is no mention of them in Russian antifascist media.

    Also, to make things more comedic, Russian government supports all kinds of far right and neofascist parties in European Union, such as Hungarian Jobbik or Bulgarian Attack. Some of them openly – they were guests of Russian government officials etc. – others were revealed to secretly receive financial support by Wikileaks documents. I suppose that they receive support only because they are anti-EU, and Russia is trying to weaken European Union in order to reoccupy eastern countries – but it is unbelievably hypocritical and cynical to constantly criticize Ukraine and the West for doing something that Russia is already doing for years. Sure, Russia will save us from fascism…

    Considering how many Eastern Europeans and Germans were murdered, raped and robbed by Russian antifascists in the last century I don’t really see in which way is this Russian type of antifascism better than fascism itself. If some Ukrainians want to wave flags with Black Suns and Wolfsangels that’s their business. If they commit war crimes they should be punished, but I don’t understand all this paranoia. Ukraine is not becoming totalitarian or Nazi, this political extremism is completely minor, and I don’t really see anything significant happening there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimbojones
    "Most of this neofascist-paranoia comes from Russian propagandist websites who completely ignore all kind of extremism on Russian side."
    Really? What's your definition of a "Russian propagandist website"? Wait, I know - any website that does not agree with your chauvinist views.
    Who needs Russian propaganda, when we have a reputable English-language magazine like Counterpunch? You can check Counterpunch's background and their cred, and then go and read all about the Ukrainian Nazi psychos.

    More than that, many people are intelligent enough to connect the dots. Ukraine used to have a democratically elected president. He was corrupt, but hey - they chose him! Then there was an armed coup, and democracy in Ukraine died.
    Then the junta decided to ban Russian, which was the language that people in "Eastern Ukraine" have spoken for many centuries. Those people's grandfathers paid dearly in blood and sweat to destroy the Nazi beast. Their reaction was predictable.
    People who tried to pay careful attention also noticed that Putin was preoccupied with his Olympic Games at Sochi while the Ukraine crisis unfolded a year ago. The entire affair caught him off-guard. Accusations of Russian grand-designs regarding the events in Kiev are laughable.
    None of this requires "Russian propaganda" to be understood.

    With friends like the ones it has, Ukraine hardly needs any enemies. Since NATO pushed forward the Nazi coup last year, Ukraine's economy has collapsed, its territorial integrity has been violated, its army has been routed, and its population has been totally demoralized. Russia has hardly done anything to damage its western neighbor - it merely requested its due payments for its gas; accepted Crimea back into the fold (in consequence of a referendum as legitimate as the one in Kosovo); and watched as the rebel militias smashed their enemy (likely with the help of at least military intelligence). From a realistic political viewpoint, the Kremlin has hardly had any choice in any of these matters.
    There will be another revolution in Ukraine soon - the population is reaching its breaking point. As they say, for every revolution there is a counter-revolution. Yats the Rat and Pornoshenko know that, and are making their getaway plans. Here's hoping that democracy, peace, and development return to Ukraine, and this time of lunacy ends soon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Joe Walker
    Rooting fascism out of Ukraine’s cultural, social, and political matrix is going to take a lot of work.

    If the indigenous people of the Ukraine want to be fascists, let them. It is their country and if non-Ukrainians don't like it then they should stay out of the Ukraine.

    Well the Ukrainians are asking for money, arms, and help from non-Ukrainians. They shouldn’t beg for help from other people if they don’t want any input or influence from other people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Walker
    But aren't the Ukrainians looking for help from outsiders because of what the Russians are doing?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @fnn
    Portrait of Stalin appears in Russian-occupied Crimea:

    http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1403486965

    You can find lots of info about the revival of the Stalin cult in Russia. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean that the anti-Kiev forces are trying revive the Stalinist USSR any more than the Kiev forces want to bring back the Third Reich. Just like almost nobody who displays the Confederate battle flag in the US wants to reinstate slavery-despite what the NYT or NPR will tell you.

    That doesn’t necessarily surprise me—and I agree with your take. A lot of older people in the FSU look back to the good times (the relatively good times) after the war and compare them favorably with the Yeltsin-era tumults. It doesn’t mean they’re planning on going all Uncle Joe on the citizenry, though. (I think.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Meanwhile Alexander Dugin has been put on the under sanctions for “extremism”:

    http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl9993.aspx

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @fnn
    Let some common sense intrude:

    http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/03/semiotics-swastikas-and-shadowplay/

    Perhaps the best example is the famous hissing noise that the various opponents of Tottenham Hotspur, a North London club traditionally supported by Jews, make in imitation of the gas chambers that were supposedly used to gas Jews. Assuming on this basis that each and every member of these crowds was an actual Nazi is of course an absurdity, otherwise a real Nazi, like Colin Jordan, would have been elected Prime Minister of Britain sometime in the 1970s, when such hooligan jests were at their peak.

    Among elements of the Ukrainian military, especially among volunteers like the Azov Battalion, there is a similar element of offensive posturing, but it is also backed up by the totemic needs of the Männerbund – the basic unit of the army in the same way that the family is the basic unit of society. Among primitives, totems are always taken from powerful or agile animals with which the tribesmen wish to associate themselves in an attempt to acquire some of their power and virility...For Ukrainians, Nazi symbolism does not in any way represent a positive assertion of Nazi beliefs and ideals. How could it? Ukrainians are after all Slavs, a despised race according to the ideology of Hitlerian National Socialism. But Nazism was of course more than a mere ideology. In its historical manifestation it also existed as a potent force uniting diverse elements of European civilization and even non-European civilization in a grand struggle against Stalinist Imperialism.

    While Nazism and its symbols have meant many things to many people – occasionally even including actual Nazism – for the Ukrainian nationalists Nazi imagery is almost always simply code for being extremely anti-Russian, the “extreme” part a reflection of the asymmetry of power that Ukrainians have long felt towards their giant neighbor and former master...
     

    Thanks. That’s an excellent article from Colin Liddell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jonathan Revusky
    "...apparently the people there don’t want to be connected to the Russians, the eastern Ukrainians or the Poles?"

    If this people in Western Ukraine do not want anything to do with the ethnic Russians in the Donbass, why don't they just accept the independence of that region? Why send in the military to terrorize the people there?

    Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries? It is not as if Russia is exactly over crowded.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
    "Maybe the ethnic Russians should move back to Russia instead of occupying other people’s countries?"

    You need to educate yourself, dude. The ethnic Russians in the Donbass are most certainly not occupying somebody else's country. They are occupying their own land, their own country, the place where they have been for centuries, long before the United States even existed.

    The reason these places are in this artificial country called Ukraine is because, administratively, they were part of the Ukrainian SSR, which was simply an administrative division within the Soviet Union.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    "As more and more people are realizing the ’6M & gas chambers’ are impossible frauds..."

    Really? You've been at this for how long, exactly? If I had to venture a guess, I'd say at least since the 1980s, maybe earlier. Faurisson hit big in the 1970s, Leuchter in the 1980s, and Irving in the 1990s into the early 2000s. Exactly how much headway has each of them made? What's the big revelation that we're supposed to have gotten?

    I know, I know, I know. The Internet. Here, take a bite of the clue cookie: It's been around for twenty years, and the most you people have managed to accomplish a bigger audience of crazy people. But no impact. Ever wonder why not? I'll tell you.

    Because you can barely contain your hatred for Jews long enough to make a coherent point. Every single one of you people is a knuckle-dragging Nazi who is only sad because he never had the opportunity to join the Einsatzgruppen and kill himself some Jews.

    But by all means, do continue...

    Maybe the reason why so many people hate the Jews has to do with Jewish behavior?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Well, gee, maybe it does. But then I guess you'd have to ask yourself whether the behavior is "Jewish." Drawing a conclusion about whole groups of people based on the actions of some is a little bit, well, idiotic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @annamaria
    "The fictional kind." - Only for those who live in asylum:

    Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine? Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine:
    http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/us-backing-neo-nazis-ukraine

    How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: http://www.alternet.org/world/how-israel-lobby-protected-ukrainian-neo-nazis

    NYT Whites Out Ukraine’s Brown Shirts: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/11/nyt-whites-out-ukraines-brown-shirts/

    Zionists and Anti-Semites in Ukraine: A Strange Union: http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/04/17/zionists-and-anti-semites-in-ukraine-a-strange-union.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Rooting fascism out of Ukraine’s cultural, social, and political matrix is going to take a lot of work.

    If the indigenous people of the Ukraine want to be fascists, let them. It is their country and if non-Ukrainians don’t like it then they should stay out of the Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Well the Ukrainians are asking for money, arms, and help from non-Ukrainians. They shouldn't beg for help from other people if they don't want any input or influence from other people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @annamaria
    Perhaps if Holocaust were not so profitably cooped by the powerful Zionist organizations in the US and UK, the silence of these organizations with regard to the rise of neo-Nazism in Ukraine would be less conspicuous. The Israel-firsters need to make a choice between the respect for memory of the victims of the WWII and the immediate profit from the cooperation with the heirs of Nazism in Europe. Otherwise, the Holocaust Museums stand as part of Shoa business.
    Representation of far-right in the current government in Kiev:
    "We are not dealing with a transitional government in which Neo-Nazi elements integrate the fringe of the coalition, formally led by the Fatherland party. The Cabinet is not only integrated the Svoboda and Right Sector (not to mention former members of defunct fascist UNA-UNSO), the two main Neo-Nazi entities have been entrusted with key positions which grant them de facto control over the Armed Forces, Police, Justice and National Security.
    While Yatsenuyk’s Fatherland Party controls the majority of portfolios and Svoboda Neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a major cabinet post (apparently at the request of assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland), members of Svoboda and the Right Sector occupy key positions in the areas of Defense, Law Enforcement, Education and Economic Affairs.
    Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) was appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU)... He is referred to by the Western media as the “kommandant” of the EuroMaidan movement. Andriy Parubiy together with party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is a follower of Ukrainian Nazi Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews and Poles during World War II.
    Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in the parliament, has been appointed Parubiy’s deputy Secretary of the RNBOU. Yarosh was the leader of the Brown Shirt Neo-Nazi paramilitary during the EuroMaidan “protest” movement. The Neo Nazi party also controls the judicial process with the appointment of Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party to the position of prosecutor-general of Ukraine. "
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554

    You cited globalreaearch.ca, which is infamous for publishing nonsense. Here is globalresearch.ca defending Stalinist North Korea:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/understanding-north-korea/3818

    [MORE]

    It’s clear why Che Guevara, and other revolutionaries, considered north Korea of the 60’s, 70’s and even early 80’s, to be an inspiration. Emerging from the womb of the guerilla wars of the 30s, the north had fought two imperialisms. It had won against the Japanese and held the US to a standstill. It was building, in the face of unremitting US hostility, a socialist society that was progressing toward communism. The country offered free health care, free education, virtually free housing, radical land reform and equal rights for women, and its industry was steaming ahead of that of the south. By contrast, the neo-colony Washington had hived off for itself below the 38th parallel was a vast warren of sweatshops reminiscent of England’s industrial revolution. People lived harsh, miserable, uncertain lives, in incessant struggle with a military dictatorship backed by the US, bearing an uncomfortable resemblance to Europe’s pre-war fascist regimes.

    Would Che be inspired by the north Korea of today, an impoverished country that struggles with food scarcity? Probably. What have changed are the circumstances, not the reasons to be inspired. The projects north Korea has set for itself – sovereignty, equality, socialism – have become vastly more difficult, more painful, more daunting to achieve in the face of the void left by the counter-revolution that swept the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and China’s breakneck sprint down the capitalist road. Would Che have soured on north Korea, because the adversity it faces has grown tenfold? I doubt it. A revolutionary, it’s said, recognizes it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees. North Korea has never lived on its knees. I think Che would have liked that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP [AKA "Dr. Preobrazhensky"] says:
    @annamaria
    "The fictional kind." - Only for those who live in asylum:

    Is the U.S. Backing Neo-Nazis in Ukraine? Exposing troubling ties in the U.S. to overt Nazi and fascist protesters in Ukraine:
    http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/us-backing-neo-nazis-ukraine

    How the Israel Lobby Protected Ukrainian Neo-Nazis: http://www.alternet.org/world/how-israel-lobby-protected-ukrainian-neo-nazis

    NYT Whites Out Ukraine’s Brown Shirts: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/02/11/nyt-whites-out-ukraines-brown-shirts/

    Zionists and Anti-Semites in Ukraine: A Strange Union: http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/04/17/zionists-and-anti-semites-in-ukraine-a-strange-union.html

    You forgot to mention aliens, a resurrected Elvis, and the exiles from Atlantis alongside the Zionists and others in on the neo-Nazi conspiracy.

    Meanwhile in the real world, there are several hundred, perhaps even a thousand or two, neo-Nazis out of the tens of thousands fighting in eastern Ukraine against pro-Russian forces that include their own neo-Nazis. One can hope the pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian neo-Nazis harm each other and leave others alone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Since when the unholy union (well documented) of the Zionist Nuland with neo-Nazis in Kiev government has entered the plane of mythical aliens and Atlantis? If you are irritated by the mention of this union, should not your irritation be rather directed toward the Zionist scoundrels that have been defacing the memory of victims of Nazism in Ukraine? Take a quick look at the information on Babi Yar:
    "large ravine on the northern edge of the city of Kiev in Ukraine, the site of a mass grave of victims, mostly Jews, whom Nazi German SS squads killed between 1941 and 1943. After the initial massacre of Jews, Babi Yar remained in use as an execution site for Soviet prisoners of war and for Roma (Gypsies) as well as for Jews. Soviet accounts after the war speak of 100,000 dead. The true number may never be known."
    or the Nikolaev massacre: "The Nikolaev Massacre was a massacre which resulted in the deaths of 35,782 Soviet citizens, most of whom were Jews, during World War II, on September 16–30, 1941. It took place in and around the city of Nikolaev and the neighboring city of Kherson in the southern Ukraine."
    These and other atrocities have become the ground for the famous "Never Again" that is a symbol of the numerous Holocaust Museums worldwide.
    Mr. Kolomoisky, the financier of neo-Nazis is Ukraine is not "a resurrected Elvis" and "exile from Atlantis." He is an Israeli citizen. Mrs. Nuland-Kagan, her war-mongering husband Robert Kagan and such are quite adept at squealing about anti-Semitism, yet they have been fantastically effective in resurrecting Nazism in Europe. And don't even try to accuse the critics of Kolomoisky and Kagans of anti-Semitism, since the Zionism has become the main tool of destroying the noble traditions of Judaism.
    Hillel: “That which is hateful to you, do not unto another: This is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary — [and now] go study.”
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Hunsdon
    Good thing the Soviet hammer and sickle is gone, then, isn't it? Say, what makes you think the Donbass rebels/separatists/terrorists are neo-Stalinist?

    Portrait of Stalin appears in Russian-occupied Crimea:

    http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1403486965

    You can find lots of info about the revival of the Stalin cult in Russia. Of course that doesn’t necessarily mean that the anti-Kiev forces are trying revive the Stalinist USSR any more than the Kiev forces want to bring back the Third Reich. Just like almost nobody who displays the Confederate battle flag in the US wants to reinstate slavery-despite what the NYT or NPR will tell you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hunsdon
    That doesn't necessarily surprise me---and I agree with your take. A lot of older people in the FSU look back to the good times (the relatively good times) after the war and compare them favorably with the Yeltsin-era tumults. It doesn't mean they're planning on going all Uncle Joe on the citizenry, though. (I think.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Good piece Peter – thanks. Surprised you didn’t mention Kolomoisky – ‘governor’ of Dnepr’osk and chief financier of the fascist battalions, though domiciled in Switzerland. Jewish, major contributor to New York Chabad. Zionists have their own ‘aryan’ myth, something that cross-pollinates with Nazism, much to the unease of Sephardis, who are obviously a Semite people, like much of the M. E.

    Check out this link. Interestingly the term ‘khagan’ refers to ‘lord’ or ‘king’ ..see any connection with latter-day bearers of the name?

    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalization_eu12.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @jimbojones
    "I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine."
    It's called WWII.

    Did fascism really have anything to do with WWII. Spain stayed out. I think it had more to do with the leaders of Germany, Italy, Japan, and the USSR than any political system. As Goering is supposed to have said the leaders can get the populace to demand war any time the government wants them too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • One can see this rapidly devolving like the battle against Bashar al-Assad. The military equipment going to the so called moderate rebels is suddenly being sported by the ISIS. The analog, if the McCain crazies get there wish to arm the Ukraine how much of it will end up in the neofascists battalions. As one my favorite anti-neocon quotes goes.

    “The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules. It is a philosophy, and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous.”
    —Jean-Luc Picard

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • why would we want to rid the Ukraine of fascism even if it were our biusiness

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tomi
    I don't understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine. Far-right groups and individuals always thrive in war. National conflicts promote nationalism. Nothing unusual about that. There was a lot of fascist symbols in Yugoslav Wars and none of those countries became totalitarian and Nazi. They are being slowly integrated in EU in the same way Ukraine will be. Compared with that conflict, there aren't any large-scale war crimes or ethnic cleansing in Ukraine.

    Ukrainian elections don't even show any significant far-right sympathies. There's probably more fascists in Hungary today than in Ukraine. Of course, all those concerned "anti-fascists" won't comment much on Hungary because neofascist and antisemitic Jobbik is financially supported by Russian government, same as many other far-right and anti-EU parties in European Union.

    Perhaps if Holocaust were not so profitably cooped by the powerful Zionist organizations in the US and UK, the silence of these organizations with regard to the rise of neo-Nazism in Ukraine would be less conspicuous. The Israel-firsters need to make a choice between the respect for memory of the victims of the WWII and the immediate profit from the cooperation with the heirs of Nazism in Europe. Otherwise, the Holocaust Museums stand as part of Shoa business.
    Representation of far-right in the current government in Kiev:
    “We are not dealing with a transitional government in which Neo-Nazi elements integrate the fringe of the coalition, formally led by the Fatherland party. The Cabinet is not only integrated the Svoboda and Right Sector (not to mention former members of defunct fascist UNA-UNSO), the two main Neo-Nazi entities have been entrusted with key positions which grant them de facto control over the Armed Forces, Police, Justice and National Security.
    While Yatsenuyk’s Fatherland Party controls the majority of portfolios and Svoboda Neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a major cabinet post (apparently at the request of assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland), members of Svoboda and the Right Sector occupy key positions in the areas of Defense, Law Enforcement, Education and Economic Affairs.
    Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) was appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU)… He is referred to by the Western media as the “kommandant” of the EuroMaidan movement. Andriy Parubiy together with party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is a follower of Ukrainian Nazi Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews and Poles during World War II.
    Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in the parliament, has been appointed Parubiy’s deputy Secretary of the RNBOU. Yarosh was the leader of the Brown Shirt Neo-Nazi paramilitary during the EuroMaidan “protest” movement. The Neo Nazi party also controls the judicial process with the appointment of Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party to the position of prosecutor-general of Ukraine. ”

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    You cited globalreaearch.ca, which is infamous for publishing nonsense. Here is globalresearch.ca defending Stalinist North Korea:

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/understanding-north-korea/3818

    It’s clear why Che Guevara, and other revolutionaries, considered north Korea of the 60’s, 70’s and even early 80’s, to be an inspiration. Emerging from the womb of the guerilla wars of the 30s, the north had fought two imperialisms. It had won against the Japanese and held the US to a standstill. It was building, in the face of unremitting US hostility, a socialist society that was progressing toward communism. The country offered free health care, free education, virtually free housing, radical land reform and equal rights for women, and its industry was steaming ahead of that of the south. By contrast, the neo-colony Washington had hived off for itself below the 38th parallel was a vast warren of sweatshops reminiscent of England’s industrial revolution. People lived harsh, miserable, uncertain lives, in incessant struggle with a military dictatorship backed by the US, bearing an uncomfortable resemblance to Europe’s pre-war fascist regimes.

    Would Che be inspired by the north Korea of today, an impoverished country that struggles with food scarcity? Probably. What have changed are the circumstances, not the reasons to be inspired. The projects north Korea has set for itself – sovereignty, equality, socialism – have become vastly more difficult, more painful, more daunting to achieve in the face of the void left by the counter-revolution that swept the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe and China’s breakneck sprint down the capitalist road. Would Che have soured on north Korea, because the adversity it faces has grown tenfold? I doubt it. A revolutionary, it’s said, recognizes it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees. North Korea has never lived on its knees. I think Che would have liked that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Tomi
    I don't understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine. Far-right groups and individuals always thrive in war. National conflicts promote nationalism. Nothing unusual about that. There was a lot of fascist symbols in Yugoslav Wars and none of those countries became totalitarian and Nazi. They are being slowly integrated in EU in the same way Ukraine will be. Compared with that conflict, there aren't any large-scale war crimes or ethnic cleansing in Ukraine.

    Ukrainian elections don't even show any significant far-right sympathies. There's probably more fascists in Hungary today than in Ukraine. Of course, all those concerned "anti-fascists" won't comment much on Hungary because neofascist and antisemitic Jobbik is financially supported by Russian government, same as many other far-right and anti-EU parties in European Union.

    “I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine.”
    It’s called WWII.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Did fascism really have anything to do with WWII. Spain stayed out. I think it had more to do with the leaders of Germany, Italy, Japan, and the USSR than any political system. As Goering is supposed to have said the leaders can get the populace to demand war any time the government wants them too.
    , @Tom
    Can you even lucidly explain why WWII occurred? You have no right to your consternation over fascists if you can't well-explain the reasoning behind it. Pro-tip: Nazis bad! Jews good! ...won't cut it. Also, your reasoning falls apart if you merely invoke the Holocaust. Why? Because you are essentially telling us that murder is the reason why fascists are a cause for consternation. If that is the case, then every warring government on the planet, to include the USA, the USSR, and Israel would be on exactly the same footing as the Nazis. It goes beyond... and the only two believable reasons left are Jew fetishism and/or leftism. Neither is going to win you many arguments on this side of the political spectrum
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Politics makes strange bedfellows.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Giuseppe
    Yes, who would have thought, heavily Jewish neoconservative support of their client Ukraine, even though strong neofascist elements were evident at the Maidan. My how the incovenient truths get swept away. And no, Victoria Nuland, I am not a Russian troll.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine. Far-right groups and individuals always thrive in war. National conflicts promote nationalism. Nothing unusual about that. There was a lot of fascist symbols in Yugoslav Wars and none of those countries became totalitarian and Nazi. They are being slowly integrated in EU in the same way Ukraine will be. Compared with that conflict, there aren’t any large-scale war crimes or ethnic cleansing in Ukraine.

    Ukrainian elections don’t even show any significant far-right sympathies. There’s probably more fascists in Hungary today than in Ukraine. Of course, all those concerned “anti-fascists” won’t comment much on Hungary because neofascist and antisemitic Jobbik is financially supported by Russian government, same as many other far-right and anti-EU parties in European Union.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimbojones
    "I don’t understand why are people so concerned about few neofascists in Ukraine."
    It's called WWII.
    , @annamaria
    Perhaps if Holocaust were not so profitably cooped by the powerful Zionist organizations in the US and UK, the silence of these organizations with regard to the rise of neo-Nazism in Ukraine would be less conspicuous. The Israel-firsters need to make a choice between the respect for memory of the victims of the WWII and the immediate profit from the cooperation with the heirs of Nazism in Europe. Otherwise, the Holocaust Museums stand as part of Shoa business.
    Representation of far-right in the current government in Kiev:
    "We are not dealing with a transitional government in which Neo-Nazi elements integrate the fringe of the coalition, formally led by the Fatherland party. The Cabinet is not only integrated the Svoboda and Right Sector (not to mention former members of defunct fascist UNA-UNSO), the two main Neo-Nazi entities have been entrusted with key positions which grant them de facto control over the Armed Forces, Police, Justice and National Security.
    While Yatsenuyk’s Fatherland Party controls the majority of portfolios and Svoboda Neo-Nazi leader Oleh Tyahnybok was not granted a major cabinet post (apparently at the request of assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland), members of Svoboda and the Right Sector occupy key positions in the areas of Defense, Law Enforcement, Education and Economic Affairs.
    Andriy Parubiy, co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) was appointed Secretary of the National Security and National Defense Committee (RNBOU)... He is referred to by the Western media as the “kommandant” of the EuroMaidan movement. Andriy Parubiy together with party leader Oleh Tyahnybok is a follower of Ukrainian Nazi Stepan Bandera, who collaborated in the mass murderer of Jews and Poles during World War II.
    Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector delegation in the parliament, has been appointed Parubiy’s deputy Secretary of the RNBOU. Yarosh was the leader of the Brown Shirt Neo-Nazi paramilitary during the EuroMaidan “protest” movement. The Neo Nazi party also controls the judicial process with the appointment of Oleh Makhnitsky of the Svoboda party to the position of prosecutor-general of Ukraine. "
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @eah
    the fascist/Neo-Nazi/white supremacist world

    You know you're dealing with at best an alarmist, at worst a hack, when White Nationalism is equated with 'white supremacism'.

    Yes, much better to continue with the cultural-cidal governments of the West, like in the UK, where they put people in jail for twitter postings, have surveillance cameras everywhere, and allow their young girls to be sexually brutalized by foreign scum because they're afraid to be called names. Not to mention the nation-destroying levels of immigration generally. Oh, and I almost forgot: where sovereign nations with their own currency are forced to borrow money into existence, and then pass the debt onto their children. No, no 'extremism' in any of that.

    If it takes 'fascism' to get rid of all that, maybe it's worth a(nother) try.

    Well said, eah.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @map
    The Ukrainians were massacred by the Nazis. Where does this idea that they were somehow allies come from?

    I think it was to the tune of 3 million.

    It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930′s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @map
    "It depends how you define ‘Ukrainian’. Remember that, then as well as now, the people in eastern Ukraine were basically Russian. They were only made part of the Ukrainian SSR in the 1930′s."

    What sort of reasoning is this? How would you define "Bulgarian", "Pole", "Lithuanian", "Chechen", "Georgian", etc.? Ukrainians have a distinct culture and language, as distinct as the one between Japan and Korea.

    Furthermore, large numbers of Russians lived in these areas as well. Does that mean that wherever a Russian is Russia? I suppose the US should just kick back and allow Cuba to annex South Florida because a lot of Cubans live there.

    And Texas was only made part of America in the 1840's. So what?

    Russians stayed in Ukraine because they liked plundering it, not because it is some native soil of theirs.
    , @Philip Owen
    They were however Little Russian. Ukraine is a moderate part of the Little Russian dialect area.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Let some common sense intrude:

    http://www.counter-currents.com/2015/03/semiotics-swastikas-and-shadowplay/

    Perhaps the best example is the famous hissing noise that the various opponents of Tottenham Hotspur, a North London club traditionally supported by Jews, make in imitation of the gas chambers that were supposedly used to gas Jews. Assuming on this basis that each and every member of these crowds was an actual Nazi is of course an absurdity, otherwise a real Nazi, like Colin Jordan, would have been elected Prime Minister of Britain sometime in the 1970s, when such hooligan jests were at their peak.

    Among elements of the Ukrainian military, especially among volunteers like the Azov Battalion, there is a similar element of offensive posturing, but it is also backed up by the totemic needs of the Männerbund – the basic unit of the army in the same way that the family is the basic unit of society. Among primitives, totems are always taken from powerful or agile animals with which the tribesmen wish to associate themselves in an attempt to acquire some of their power and virility…For Ukrainians, Nazi symbolism does not in any way represent a positive assertion of Nazi beliefs and ideals. How could it? Ukrainians are after all Slavs, a despised race according to the ideology of Hitlerian National Socialism. But Nazism was of course more than a mere ideology. In its historical manifestation it also existed as a potent force uniting diverse elements of European civilization and even non-European civilization in a grand struggle against Stalinist Imperialism.

    While Nazism and its symbols have meant many things to many people – occasionally even including actual Nazism – for the Ukrainian nationalists Nazi imagery is almost always simply code for being extremely anti-Russian, the “extreme” part a reflection of the asymmetry of power that Ukrainians have long felt towards their giant neighbor and former master…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matra
    Thanks. That's an excellent article from Colin Liddell.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.